Psycho
Honestly, I was not too excited to watch this movie, but I actually really enjoyed it. I found it very interesting and suspenseful, and I would definitely watch it again. This movie seems to resemble a typical "mystery" story. There is a crime. There are characters trying to solve the mystery. The characters and the audience do not know the whole story until the very end.
I was not familiar with this movie at all, so I had no idea what to expect. I had no idea who would die or who would be the murderer. I found it interesting how the different directorial choices, like the camera angles and music, affected how the audience perceived certain characters.
When Marion was driving way from Phoenix, she was on the center of the screen. Roger Ebert said in his article, "How to Read a Movie," that "a centered person will seem objectified." This scene also included the same music from the beginning credits of the movie and dialogue from the people in Phoenix concerning Marion and what she did with the money. Marion committed a crime, so it makes sense that she would be targeted. This scene seems to put the focus on her and makes the audience understand her paranoia. In the dialogue, Cassidy (I think he is the man who had the $40,000) said that he would find Marion and get the money back. When he said this, I started wondering if he would be involved in the murder somehow. Marion ended up dying, but I found it ironic how the movie made it seem like she would be the victim because of her crime rather than for a different reason.
When we first saw Norman Bates, he seemed nice. Norman did seem suspicious, but the audience did not have that much of a reason to suspect him in the beginning. As time went on, we realized how strange he was, especially with the stuffed birds and the hole in the wall. I found it interesting how the music was not paired with him, but it makes sense because we did not have much of a reason to suspect him. The music wold make it too obvious, and we instead had to learn little by little what type of person Norman was.
Anyways, I had fun watching this movie, and I am glad we had to watch it for homework because I probably would never have watched it otherwise.
Ebert, Roger. "How to read a movie." Roger Ebert's Journal, August 30, 2008.
I was not familiar with this movie at all, so I had no idea what to expect. I had no idea who would die or who would be the murderer. I found it interesting how the different directorial choices, like the camera angles and music, affected how the audience perceived certain characters.
When Marion was driving way from Phoenix, she was on the center of the screen. Roger Ebert said in his article, "How to Read a Movie," that "a centered person will seem objectified." This scene also included the same music from the beginning credits of the movie and dialogue from the people in Phoenix concerning Marion and what she did with the money. Marion committed a crime, so it makes sense that she would be targeted. This scene seems to put the focus on her and makes the audience understand her paranoia. In the dialogue, Cassidy (I think he is the man who had the $40,000) said that he would find Marion and get the money back. When he said this, I started wondering if he would be involved in the murder somehow. Marion ended up dying, but I found it ironic how the movie made it seem like she would be the victim because of her crime rather than for a different reason.
When we first saw Norman Bates, he seemed nice. Norman did seem suspicious, but the audience did not have that much of a reason to suspect him in the beginning. As time went on, we realized how strange he was, especially with the stuffed birds and the hole in the wall. I found it interesting how the music was not paired with him, but it makes sense because we did not have much of a reason to suspect him. The music wold make it too obvious, and we instead had to learn little by little what type of person Norman was.
Anyways, I had fun watching this movie, and I am glad we had to watch it for homework because I probably would never have watched it otherwise.
Ebert, Roger. "How to read a movie." Roger Ebert's Journal, August 30, 2008.
Very insightful analysis! I really like how you analyzed the directorial choices of the movie, especially Hitchcock's choice to have Marion at the center of the screen. I also agree with you about how Hitchcock misleads us, as he makes us think that the $40,000 will be Marion's downfall, when really her murder was completely unrelated to the amount of money she stole. I also enjoyed the movie, and wouldn't have watched it had it not been assigned, because these usually aren't my kind of movies.
ReplyDeleteI agree with how you pointed out that in the beginning Norman seems like a normal guy. We really didn't hav a huge reason to suspect him. Also, I like how you pointed out that having Marion in the center of the screen objectifies her; things that are in the center of the screen seem to become just that, "things."
ReplyDelete