User Score
4.3
out of 10
Mixed or average reviews- based on 15 Ratings
User score distribution:
-
Positive: 5 out of 15
-
Mixed: 1 out of 15
-
Negative: 9 out of 15
Review this movie
-
Your Score10 out of 10
-
Please sign in or create an account before writing a review.
-
-
Submit
-
Check Spelling
-
Characters remaining: 5000 out of 5000
- User score
- Most active
- By date
- Most helpful
- Most Clicked
-
JayFeb 24, 200510Good remake!
-
-
PatrickJul 23, 20055Just, see the original. It's better. Marion was weird in this one, and it just seemed duller. Maybe, knowing this is a preserved classic makes the original a whole lot better.
-
-
May 14, 20120Frankly, this experimented shot-for-shot remake is just an insult to the timeless, classic 1960 original version of "Psycho".
-
Mar 4, 20121Roger Ebert said it perfectly. When your shot-for-shot remake turns out to have zero of the intensity of the original, it serves as excellent proof that **** sense of timing and atmosphere simply cannot be duplicated. Totally pointless and completely forgettable. Watch the original.
prev
next
Page:
- 1
-
38The movie is an invaluable experiment in the theory of cinema, because it demonstrates that a shot-by-shot remake is pointless; genius apparently resides between or beneath the shots, or in chemistry that cannot be timed or counted.
-
50The movie doesn't stink. The performances are good, potentially great, especially Vince Vaughn as Norman Bates.
-
50In the shock department, the ante has been upped, way up, and a mere kitchen knife through a shower curtain just doesn't cut it any more.