Moriarty sends in a report to Father Geek that is sure to generate some rabid talk backs. I'll just fade away and let the genius of all psychos state his position on the subject...
Moriarty" here.
As an Evil Genius, I'm not interested in being loved, and I find that it's sometimes better not to court respectability. Recently I've come under fire on this site for my firm loathing of SIMON BIRCH (a view I stand behind -- I hate the movie, not the adaptation, folks), and I have a feeling that it's about to get even worse.
You see, I'm interested in Gus Van Sant's PSYCHO.
Oh, sure, I did the same knee-jerk thing everyone has done regarding this film. "What? He's doing what? And shot-for-shot?! What is he, fucking crazy?!" To tell you the truth, I still think Van Sant's crazy. This is the most radically experimental major studio picture since BACK TO THE FUTURE II. I don't know how Van Sant ever snuck this one by the studio, but I figure he just kept whispering "SCREAM" in the ears of the execs while he got them to sign the contracts and the checks.
One of the reasons I'm able to deal with this with something resembling an open mind is because I'm not really nuts about the original PSYCHO. It's a decent thriller that is technically stylish, but it's got some story flaws and an ending that is just DEATH to sit through. Of Hitchcock's work, I far prefer VERTIGO and REAR WINDOW, or even NORTH BY NORTHWEST. PSYCHO has always been a film that I've respected, but it's never been a film I loved.
The advertising blitz for PSYCHO '98 (as I'll call it to distinguish between the two) got underway during the MTV Music Video Awards, and I thought the two ads they showed were arresting and bold. They definitely got my full attention.
Since then, I've seen at least four different spots, and they're all fascinating. The recreation footage is more exact than I'd even thought possible. Vaughn looks interesting. Seeing these images that are so familiar in color with different actors is almost hallucinatory. I mean, we know these shots. Even someone like me who's not the biggest fan in the world has seen these images so many times that they're permanently engraved in my brain. The effect is surreal.
Now, having commented on what I know from having seen the trailers, let me pass along the newest rumor I've heard from a fairly reliable Universal source.
What I've heard -- and I pass it along with a big fat grain of salt stapled to it -- is that Van Sant's whole plan is to publicize this recreation, lull people into thinking they're going to see the same film, and even start the film the same way. It's when we reach the shower scene that Van Sant plans to pull the rug out from under the audience by taking the film in a radically different direction. All this talk of the shot-for-shot recreation... it's a smoke screen. Everything's been a lie, a ruse, a "McGuffin," if you will.
We've all heard about how shocked audiences were to see Janet Leigh, a fairly well-known actress and the supposed lead of the film, die less than halfway in. Well, there's no way to shock or surprise a modern audience to the same degree, especially not while remaking such a well-known film... or is there?
Could Van Sant have something up his sleeve? Was Joseph Stefano brought in to do more than just change the price of making a phone call? Could this film be a worthy companion to the original?
Remember... Hitchcock himself was a risky filmmaker. ROPE is little more than an experimental gimmick stretched to feature length. Hitch remade his own films when he felt like it. Hitch was a firm believer in taking advantage of new film technology to try and better his previous efforts.
I guess what I'm saying is... well, damn it, I'm interested.
Of course, now that I've said that, I can hear an army of close-minded film geeks outside the castle walls, all chanting and buring effigies of yours truly. I've gotta go see if I can find my short range nuclear device, so I'm afraid I must say...
"Moriarty" out.
