MovieChat Forums > Psycho (1960) Discussion > Psycho and some landmark films that foll...

Psycho and some landmark films that followed it

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

A problem with talking only about Psycho on the Psycho board is...you can lose context.

Most of us know that Psycho was not only a big blockbuster hit for Hitchcock, it was a literal "landmark" film in Hollywood history. Because of his clout and backing, Alfred Hitchcock was allowed to put elements into Psycho that had never been allowed in a movie before -- and audiences noticed. And showed up to "experience the forbidden." And, of course, to get really scared and scream.

What's landmark in Psycho? The shower scene above all else....in which a woman in a shower(naked, natch) is stabbed over and over and over again with a very big knife by a very scary and shadowy old woman. The mix of nudity somewhat seen and stabbing not really seen but HEARD. The screech of violins jolting our screams higher. The censors simply had not allowed that kind of violence before -- nor, really that much nudity.

But the second murder has the same kind of landmark feeling -- the idea that, just like with the shower murder, that Hitchcock was being allowed to show MORE of an attack on a human being with a big knife...to go further than ever before. A 1940 or 1950 movie would have ended the Arbogast murder scene with the shot of the door slowly opening, light on the carpet. Fade out. But Hitchcock kept going and audiences couldn't BELIEVE it. The screeching violins. The run at the victim by the scary old lady. The brutal slash to the face(landmark --something NOT in the shower scene) And -- even though it is not graphic, the final "finishing off" of the victim on the floor. Hitchcock went too far -- and people never forgot it.

The two murder scenes are what's REALLY landmark in Psycho, but sure, so is killing the protagonist early(though Hitch promised it in his trailer), and a young man gutting and stuffing his mother's corpse with sawdust and keeping it around....and little things like showing a flushing toilet (with paper waste, not human waste) and showing an unmarried couple half dressed and necking.

This was all pretty landmark in 1960, and as one critic noted "Psycho slashed movie history in half -- nothing would ever be the same."

But what are some landmarks that Psycho did NOT enact?

Well:

Cussing for one thing. Is there ONE even MINOR cuss word in Psycho? Even a "hell" or a "damn"? Not as I recall.

Actual sexual activity for another thing. We come upon Sam and Marion half-dressed and necking and though we will surmise that they WERE having sex just a few minutes ago...the movie didn't show it. Couldn't show it. That landmark had to wait.

Extended nudity. There is nudity without nudity in the shower scene -- nipples are covered up except for one blurry shot that Hitch snuck past the censors. But the movies would have to wait for nudity to be shown for a longer period of time.

---

I've been reading a couple of books that, together, remind us that as the movies marched on past 1960 and towards a new ratings code in 1968, that Psycho was joined by other landmark movies and...grouped together...you can see the movies getting more sexual, more violent, more profane...one book is a biography of director Mike Nichols; the other a book about the writing and making of Chinatown ("The Big Goodbye.")

Mike Nichols had two very noteable hits , back to back, and both were landmarks.

1966: Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf. The "R' rating isn't here yet, so a "For Adults Only over 18" tag was slapped on the picture and Liz and Dick were allowed to say things on screen previously not heard. The language was the big deal in "Woolf," though certainly in a more generalized way, the movie tore apart notions of the sanctity of marriage and of middle-aged love.

1967: The Graduate. Still no R rating yet, but Nichols snuck in some nudity(quick, bizarre flashes of it), and a little language but mainly a quasi-incestuous pair of love affairs: Young graduate Dustin Hoffman first has a sexual affair with a woman old enough to be his mother, and then pursues that woman's age-appropriate daughter for marriage and sex.

Those were Nichols' two back to back landmarks, but also in 1967 from Arthur Penn:

1967: Bonnie and Clyde. One could say that Bonnie and Clyde had landmark violence and The Graduate had landmark sexual content...but Bonnie and Clyde had sexual content, too. Faye Dunaway's nudity. Clyde Barrow's impotence.

Still, perhaps more than their "content landmark status," Bonnie and Clyde and The Graduate announced the landmark of "a new, young generation of filmmakers with a revolutionary stance." Hitchcock's era had been dying out with the studio system; he would survive but many of his peer directors would not....and we had the story of Dennis "Easy Rider" Hopper yelling at George Cukor at a Hollywood party: "We're going to bury you!" to which Cukor replied, "you very well might."

[–] ecarle (14979) 4 years ago

Bonnie and Clyde was landmark as Psycho had been for bloody violence. In Technicolor this time, with lots more of it than in Psycho(including a point blank gushot into a man's face inspired by Arbogast's slashed face) and an emphasis on bullets rather than a knife(which eliminated the "scare factor.") Most of the press concentrated on the final scene of the film, in which Bonnie and Clyde together are machine-gunned to death in orgasmic slow motion. Here, too, Psycho was an influence: quick shots of Bonnie and Clyde (apart) looking at each other in close-ups are based on the one-two-three shots of Marion's screaming mouth at the beginning of the shower scene.

The R and X arrived at the end of 1968, so starting in 1969 we didn't have ONE landmark movie, we had a whole SET of them. Filmmakers were going to be able now to have cussing, nudity, simulated sex and ever-expanding bloody violence in their films. Horribly, sexual activity would shift in many movies to the act of rape.

I'll pick this handful to note:

1969: The Wild Bunch. Like Bonnie and Clyde and Psycho before it, the whole controversy about The Wild Bunch was about how bloody it was. Blood had now been brought to the Western as it had to the gangster movie and the Gothic thriller. Again, Psycho influenced the finale: the one-two-three of Marion's screaming mouth in the shower became Holden and Borgnine and Oates and Johnson all giving each other last looks before unleashing suicidal gunfight hell on 200 Mexican soldiers. Hitchcockian montage (ala Psycho and The Birds) reached new heights with the Wild Bunch gunfights; John Ford was nowhere to be seen.

[–] ecarle (14979) 4 years ago

1972: Deliverance. Audiences showed up expecting a macho-man white water rapids river adventure with Burt Reynolds(still more a TV star than a movie star) and Jon Voight. But soon they found out that they were going to get a movie where men(psychotic hillbillies) rape men("soft" surburbanites") and one more taboo was dashed under the R rating.

I mention Deliverance because for the most part, all the movies around it were about men raping women(The Hunting Party, Straw Dogs, A Clockwork Orange, Frenzy), and that got a little old, and Deliverance was the brutal corrective. Barbra Streisand ordered a screening of Deliverance at her home saying "I want to see a movie where finally the man gets raped."

1974: Chinatown. One more taboo to go. Incest. For real, and not symbolic ala The Graduate. Chinatown is a 30's detective movie that starts as a private eye's divorce case that turns into a murder case that turns into a political conspiracy case. But the movie holds its wild card for last --- crazy old rich man John Huston has sired a daughter by his OTHER daughter(Faye Dunaway) and, to private eye Nicholson's surprise, the sex was not forced, says Dunaway ("Get the picture?" she adds.)

En route to its big taboo-buster, Chinatown has a smaller taboo buster that follows from Psycho as a landmark piece of screen violence. A thug hired by Huston (played by Chinatown director Roman Polanski) sticks a small switchblade up Jack Nicholson's nostril and ...pulls up. Why hadn't the movies thought of THAT one before? Because, before the R rating came along, you could not SHOW such a thing. So Nicholson's nose is sliced wide open and the then-handsome young star spends most of Chinatown with a big bandage on his face and then an ugly scar on his nose. THAT was landmark -- the literal defacing of the leading man.

---

[–] ecarle (14979) 4 years ago

There are many more of these examples and I suppose the rueful truth is that most of the 'landmark movies" (including if not quite starting with Psycho) were landmark in bringing "bad things into movies": cussing, more violence, more sex , more nudity. (Well they aren't ALL bad.)

Once all the taboos were busted and the blister had broken, the movies "calmed down" as former TV executives took over the studios and it was determined that more money could be made with PG movies for teenagers and kids. You got your Star Wars and your Indy Jones and your Ghostbusters and the return of Star Trek. There was nothing to be "landmark" about anymore.

I am sure that "landmark" films can be found from the 80's on and that there are some acts of violence and of sex -- Tarantino has been the "mainstream" purveyer of violence in recent years.

But you can't beat that period from Psycho on when American filmmakers(following an already established European template) said..."we want to show audiences things that will shock them, stir them and that don't promise to pull the punches."

It was exhilarating.

By the way, another landmark in the 60's was surely the blockbuster success of "The Sound of Music," which would have been G rated if the rating existed. This lives on in the domination of Pixar and other animation that we have today(granted, SOM wasn't animated, but it WAS G-rated family entertainment, which Pixar is today). Psycho was a blockbuster, but not as big as The Sound of Music. Ultimately...The Sound of Music has prevailed. G-rated entertainment makes big bucks, world wide.

[–] swanstep (2715) 4 years ago

1974: Chinatown. One more taboo to go. Incest... and, to private eye Nicholson's surprise, the sex was not forced, says Dunaway ("Get the picture?" she adds.)

That line's not in all the vhs/dvd etc. versions of Chinatown I've seen! (Maybe it was in the theatrical print?) Rather all Evelyn does in response to Jake's rape-query is shake her head "No" and kind of shudder in shame then move on immediately to 'I ran away...'

Thinking about this some more I checked the Chinatown script I have, 3rd Draft 10/9/73, and it doesn't have that line or even Jake's rape-query. Rather, the whole idea of the consensualness of the incest is expanded/explained by Evelyn in a few lines before 'I ran away':
"... he [Noah Cross] had a breakdown... the dam broke... my mother died... he became a little boy... I was fifteen...he'd ask me what to eat for breakfast, what clothes to wear!... It happened... then I ran away..."

Towne's Third Draft *has* Evelyn dying at the end but the horror of the film's final scene still isn't fully developed. In the third draft Cross sees the daughter, Katherine, and even yells out to her but Curley quickly spirits her (and her and Evelyn's luggage) away to the marina. Evelyn holds a gun on Cross but never shoots him. And when Evelyn drives off it's in another car (Duffy's, Jake's Partner's) not her own and she's *by herself*, there's no scream. After Evelyn's shot, Jake is less comatose than in the movie, he cradles Evelyn's dead body before Cross elbows his way through and "Cross is on the ground, holding Evelyn's body, crying."

The upshot is that nothing as disturbing as Katherine screaming and screaming again as Cross drags her away happens in the 3rd Draft, and its motivation of cops to shoot a fleeing Evelyn isn't as secure without Evelyn shooting Cross. Presumably it was Polanski who dragged Towne deeper and deeper into the darkness the film finally clobbered us all with. The post-3rd Draft refinements were all doozies.

[–] ecarle (14979) 4 years ago

1974: Chinatown. One more taboo to go. Incest... and, to private eye Nicholson's surprise, the sex was not forced, says Dunaway ("Get the picture?" she adds.)
That line's not in all the vhs/dvd etc. versions of Chinatown I've seen! (Maybe it was in the theatrical print?)
Rather all Evelyn does in response to Jake's rape-query is shake her head "No" and kind of shudder in shame then move on immediately to 'I ran away...'

--
"I confess." I pushed "send" unsure if I remembered that line right...I wasn't sure...I should have added "Get the picture?"(or something like that) or "Get the picture?" (paraphrased.)

So she doesn't say "get the picture?" I'm not where I can check the scene on my Chinatown DVD(see how great DVDs are versus VHS AND streaming? You can go right to the scene!)

This reminds me of a joke of sorts started by a friend of mine.

He would verbally re-tell the scene in The Godfather near the end where the traitorous Tessio(Abe Vigoda) having been found out , asks lawyer Tom Hagen, "Can you get me off the hook, for old time's sake?" and Duvall shakes his head.

My friend's version:

Tessio: Can you get me off the hook, for old time's sake?
Duvall: NO CAN DO.

It turns out this joke is from "Hot Shots" or "Hot Shots Part II" (a Charlie Sheen Rambo spoof) or something, but it is still funny...and I will forever remember Duvall's reply as "NO CAN DO." And thus, I remember Dunaway's reply as "get the picture?"

But back to Chinatown... Dunaway DOES confirm consent, yes? In response to Nicholson's "He raped ya?" "No."

Side-bar: I'm reminded that Hitchcock when casting Family Plot offered the Bruce Dern role first to Jack Nicholson and the Karen Black role to Faye Dunaway. It was wishful thinking on Hitchcock's part to hope he could re-unite the hot major stars of Chinatown in a "Hitchcock past his prime" movie -- even with Frenzy as a well-reviewed calling card. Still, Hitchcock was "trying to work with the best" to the end.

[–] ecarle (14979) 4 years ago

The upshot is that nothing as disturbing as Katherine screaming and screaming again as Cross drags her away happens in the 3rd Draft, and its motivation of cops to shoot a fleeing Evelyn isn't as secure without Evelyn shooting Cross. Presumably it was Polanski who dragged Towne deeper and deeper into the darkness the film finally clobbered us all with. The post-3rd Draft refinements were all doozies.

---

I have mentioned that I have read "The Big Picture"(about the making of Chinatown) , and by far the most interesting part of the book is to read about the many, many, MANY changes in the script before it was finally filmed. I will add that while I had always thought that Polanski changed the ending right before they shot it -- no. Polanski argued with and overruled original screenwriter Robert Towne early on in script discussions once Polanski came aboard as director. The ending had to be refined...but Polanski wanted Dunaway dead(evidently in real life, too.)

One reads about a LOT of scripts that the writer turned in a 300 page script, or the writer turned in a script for a four hour movie...and I suppose the details in The Big Picture show us how this happens, and how the writer and director(and others?) almost invariably have to "cut it down." So Chinatown lost all sorts of additional characters and additional scenes and relationships (Escobar wasn't a cop, he was an ex-lover of Evelyn's in one draft), etc.

Our man Hitchcock wasn't immune to this. One of the books on Hitchcock demonstrates that screenwriter John Michael Hayes and he tried about six different endings to To Catch a Thief on paper(including a car cliffhanger on the Monte Carlo cliff road!) before settling on the minor key, suave ending we have on the movie today(Grant and Kelly, looking great and DRESSED great, for a final smooch and joke.)

--

[–] ecarle (14979) 4 years ago

As The Big Picture notes, Chinatown was nominated for a lot of 1974 Oscars but only won one : Best Original Screenplay...for Robert Towne only. We have Polanski(interviewed for this book recently) saying he wasn't bothered by that -- "I never felt like I should take on-screen credit for the script, it wasn't important to me," but that the final draft of the script "clearly" shows Polanski's changes, says he. I'd say we will never know, but I think we DO know...Polanski was still haunted by the death of his beautiful blonde wife Sharon Tate and wasn't in an upbeat mood five years later. (In between, he had directed MacBeth -- with Jon "Frenzy" Finch in the lead -- and THAT had its share of family murder.)

It seems to me that when Robert Towne picked up that Oscar for Chinatown, he knew two things in his heart (1) some of the script had been written by his old friend and collaborator Ed Taylor and (2) some of the script had been written by Roman Polanski. But both the water conspiracy and the incest were Towne's ideas, so...his baby.

[–] swanstep (2715) 4 years ago

But both the water conspiracy and the incest were Towne's ideas, so...his baby.

Agreed. I'm just impressed that there's evidently a lot *more* presumably Polanski polishing going on *after* Towne's already conceded that Evelyn has to die point by the late 1973 Third Draft (which *is* the latest script - it's often called 'the shooting script' - that's every been published I believe).

And, look, 'Success has a thousand fathers' (as JFK said I believe) so surely a lot of people in this case have every reason to exaggerate their undoubtedy crucial contributions. But when it comes time to shoot and also in the editing room there's a lot of creative people all pulling in the same direction, hopefully all shooting off sparks becoming in effect co-writers at that point. Sam O'Steen was the editor seeing all the rushes every day and coming up with basic assemblies of scenes as the film's shot - we *know* he must have had som great ideas at various points. And, honestly, I've gotta believe that John Huston, one of the all-time-great writer-directors would have had lots to say about Polanski's making his already villainous character darker and darker and darker. And, e.g., *somebody* straightens out the car mechanics of the end of the film after the Third Draft. Could it be Huston? Hell everyone up to Evans on this movie *believed* they were fully part of the creative process and were putting in their 2c every time they felt like it - its the sort of thing an Evans might have suggested straightening out. And *we know* that people were still thinking and rethinking the film very late. E.g., it's hard to believe, but Jerry Goldsmith's great great score was a last week/weekend completely new idea from him after his (completely different!) previous score was rejected. Late polishing of the film from all the creative hands on deck, not just Polanski, plausibly lifted Chinatown from very very good to become the fantastically dark, ultra-classic we know.