MovieChat Forums > Psycho (1960) Discussion > "And the WAY he Died"

"And the WAY he Died"


This post is, perhaps, an offshoot of our ongoing argument about the lengthy "psychiatrist explanation scene" at the end of Psycho...with a reminder from me that a fair amount that the doc discusses is "the solution of a mystery" that Hitchcock has been working for the entire movie. The shrink isn't ONLY teaching us about the split personality of Norman Bates.

Back up to the parlor scene between Marion and Norman. Though some have seen this scene as establishing a touching "human connection" between the two that is so poignant the shower murder seems to betray it, there can be no doubt that Norman comes off as pretty weird and hostile during the conversation too(notably, near the end, when its really Mother speaking through him -- "People cluck their thick tongues and suggest, oh so very delicately...."

Though Psycho doesn't become a shocker(THE shocker) until the shower scene at the 47 minute mark, I contend it becomes a horror movie at about the 30 minute mark: when the Bates house first appears on screen in all its reptilian Gothic glory(in the rain, yet.) Mother glides past that window and we just FEEL a horror movie coming on.

And this continues on into the parlor scene. The stuffed birds. Norman's comment about how if he left his mother "It would be cold and damp, like the grave."

But also this: Norman tells Marion how after his father died and some years passed, "Mother met a man." He's the man who convinced her to build this motel ("He could have convinced her to do anything.")

"And then he died....and the WAY he died...its not really something you should discuss while you're eating," says Norman.

An interesting element enters the story. This "ordinary motel keeper" and his mother up in the house, have a man in their past, a man who died in some...horrible way. Hitchcock is laying groundwork here: we want to know MORE about the past of Norman Bates, we sense he is holding back some secrets. And if a man died in a horrible way...

Marion puts up with all this weirdness, and a discussion of horrible death because, well, because Norman seems so harmless and she's so tired and just wants the night to think things over.

But soon, MARION will die a death -- the way SHE dies, its not something to discuss while you're eating. She was actually being prepared for her own death, in a weird way.

The plot point of the "man who died a horrible death" is left alone -- pretty much forgotten -- until Sheriff Chambers spells out to Sam and Lila What Happened Ten Years Ago: Mother poisoned this fellow she was involved with, and took a helping of the same stuff herself. Strychine. Ugly way to die.

So now the audience "gets it" but is confused. "And the WAY he died" -- the boyfriend -- WAS horrible. Strychnine. But Norman said that Mother was still ALIVE.

At this point folks may be guessing that Mother is dead and that Norman is Murdering Mom. Hitch and Stefano give Chambers that great red herring line "Then who's that woman buried in Greenlawn Cemetary?" to throw us off track("Oh, Mother killed another woman and had her buried in her place") but...how could that be if the cops found mother dead with her boyfriend? The way I figure it, audiences simply couldn't think that quickly to see the glaring contradiction here. Hitch keeps the story moving.

And thus of course, ONLY at the end , ONLY in the shrink's speech, does the mystery which has been planted once one way(with Marion in the parlor -- the man died) and once by the sheriff(with Sam and Lila -- Mother poisoned the man and herself) FINALLY get explained(No, NORMAN poisoned the man AND his mother -- matricide, the most unbearable crime of all.)

Psycho has always gotten positive points for the utter suspense simplicity of the plot: woman gets killed, detective tracing her gets killed, loved ones tracing the detective capture the killer; but complex plotlines(almost all of them from the past) thread through the entire movie and keep us in a different kind OF suspense: What DID happen to that man(the boyfriend)? How DID he die? Did Mother REALLY die?

The shrink tells all...and a few things more...

reply

If that was Norman's mother in the window then who is buried in Greenlawn Cemetary?

reply

If that was Norman's mother in the window then who is buried in Greenlawn Cemetary?

---

That's the line. And a great line it is. For elsewhere in this scene with the Chambers, the truth is edging out: if Mother is dead, who is doing the killing? Norman?

But the line misleads us -- Mother is still alive, she killed another woman who was buried in her place.

Except, again: if Mother was found dead, with her boyfriend, the Sheriff shouldn't be wondering who is buried in Greenlawn Cemetary...

By the way, I kind of figure that one reason the twist ending held for many folks in 1960 is because it was difficult to get their heads around the idea that Norman would dress up like a woman to do his killings. Just hard to think about ...until it was revealed to be the truth.

reply


Agree 100 percent that Simon Oakland's scene works. First of all, we need to see this whole thing spill out on
Sam's and Lila's face. And the psychiatric explanation doesn't date. And the scene is nicely staged and shot,
and isn't overlong.

reply

Always willing to re-open on this scene. It is very good and indeed, we've been waiting half the movie for Sam and Lila to learn what we know. That's called "ending the suspense."

Also, I always point out these vital pieces of information given us nowhere else in the film:

ONE: Norman killed his mother and his lover. That's HUGE. Explains practically everything about his split personality.

TWO: Norman stole his mother's corpse, gutted it, stuffed it with sawdust and preservatives. Perhaps the most shocking plot reveal in movie history to that date. "Unheard of." True horror. That wasn't just a decomposing body in the fruit cellar.

THREE: Norman killed two other young women before Marion. Marion wasn't the first one, he was a serial killer. Who made a mistake this time: killing a woman with a private eye and loved ones on her tail.

Aside from this vital plot information, the scene has a certain "ebb and flow" and drama to it; this movie needs some closure. Not to mention: the psychiatrist is telling 1960 audiences a "campfire horror story" that could NEVER have been filmed in 1960 (the gutting of Mother? No way.)

reply