The prevalence of a horror trend can often be determined by whether or not it’s been discussed and parodied within an entry in aScreamfranchise. That series is all about deconstructing horror tropes and trends, often through meta-humor, and its two most recent installments have both looked at the idea of legacy sequels. One component of a legacy sequel is that it takes place numerous years after the previous installment, and will often feature some recurring characters, all generally/naturally older, alongside new characters. OutsideScream, other horror movies to take this approach within long-running franchises have beenthe newestHalloweentrilogy (2018-2022)and, most recently,the less-than-amazingThe Exorcist: Believer.All that’s to say that perhapsPsycho IIwas ahead of the curve, being a legacy sequel to a horror movie close to four decades before the trend became noticeable enough to get mocked and discussed within theScreamseries.
It was released 23 years after theiconic original film, directed byAlfred Hitchcock, and it narratively takes place about two decades later, too.Psycho IImight not exactlybe a decade-defining masterpiecethe same waythe originalPsychois, but it’s a horror sequel that doesn’t get as much credit as it deserves. It features another engaging performance fromAnthony Perkinsas Norman Bates,here emerging as the undisputed lead character throughout. It also brings back Lila Crane (Vera Miles) and follows how the two clash after Bates is released from an extended stay at a psychiatric hospital after the murders committed in the first movie. It finds an interesting angle for these older characters, builds on the original film’s story while trying (though not always succeeding) to shock the waysPsychodid, and is ultimately well-made for a horror sequel. No one’s going to call it better than the first, but it is respectful to the 1960 original and effectively finds ways to both honor its legacy and continue its memorable story.
What Happens in ‘Psycho II’?
Norman Bates is outed as a serial killer at the end of the originalPsycho, and one who tends tostab people accompanied by very memorable music. Thepsychological aspects of the film may be dated, but so too was knowledge of dissociative identity disorder, which is the reason given for Bates murdering two people during the film, and apparently two more before. He’s sent to a psychiatric hospital for 22 years between the end ofPsychoand the start ofPsycho II, which begins withproviding insight into how Norman attempts to resume his life at the infamous Bates Motel. Lila, the sister of the murderedMarion Crane(Janet Leigh) from the first film isn’t thrilled with Norman’s release from the hospital, however, and conspires with her daughter, Mary (Meg Tilly), to drive Norman Bates mad once more, in the hope that such a thing will get him recommitted.
Psycho IIis at its best when it focuses on this conflict that builds naturally from the events of the first film, and it can get a little silly as it enters its second half, and beyond. There’s a series of murders committed throughoutPsycho II, and while the eventual reveal of who the killer is does feel a little extreme, these crimes do add to the film’s tension by making Norman someone who’s at risk of being blamed for committing them. This makes it function, at its best, like a psychological thriller about a man who’s in danger of being accused of crimes that he didn’t commit. Indeed, Alfred Hitchcock — who passed away a few years beforePsycho II’srelease — did have an affinity for plots about false accusations, as seen most obviously in something likeThe Wrong Man, starringHenry Fonda(as well asPsycho’sVera Miles). It’s not a film that necessarily tries to be a Hitchcock movie, butthe premise itself can be seen as something that honors the late, great director’s ownlegacy.
How ‘Psycho II’ Expertly Uses a Jump Forward in Time to Feel Different from the First
22 years is a long time, andPsycho IIis well aware of this. Norman Bates is noticeably older and comes across as a very different person at the start of the film from who he was the last time we saw him. It’s safe to assume that fans ofthe iconic original horror/thrillerare going to want to know how the time jump has affected Norman Bates, and thisslow-burn character study of an iconic villain turned sympathetic yet troubled protagonisthelps ensurePsycho IIgets off on the right foot. The passage of time is also reflected within the filmmaking itself. It’s a little surprising at first to see the characters and iconography ofPsychoin color.
The Writer of ‘Psycho’ Doubled Down on Psychological Thrillers With ’60s Schlock
Joan Crawford is hellbent on burying her demons in this gnarly post-‘Psycho’ thriller.
coPerhaps a less immediate sign of the changing times is the fact thatPsycho IIis considerablybloodier, more violent, and deadlierbody count-wise than the original film. That one was shocking for the standards of 1960, but by 1983, the slasher subgenre was in full swing, horror movies were generally a good deal more violent, and 10 years earlier, audiences hadwitnessed a pre-teen girl projectile vomit pea soupon a pair of priests, among various other shocking acts. Regardless of whether you likePsycho IIor not, you’d have to admit that on some level,it raises the barwhen it comes to surprising acts of violencethat make the infamous shower scene from the first look like a Disney film.Psycho IIuses its time jump and its lack of limitations as a 1980s release to its advantage, meaning that narratively, visually, and viscerally, it builds on what was established in the first movie without risking, too severely, coming across as derivative.
‘Psycho II’ Is a Solid Continuation of the First Film’s Story
As mentioned before, things get a little far-fetched asPsycho IIaccelerates into its final act before ultimately coming to a conclusion that aims to top the first movie’s once-surprising ending. But before then, it’s the more grounded aspects ofPsycho IIthat prove most impressive and engrossing, withthe film shining because Anthony Perkins is given the opportunity toplay a radically different version of Norman Bates. Seeing him try to fit himself back into society without falling back into a life defined by a compulsion to murder makes for interesting drama. The conflict between him and the family of one of his past victims is also relatively well-done, even if they’re not quite as strong as the moments that make the film more akin to a character study. As for the way the serial killer plot line revolves toward the end? Maybe, the less said about that, the better.
Norman Bates battles his inner demons while the consequences of his past actions haunt him, and those he’s wronged directly seek revenge. It is a more than solid premise for a horror sequel, and it’s commendable that it doesn’t feel like a simple retread of the first film.Bates himself isn’t even the villain again here; not really, which is a radical change for the series to make, and one that it executes relatively well, especially early on in the film. Some of the choices made later in the film are odd, andunderstandably irked authorRobert Bloch, who wrote the book the originalPsychowas based on. Eggs were broken and an omelet was made, and thoughPsycho IIis an imperfect omelet where the last few bites reveal there were a few unsavory pieces of eggshell that fell in, most of it still tastes pretty good.
Once the original movie is disqualified on account of it being an undisputed classic of its genre, it’s pretty easy to labelPsycho IIas ahigh point of what’s become a horror series. Even though it builds on the first well in some ways, the question may remain whether it would’ve been more critically successful had it not needed to live up to the legendary first movie. It’s unlikely it would’vebeen as commercially successfulwithout having a recognizable title and star in Perkins, butthe core story of a reformed man with a violent past trying to reintegrate himself into society would’ve remained largely interestingif executed as well as it was here. Without being attached to the original, perhaps it wouldn’t have felt a need to repeat the murder-mystery aspect of that film, the “surprising” reveal of which at the end ofPsycho IIprobably hurts the film overall more than it helps.
It’s a flawed sequel, but in a world wherehorror sequels tend to disappoint, a film likePsycho II,which does a reasonably good job of being its own thingwhile honoring the legacy of the original,ought to be celebrated. It’s not mandatory viewing for anyone who liked the original movie from 1960, but those interested in where a character like Norman Bates might end up after 20+ years should still find this sequel intriguing and mostly entertaining. It gives Anthony Perkins even more to do than the first, and he rises to the occasion, with the film having an interesting premise, a few narrative risks, and a final act that ambitiously tries to top the original’s shock value, even if it falls a little short. There’s still a great deal more good than bad inPsycho II, making it an underrated horror movie, a solid sequel, and an overall pretty good continuation of one ofthe most acclaimed films of all time.
Psycho IIis available to rent on Apple TV in the U.S.
