MovieChat Forums > Psycho (1960) Discussion > What's In a Name? -- There is a new 2020...

What's In a Name? -- There is a new 2020 Movie Called "Psycho" (and a 2018 one called Frenzy)

posted 5 years ago by ecarle (14979)
6 replies | jump to latest

I think this is interesting.

I was surfing streaming the other day, and one of the movies advertised with a small poster on the TV screen was: Psycho.

I thought: "Oh, Psycho is in rotation. The old one or the new one?"

And then I looked closer at the poster. The logo "Psycho" was NOT the famous slashed word of movie legend. The word was rather splashed, like blood. And Anthony Perkins, Janet Leigh, Vince Vaughn and Anne Heche were nowhere on the poster.

So I clicked on the movie and started to watch.

Seconds into the film, a photo/drawing of Hitchcock appears along with the words "Dedicated to Alfred Hitchcock" or some such. So far, so good.

And then the movie proper begins....with a realistic, grisly knife beheading of a woman and the placement of her headless corpse in a public place.

It was gory, stomach-churning stuff, sort of in the "Henry: Portrait of a Serial Killer" vein. And it had nothing to do with Hitchcock or Norman Bates or the Bates Motel. THIS film's psycho is not the famous Norman Bates.

I turned it off.

Then I looked it up and got this data:

"Psycho(2020)...directed by Myshkin. With Udhayanidhi Stalin, Aditi Rao Hydari, Nithya Menon. Based on the Buddhist tale of Anguliamala."

Huh? What goes on here?

To me, the questions of the day is: CAN you give the title of one of the most famous movies of all time to your movie, when it is not based on the same material? And if you can, SHOULD you?

I'd say you shouldn't. But Psycho has been so aped and rebooted and leached from over the years, oh...why not.

THIS Psycho, on the basis of the first five minutes, is simply too sickening and gory for a large audience. It hasn't been released in US theaters to my knowledge(of course, COVID-19 stopped any chance anyway.) I suppose it will drift away into nothingness -- rather like the Van Sant version of the Hitchcock film.

But still...why put THAT title on THIS movie. And then slapping Hitchcock's visage on the film up front.

And this: Evidently this director , Myshkin, has respect and a canon of work in the "international" field. Which might make this "Psycho" even worse -- it was made by a "respected international filmmaker?"

Most curious.

As a legal matter, I guess you can go ahead and recycle any title. If somebody out there wants to slap the title Citizen Kane or Casablanca or The Godfather or The Exorcist or Jaws on some unrelated movie in the future -- go for it.

There is this "on point" irony:

When Hitchcock announced that his next film would be called "Frenzy," in 1971, the author of the book from which Hitchcock was making that movie, Arthur LaBern, sent Hitchcock a friendly letter saying "Mr. Hitchcock, are you aware that a film named Frenzy was already released in 1944, from a script by Ingmar Bergman?"

True. Indeed, the Swedish Frenzy gets an entry next to Hitchcock's Frenzy in David Thomson's book of 1000 Great Films, "Have You Seen?" But the 1944 Frenzy was called "Hets" in Sweden and sometimes called "Torment" in America as well as Frenzy.

In any event, Hitchcock didn't heed LaBern's counsel, and called his movie Frenzy anyway. The novel was called Goodbye Picadilly, Farewell Leceister Square"; the only other tentative title for the Hitchcock film was, I've read: "Necktie." Alfred Hitchcock's Necktie. Eh, no.)

So I suppose what was good enough for Hitchcock(using the title Frenzy again) was good enough for Myshkin(using the title Psycho again).

But wait, there's more. Nowadays if you look up the title "Frenzy" on IMdb, you get THREE. The 1944 Swedish one, the 1972 Hitchcock one(officially a British one); and a 2018 American "straight to video" one: about young people menaced by a bunch of sharks. (Hey, a "Frenzy" based on "Jaws"?)

I suppose the makers of the 2018 Frenzy figured that nobody remembered Hitchcock's 1972 Frenzy at all, let alone a 1944 film.

Me, I always liked "Frenzy" as a follow up serial killer title to "Psycho." Classic "single word" Hitchcock titles(unlike Family Plot or The Man Who Knew Too Much.) Both words were strong and conveyed something scary, and as I like to point out -- Psycho could have been called Frenzy(Mrs. Bates kills in a frenzy) and Frenzy could have been called Psycho(Bob Rusk is a psycho.)

I think "repeat titles" have occurred elsewhere "at the movies." Particularly when the earlier title was barely seen. For instance, there's a 1962 movie with Kirk Douglas called "For Love or Money" AND there's a 1993 Michael J. Fox movie called "For Love or Money." Neither was a classic. The Kirk Douglas one is a fun anomaly: its a glossy Universal rom com in the Cary Grant tradition; Douglas is a lawyer trying to marry off the three beautiful daughters of a very rich woman -- Thelma Ritter!(in mink; it was about time.) Of course, Kirk lands one of the daughters for himself. A staple of NBC Saturday Night at the Movies.

[–] ecarle (14979) 5 years ago

Legal question: do you have to pay somebody for a title? If you use the story and characters of Psycho, you have to pay SOMEBODY. But for the word? Psycho? I guess not.

Two final notes in passing:

Writer-director Samuel Fuller in 1960 tried to register the title "Psycho" for his new movie. Hitchcock fought that, and somebody(the Writers Guild?) ruled in favor of Hitchcock: Psycho, the novel, was there first. So Fuller renamed his movie Shock Corridor(it came out in '63.)

Robert Bloch said that Paramount was against Hitchcock ever making Psycho and...."they didn't even like the title."

Psycho. I guess it was too "tabloid" for a Hitchcock film, maybe?

Hmm. I'm glad its called Psycho -- with that great slashed logo -- but what else could have it been called?

How about Bates Motel?

Or "Crazy Lady"(the title Bloch gave the movie in his book Psycho II.)

You gotta admit..."Crazy Lady" really cuts to the chase....

[–] swanstep (2715) 5 years ago

But the 1944 Frenzy was called "Hets" in Sweden and sometimes called "Torment" in America as well as Frenzy.

I've see Torment (1944). I never knew it was a.k.a. Psycho!

Anyhow, it's been a while, but I remember liking Torment (1944) quite a lot. I remember it made me question the role of a director a bit since the film *feels* *exactly* like any other early Bergman. At least 50% of Bergman's projects are somewhat grim, realistic depictions of families and other conformist social structures in Sweden squeezing the life out of people. Torment's script was clearly one of those. Maybe, then, the point is that any Swedish director [at least one coming out of the central Swedish tradition - Torment was produced by Victor Sjostrom who was *the* Swedish silent film director, e.g., The Ghost Carriage (1922), Wind (1928)] would have made essentially the same film of Bergman's script.

Reading around now to refresh my memory it turns out that Bergman actually did direct the big final sequence of the film, the most emotionally complex scene with the rousing final shot.... Maybe Sjostrom (who'd later star in one of Bergman's best, Wild Strawberries) ordered the director to give Bergman that chance. At any rate, Torment is close to being a Bergman co-direct, which is what it feels like.

[–] ecarle (14979) 5 years ago

I've see Torment (1944). I never knew it was a.k.a. Psycho!

---

Actually...aka Frenzy. I know I'm confusing the two titles a lot in my post....its funny how close the titles are in meaning and yet the movies ...entirely different. The Hitchcock movies, I mean.

---

Anyhow, it's been a while, but I remember liking Torment (1944) quite a lot. I remember it made me question the role of a director a bit since the film *feels* *exactly* like any other early Bergman.

---

That's an issue, isn't it? I haven't made a study of this, but it is said that Billy Wilder SCRIPTED movies, with other directors, really looked and felt like movies directed by Wilder.

With a modern artist, we have the three(I think three) QT-scripted movies directed by other people: True Romance, Natural Born Killers, From Dusk Til Dawn. Of the three, Oliver Stone seems to have obliterated the QT feeling in Natural Born Killers -- its an Oliver Stone movie in look and feverish feel, and I can barely hear QT's lines at all.

True Romance "made" Tarantino with that scene between Dennis Hopper andChristopher Walken(with the "N" word in full, early Tarantino flower, making its ugly-funny splash). And "From Dusk Til Dawn" actually has Tarantino in it --its QT gone Midnight Movie(a precursor to Grindhouse.) Interesting: Travolta knew a gorefest when he saw one, he turned this down -- George Clooney took the lead, as QT's brother. They were sure bad guys -- until the movie did a "Psycho" and switched from a crime story(hostage-taking division) into a night of vampire fighting to the death, and then George and QT(a rape-killer in this) became HEROES.

[–] ecarle (14979) 5 years ago

At least 50% of Bergman's projects are somewhat grim, realistic depictions of families and other conformist social structures in Sweden squeezing the life out of people. Torment's script was clearly one of those.

---

That seems to be the Bergman "theme" - and Woody Allen evidently aped it well enough with "Interiors." (All those other writer directors like DePalma copycatting Hitch...Woody aimed for the fences of esoteric influence.)

I have been thinking about Ingmar Bergman lately -- having set myself a goal of renting or streaming some of his movies and "taking the dive" into experiencing them. I will do this. In the meantime, I've been re-seeing stuff like Urban Cowboy and Poseidon and The Outer Limits in some lazy "stream surfing" -- but I'll get there.

And I'm thinking this: in this day and age with an emphasis on diversity in film casting and film making -- will Bergman end up being the "whitest writer-director of all time?" Maybe -- and it would be a fitting "niche" given the "white" social themes he takes up. Every culture deserves their day.

----

[–] ecarle (14979) 5 years ago

Maybe, then, the point is that any Swedish director [at least one coming out of the central Swedish tradition - Torment was produced by Victor Sjostrom who was *the* Swedish silent film director, e.g., The Ghost Carriage (1922), Wind (1928)] would have made essentially the same film of Bergman's script.

--

Its possible. Here is David Thomson(partial) on Frenzy/Hets/Torment:

BEGIN:

"I wouldn't dispute that Bergman is by far the larger figure(than Alf Sjoberg, director of ...heh...Frenzy.) But that's no reason to neglect Sjoberg. The disappearance of his Miss Julie from critical appraisal is a bewildering thing.nd Frenzy is not just a sinister, disturbing film, but a clear influence on Bergman for several years and at least one source of his guilty obsession with sexual discovery."

END

I will note in passing that I think Hitchcock hired an actress from Miss Julie for I Confess, but had to release her over some scandal; "she went back to her fjords," Hitch told Truffaut, and Anne Baxter took the role.

Also this: it seems like a few Bergman films have been construed as "quasi-thrillers." Persona and Hour of the Wolf at least got POSTERS than suggested this in the 60's. And is not The Virgin Spring an influence on "Last House on the Left"? I expect for the most part, this is just the advertising. Bergman was not a thriller maker.

[–] swanstep (2715) 5 years ago

Also this: it seems like a few Bergman films have been construed as "quasi-thrillers." Persona and Hour of the Wolf at least got POSTERS than suggested this in the 60's. And is not The Virgin Spring an influence on "Last House on the Left"? I expect for the most part, this is just the advertising. Bergman was not a thriller maker.

Terrible things happen in Bergman films but it's never exciting....so, no thrillers. His films are always rather static feeling & he's just not going to be everyone's cup of tea (or anyone's exclusive film diet) for this reason.

Note that even if you've never seen a Bergman film, you've been touched by a lot of films that were influenced by him. Set aside all of Allen's & Schrader's & Mazursky's explicit homages & consider all those slightly, proudly offbeat films in the '70s where character not action or plot is king, and those characters are kind of stationary or stuck, mysteries even to themselves, maybe victims but also inflicting pain on others, etc.. Think of McCabe & Mrs Miller, The King of Marvin Gardens, Carnal Knowledge, Scarecrow, Two-lane Blacktop, T.R. Baskin, Girlfriends. There's a bit of Bergman in all these films.