MovieChat Forums > Psycho (1960) Discussion > The Wacky Rumor that George "Superman" R...

The Wacky Rumor that George "Superman" Reeves Was Signed to Play Arbogast, But Died

posted 4 years ago by ecarle (14979)
46 replies | jump to latest

From the "Trivia" Section of the Internet Movie Database(IMDb):

BEGIN:

A false story has circulated that George Reeves was hired to play detective Milton Arbogast and filmed a few of his scenes with the rest of the cast just a week before his death. There is no truth to this rumor whatsoever. Reeves died on June 16, 1959, almost two months before Sir Alfred Hitchcock decided to make this movie, and exactly one year before the June 16, 1960 date when this movie had its world premiere in New York City. Work on the script began in October, 1959, four months after Reeves' death. Filming began in November, 1959, five months after Reeves' death. At the time of Reeves' death, Hitchcock was on a world tour promoting North by Northwest (1959). (Source: "The Dark Side of Genius: The Life of Alfred Hitchcock," by Donald Spoto.) George Reeves did not live long enough to even know a movie of "Psycho" was planned, much less appear in it.

END

So there you have it. Impossible that George Reeves -- for most of the 50's, the star of the TV series "Superman" and hence a very famous fellow -- even knew that Psycho was going to be made, let alone was signed to play Arbogast, let alone filmed any scenes, before his untimely death by gunshot in 1959.

But what's MORE impossible about this rumor to me is -- that somebody chose to develop it and broadcast it, at all. Just how and why DID this crackpot story circulate?

A not unhelpful clue comes in a review for a 2006 movie called "Hollywoodland," which starred Ben Affleck AS George Reeves and gave us the story of the confusion and mystery surrounding his "suicide" by a gunshot to the head. The movie suggests that Reeves was murdered, possibly by the Hollywood mogul's wife he was ending an affair with, possibly the mogul himself, or the mogul's hirelings. Or possibly -- indeed a suicide, given Reeves supposed frustration that Superman had effectively killed his career doing anything else and he couldn't get work when the show ended (also see: Adam "Batman" West.)

When I read reviews for Hollywoodland in 2006, one stood out: it "backgrounded" Reeves with a sentence like this:

"In 1959, George Reeves had completed work on his Superman series, but had been cast as the detective Milton Arbogast in Alfred Hitchcock's Psycho. "

Reading this, I did a bit of a double take -- "What? WHAT?" I'd never read that in any book or article on Psycho. I can only assume that the movie critic reviewed the information in background materials on "Hollywoodland" from the studio that made it. Which STILL begs the question: who the hell came up with THIS rumor?

What's funny about the rumor, I think are two things:

ONE: A look at George Reeves' 1950's output OTHER than Superman finds a man who barely worked in anything else at all. Famously he's barely in "From Here To Eternity"(many scenes were cut when audiences yelled out "Superman!") A couple of other movies. But NOTHING to build up much "character guy cred" as Arbogast needed. (Martin Balsam was early in his career, but at least he had 12 Angry Men, Al Capone, Middle of the Night, a TV drama about Sacco and Vanzetti the bombers, and a TON of other dramatic TV work on his resume.) Reeves had nothing of this caliber in the 50's.

TWO: Once you hear/read the "George Reeves as Arbogast" rumor, its hard NOT to think about Reeves in the role. He was an amiable enough fellow as Clark Kent in suit and tie; take off the eyeglasses and you can certainly see Reeves in the hardware store with Sam and Lila; maybe even grilling Norman in the dark at the motel. But as soon as you "see" George Reeves in the Arbogast scenes -- he just doesn't fit at all.

Not to mention: SUPERMAN getting slashed in the face and killed by an old woman? Hitchcock simply wouldn't have made the casting.

So the biggest mystery of all about the "George Reeves as Arbogast" rumor is this: WHO started it? And WHY? Somehow the rumor ended up in materials circulated by the "Hollywoodland" producers to film critics.

I can't wait for the "Red Skelton was cast as Arbogast" rumor to begin....

PS. The records reflect that even though Arbogast is a tall, tan Texan in a Stetson in Robert Bloch's book(think Malcolm Attebury, the farmer in NXNW and the sheriff in The Birds), he became short stocky urban Martin Balsam on recommendation of Psycho screenwriter Joe Stefano. No other choice was even considered -- Hitch made the hire on the basis of viewing 12 Angry Men.

[–] swanstep (2715) 4 years ago

That's a wild rumor alright!

even grilling Norman in the dark at the motel.

Really? Did Reeves have the actor chops to go toe to toe with Perkins like that? Seems unlikely. And surely Reeves would have felt in the same 'big lunk/jock' category as John Gavin - suddenly the 'spacing' of the movie would be off, e.g., we wouldn't have the sense of Sam/John Gavin being a *new* kind of threat to Norman in Act 3.

This story vaguely relates to two other point of interest.

1. The MEF video commentary guy on youtube recently posted (or maybe it's a re-post) his take on Breakfast at Tiffs (it's one of his best commentaries - more traditionally structured films with big stars are better humor targets for his hillbilly schtick). When balsam shows up he yells "Arbogast!":
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ew_IC7NKkAY

2. A fateful casting decision that I only read about recently: Marvel's first choice for Black Widow (whose first picture was Iron Man 2) was Emily Blunt. Blunt turned down the role to honor her commitments to do a truly lousy version of Gullivers Travels starring Jack Black. Obviously Blunt's career has been fine and I've really enjoyed Scarlett J's Black Widow, but it is rather mind-banding to think of how differently BW probably would have played with the slightly more reserved, bigger and more naturally athletic, but slightly less voluptuous or cartoonish Blunt in the role.

[–] ecarle (14979) 4 years ago

That's a wild rumor alright!

---

Very wild. For several reasons. One being that I cannot conceive of Alfred Hitchcock seeking to put George Reeves in a significant role in any of his movies in the 50's when Reeves sole claim to fame was Superman. (In the 40's maybe, BEFORE Superman; Reeves had been in Gone with the Wind and was a more "standard" supporting guy.)

Another being that , it seems so "alien" for George Reeves to have been cast as Arbogast, given his background at the time. If I were told that, say, Jack Warden almost played Arbogast, or Edmond O'Brien almost played Arbogast, or Simon Oakland almost played Arbogast, or even Walter Matthau(1960 serious version) almost played Arbogast ...I could see it and accept it. But George "Superman" Reeves? It doesn't compute.

Another reason being that -- as you note below, its hard to believe that George Reeves had the "acting chops" to handle the role of Arbogast(including the semi-improvised office interrogation scene AND the immortal and horrific death scene.)

But the main reason being that, the rumor itself is so...psycho....that I keep wondering: WHO started it? And on what basis? The rumor seemed to arrive fully formed with the promotional materials of "Hollywoodland" (2006) But SOMEBODY must have started the rumor years before that -- maybe it was in a 1960 article about the recently dead George Reeves, an agent's "wishful thinking" about "what might have been."

[–] ecarle (14979) 4 years ago

even grilling Norman in the dark at the motel.
Really? Did Reeves have the actor chops to go toe to toe with Perkins like that? Seems unlikely.

--

Oh...no. I miscommunicated. What I meant was, I could SEE George Reeves in those scenes(put him in there, in my mind) and then...I could NOT see him "Fitting" --- pulling it off with any degree of the seriousness and professionalism that Martin Balsam gave in the film.

---

And surely Reeves would have felt in the same 'big lunk/jock' category as John Gavin - suddenly the 'spacing' of the movie would be off, e.g., we wouldn't have the sense of Sam/John Gavin being a *new* kind of threat to Norman in Act 3.

---

Ha. Yeah the movie couldn't have TWO John Gavins (I'm reminded that, in 1971, John Gavin was actually signed to play James Bond...until Connery agreed to come back in Diamonds are Forever -- Superman, Bond, they "connect a bit.")

Its also a great point that Arbogast's "threat" to Norman (as a short middle-aged detective asking shrewd questions, but only PARTIALLY having the physical power to back them up with enforcement) is different from Sam's: younger, taller, more strapping...ready to fight Norman with ease(we think) , and maybe overcome Mother -- until we see Norman knock him right out.

--

[–] ecarle (14979) 4 years ago

It remains one of those "classic movie strokes of luck" that Hitchcock, in choosing Martin Balsam for Arbogast, not only got an Actors Studio-trained pro for this key role, but got an actor's whose PHYSICAL features --- round balding head -- became a work of art unto themselves. I am thinking of that often "frozen frame" of Arbogast right after the knife slashes down his face -- head tilted back and up, eyes wide in terror, mouth open and gaping in shock, even his NOSTRILS joining the "painting of concentric circles" (round head, round eyes, round mouth, round nostrils.) The image of Arbogasts slashed face in that close-up expands the horror of the moment and stands as "art."

You can see a freeze frame of William H. Macy as Arbogast (1998 remake) after the face slash on YouTube and the "round circle" effect with Balsam just isn't there. Though Macy went for a more "confused and dazed face" under initial attack. He's in shock.

And you cant see George Reeves pulling this off, at all.

[–] ecarle (14979) 4 years ago

1. The MEF video commentary guy on youtube recently posted (or maybe it's a re-post) his take on Breakfast at Tiffs (it's one of his best commentaries - more traditionally structured films with big stars are better humor targets for his hillbilly schtick). When balsam shows up he yells "Arbogast!":
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ew_IC7NKkAY

--

Ha. I'll have to take a look. Though Balsam did a few TV episodes right after Psycho, Breakfast at Tiffany's was, I think, his next screen appearance after Psycho and I'll be a LOT of audience members thought: "Arbogast!" Balsam was now a very unforgettable character in a blockbuster movie -- it would take a while to shake it. (Eh, maybe Balsam was in Ada between Psycho and BAT , I'm remembering -- but nobody saw THAT one.)

[–] ecarle (14979) 4 years ago

2. A fateful casting decision that I only read about recently: Marvel's first choice for Black Widow (whose first picture was Iron Man 2) was Emily Blunt. Blunt turned down the role to honor her commitments to do a truly lousy version of Gullivers Travels starring Jack Black. Obviously Blunt's career has been fine and I've really enjoyed Scarlett J's Black Widow, but it is rather mind-banding to think of how differently BW probably would have played with the slightly more reserved, bigger and more naturally athletic, but slightly less voluptuous or cartoonish Blunt in the role.

---

Movie history is filled with "people who didn't get the big role," and it does seem that luckily enough, they get ANOTHER role(for Blunt, not in Gulliver's Travels but in later films up through Mary Poppins) that makes them. Still, those major Marvel roles are like a guaranteed millionaires income (RDJ got such for 12 years) so it probably stings Blunt a bit.

Note in passing: one of the 2020 summer blockbusters that has been consigned to perdition until the world comes back stars the unlikely pairing of The Rock and Emily Blunt in a film of another Disney ride: Jungle Cruise. Could it be another Pirates of the Carribean?(Money for The Rock and Blunt for years to come, as came to Johnny Depp?) Or another Haunted Mansion(a fading Eddie Murphy couldn't make a franchise out of that one.)

It will be a long time finding out!

PS. A famous "person who didn't get the big role" was Tom Selleck, initially selected to play Indiana Jones. CBS wouldn't let Selleck out of Magnum PI. Spielberg cast Harrison Ford over initial objections from George Lucas that a "Star Wars" lead shouldn't play Indy.

It worked out for Ford -- whose career was drowning in dreck like "Force 10 From Navarone" . As for Selleck, an attempt at launching a movie star career failed and he stuck to TV. "A wonder" was this maybe the right outcome, after all? That Ford WAS meant to be a movie star, and Selleck was NOT?

[–] ecarle (14979) 4 years ago

Note in passing: one of the 2020 summer blockbusters that has been consigned to perdition until the world comes back stars the unlikely pairing of The Rock and Emily Blunt in a film of another Disney ride: Jungle Cruise. Could it be another Pirates of the Carribean?(Money for The Rock and Blunt for years to come, as came to Johnny Depp?) Or another Haunted Mansion(a fading Eddie Murphy couldn't make a franchise out of that one.)

---

Having brought up Johnny Depp, I have to comment: that British libel trial he launched against his ex-wife(the super-hot Amber Heard) and the disastrous testimony on both sides. Its gossip, yes, and their two careers(his more than hers) are probably doomed now(though Hollywood loves comebacks) but -- in these terrible times this story of Hollywood spoiled children and how one of them managed to blow through $650 million dollars is more than a cautionary tale: its kind of an indictment of excess. Too bad, I really liked Johnny Depp as a movie star, and that marriage always looked like trouble from the get go.

[–] ecarle (14979) 4 years ago

A bit more on George Reeves(Arbogast left largely out of it, but not entirely.)

I guess his death being a REAL suicide remains a possibility. Which brings us to the issue of TV typecasting ruining a career. Reeves was largely cut out of the important "From Here to Eternity" because of Superman razzes from the audience -- was he really "unemployable" after the Superman run?

A streaming service has a threadbare but poignant documentary on Adam West, who got a mere three years of fame on the Batman TV series (1966-1969) and plunged into decades of joblessness. Somehow he pulled through -- his wife stayed with him the whole time, he moved his family to Idaho, he borrowed money from his father to live. And then, a few decades AFTER Batman, some kids who grew up to be showrunners themselves started to hire West for both live action and voice work. (He had a GREAT voice.) West was also saved by "autograph shows," which helped many old time TV and movie stars.

I suppose that George Reeves would be facing a similar downfall in the 60's but..maybe not. There were a lot of TV series being made; you would think that he could have been hired at SOME level(not Arbogast level, but some level.) Maybe not by showrunners who were kids when Superman was on(those weren[t grown up)...but showrunners with KIDS who loved Superman.

But we'll never know. There is this , though: at the time of his death, George Reeves may have been struggling with his career, but he was still attractive to a number of women and at least one of those affairs may have contributed to his death if it WASN'T suicide. George Reeves was still a star with some ladies..

PS. For "fate and coincidence" buffs: TV's Superman was played by George Reeves. The first major movie Superman was played by Christopher Reeve. And both met with tragedy and early deaths.

[–] swanstep (2715) 4 years ago

Having brought up Johnny Depp, I have to comment: that British libel trial he launched against his ex-wife(the super-hot Amber Heard) and the disastrous testimony on both sides. Its gossip, yes, and their two careers(his more than hers) are probably doomed now

Agreed... While I haven't been following the trial closely it sounds ghastly, mutual assured destruction. The trial is also legally/logically bizarre. Depp's brought the case for libel against a newspaper for calling him a 'wifebeater'; the paper has responded with the defense of 'truth' citing all of the prior reporting in the gossip press and otherwise of Depp & Heard's marriage inferno; and so now Heard & Depp have to litigate just as evidence a full domestic violence & abuse case that had never been properly before the courts before. Heard and Depp were able to grit their teeth and get through their actual divorce (and arrive at a settlement) without a complete public airing of this stuff, but now in the evidence phase of a libel case it's all come out in the most destructive way possible.

[–] swanstep (2715) 4 years ago

Well not *the* most destructive way. If the violence/marriage breakdown had originally occurred in the UK, Depp would now be in jeopardy of facing a subsequent trial for the domestic violence! One of the most famous cases in UK legal history followed this terrible path: Oscar Wilde, against friends' advice, brought a libel case against his lover's father, The Marquess of Queensberry, who'd called Wilde a 'sodomite' (i.e., who was corrupting the Marquess's son).

The Marquess used the defense of 'truth' &, after 3 days of excruciating trial, Wilde, seeing his peril, withdrew his charges. Too late! Charges of 'Gross Public Indecency' and so one were promptly filed by the State against Wilde. Wilde goes to jail for several years, never really recovers, and dies at age 46 in exile in Paris.

I don't suppose Depp's case is going to end up as famous, or as tragic as Wilde's but the 'terrible self-inflicted wound' of his libel case is going to be studied for a long time. Of course, Depp hasn't lost the case yet... but assuming he does.

[–] telegonus (736) 4 years ago

No,--or yes, EC--I agree that George Reeves would have been a poor casting choice for Arbogast in 1958-59,--but who knows?--if Hitch had considered him, and Reeves was "brushing up on his Shakespeare", this might have energized him, given him a new lease on life even as the role itself might seem like a "career killer" in most other respects. Though for the record, Reeves would be dressed like Clark Kent, not Mr. Supes, so it's not like Our Favorite Superhero's gonna go down those stairs in tights.

Another problem here (of many) is director Hitchcock's aversion to actors who don't have prestigious credentials, even if it's primarily radio. He seldom used veteran cowboy actors (let alone stars) in his films. Where are the Hitch features with good supporting roles for Walter Brennan, Arthur Hunnicutt, Lee Van Cleef and Pat Buttram? I remember Sometime western player Rod Cameron in a Hitch half-hour (The Man Who Found The Money) but how many others like him are there? I recall seeing "sometime" western players like Brian Keith and Robert Bray in occasional TV Hitch episodes, but who else?

In this, Psycho was a classy production, with John McIntire as the local lawman, not Jon Lormer. Used car dealer John Anderson was inspired in Psycho. Now let's try to imagine Edgar Buchanan,--who could be inspired when playing a frontier con-man--playing California Charlie. If they hadn't used Simon Oakland as the shrink I can see Hitchcock vet Macdonald Carey doing nicely in the same role, albeit in a different key.

[–] ecarle (14979) 4 years ago

No,--or yes, EC--I agree that George Reeves would have been a poor casting choice for Arbogast in 1958-59,--but who knows?-

---

Hey, telegonus!

Well, I think what remains the truly interesting thing about this story is it would be great to find out (somehow) who came up with it and WHY.

The timeline seems to show that Reeves was dead before Psycho was cast -- though it may have been close. The novel came out in April of 1959, Hitchcock bought it shortly thereafter, Reeves died in June 1959-it is actually CONCEIVABLE that Hitchcock or his casting director had Reeves in mind for Arbogast,

I re-read the IMDB entry, which says:

"....Reeves died on June 16, 1959, almost two months before Sir Alfred Hitchcock decided to make the movie..."

Suddenly, I realize, that's WRONG. Two months would be August of 1959. I'm pretty sure that Hitchcock decided to make Psycho in April of 1959 -- when he decided to buy Bloch's novel. Actual PRODUCTION of Psycho began in late November of 1959. In the seven months in between, Hitchcock hired and fired a first screenwriter(James Cavenaugh), pitched Anthony Perkins on Norman, pitched Janet Leigh on Marion(those were the two big roles.) It is , again, CONCEIVABLE that George Reeves may have been in the "casting mix" in late April, May, and early June before his June 16th death. But I'd love to know more.

---

[–] ecarle (14979) 4 years ago

if Hitch had considered him, and Reeves was "brushing up on his Shakespeare", this might have energized him, given him a new lease on life even as the role itself might seem like a "career killer" in most other respects.

---

I would suspect that George Reeves would feel that if he could get into ANY Hitchcock movie, he could turn his career around, and maybe even leave Supes behind for good. I can see Reeves as the kind of handsome support in sixties movies starring Rock Hudson or Tony Curtis(Reeves would be middle-aged by then, maybe a "boss" type for those movies.)

Of course, Arbogast was a role that didn't SEEM to lend itself to light comedy roles later...but Martin Balsam was soon playing such in Breakfast at Tiffany's and some Dean Martin movie.

---

Though for the record, Reeves would be dressed like Clark Kent, not Mr. Supes, so it's not like Our Favorite Superhero's gonna go down those stairs in tights.

---

Ha. Yes. When I "picture" George Reeves as Arbogast, the glasses are off as well as the tights. Just a character guy in a character role.

Except it is rather key to Arbogast as Martin Balsam created him(likely to Hitchcock's liking)...the man is tough enough, but not physically formidable. He's short. He's at once slight AND stocky - he's "takeable in a fight" unless there's something we don't know about him. (Do ALL private eyes in real life have to be fighters like fictional Peter Gunn?) "Superman" is anything but "takeable," slight, stocky, etc.

[–] ecarle (14979) 4 years ago

Another problem here (of many)

---

With George Reeves? Yes -- many!

---

is director Hitchcock's aversion to actors who don't have prestigious credentials, even if it's primarily radio. He seldom used veteran cowboy actors (let alone stars) in his films. Where are the Hitch features with good supporting roles for Walter Brennan, Arthur Hunnicutt, Lee Van Cleef and Pat Buttram? I remember Sometime western player Rod Cameron in a Hitch half-hour (The Man Who Found The Money) but how many others like him are there? I recall seeing "sometime" western players like Brian Keith and Robert Bray in occasional TV Hitch episodes, but who else?

--

I suppose that part of this is that the "classic" Hitchcock thriller was meant to be "urbane and sophisticated" and so even Hitchcock's supporting players were, too. John Williams was British -- and I think Leo G. Carroll(whom Hitch used in the move movies) was too. And then there is Sir Cedric Hardwicke in Rope.

Hitchcock rarely went "rural," but I suppose when he did, he cast a bit from the Western ranks. Psycho had its "rural" characters. John Anderson (California Charlie) was in a lot of Westerns. John McIntire(Sheriff Chambers) was in a lot of Westerns. Mort Mills(the highway cop) was in a lot of Westerns. And Frank Albertson(Cassidy) is DRESSED like a Westerner.

Another "rural" Hitchcock film is "The Trouble With Harry" where we find tall and lanky Royal Dano as the local deputy sheriff.

But no, for the most part, Hitchcock seemed to want a certain "seriousness" in his supporting players. Buchanan had a funny cracker barrel delivery; Hunnicutt was near-hillbilly. Another good but rather cartoonish character guy, Arthur O'Connell, never made it into a Hitchcock either. It occurs to me that Hitch wanted(and needed) rather menacing, cold people to populate his thrillers. There wasn't much room for "warmth."

[–] ecarle (14979) 4 years ago

In this, Psycho was a classy production,

---

Which was "weird," given its roots in sleazy cheapjack horror movies of the time. But that's what made it a classic, among other things. One take I've read on Psycho was that Hitchcock mused aloud "what if one of these cheapjack horror movies was made by a good director with a good script and production?" The answer: Psycho.

---

[–] ecarle (14979) 4 years ago

with John McIntire as the local lawman, not Jon Lormer. Used car dealer John Anderson was inspired in Psycho. Now let's try to imagine Edgar Buchanan,--who could be inspired when playing a frontier con-man--playing California Charlie.

--

I'm reminded here that as much as a movie fan as I am, I've never REALLY known exactly how movies are made, and casting is one such area.

Take male leads. One figures in any decade of "movies," filmmakers look at the list of major male stars, make offers to the leads they want -- and then see if they get them or not. If they don't...they get another male star from the list.

Here's a roundelay I read of recently. Cary Grant was wanted for "Charade," and if he did it, Audrey Hepburn agreed to do it with him. Grant dropped out to do Howard Hawks' "Man's Favorite Sport," instead. So Hepburn dropped out of "Charade." So now "Charade" was set up with...Warren Beatty and Natalie Wood. But Grant decided he didn't want to do "Man's Favorite Sport" after all, called "Charade" producer director Stanley Donen and said "I'll do Charade, if you want me?" Beatty and Wood OUT. Grant and Hepburn IN.

But who to cast in "Man's Favorite Sport?" Rock Hudson went for it. Which meant that Rock Hudson pulled out of "Marnie"(yes, Hitch wanted to work with Hudson.) So Marnie went to "newbie" Sean Connery. "And everybody was cast happily ever after."
---

[–] ecarle (14979) 4 years ago

That's male leads. I remain very curious about how large supporting casts get cast. I got a clue (with Hitchcock) in the book about the making of Marnie.

There was a quote from his casting director: "Hitch said I could cast everybody except the top four parts." Which would have been Hedren, Connery, Baker, Latham. Louise Latham was brought to Hitchcock by her friend, the screenwriter of Marnie, Jay Presson Allen.

And Joseph Stefano, screenwriter of Psycho, famously recommended Martin Balsam for Arbogast and Simon Oakland for the psychiatrist -- one figures that Stefano pictured those men while writing their roles..

Anyway, we can figure that Hitchcock allowed his "Psycho" casting director to cast everyone except the top five parts(Norman, Marion, Lila, Sam, Arbogast) -- likely for Hitchcock's final approval. (I have read that he wanted Alan "Fred Flintstone" Reed for Cassidy, though.)

Arbogast wasn't a big enough role to get Martin Balsam a photo in the Psycho poster or any more than one lobby card photo(Arbogast shows Norman Marion's photo.) But I figure that Hitchcock wanted that role "cast with care" -- its a near-lead.

"From the other side": You're an agent trying to get your actor cast. You get all the necessary information about what movies are about to be made, and a list of the characters who need to be cast. Its conceivable that George Reeves' agent saw Psycho being put together, got a character list, put Reeves forward for a character part.

[–] ecarle (14979) 4 years ago

If they hadn't used Simon Oakland as the shrink I can see Hitchcock vet Macdonald Carey doing nicely in the same role, albeit in a different key.

---

You're a good casting director, telegonus! I can see Carey being more of a "gravitas guy" and maybe warmer towards Lila. Oakland famously went for a "bombastic" take which edged into his being a rather humorous character -- "the doctor sounds as crazy as his patient" wrote one wag.

Trivia: Psycho scenarist Joe Stefano said he wanted the psychiatrist to be a WOMAN - -because HE was seeing a woman psychiatrist at the time. Hitchcock decided no, it should be a man(I'll guess because the psychiatrist has to talk about matters of sexual arousal.)

I wonder what 50s/60s character actress might project the right "gravitas?" From Hitchocck's own stable -- Barbara Bel Geddes(Vertigo) maybe?

I'll take other suggestions!

[–] telegonus (736) 4 years ago

Some good stuff here, EC, and all of it true or close enough. I certainly agree that Edgar Buchanan's vocal style better suited him to comedic or semi-comedic roles. He appeared in more serious parts early on, yet as the years went by Hollywood recognized the actor's "funny bone". (I see a similar "development" in Chill Wills, but from the other end of the telescope, as he continued in his folksy vein now again right to the end of his career, yet he was downright frightening as a cowboy type, and near diabolical seeming in the Hitchcock half-hour about a voluble boy taking a long distance train ride with his parents in what turns out to be snowstorm, and the consequence on what he should do when he sees a desperate man outside trapped in the snow, ponders what to do about it; the right thing or the selfish one. Wills was even more sinister in a Night Gallery revolving around how Wills behaves around ex-doctor Burgess Meredith and the contents of his black bag.)

As to Hitch and other "rustic" players, I believe that Royal Dano was a classically trained stage actor who bore a resemblance to Abraham Lincoln somewhat, and had an "Old American" look about him whether Revolutionary War period, the western frontier, clipper ship, whaling vessel or New England farm. Dano was classy and quite versatile, and he had range; could play preacher, teacher or town marshal. I can't see him as California Charlie, but he'd have made a fine Al Chambers, and a decent Mr. Lowrey for Psycho. Any number of fine actresses could have played Mrs Chambers, though Lurene Tuttle got it, Jeanette Nolan or Ellen Corby have have done it well. As to Arbogast, Martin Balsam made the part his own. Nor am I sure that his short stature reduced his "formidability" . Short though he was, he was stocky, not slight framed. In a fight with George Reeves he could have given the much larger man a run for his money; and I can seeing him easily handling Tony Perkins. But a mad Perkins rushing down staircase with a knife, the quick head wound, the shock killed him; and it would have killed Reeves just as easily.

[–] ecarle (14979) 4 years ago

I certainly agree that Edgar Buchanan's vocal style better suited him to comedic or semi-comedic roles. He appeared in more serious parts early on, yet as the years went by Hollywood recognized the actor's "funny bone".

---

You would have more "depth back in time," telegonus, than I on Mr. Buchanan. I suppose he "bought it" when he became "Uncle Joe"("That's Uncle Joe, he's a movin' kinda slow at the Junction...Petticoat Junction")

Around the time that show was on the air, in 1962, Buchanian played a serious role, as a high mountain frontier judge, in his cracker barrel way -- in Peckinpah's "Ride the High Country." After helping the heroes and heroine escape, Buchanan's final scene fades out on a group of vengeful toughs beating him...perhaps to death.

Back to humor: John Ford's Hawaii-based comedy "Donovan's Reef"(with John Wayne and Lee Marvin), opens in snowy Boston as Buchanan's lawyer reads the particular of a will for a wealthy family saying "I'm not with the snooty law firm this family usually hires -- I'm the second rate lawyer the family hires to do shady things." Funny.

Character actors are a matter of "tone." Had Edgar Buchanan played California Charlie or Sheriff Chambers, things would have shifted towards the comical. And that's not good...Charlie is meant to be judgmental and menacing; Chambers is meant to express "the law."

[–] ecarle (14979) 4 years ago

Appropos of "something": back in the 70's, a studio friend gave me the script of a movie called "Lucky Lady" to read. Before production began. It was Stanley Donen's 1930s action comedy about rum running off the coast of California, with Gene Hackman, Liza Minelli and Burt Reynolds in the leads.(Hackman came in for George Segal, who quit.) I knew who the leads were to be when I read the script, but I didn't know who was to play the main gangster villain. I pictured a big guy like Al Lettieri (from The Godfather and The Getaway), maybe George Kennedy.

In the movie it turned out to be...John Hillerman, the moustache-wearing , rather small and slight, and unctuous soon-to-be co-star of Magnum PI. I thought this casting was so far off the mark it helped ruin the movie(among other things that did.)

I'd say that's an example of "miscasting the support" that Hitchcock rarely(never?) made.

Speaking of Hitchcock and his support..there are some records of Hitchcock treating them with less deference than his stars.

An unnamed character guy was playing the psychiatrist who tells Midge about Scottie's catatonic state in Vertigo. He couldn't get his lines straight. Hitchocck would do multiple takes until Ingrid Bergman and Janet Leigh got THEIR lines straight -- but not supporting actors. The character actor was fired on the spot, and evidently it only took HOURS to replace him with Raymond Bailey(Drysdale on The Beverly Hillbillies.)

A named(but unknown) character guy had a role in Topaz. Hitch didn't fire him; he filmed his scenes. Then he brought in ANOTHER character guy , re-cast the role and shot that. The other actor showed up to see Topaz and realized his role had a different man in it.

Finally, at a level somewhere between support and star, Roy Thinnes got to play Arthur Adamson in Family Plot for a couple of weeks before being fired by Hitchcock and replaced with William Devane.

[–] ecarle (14979) 4 years ago

I see a similar "development" in Chill Wills, but from the other end of the telescope, as he continued in his folksy vein now again right to the end of his career,

---

Chill Wills. First of all: what a memorable name. And he had the quintessential "country boy" drawling voice(he voiced Francis, the Talking Mule -- NOT Mr. Ed). He was fine support "around the edges" in Giant. Famously, he milked his Supporting Actor Nomination for "The Alamo"(in the Psycho year of 1960) via some awful trade paper advertising. As he aged, gained weight, and physically deteriorated, he indeed took on a sinister cast. He's downright creepy in Peckinpah's "Pat Garrett and Billy the Kid."

I have not seen his Hitchcock and Night Gallery offerings. I'll have to remember to find them and take a look.

[–] ecarle (14979) 4 years ago

As to Hitch and other "rustic" players, I believe that Royal Dano was a classically trained stage actor who bore a resemblance to Abraham Lincoln somewhat,

--

I think Dano PLAYED Lincoln somewhere, sometime. I'd say that John Anderson, California Charlie himself, also had a "Lincolneswque" face.

--

and had an "Old American" look about him whether Revolutionary War period, the western frontier, clipper ship, whaling vessel or New England farm.

---

Dano is an example of that line in Sunset Boulevard: "They had faces then."

---

Dano was classy and quite versatile, and he had range; could play preacher, teacher or town marshal. I can't see him as California Charlie, but he'd have made a fine Al Chambers, and a decent Mr. Lowrey for Psycho.

---

A nice thought here is that though the supporting cast people in Psycho are all great an memorable -- OTHERS could have played their parts, too. But "the casting director Gods" dealt these cards, this time. The Birds, one film later , would have roles for the more amusing character people Richard Deacon and Doodles Weaver...a bit less precise and serious , in my view.

---

Any number of fine actresses could have played Mrs Chambers, though Lurene Tuttle got it, Jeanette Nolan or Ellen Corby have have done it well.

---

Jeanette Nolan was the real-life wife of Sheriff Chambers himself, John McIntire, and they often played husband and wife on screen. I guess Hitch just wasn't interested in that "gimmick." Though it is rumored that Nolan did some voice work as Mrs. Bates(more extensively done by a woman, Virginia Gregg, and a MAN, Paul Jasmin.)

[–] ecarle (14979) 4 years ago

As to Arbogast, Martin Balsam made the part his own.

---

He most certainly did. You know, on the internet there are about three or four articles about Balsam as Arbogast -- rather as with Norman Bates and Marion the Shower Victim, I'd say this character has taken on a certain legendary status. He's really the first MALE slasher victim in movie history, and -- working backwards from his spectacular murder -- he may be famous FOR That murder scene, but his acting in the 20 minutes before that scene turned out to be pretty memorable, too.

---

Nor am I sure that his short stature reduced his "formidability" . Short though he was, he was stocky, not slight framed.

---

I"d line to refine my statement about him being "slight, but stocky." I've had reason to see him in some the movies he made right before Psycho -- 12 Angry Men(where he plays a juror in a tight tee-shirt; the character coaches sports); Middle of the Night, and Al Capone(he's a crooked reporter.) And in those films -- particularly Middle of the Night, he struck me as more slight than he was as ARBOGAST. I wonder: did the Method-trained Balsam add weight, hit the gym, "bulk up a little" to play Arbogast. Perhaps he saw Arbogast as an ex-cop or soldier, a tougher guy. However -- he WAS slight in those other movies. In Middle of the Night, its like he's a Big Round Head mounted on a small, thin body.

--

[–] ecarle (14979) 4 years ago

In a fight with George Reeves he could have given the much larger man a run for his money; and I can seeing him easily handling Tony Perkins.

--

As Arbogast keeps pressing Norman, we instinctively think: this private eye could beat Norman up, Norman can't make a move. This sets up Arbogast in our minds as "formidable" and then Mother shockingly dispatches him "just like that."

The miscasting in Van Sant's Psycho of TRULY slight William H. Macy versus Supertall, strapping Vince Vaughn changed their interrogation scene and Macy seemed more easily taken by Mother(he climbs the stairs almost in fear.)

---

But a mad Perkins rushing down staircase with a knife, the quick head wound, the shock killed him; and it would have killed Reeves just as easily.

---

Yes, indeed. The killing of Arbogast was carefully thought out by Hitchcock and Stefano. In the book, Mother slashes Arbogast's throat as he raises his head to speak to her directly(in the foyer.) Which makes sense, ambush-wise.

In the film, we have Mother using THE STAIRCASE ITSELF as a murder weapon, along with the knife. Once Arbo is falling down those stairs, his goose is cooked("the back broke immediately, it hit the floor," noted Hitch in his trailer film.)

By the way, while some believe that the blood on Arbogast's face(a seminal "slasher moment") popped up from a stab to his chest, I think it is a face slash. Hitchcock told Truffaut about how a tube was put on Balsam's face and a string released the blood(you can see it in slow motion.)

And one writer on Psycho contended that more than just a face slash, this wound "punctured the brain" of Arbogast. Maybe so, which would mean he was REALLY dazed as he fell.

One last thing: somewhere up there, I mentioned how the Arbogast of the book was described as looking like Malcolm Atterbury. I got THAT name...from you. One of your posts, telegonus, some time ago.

[–] jasonbourne (1027) 4 years ago

>>Ha. Yes. When I "picture" George Reeves as Arbogast, the glasses are off as well as the tights. Just a character guy in a character role.

Except it is rather key to Arbogast as Martin Balsam created him(likely to Hitchcock's liking)...the man is tough enough, but not physically formidable. He's short. He's at once slight AND stocky - he's "takeable in a fight" unless there's something we don't know about him. (Do ALL private eyes in real life have to be fighters like fictional Peter Gunn?) "Superman" is anything but "takeable," slight, stocky, etc.<<

George Reeves would've been too tall to play Arbogast. He's listed as 6' 2" in wiki. Anthony Perkins is almost 6' 3". I read Hitchcock hired dwarf actress Mitzi Koestner to portray Norma Bates. Hitch was afraid the audience would figure it out as Arbogast's murder comes a bit past the half way point. Martin Balsam is 5' 7".

'In the finished film, the "Mother" we occasionally see on screen was actually played by three different actresses -- Margo Epper, Anne Dore, and Mitzi Koestner. The diminutive Koestner also appeared as a "Munchkin" in "The Wizard Of Oz" (1939).'

...

'The voice of "Mother" in the movie was handled by three other people -- Virginia Gregg, Paul Jasmin, and Jeanette Nolan (who was married to another "Psycho" cast member, John McIntire)."

https://the.hitchcock.zone/wiki/Norma_Bates

[–] ecarle (14979) 4 years ago

George Reeves would've been too tall to play Arbogast. He's listed as 6' 2" in wiki. Anthony Perkins is almost 6' 3".

---

Perkins was that tall? He doesn't look that much taller than Martin Balsam in their face-to-face on the porch, but I guess so. At the time, Perkins was famous for a very thin build -- and very broad shoulders. One wag said Perkins was "built like a Pterodactyl."

But yes, I have to believe that Hitchocck, in casting Martin Balsam(and Joe Stefano in recommending him) realized that a big strapping private eye would not seem to be believably routed by "an old lady." Van Sant went a bit overboard with the very "wimpy" looking and sounding William H. Macy. Balsam was just right. In close-ups, his face is tough and formidable. Its just his body that isn't up to the job(well, not after a staircase fall and a face slash.)

I've got "Peter Gunn" re-runs on streaming; I watch them for fun(some of them played in 1960, the year of Psycho, and they are b/w LIKE Psycho), but I'm reminded: Craig Stevens as Peter Gunn is a Korean War veteran with both fist-fighting AND judo skills, and most episodes have him duking it out(long, vicious, and often to the death) with bad guys. Balsam's Arbogast was proabably a "gag" on the Peter Gunn model -- he gets wiped out in seconds, no fight allowed.

---

[–] ecarle (14979) 4 years ago

I read Hitchcock hired dwarf actress Mitzi Koestner to portray Norma Bates.

--

Yes, evidently JUST for the shot when she comes out the door and meets Balsam face to face; Mrs. Bates at the bottom of the stairs looks more "Full sized."

---

to a Hitch was afraid the audience would figure it out as Arbogast's murder comes a bit past the half way point. Martin Balsam is 5' 7".

---

Anthony Perkins was quoted to that effect. While Perkins was famously allowed to go to NYC to rehearse a musical(Greenwillow) during the week that the shower scene was filmed; he was evidently back at Universal and on-set to watch "Mother" kill Arbogast.

---

'In the finished film, the "Mother" we occasionally see on screen was actually played by three different actresses -- Margo Epper, Anne Dore, and Mitzi Koestner. The diminutive Koestner also appeared as a "Munchkin" in "The Wizard Of Oz" (1939).'

--

So Arbogast was killed by a munchkin! Ha.

[–] ecarle (14979) 4 years ago

You know, I'm not sure that Janet Leigh was ever face to face with the Mrs. Bates who killed her in the shower == Margo Epper. Epper got all those medium shots and close-ups "by herself" and then "shared the shower" with nude double Marli Renfro as "Marion."

But Martin Balsam MUST have had to "share the screen with his killer" -- both when Mrs. Bates ran out the door at him, and then when Mrs. Bates finished him off on the floor. I know it was "just acting," but I'll bet Balsam was a bit unnerved to have to face "those women" in those shots. Balsam refused all interviews about Psycho -- I'd have LOVED to have asked him: "So, were you attacked by one woman...or two? Was one REALLY a little person? And...how did it feel to act out the attacks on you."

It doesn't ruin Psycho for me, but sometimes I picture Balsam lying on the floor with Mrs. Bates kneeling over him, knife upraised and -- Hitchcock yelling "Cut! Print!" and Margo Epper backing away from Balsam and maybe helping him up off the floor and the two of them patting each other on the back and walking to Hitchcock with Balsam saying "I'll bet THAT's gonna scare them, eh Hitch?"

Its just a thought.

..

[–] ecarle (14979) 4 years ago

'The voice of "Mother" in the movie was handled by three other people -- Virginia Gregg, Paul Jasmin, and Jeanette Nolan (who was married to another "Psycho" cast member, John McIntire)."

---

That's some great movie lore, there. For those who say that Mother's voice "was a cheat -- clearly a real woman's voice," Hitchcock could counter: "but sometimes, a MAN's voice." Word is that Virginia Gregg and Paul Jasmin did the voice in the main, and that Nolan "tested" the voice, but was also used for some of the screams of Leigh and Miles.

I think in Psycho as we have it, Paul Jasmin does the "cranky Mother"("Think I'm fruity, hah?") and Virginia Gregg does the quieter Mother at the end ("Its sad...when a mother has to condemn her own son...") Stephen Rebello said that Hitchcock have MIXED the two voices in the same sentence. Wow. Such technical precision.

Funny that Jeanette Nolan didn't land the role of "Mrs. Chambers" to her real life husband, John McIntire. But Nolan was in 1960 a bit too young and "sexy" for Mrs. Chambers; Lurene Tuttle was more "on point" as sweet and small town, I think.

You can see John McIntire and Jeanette Nolan in 1984 as "a sweet old couple" who turn out to be murderous spies in "Cloak and Dagger," directed by Richard Franklin(Psycho II) and starring Henry Thomas(ET and...Norman Bates in Psycho IV.) Funny that Franklin didn't use McIntire in Psycho II.

McIntire and Nolan had an actor son named Tim McIntire, who kind of got his father's craggy handsome looks and played some tough guys (in The Choirboys, he's brutal cop Roscoe Rules)...before dying young.

And Virginia Gregg -- alone -- voiced Mrs. Bates in Psycho II, III, and IV. Very nostalgic. I do believe that Rose Marie (The Dick Van Dyke Show) voiced Mrs. B in Van Sant's Psycho.

[–] jasonbourne (1027) 4 years ago

>>So Arbogast was killed by a munchkin! Ha.<<

Haha. It's really funny after learning what was done. What a joke played by Hitch. I had no idea as the way it was shot never made you realize Mother was a munchkin compared to the shower scene. We do see that Mother is smaller when we see Norman taking her down the stairs and into the cellar. It's shocking to see Arbogast falling backwards straight down the stairs the way he did and breaking his back and then getting killed. It's hard to think of every detail in those circumstances.

The big discrepancy is a taller Mother during the shower scene, but we only have Marli Renfro's character to compare her by. If someone could figure out Mother was Norman by Arbogast's killing afterward, then it would've been prophetic.

>>But Martin Balsam MUST have had to "share the screen with his killer" -- both when Mrs. Bates ran out the door at him, and then when Mrs. Bates finished him off on the floor. I know it was "just acting," but I'll bet Balsam was a bit unnerved to have to face "those women" in those shots. Balsam refused all interviews about Psycho -- I'd have LOVED to have asked him: "So, were you attacked by one woman...or two? Was one REALLY a little person? And...how did it feel to act out the attacks on you."<<

The falling down the stairs backwards and killing scene on the floor was a pretty good piece of acting. I didn't think about Balsam's acting so much as we hear him scream off camera. I think the role of Mother was by the munchkin at both the top of the stairs and bottom. That is the joke Hitchcock got over on us. I think the stunt woman Mother by Margo Epper was only in the shower scene.

[–] ecarle (14979) 4 years ago

It's shocking to see Arbogast falling backwards straight down the stairs the way he did and breaking his back and then getting killed.

---

Interesting: Arbogast breaking his back was mentioned by HITCHCOCK in his "tour guide trailer" ("The back broke immediately, it hit the floor.") Watching the scene, I'm not sure that comes across -- except that one realizes when we see Arbogast fall to the foyer floor, we have to remember the velocity of that spill down the stairs first.

---

[–] ecarle (14979) 4 years ago

It's hard to think of every detail in those circumstances.

---

Very hard. Over the years, I looked at still frames of the Arbogast murder(in Hitchocck/Truffaut and in the Richard J. Anobile frame-by-frame book), and I've run the scene in slow motion many a time.

But whenever I watch Psycho at "regular speed," its amazing how FAST the Arbogast murder is, really. Its almost a "blink and you miss it" scene and yet -- when I saw the scene with a full-house screaming crowd in 1979 -- it was like everything slowed down as they screamed loud(Mother out the door), louder(Arbogast's slashed face) and LOUDEST(mother finishes him off on the floor.) It is a sequence that seems to "trick the brain" into seeing everything even as it rushes by too fast TO see.

The attack on Arbogast was rehearsed extensively by doubles for Balsam AND Perkins, then choreographed with Balsam and his "killer." You can see the precision in their movements -- and Hitchcock's direction -- if you slow the attack down:

ONE: The cut on the door opening and light spreading cuts TO the murder the second there is no more light on the floor to show.
TWO: When Balsam reaches the top step and puts his left hand on the post at the top -- THAT's when Mother runs out.
THREE: Even from high above, you can see Mother's nose...this helps you think you are seeing the rest of her.
FOUR: When Mother raises her very big knife, a FLASH OF LIGHT hits the blade
FIVE: Screen right on the wall: the shadow of Mother brings the shadow of the knife down on the shadow of Arbogast(this didn't make it into the Van Sant version -- he put a big glass case against that wall.)
SIX: Arbogast drops his hat from his hand.
SEVEN: As Mother brings the knife down at Arbogast's face, he rears backwards, opening his mouth and setting up the big close-up of his bloodied face.

And ALL of that happens in less than four seconds...

CONT

[–] ecarle (14979) 4 years ago

Bonus details:

When Arbogast falls to the foyer floor and Mother leaps upon him, Mother's body blocks our view of Arbogast's face under attack(probably a Hays Code thing). Mother has pinned down one of Arbogast's arms to stab him, but his other arm flails around in a perfect circle(I expect that Hitchcock coached Balsam to make such a perfect movement.)

[–] ecarle (14979) 4 years ago

The falling down the stairs backwards and killing scene on the floor was a pretty good piece of acting.

---

Yes. Martin Balsam did great work, start to finish. His face when first slashed "locks in" to that famous freeze frame(Eyes wide open, mouth wide open, NOSTRILS wide open) and then, as he falls, he enacts for us a man in shock, disoriented, scared...he gives us every last moment of Arbogast's life.

---

I didn't think about Balsam's acting so much as we hear him scream off camera.

--

That scream -- deep, guttural, reflecting a man both in pain and in mortal terror -- "sells the shock." Arbogast has been silent for about four minutes before he dies..his scream is that last "human" thing he will do before becoming a corpse.
(In the Van Sant, William H. Macy screams -- or rather "yodels" -- all the way down the stairs, and "grunts" under the knife at the end. Its evocative...but not as chilling as Balsam's scream.)

[–] ecarle (14979) 4 years ago

I think the role of Mother was by the munchkin at both the top of the stairs and bottom. That is the joke Hitchcock got over on us. I think the stunt woman Mother by Margo Epper was only in the shower scene.

---

Well, "mother in action killing" is only shown those three times. I'm pretty sure it was only Margo Epper in the shower. Mother at the top and bottom of the stairs...a mystery. The munchkin twice? Hitchcock and Balsam took that to their graves.

Trivia: On YouTube there is(used to be?) a clip of the Great Auteur Alfred Hitchcock crammed onto a couch with about three other celebrities on "The Mike Douglas Show" in the 70's. He looks "reduced." I think Joan Rivers is one of them, maybe Steve Lawrence? But I KNOW that soul singer James Brown is on the couch. The exchange:

James Brown: Mr. Hitchcock, can you tell me, who , in your movie Homicidal, actually played the mother killing people?
Steve Lawrence: I think he means "Psycho."
Hitchcock(to Brown): If I told you...I'd have to kill you.

Everybody laughs. It remains a great mystery of Psycho -- who DID play Mother, when and where? Visually(and let's not forget MOther moving in the window -- Epper?) and aurally(Virginia Gregg, Paul Jasmin, maybe Jeanette Nolan.)

[–] jasonbourne (1027) 4 years ago

>>It's hard to think of every detail in those circumstances.<<

Actually, I was thinking when people watch the movie again.

After watching it the first time and discussing it, I suppose some would realize Norman is slender and tall, around 6' 3". We see scenes with him and John Gavin who is taller and more muscular. I looked up his height and he's listed as 6' 4". If Anthony Perkins was in the dress in the shower and Arbogast scenes, then we probably would be able to tell that it was Norman. However, since actors who aren't as tall were used and because of the angle of the shots from above, we don't really notice the difference. Even with multiple viewings, we don't really notice it. It could be the music, too.

ETA: The most telling scene is when Norman brings Mother down to the fruit cellar. You can see that she's shorter than Norman. I'm not sure if that was a prop or Norman bringing an actor down. There are different actors for Mother's voice, but I don't think it is so different that you don't believe it's coming from Norman. I think Norman made himself walk like his Mother so he wasn't as erect as Norman.

[–] ecarle (14979) 4 years ago

After watching it the first time and discussing it, I suppose some would realize Norman is slender and tall, around 6' 3". We see scenes with him and John Gavin who is taller and more muscular. I looked up his height and he's listed as 6' 4".

---

When Gavin is in profile in two-shot across the office desk from Perkins...Gavin looks a LOT taller than Perkins, and he has more size on him(beef, not fat.) Perkins looks downright small and spindly, for the first time in the film. "Everything is relative," but the feeling we have here is that Sam could easily beat Norman up -- a feeling that was "borderline" with Arbogast and simply not there with Marion. Irony, though: Norman knocks Sam out in their brief fight. But he doesn't put Sam all the way out -- lucky for Lila in the fruit cellar.

---

If Anthony Perkins was in the dress in the shower and Arbogast scenes, then we probably would be able to tell that it was Norman.

---

Perkins made comment that Mother in the shower scene is clearly not him in head-and-face shape, moreover, she's right handed with the knife, and Perkins was left handed.

Still, I don't think that was a cheat. When we finally DO see Norman in the wig, his head and face shape look different.

Hitchcock said somewhere that he thought "it would not be very nice" to make Perkins himself wear the dress for the murder scenes given that his face would not be shown. Famously, Perkins was allowed to fly to NYC to rehearse a play for the entire week the shower scene was filmed(Thank God the planes didn't crash, there and back to California!) Perkins evidently was on set for the Arbogast murder, because it was Perkins who revealed that "Mitzi the little person" attacked Balsam(but not how many times.)

---

[–] ecarle (14979) 4 years ago

However, since actors who aren't as tall were used and because of the angle of the shots from above, we don't really notice the difference. Even with multiple viewings, we don't really notice it. It could be the music, too.

---

As Hitchcock pointed out, Psycho would still be pretty scary even if you guessed that Norman WAS the killer, but Hitch decided to make a very carefully planned, very carefully shot film to "fool the audience" -- and to PLEASE them if they WERE fooled. (The Sting works rather the same way; its better if you fall for the twist.)

The shot where Norman goes upstairs and carries Mother down to the fruit cellar is certainly flamboyant (and technically difficult), but Hitchcock went to all that trouble for a very specific reason: to hide Mother's face when Norman carried her downstairs.. It is NOT a "wild shot for the sake of a wild shot." That said, the climbing camera and Herrmann's music combine to create a real creepy emotion that is part of the "dark magic" of Psycho. Norman is talking to Mother about her victims("He came after the girl...and now someone will come after him") and its just unnerving to see Norman carrying his Monster mother and discussing her murders. And this happens ASIDE from the "plot twist reason" for the shot.

[–] ecarle (14979) 4 years ago

ETA: The most telling scene is when Norman brings Mother down to the fruit cellar. You can see that she's shorter than Norman. I'm not sure if that was a prop or Norman bringing an actor down.

---

I think it was a prop...the same dummy put into the chair in the fruit cellar. You can tell by the size and the "bouncing legs," but also "she" seems very small and lightweight. Which would be the TRUTH -- a "long-dead mother" no longer has the water weight and musculature of a living person.

I got no proof, though. Just the way it looks. And I wonder if the "mother skull face" was attached to the dummy for Perkins walk...or used later, in the fruit cellar scene only. "The things we don't know about how movies are made."

--

There are different actors for Mother's voice, but I don't think it is so different that you don't believe it's coming from Norman.

---

That "old lady voice" has been cited by many as a "cheat." Clearly another person, a woman(?) The use of Paul Jasmin puts that accusation to rest, but it is still very clearly not Perkins' voice or timbre. I will say that Mother's voice DOES feel like a cheat to me(I hear Virginia Gregg a lot) but...hell, it worked.

---

I think Norman made himself walk like his Mother so he wasn't as erect as Norman

---

An intriguing thought. Mother certainly moves weirdly when we see her -- gliding across the window(from Marion's POV), her movements leading up to, during, and leaving the shower murder; stomping out at Arbogast on the landing. Norman clearly seen in the fruit cellar doesn't really get to move much as Mother, though.

[–] jasonbourne (1027) 4 years ago

>>Perkins was that tall? He doesn't look that much taller than Martin Balsam in their face-to-face on the porch, but I guess so. At the time, Perkins was famous for a very thin build -- and very broad shoulders. One wag said Perkins was "built like a Pterodactyl."<<

I think it's because Reeves is more built like Superman. I doubt people would say Perkins is a bigger, i.e. taller man, standing next to Reeves. I can see Reeves as the inyaface CHPs guy as he could look and play a menacing figure looking to write a ticket and maybe sneak a peek at what's in Marion's purse.

>>Perkins was that tall? He doesn't look that much taller than Martin Balsam in their face-to-face on the porch, but I guess so. At the time, Perkins was famous for a very thin build -- and very broad shoulders. One wag said Perkins was "built like a Pterodactyl."

Clearly, Norman is supposed to be bigger than Arbogast on the screen, but it's Arbogast who gets the better of him and traps him with his words. What does Arbo have. Presence? Control? Arbogast shows he has presence and gains control over Norman. He takes his control and turns away to get a look at Mother in the window. He doesn't waste any time getting to who he wants to talk with next as he's found all that he wants from Norman.

>>Yes, evidently JUST for the shot when she comes out the door and meets Balsam face to face; Mrs. Bates at the bottom of the stairs looks more "Full sized."<<

This really affected me. I didn't know Hitchcock was fooling us with how he showed Mother on the screen. One gets that slightly opened door and light and then the overhead shot which happens quickly and then Arbogast falling backwards down the stairs. That is a highly unusual setup for a killing; It happens fast enough, but gives you time to take it all in and then the killing is done off screen. The stunt woman could've been used there, but we're still trying to take in a big shocker.

[–] Adam60z (3766) 4 years ago

Alternate version: Norman Bates comes toward the shower with his knife. Then Superman smashes through the wall and stops him saving Janet Leigh!

[–] ecarle (14979) 4 years ago

Alternate version: Norman Bates comes toward the shower with his knife. Then Superman smashes through the wall and stops him saving Janet Leigh!

---

You could even have a bit where Norman/Mother stabs his/her big knife right into Superman's chest -- and it bends like rubber.

With Superman flying Norman into Shasta County police HQ holding him by the scruff of his neck by his dress!

[–] Adam60z (3766) 4 years ago

And Superman explains the whole thing: "Norman thinks he's his mother". Case is solved! But the only charge they could hold him on was being a transvestite, which wasn't illegal.

[–] ecarle (14979) 4 years ago

Yes, well, you've nicely changed "Psycho" into a comedy..and the murders have to "go away." Its funny how quickly the comedy images appear(for me, the knife bending against Superman's chest.)

[–] ecarle (14979) 4 years ago

>>So Arbogast was killed by a munchkin! Ha.<<

Haha. It's really funny after learning what was done. What a joke played by Hitch. I had no idea as the way it was shot never made you realize Mother was a munchkin compared to the shower scene.

---

We're so high up looking down as Mother comes rushing out at Arbogast, its hard to tell. Balsam at 5'7" was short for a movie star, but not THAT short. We use the term "little person" now and we don't differentiate between the words "dwarf" and "midget" , so I'm not really sure HOW short this Mitzi person was. Anyway, to me, I've always imagined Mother to be "full sized" when she comes out that door, and she certainly looks full sized kneeling over Arbogast to finish him off.

---

We do see that Mother is smaller when we see Norman taking her down the stairs and into the cellar.

--

Given the way Mother's tiny legs "wobble" as Norman carries her, I've always figured that was a dummy. As a "dramatic" matter -- once we know the twist ending -- that scene becomes even more creepy. Norman was carrying his DEAD, skull-faced(possibly stinky) Mother's stuffed corpse, her horrific face mere inches from his.