MovieChat Forums > Psycho (1960) Discussion > Shower scene is meaningless now

Shower scene is meaningless now

posted 3 years ago by Heisenberg (6306)
20 replies | jump to latest

The original impact of the premiere is long lost.
Everybody knows this scene before ever watching it.
Everybody knows its music.
Everybody knows she gets killed there, with a big knife.
So that's already spoiled.

Then, add that, given the limitations from 60 years ago, we see very little in the actual scene, it looks tame and sterile indeed. Any horror that comes out nowadays shows 1000 time more, this scene would be fine for a pg13 release.
Viewers are desensitized to splatter and horror.
So what's left?

[–] ChipDouglas (1602) 3 years ago

Agreed. People need to get over this movie

[–] SandyR (7341) 3 years ago

Not if they want to be informed scholars of cinema they don't.

If they're mindless Marvel/DC movie fans, why then, by all means, leave the good films to people with discerning taste.

[–] ChipDouglas (1602) 3 years ago

lmao "informed scholars of cinema"
cringe

[–] Sidha108 (2356) 3 years ago

I think the horror of Psycho is how “real” it is for a film made in the early 1960s with the characters talking about sex and displays of feminine intimacy. Most viewers probably associate the look and time period with shows like Andy Griffith, so it definitely is shocking in that regard.

[–] Heisenberg (6306) 3 years ago

Yeah ok but, that's all that's left.
To me the horror is his face as the mother when they catch him, and his final monologue, or the pov of Arbogast getting killed.
It's mostly the afterthought of these images, rather than seeing them.

Anyway, I am pretty sure that any of whatever stuff from Psycho makes us scared now, is just a tiny fraction of the horror it must have caused in the viewers of 1960. I think it was a complete shock for them, and I doubt we can get that feeling anymore from this.

[–] Egosomnia (791) 3 years ago

You always write shit don't you herr heisenburger.

When are you going to say something actually intelligent?

[–] Roguemail (1562) 3 years ago

Context is everything. Learn.

[–] TheArgentinian (6426) 3 years ago

Well, everyone knows that Darth Vader is Luke's father and that Bruce Willis is dead but that doesn't stop people from watching Star Wars and The Sixth Sense.

[–] Heisenberg (6306) 3 years ago

It does only stop the original impact of those scenes and movies as a whole.
Why do you think what you wrote are called spoilers? Because they improve the experience or because they ruin it?

[–] TheArgentinian (6426) 3 years ago

Nonsense. Those Movies aren't great just because of a twist.

[–] MichaelJPollock (649) 3 years ago

Right. To quote Scorsese: "they're about HOW they're about what they're about, not what they're about."

[–] Heisenberg (6306) 3 years ago

Right...
1- as anybody with 2 working brain cells can fathom, the 6th sense is exactly that, a movie of 2 hours about a twist that puts everything we watched in perspective. Proof of that is that its director built his whole carreer on that gimmick, that's how much he thinks his movie was solid on its own without that twist.
Without that twist it's a just very meandering and pointless ghost story.
2- the sixth sense is certainly NOT a great movie, it's barely ok exactly because of its twist. Take that away and it's just another boring horror with a kid.
3- Empire is great without that twist, but that's the exclamation point on 2 hours of epic space fantasy. Again, take that off the table and the whole thing comes down a notch, you can easily imagine that alternate ending (Luke, I had to kill your father because the dark side is the way, join me - Noooooooo!) and you tell me if you think that movie with that ending would be as good as the one we got.

[–] RichardBlaine (303) 3 years ago

Wait - Darth Vader is Luke's father?? What?!

[–] SandyR (7341) 3 years ago

Pay-per-view snuff.

[–] peter_t_2k3 (957) 3 years ago

I get your point. How many people do the stabbing thing while doing the score and most haven't even seen the film.

However it's still a great film for me and I don't think you can deny its influence on the slasher genre

[–] Heisenberg (6306) 3 years ago

Hey, not only it's still great, I love this movie and it is still scary.
But I'm sorry that its most iconic scene has lost its original impact and I won't ever get that experience.

[–] Garyandfilm (513) 3 years ago

Yeah, "Over the Rainbow" from The Wizard of Oz is now pointless, too.

Translation: the OP is an idiot.

[–] liscarkat (16496) 3 years ago

What a clueless original post. The fact that "we see very little in the actual scene" is what makes it so effective. Horror film makers today have forgotten how to pull this off. They, and the simpletons in their audience, mistake over-the-top gore for horror. They are children compared to Hitchcock.

[–] Heisenberg (6306) 3 years ago

Clueless my ass.
I am talking about the current impact of the scene.
I am perfectly aware of how horror can be affective when you don't show.
This is not such case.
Hitch had a load of troubles for this scene, and he had to go around the censors and convince them this was ok by actually explaining them what you think you are getting: that he didn't shoot a single naked frame nor knife going in the flesh. That you actually think you see some of it, but it's not there.
Well, that's great directing and editing. But believe me, if he could have shown her fully naked getting stabbed like in any modern horror, he would have. He just had no other choice.
Hitch was pushing the envelope here, it was a never seen before level of gory and gritty murder scene. What it's clear is that all that impact is lost, as nowadays this scene would not shock anybody who is familiar with modern horrors.