MovieChat Forums > Psycho (1960) Discussion > British Psycho Knock Offs

British Psycho Knock Offs

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

P.S. "British Psycho Knock Offs" would be an interesting thread for you to start, ecarle

---

Done.

You wrote on another thread:

on October 12th, 1959 (Psycho started filming on November 11, 1959), but it was not released until a three months after Psycho (released in June 16th, 1960) in September of 1960. It wasn't released in the States until 1961.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_City_of_the_Dead_(film)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vF7IB3n3UbU&ab_channel=FEATUREFILM

CotD was filmed in England, while Psycho was filmed in Hollywood. However, there is an undeniable similarity between the fates of the two "heroines" in both films, and the ending of the film with Mrs. Newlys/Selwyn is very reminiscent of "mother" in the fruit cellar. Apparently, though, it was just a coincidence - or did they reshoot certain parts of the movie to capitalize on Psycho (tinfoil hat time)? For such a low-budget film, that's a pretty long gap between principal photography and release. Hammer and Amicus studios did do a whole series of black and white Psycho rip-offs in the early 60s, most famously Hammer's "The Taste of Fear" from 1961. Michael Powell's film "Peeping Tom" was made in Britain in 1960 as well, although it is a very different different picture than Psycho (and in color), and doesn't seem as close to Psycho as City of the Dead does.

And swanstep responded:
CoTD struck me as pretty clunky when I saw it a few years ago, but there was definitely some resemblance to Psycho in the basic plot structure: Babe visits spooky small town and gets killed by motel/hotel owner who isn't quite what she seems; fiancé follows up Babe's disappearance and solves the crime and the small town's mysteries. With all its witch covens 'over the centuries' stuff, however, CoTD more closely resembles another 1960 movie, Mario Bava's Black Sunday (w. Barbara Steele). I'd definitely rank these films P > BS > CoTD, but there is a kinship between them. Horror was developing fast at the time, expanding boundaries and attracting ambitious directors to make stuff like Psycho, Peeping Tom, Eyes Without A Face, Les Bonnes Femmes, Virgin Spring. More purely genre work like BS and CoTD, while fun, couldn't quite compete in my view.

CoTD's babe-victim, Venetia Stevenson had an interesting biography: she was the daughter of Mary Poppins director Robert Stevenson, married Russ Tamblyn then later one of the Everly Brothers. Her daughter, Erin Everly married Axl Rose and famously inspired their mega-hit/classic 'Sweet Child of Mine' (she's in the vid.).

[–] ecarle (14979) 4 years ago

That other thread on "City of the Dead" has its own good follow up posts and can/should run its course.

But I'll run the responses above to "try" your other thread idea("British Psycho Knock Offs") and...either it will work or it won't. (In which case, the other thread WILL work.)

I would say this:

Even if COTD started filming before Psycho in 1959, it is possible that the makers read Robert Bloch's NOVEL of Psycho when it was PUBLISHED in April of 1959...and may have incorporated some of the plot devices into their film.

Here's something I cannot recall: when did Hitchocck "tell the world" that Psycho would be his next film? April, when the novel came out? Summer? Or not til November when production began? This would need some research. ( I do recall reading an NYT article in archives in which Hitchcock announced his cast : Perkins, Leigh, Miles, Gavin, and Balsam. Fall, I t hink.)

---

The run of "British Psycho derivatives" would include Maniac and The Psychopath, at least. And didn't Bette Davis and Tallulah Bankhead make some British psychopath films in the 60's?

Meanwhile, in the late 60s and early 70's , Robert Bloch himself was hired to pen some anthology horror/slasher movies like Asylum and The House That Dripped Blood.

This very week while I sampled the Halloween horrors on streaming, I found a 1959 British version of "Jack the Ripper" that I found really rather violent for its time. Did this movie ANTICIPATE Psycho? The Ripper kills with a big knife and we not only get the "downward stabbing" ala Arbogast, but some lingering roughhousing and near strangulation of the hooker victims before the (unseen) knife goes in. (As with Peeping Tom, its a bit more Frenzy than Psycho.) The Ripper is revealed at film's end, and meets a crushing death beneath an elevator. No blood is shown, but I remember hearing about an additional shot with blood pouring out from under the elevator...way back in the 60's when a childhood friend got to see this movie.

[–] ecarle (14979) 4 years ago

As swanstep notes, this "run of horror" in the late 50's/1960 cusp seemed to be "in the air" and across all nations. I suppose folks ALWAYS liked horror(see the Universal horror movies of the 30s and 40's, plus Cat People and the like) but the 50's seemed to go hog wild -- from monster movies like Godzilla and Them to the horror movies of Wiliam Castle -- plus Diabolique. EVERYBODY wanted to get into the act and -- big money was the big lure. (North by Northwest was very expensive to make and had to travel to Mount Rushmore to do it; Psycho was made on the backlot cheap, with "a few bottles of chocolate syrup blood.")

Feel free to skip this thread for the other one, or "jump back and forth."

But...my task is done.

[–] christomacin (4655) 4 years ago

You always make welcome contributions. Thanks. You're also better at starting threads than me and keeping them going. He he.

What you say about the BOOK being an inspiration for CotD could well be true. However there is still the similarity of the closing scene of CotD and the fruit cellar scene in Psycho to consider. The way the witch's body swivels around in the chair and the lighting strongly brings Hitchcock's penultimate scene to mind. CotD dispenses with the Simon Oakland-style epilogue, so this actual end of the film. It was released AFTER Psycho, which makes me wonder.

The movie you were thinking of with Betty Davis sounds like "The Nanny" (1965). One of Hammer's only truly "A-List" quality films, in my opinion. She did another one for Hammer in 1968 called "The Anniversary". OH, I forgot another British Psycho Knock Off... Twisted Nerve also from 1968 (with music by Bernard Herrmann). That one wasn't for Hammer.

I had another thought. What if Hitchcock had abandoned Hollywood and gone back to Britain for the tail end of his career (after Marnie, say)? He sort of did that with Frenzy, I suppose. Maybe he would have had slightly more creative freedom back in Britain... or maybe not. If Polanski could get away with Repulsion in Britain in 1965, maybe Hitchcock could have pulled off Kaleidoscope in 1966 or 1967 or 1968... or at least stood a better chance than back in the U.S. of A. It sounds like his contract at Universal was maybe a little too comfortable, and he was being held back from making the films he wanted to make after The Birds and Marnie by Lew Wasserman - for dumb political reasons. It almost seemed like he became more of a monument on the Studio lot, at best - or a mascot at worst - whom everyone was humoring but nobody really took seriously any more... pretty sad.

[–] ecarle (14979) 4 years ago

Thank you for your kind words.

What you say about the BOOK being an inspiration for CotD could well be true. However there is still the similarity of the closing scene of CotD and the fruit cellar scene in Psycho to consider. The way the witch's body swivels around in the chair and the lighting strongly brings Hitchcock's penultimate scene to mind. CotD dispenses with the Simon Oakland-style epilogue, so this actual end of the film. It was released AFTER Psycho, which makes me wonder.

---

Well, "cheapie" movies could probably get some cast and crew together "real quick like" to re-shoot or add scenes for whatever reason. "Matching up" CotD more strongly to Psycho(the movie, not the book) could have been a sound exploitation goal.
---
The movie you were thinking of with Betty Davis sounds like "The Nanny" (1965). One of Hammer's only truly "A-List" quality films, in my opinion. She did another one for Hammer in 1968 called "The Anniversary".

--

Yes, I was thinking of "The Nanny." I was a young reader of movie newspaper ads back then. If not GOING to the movies, I was reading about them. And there was that whole run of the nastily titled "hag horror movies" that gave Davis and Crawford and Tallulah Bankhead("Die Die My Darling") and Olivia de Havilland work. It was good(financially) but bad at the same time. Recall that "Baby Jane" director Robert Aldrich started the trend because he thought that Psycho would have been more terrifying if the mother WAS the killer -- a hag.

And the "split" seems to be have been between American productions(like William Castle's Strait-Jacket with Crawford) and British ones(The Nanny.)

---

[–] ecarle (14979) 4 years ago

OH, I forgot another British Psycho Knock Off... Twisted Nerve also from 1968 (with music by Bernard Herrmann). That one wasn't for Hammer.

--

Ive seen Twisted Nerve. It isn't very good but it is famous for at least two reasons. One is that Tarantino used some "Twisted Nerve" music(a whistling theme) in the scene in Kill Bill where one-eyed Darryl Hannah, dressed like a nurse, comes to kill the Bride in a hospital.

But Twisted Nerve is famous(somewhat) also because he cast Barry Foster out of it as the killer in Frenzy. Foster IS in Twisted Nerve, but he isn't the psycho in that one. I figure Hitchocck cast Foster because -- based on viewing Twisted Nerve -- Foster looked and sounded like Michael Caine who had refused the killer role. In an interview, Foster said that Hitchcock came to watch him in West End London play (with Frenzy co-star Billie Whitelaw), but that he learned Hitch cast him from Twisted Nerve, not from the play.

As it turned out, once Caine said no, Hitchocck interviewed about 14 British unknowns to play the killer (Bob Rusk) in Frenzy. One of them, interestingly enough -- was Jon Finch, who ended up playing the anti-hero Blaney. Try as I might, I can't picture Jon Finch in the "killer Rusk scenes" -- Hitch was right to go with a more blond-red haired, flamboyant Michael Caine type for Rusk

[–] ecarle (14979) 4 years ago

I had another thought. What if Hitchcock had abandoned Hollywood and gone back to Britain for the tail end of his career (after Marnie, say)? He sort of did that with Frenzy, I suppose. Maybe he would have had slightly more creative freedom back in Britain... or maybe not. If Polanski could get away with Repulsion in Britain in 1965, maybe Hitchcock could have pulled off Kaleidoscope in 1966 or 1967 or 1968... or at least stood a better chance than back in the U.S. of A.

---

That all sounds very good to me as something that could have/should have happened. Frenzy, made in England at Pinewood Studios, WAS an escape from the "sameness" of Universal Studios sets(all the rooms looked the same in those movies) and the overall cheapness of Universal product back then. But as you note, Hitchcock WAS on a very lucrative contract, with big enough budgets to hire Paul Newman and Julie Andrews after Marnie -- he was kind of stuck where he was: "A bird in a gilded cage," one scholar wrote.

Another critic wrote of Frenzy, with its low budget and non-star British cast, that it felt like "what a 70's Hitchcock movie would look like if he had stayed in England, and never gone to Hollywood, for his whole career." Certainly, it was a nostalgic selling point for Hitchcock that Frenzy WAS a return to England. I can't picture the story in New York -- no Covent Garden, no Cockney killer...

[–] ecarle (14979) 4 years ago

It sounds like his contract at Universal was maybe a little too comfortable, and he was being held back from making the films he wanted to make after The Birds and Marnie by Lew Wasserman - for dumb political reasons.

--

All true. The "dumb political reasons" are detailed in Patrick McGilligan's book on Hitch. Though Wasserman as Hitchcock's AGENT had helped Hitchcock fight Paramount to get Psycho made, Wasserman as Hitchcock's BOSS(Universal studio chief) did NOT want another Hitchcock psycho movie being made while Wassserman was seeking "respectability" in national Democratic circles. Evidently once Richard Nixon won(for a few years) a "Hitchcock psycho movie" got a green light from Wasserman.

Wasserman and his minions STOPPED Hitchcock from making Kaleidiscope, and Mary Rose(a ghost story that might have been another Vertigo.) Wasserman evidently forced Newman and Andrews on Hitchcock for Torn Curtain when he wanted...Anthony Perkins and Eva Marie Saint!(Surely Uncle Lew found bigger stars.)

[–] ecarle (14979) 4 years ago

It almost seemed like he became more of a monument on the Studio lot, at best - or a mascot at worst - whom everyone was humoring but nobody really took seriously any more... pretty sad.

--
Yes. Pretty sad, and very true. It was good news/bad news for Hitch. The good news was that Hitch still HAD a contract in Hollywood even as Frank Capra got fired off of two films(The Best Man and Circus World); John Ford couldn't get work after Seven Women; and Billy Wilder(eventually) couldn't get work either(said Billy, "Everybody says how great I am, but nobody will give me a job.")

The bad news is that the contract was indeed very restrictive and Hitchcock was half ignored, half jokey.

I lived in Los Angeles in the 70's and I have bittersweet memories of Hitchcock's very cheapjack TV commercials for the Universal tour. It was bittersweet because I had come in too late to be a Hitchcock fan, and just seeing him at ALL in those commercials was nostalgic. But they were lousy commercials and in one, Hitchcock had to raise his elderly arms above his head and act like he was flying.

Universal paid Hitch a cool million dollars to do those commercials. When Steven Spielberg(who had dissed the commercials, in Hitchcocks favor as being exploited) announced he was coming on the Family Plot set to meet Hitch...Hitch ran away. Bruce Dern said Hitch said "I'm such a whore for making those commercials, I cant look at him."

Sad.

But... Hitchcock had a contract for life, worked on a final movie called The Short Night until he couldn't anymore, watched Universal movies like Smokey and the Bandit and Animal House and became a fan of them, earned stock dollars as an MCA stockholder from The Sting and Jaws and those movies...it was a pretty damn good life.

And this viewer right here LIKES Marnie and Torn Curtain and Topaz...I'm glad we have them.

[–] christomacin (4655) 4 years ago

I would love to have seen Hitchcock do a cameo in Animal House. He could have played John Vernon's father (as a former Dean of the college).

[–] ecarle (14979) 4 years ago

Ha.

Animal House came out in the summer of 1978 and was a blockbuster(Psycho style -- low budget, big reward.) Hitchcock watched it over and over in his private screening room and developed a friendship (lunches on the Universal lot) with young director John Landis. Near the end of Hitchcock's life, Landis tried to pitch Hitchcock to do the trailer for Lily Tomlin in The Incredible Shrinking Woman(with her in Hitch's hands), but he gently refused.

And Hitchcock -- as the third largest holder of Universal-MCA stock, made money FROM Animal House. And Jaws. And Smokey and the Bandit(another favorite.) And The Sting.

Note in passing : Hitchcock seemed to like to watch comedies and "animal movies" like Benji over thriller fare. Maybe didn't like looking at the competitors taking over his turf.

[–] christomacin (4655) 4 years ago

He probably hated De Palma's "Obsession". What did he think of Truffaut's "The Bride Wore Black"?

[–] ecarle (14979) 4 years ago

He probably hated De Palma's "Obsession".

--

Though Hitchcock made fast friends with Mel Brooks when Brooks did the (not very good) Hitchcock spoof "High Anxiety" there is no record of Hitchcock befriending his chief copycat Brian DePalma.

There IS a record of Hitchcock DISLIKING a DePalma film. Hitchcock's young director pal John Landis(whose Animal House Hitchcock so loved) said he showed Hitchcock a DePalma film, told Hitchcock it was an "homage" and Hitchocck said: "More like fromage."(Cheese.)

Landis said the movie was Dressed to Kill, which was released in 1980 a few months after Hitchcock's April death. Maybe Landis showed Hitch an "early print"? Or maybe he showed him Obsession and forgot that.

---

What did he think of Truffaut's "The Bride Wore Black"?

--

As I recall, Hitch gave it "lip service" praise and criticized some of the plotting.

I've seen The Bride Wore Black and even with a Herrmann score -- it really isn't much like a Hitchcock. Not enough happens in it. Truffaut tried one more Hitchcockian film -- Mississipi Mermaid -- with legit stars Catherine Denueve(with whom Hitchcock wanted to work, but never could) and Jean Paul Belmondo. That one's better IMHO.

Also : there is footage somewhere of a frustrated Truffaut directing Herrmann to "use different music" for a sequence in The Bride Wore Black. Truffaut wanted lighter music than Herrmann was composing. Simply put: Truffaut really didn't dig Herrmann's music on a Truffaut film.

[–] christomacin (4655) 4 years ago

Here's the footage on YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gGLPGbNt9fA