MovieChat Forums > Psycho (1960) Discussion > The Normans

The Normans

posted 7 years ago by ecarle (14979)
17 replies | jump to latest

By my count, we've had five Norman Bates by now, over a period of 58 years:

Robert Bloch's Norman: Famously nowhere near where Hitchcock went, Bloch's Norman was overweight, forty years old(but dangerously close to child-like), bespectacled, a heavy drinker and offputting in almost every respect. What little sympathy he obtained from Mary Crane dissipated with his temper tantrum-like protests(She's not crazy!) in the book's "parlor scene"(set up at the house in a scene Hitchcock couldn't logically set there.)

Anthony Perkins' Norman: Things are unfair now about the Perkins performance. For 23 years, from 1960 to 1983, Anthony Perkins circa 1960 (27 years old) was the only Norman Bates the public really had. Far more people had seen Psycho worldwide than had ever read the book. Anthony Perkins WAS Norman Bates because Hitchcock had Norman re-written AS Anthony Perkins. Within weeks, a rather struggling movie ingénue(too sweet, too skinny for some of his macho romantic roles) was turned into a horrific villain who, nonetheless, drew our sympathy BECAUSE he was played by Anthony Perkins.

Perkins worked steadily after Psycho, and he elected NOT to play too many villains(one or two, and none psycho), and he actually came back a bit in the 70's as more 60's kids grew into 70's filmmakers who wanted to use him and fans who wanted to see him as Psycho percolated out across countless TV showings.

But in 1982 -- for 1983 release -- Universal lured Tony Perkins back to his most famous role for Psycho II. He was still thin enough to wear his 1960 jacket, there had been no significant weight gain and a little shoe polish kept his hair black and the bald spot covered. But he WAS 23 years older, Norman now WAS a middle-aged man and -- servicing both a director and a script far less than what he had in 1960 -- something was off in the Perkins performance. He could not go home again.

Came 1986, the success of Psycho II spawned a Psycho III -- with Perkins getting to direct this time. The movie was better, smarter than II (IMHO) but Perkins had aged three more years, elected to wear a spiky modern haircut at odds with the '60 model and already to get a little wizened in the face, and WAY too live-wire neurotic in the acting.

1990: Perkins returns one more time for a movie that only played Showtime cable in America, and had(comparatively) the lowest budget yet: Psycho IV: The Beginning. A VERY wizened Perkins(only two years away from his death) shared the screen with a new version of Norman(teenage young, in flashbacks): Henry Thomas, 8 years out from ET in what seemed a horrible violation of his famously sweet blockbuster role. Henry's Young Norman was more strapping and physically powerful than Perkins; that was wrong right there. But the script had him do horrible things "in full view" -- and as a matter of "breaking the motif"(butcher knife stabbings) he even strangled one victim rather than stabbing her.

MORE

[–] ecarle (14979) 7 years ago

1998: Vince Vaughn's Norman Bates.

Anthony Perkins had passed away at 60 (too young) in 1992, only two years after playing Norman again. Came Gus Van Sant with his idea for a "shot by shot" remake of Hitchocck's most famous movie and Perkins' most famous role, Van Sant had a devil of a time convincing some new young actor to take the part. About 20 turned him down.

The one who said yes first was...Joaquin Phoenix. He had recently made "To Die For" for Van Sant, with Nicole Kidman. Based on a real-life case, Kidman played a wannabee news anchorbabe who convince Phoenix and some other lads to kill her husband. Van Sant offered Kidman Marion Crane and Phoenix Norman Bates. Kidman turned Marion down immediately(citing a play she had to do.) Phoenix said yes...but had to make another movie first.

A nervous Van Sant, not ready to lose his long-sought chance to remake Psycho, went for a 21st choice: Vince Vaughn, newly hot from "Swingers" and newly blockbustered with "Jurassic Park: The Lost World," but wrong every which way for what the Perkins version of Norman had given us: a slight, sweet, spindly man who was non-threatening to women like Marion Crane and likely beaten up easily(so one would think) by a tough dick like Arbogast. The very tall("Circus giant tall," said Vaughn), very strapping Vaughn was rather menacing -- and crazy -- from the get-go as Norman, and the weird thing to me is that he NEVER really seemed to be the man dressed up as Mrs. Bates. It was if he stepped in at the fruit cellar climax to fill in for the real killer. That Vaughn rather rapidly went for a so-so career in comedy further made his Norman "retroactively even wronger" than he looked when folks didn't much know him. (And, playing Norman with a buzz cut and designer shirts wasn't too bright, either.)

MORE

[–] ecarle (14979) 7 years ago

2013-2017: Freddie Highmore's Norman.

In a world in which "now is the only thing" and 1960 might as well be 1860, I would suspect that Freddie Highmore has become THE Norman Bates. Now Perkins moves into "the original" status. Certainly Highmore is closer to the Perkins model than Vince Vaughn was: Thin. Check. Spindly. Check. Boyish. Check. Hell, LITTLE boyish. Check.

One thought I've had: Van Sant's shot-by-shot, line-by-line remake of Hitchcock's Psycho might have played a whole lot better with Freddie Highmore playing Norman. Maybe they can remake it again. Freddie should be old enough now to play it as Perkins did.

I would also assume that Highmore has played Norman for more hours than Perkins did. Perkins: roughly eight hours of screen time. Highmore: 40?

Highmore is a British actor doing an American accent. I understand in real life, he knows many languages and was a bit of a boy genius in school. His credentials are in order and his Norman Bates is the closest we will get to Perkins, I'd expect. But not close enough.

And back to Anthony Perkins Norman of 1960 For a few years, Anthony Perkins was something that Freddie Highmore was not: a proven, self-made American movie star, with handsome looks of an order (as necessary in the fifties) that was much above that of the average young man, and with a strong and focused voice to match his looks. Perkins wasn't considered a very good actor prior to Psycho -- his Oscar nomination for Friendly Persuasion notwithstanding -- but it seems to have been a matter of miscasting, bad movies, the wrong female leads and sometimes, poor scripts. And even in Stanley Kramer's On the Beach, Perkins had such an overwrought out-of-nowhere yelling scene that we have to blame the director: another take was necessary. Kramer didn't do it.

Alfred Hitchcock seemed to understand all the good takes Perkins was capable of. Hitch kept the young actor calm, pampered(with top billing, not always given to Perkins) and perfectly captured in frame and lighting. Both Hitchcock and Perkins seemed to understand that Bloch had given them a great story and Stefano a literate, witty script. "You ARE this picture," Hitchcock had said to Perkins in luring him to play such a horrible -- but likeable -- bad guy -- and the movie seemed to follow that lead.

Anthony Perkins noted of his 1960 performance -- "Have you noticed how little Norman's in it?." True. He enters at the 30 minute mark and disappears during all scenes in Fairvale. And when Mother's killing people well...Perkins wasn't there in real life.

But oh what Perkins accomplished when he WAS there:

Meeting Marion: Nice, polite, witty("Stationary with Bates Motel printed on it, to make your friends back home feel envious.") Even forthright -- inviting Marion to dinner.

The parlor: he starts nice, but reveals spooky levels of broodiness("It would be cold and damp...like the grave") reveals himself to be fatally a Mama's boy("A boy's best friend is his mother") before snarling(not yelling) verbal attacks at Marion that are really coming from Mother("People cluck their thick tongues and suggest, oh so very delicately...")

MORE

[–] ecarle (14979) 7 years ago

From "goodnight" to the swamp: After Marion says goodnight in the parlor(with Norman "restored" from Mean Mother mode to his sweet joshing self -- "You don't want to stay a little longer, just for talk?") Perkins does something like nine minutes of screen time -- less the shower scene -- saying nothing, and acting only with his face, his throat, his body. He has one line in those nine minutes -- "Oh, God, Mother, blood! Blood!"

You can pick any moment from those nine minutes: looking at the register("Marie Samuels from Los Angeles, my ass!); looking through the peephole, stepping away from the peephole with great focus and resolve(he's...changing), entering his kitchen so dejected, hands in pockets, sitting at the table...and then the run down the hill, the hand over the mouth...and all that cleaning up and burying(where his face and gulping throat do the suspense comedy honors as Marion's car won't sink.)

Its all rather compartmentalized for Perkins after that:

Arbogast: In black sweater with white collar, Perkins never looks better in the whole movie, lit for handsome innocence as Smiling Arbogast keeps up the duel. And doing that Mean Mother anger out on the porch.

A great single shot: Norman by the swamp as Sam yells Arbogast: spectral, razor thin..no longer such a nice guy. Vampirish. (And yet...we will start liking him again, later.)

A great twisting camera shot: Norman carries Mother to the fruit cellar. Watch his feminine hip sway up the stairs and wonder about it. Listen to Perkins trade lines with..no one.

With Sam and Lila checking in: Perkins here drains his character of all personality. Marion he wanted to talk to, Arbogast tricked him. With THIS couple, he will barely say a word, make no Arbogast-ready mistakes...try to hide in plain sight(in daylight yet.)

And then his final shockeroo "looks":

Blood-thirsty in the fruit cellar(before collapsing with a "silent scream" of inner destruction.)

Gazing out, then leering at, US , from the cell, under dark-shadowed eye sockets as Mother's skull face takes over, probably for all time(and four sequels, a remake, one TV pilot, one cable series.. more to come.)

Advantage: Anthony Perkins as Norman. 1960. Accept no substitutes (but I wish Freddie Highmore well...he came close.)

[–] MissMargoChanning (6630) 7 years ago

Interesting thoughts.
You seem to have missed one other Norman. How about the young Norman in the 1990 TV movie played by Henry Thomas? It was Psycho IV: The Beginning. Anthony Perkins was also in it.

While I will always associate Norman with Anthony Perkins, I found Vince Vaughn an interesting choice. The first film I ever saw him in was Clay Pigeons with co-star, Joaquin Phoenix!
That was made in the same year as Psycho, 1998. He was terrifying and edgy in that. At the time, I could accept him as Norman Bates.
Anyway, just a few thoughts and comments.

[–] db20db (16147) 7 years ago

I agree . I think Vince Vaughn's performance as Norman is really underrated. Especially creepy and effective I thought, was the shifty eyes and nervous laugh he employed to disarm Marion and others.

[–] MissMargoChanning (6630) 7 years ago

Oh, that was good! He stayed within the limits put upon him for the shot for shot filming but he added his own spin. That's what any good actor would do.
At the time I wasn't wild about a re-make. I still think it was unnecessary, but in the past few years I actually enjoy watching it and I appreciate the effort.

[–] db20db (16147) 7 years ago

I thought Vaughn was also effectively menacing in Domestic Disturbance.

[–] MissMargoChanning (6630) 7 years ago

Wow! I have Domestic Disturbance! I haven't seen it in years. I had no idea that Vaughn was in it. That may have been the first time I saw him in a film! lol!
Now I think I will watch it again.
Thanks!

[–] ecarle (14979) 7 years ago

I agree . I think Vince Vaughn's performance as Norman is really underrated. Especially creepy and effective I thought, was the shifty eyes and nervous laugh he employed to disarm Marion and others.

---
I am pleased that my little exercise in comparing Normans has given me some "contrasting responses." I shall re-think VV as Bates , post haste.

I think what drives my criticism of Vaughn in the role is that whereas Perkins was always Hitchcock's first choice for Norman Bates(even though he looked nothing like the Norman of the book)...Vaughn seemed to be cast because he was the first guy who said yes and was available(unlike Phoenix...hey Joaquin PHOENIX in a Psycho...that might have meant something.) Honestly, about 20 other guys said no , including Van Sant's Good Will Hunting guys, Matt Damon and Ben Affleck.

Still, Vaughn took the role and made something different of it. He improvised a bit of stuff in the parlor scene, as I recall. And he added more to a line to Arbogast about the photo of Marion:

Perkins: That's not a very good picture of her.

Vaughn: That's not a very good picture of her(pause)...AT ALL!

Thus forcing Macy to change his lines a bit:

Perkins: That's not a very good picture of her.
Balsam: I guess not.

Vaughn: That's not a very good picture of her
Macy: I guess not.
Vaughn: AT ALL!
Macy: (Repeating himself deadpan.) I guess not.

A little fun with the original there...

[–] MissMargoChanning (6630) 7 years ago

"Still, Vaughn took the role and made something different of it. He improvised a bit of stuff in the parlor scene, as I recall. And he added more to a line to Arbogast about the photo of Marion:

Perkins: That's not a very good picture of her.

Vaughn: That's not a very good picture of her(pause)...AT ALL!

Thus forcing Macy to change his lines a bit:

Perkins: That's not a very good picture of her.
Balsam: I guess not.

Vaughn: That's not a very good picture of her
Macy: I guess not.
Vaughn: AT ALL!
Macy: (Repeating himself deadpan.) I guess not.

A little fun with the original there... "

It really wasn't that much of a change there.

If we are talking about change, look at Vaughn as Norman watching through his little peep hole. He's definitely getting himself off!
That is a change. You couldn't do that in 1960 but it seems like a natural thing that Norman would have done. It makes sense when you think about the sort of man that Norman was.
We may also want to check out the character of Sam in the 1998 version..... He was nothing like the Sam in the book and he certainly wasn't like the Sam in the 1960 version.
This Sam was actually sort of a sleaze.
The 1998 version may have been filmed shot for shot but when you look at it, it has a number of subtle changes. It is actually quite unique in it's own right.
I suppose that you could call it "a little fun with the original" But over the years I have come to appreciate those small changes.
I will always love the 1960's Hitchcock version. It's my favorite.
Over the years though, I don't hate the other version any longer.

As a resident of Wisconsin, I love the book best. We live only 20 miles from Plainfield. The author was here at the time of the arrest of Ed Gein. This story was based on that case. Norman was based on Ed.

[–] ecarle (14979) 7 years ago

Interesting thoughts.

--
Thanks.

--

You seem to have missed one other Norman. How about the young Norman in the 1990 TV movie played by Henry Thomas? It was Psycho IV: The Beginning. Anthony Perkins was also in it.

---

I snuck Thomas in the section on Perkins in general. Poor structure on my part.

I realize this is a long thread of OPs and I really should have separated them out.

I will go and make that change now.

Thanks again.

[–] lennonforever (2453) 7 years ago

Norman will ALWAYS BE Perkins. Freddie Highmore was very good ,though.

[–] MissMargoChanning (6630) 7 years ago

I agree about Perkins. When I first saw Psycho, I never knew about Bloch and his connection to the Gein case. As a child, I'd heard so much about those horrible things from folks around here. I found out later on in life that Psycho was based on those terrible events.
Perkins will always be Norman to me.

[–] Greenleaf24 (126) 7 years ago

Freddie's "Norman" performance was incredible and beyond disturbing. I was pleasantly surprised at first and quickly realized that he was taking great care with Perkin's character and we were in great hands. One of the best ever!

[–] ecarle (14979) 7 years ago

1990: Henry Thomas' Norman in "Psycho IV"

8 years out from ET and his sweetly charming role as Young Elliott(perhaps as iconic in its own child role way as Norman Bates is in his way) Thomas played Young Norman in what seemed a horrible violation of his famously sweet blockbuster role. Henry's Young Norman was more strapping and physically powerful than Perkins; that was wrong right there. But the script had him do horrible things "in full view" -- and as a matter of "breaking the motif"(butcher knife stabbings) he even strangled one victim rather than stabbing her. That sequence, in which Thomas wears Mother's famous duds (the "Hitchcock version") indeed ends up looking silly: a young man dressed like a grandma doesn't play if rendered so realistically.

I did like how screenwriter Joe Stefano(who wrote the original of course) gave Norman Bates one of Marion Crane's lines from 1960:

"Not inordinately."

Janet Leigh said that when she filmed Psycho, she blew this line over and over again. Hitchcock allowed this, understanding that it happens on a movie with an actor. But she was a star. Had she been lesser...Hitchcock might have fired her(as he did with lesser actors who didn't know their lines.)

Ingrid Bergman kept blowing the same line in a take for Notorious, and when she finally got it, Hitchcock yelled "Cut" and then said, "Good morning, Ingrid!"

[–] MissMargoChanning (6630) 7 years ago

8 years out from ET and his sweetly charming role as Young Elliott(perhaps as iconic in its own child role way as Norman Bates is in his way) Thomas played Young Norman in what seemed a horrible violation of his famously sweet blockbuster role. Henry's Young Norman was more strapping and physically powerful than Perkins; that was wrong right there. But the script had him do horrible things "in full view" -- and as a matter of "breaking the motif"(butcher knife stabbings) he even strangled one victim rather than stabbing her. That sequence, in which Thomas wears Mother's famous duds (the "Hitchcock version") indeed ends up looking silly: a young man dressed like a grandma doesn't play if rendered so realistically.

8 years! I think that most people can accept that. He had done other things in those "8 years" between ET and his stint as Norman.
As for a young man dressed up like a grandma, Norman had to start somewhere......

[–] ecarle (14979) 7 years ago

8 years! I think that most people can accept that.

---

Oh, I suppose I should have accepted that. But then, I very much loved ET and felt his had been one of the greatest child performances ever. To see him stabbing and strangling and poisoning people seemed like a bit of a betrayal.

Its probably how people felt about Tony Perkins the first time around, come to think of it. HE had always played nice guys, too.

---

He had done other things in those "8 years" between ET and his stint as Norman.

---

Notably, "Cloak and Dagger," by the director of Psycho II, Richard Franklin. With a now elderly John McIntire(Sheriff Chambers of Psycho) and his wife Jeanette Nolan(a rumored Mrs. Bates and general screaming voice in "Psycho") as a kindly old couple who are really villainous spies. Thus, over two movies, director Franklin worked with Anthony Perkins, Vera Miles, and John McIntire.

---
As for a young man dressed up like a grandma, Norman had to start somewhere......

---

Ha. OK. Accepted. I just felt that showing Norman walking around in that outfit too much rather devalued its mysterious power....