Psycho [Hindi] (1960) - Dubbed Other movies recommended for you
Psycho [Hindi](in Dubbed Hollywood Movies) Psycho [Hindi] (1960) - Download Movie for mobile in best quality 3gp and mp4 format. Also stream Psycho [Hindi] on your mobile, tablets and ipads
Plot: Phoenix office worker Marion Crane is fed up with the way life has treated her. She has to meet her lover Sam in lunch breaks, and they cannot get married because Sam has to give most of his money away in alimony. One Friday, Marion is trusted to bank forty thousand dollars by her employer. Seeing… Runtime: 109 min Release Date: 15 Sep 1960
Two Words: Hitchcock's Best ...and you know that's no small feat! (by LoveCoates)
Yes, everything you've heard is true. The score is a part of pop culture. The domestic conflict is well-known. But nothing shocks like the experience itself.If you have not seen this movie, do yourself a favor. Stop reading thse comments, get up, take a shower, then GO GET THIS MOVIE. Buy it, don't rent. You will not regret it."Psycho" is easily the best horror-thriller of all time. Nothing even comes close...maybe "Les Diaboliques" 1955 but not really."Psycho" has one of the best scripts you'll ever find in a movie. The movie's only shortcoming <more>
is that one of the characters seems to have little motivation in the first act of the movie but as the story progresses, you realize that Hitchcock GENIUS! GENIUS! GENIUS! in a stroke of genius has done this on purpose, because there is another character whose motivations are even more important. Vitally important. So important that you totally forget about anything else. I was lucky enough to have spent my life wisely avoiding any conversation regarding the plot of this movie until I was able to see it in full. Thank God I did! The movie has arguably the best mid-plot point and climactic twist in thriller history, and certainly the best-directed ending. The last few shots are chilling and leave a lingering horror in the viewer's mind.Just as good as the writing is Hitchcock's direction, which is so outstanding that it defies explanation. Suffice it to say that this movie is probably the best directorial effort by film history's best director. I was fortunate enough to see this movie at a big oldtime movie house during a Hitchcock revival. Janet Leigh, still radiant, spoke before the film and explained how Hitchcock's genius was in his ability to 1 frighten without gore and 2 leave his indelible mark on the movie without overshadowing his actors like the great Jean Renoir could never do . "Psycho" is clearly its own phenomenon, despite all the big-name talent involved.Hitchcock does not disappoint by leaving out his trademark dark humor. His brilliance is in making a climax that is at once both scary and hilarious. When I saw it in the theatre the audience was both gasping in disbelief while falling-on-the-floor laughing.One more thing...Tony Perkins. Janet Leigh got much-deserved accolades for this film, but it is Perkins who gives what remains the single best performance by an actor in a horror movie. He is so understated that his brillance passes you by. He becomes the character. The sheer brillance of the role is evidenced by the ineptitude of the actors in Gus Van Sant's 1998 dear God make it stop! shot-for-shot "remake." Though the movies are nearly identical, Hitchcock's is superior mostly because of the acting and the atmosphere some of the creepiness is lost with color . This is made obvious by the initial conversation between Leigh's character and Perkins, a pivotal scene. The brilliance of Perkins in the original shines even brighter when compared with the ruination in the remake even though the words and the shots were exactly the same. The crucial chemistry in this scene lacking in the remake gives everything away and mars our understanding of upcoming events. The fact that Perkins could never escape this role - his star stopped rising star as it had done in the 50s - proves that he played the part perhaps too well.I keep using the word brilliant, but I cannot hide my enthusiasm for this movie. It is wholly unlike the overblown, overbudget, overlong fluff spewing all-too-often out of Hollywood today. "Psycho" is simple, well-crafted and just the right length.Eleven-and-a-half out of ten stars.
What can you say about a film that's been talked about to death? Just this: If you've never seen it, you owe it to yourself to do so, not because it's a way of paying homage to the one true master of modern film, but because it's so fun to watch.Janet Leigh plays a bored office drone who decides to steal some loot from her boss's obnoxious client and parlay it into a new life with her all-too-distant boyfriend. All is going more or less according to plan until she stops in at the wrong motel, where she befriends a friendly if somewhat nerdy desk clerk only to find it <more>
causes problems with that clerk's possessive mother, who as her boy explains, "is not herself today." I'll say she isn't, and so would Leigh's Marion Crane, who maybe should have put up that "Do-Not-Disturb" sign before taking a shower.You can feel the decade literally shifting out of '50s and into '60s with this one. Even the opening shot, where the camera looks over a Western U.S. city in the middle of the afternoon and zooms in on what looks exactly like the Texas School Book Depository overlooking Dealey Plaza. Norman Rockwell touches abound, like the decor of the motel, but look at what's going on around it. People dress well, they still wear fedoras and jackets, but in their tense conversations and hooded gazes you can feel the culture just ticking away like a time bomb waiting to explode.Most especially, there's Anthony Perkins, who plays motel clerk Norman Bates in a very oddly naturalistic way, complete with facial tics and half-swallowed words, not the polished image one expected to see then. Just compare him with John Gavin, who plays Marion's boyfriend in the standard-actor-of-the-day way. Perkins manages to be so weirdly magnetizing, even in small moments like the way he stumbles on the word "falsity" or notes how creepy he finds dampness to be.He shines in bigger scenes, too, like his tense chat with Martin Balsam's boorish but diligent private detective character, Arbogast, who along with Perkins and Leigh delivers a landmark performance. The way both actors play out the awkwardness in their conversation makes you literally sweat. Then again, you're always uneasy around Norman. You definitely feel wary of him right away, but you find yourself liking him, too, even when he's busy covering up "Mother's" misdeeds. Not since Bela Legosi played Dracula did you get a horror movie with such a compelling central figure.If you are sampling the many other comments here, be sure to look up Merwyn Grote's. He makes an interesting, compelling case for how director Alfred Hitchcock used his television series as a template for "Psycho." Certainly "Psycho" looks more like early 1960s television than any of the more sumptuous fare Hitchcock had been bringing to screen at the time. Not only is it in black-and-white, not color, but the sets; a ramshackle motel, a mothbally old house, a couple of cheap looking bedrooms, a bathroom in a used-car dealership, are deliberately low class.It's thrilling to see Hitchcock move so effectively outside his normal element, and move things along with such clinical detachment and low-key technical finesse. Thrilling, too, to realize this is one of his most accomplished products; made by a man who was experienced enough to know how the game was played, and daring enough still to break the rules; indeed, start a whole new ballgame.Is it the best Hitchcock movie? It's definitely one of his best, right up there with "The 39 Steps" and "Strangers On A Train" and "Sabotage" and "Shadow Of A Doubt." He only once again came close to making as good a film, with "The Birds," while Janet Leigh and Anthony Perkins never escaped the greatness they helped create here. Poor John Gavin had to quit the biz entirely, and became an ambassador.Often imitated, parodied, referenced, and analyzed to death, "Psycho" still isn't played out nearly 45 years after it came out. You owe it to yourself to pay a visit to the Bates Motel; Norman has a room ready.
So much has been written about this film that all I can do is add my own voice of approval and say that I consider it to be a masterpiece, and add a few things often overlooked or not commented on that add so much to the movie's cumulative power. It's often the little things that make a film work. Here are a few examples:a. The absolute realism of the first twenty minutes of so, which are so true to life that they might have come from a documentary on how people lived in America forty years ago. There isn't a false note,--or a missed one--as each vocal inflection and raised <more>
eyebrow carries great meaning even if, on the surface, not much appears to be happening.b. Marion and the motorcycle cop. The cop is dark and sinister in appearance, due mostly to the bright desert sun, and never takes off his sunglasses. His conduct is at all times professional; he never raises his voice, and comes across as calm and rather perceptive; and he seems truly concerned over Marion Crane's fate, though he is unaware of her actual predicament. Marion is, alas, a bad actress, and the cop sees through this, if not to the heart of the matter, yet we don't want him to follow her. Despite his appearance the cop is not the angel of death but rather Marion's last chance. Had she confessed to her crime she would have escaped the fate that awaited her; and if she had just been a little less clever, and driven more slowly, and the skies remained clear, he might have followed her to the motel and intervened on her behalf.c. California Charlie. John Anderson is wonderful as the fast-talking, semi-streetwise small town used car salesman. At the end of almost every other line of dialogue he seems on the verge of discovering who Marion really is, then pulls back or comes to the wrong conclusion. He senses that she is being watched by the cop; but he also wants to make a sale. The scenes at the used car lot are both highly realistic,--and perfectly acted and timed--and also a little frightening, from the opening, "I'm in no mood for trouble", to the final "hey!" just before Marion drives away. We know that something isn't right, but the problem isn't with the car lot; it's Marion's plight casts a dark shadow over all her scenes there, despite the brightest sunlight imaginable.d. Chitchat with Norman. Once Marion and Norman settle down for a light meal in the parlor their conversation turns to general things, and Norman is a good observer, if a bit awkward socially. Without actually lying Marion gives herself away with a throwaway line "Sometimes just once is enough", in a reference to private traps and Norman seems to catch her drift, if not the actual meaning of what she's saying, and allows it to pass. We can see that he is moody when he angrily leans forward and delivers an angry, though controlled tirade against putting people in institutions. Every camera angle and line of dialogue in this scene has meaning and carries enormous weight, and yet the drama plays out in a light, relaxed mode, and the performers seems truly connected to one another at its conclusion, strangers no more. This is in my opinion the best written and most beautifully acted, edited and photographed scene I have ever seen in a movie. The handling of every nuance is prodigal and masterful, and the end result nothing less than staggering.e. The sheriff's house. When Sam and Lila wake up the sheriff and his wife in the middle of the night we see a splendid example of people talking to one another without either party understanding what is in fact going on. The result is a mini-comedy of manners; but it is also good exposition, as we learn of Mrs. Bates' death and the dress she was buried in, "periwinkle blue" . John McInyre's sheriff dominates this scene and no other , and expertly delivers its punchline, "Well if that's Mrs. Bates in the window, who's that buried up in Greenlawn Cemetary".f. Arbogast and Norman. The private detective's interview with Norman is played low-key, and yet we sense the tension in Norman's voice and manner, and know that Arbogast does, too. Something is amiss. This is beyond the question of who killed Marion. The stakes feel very high in this sparring match, and though Norman wins on a technicality, we know that Arbogast is coming back for more.g. The shrink's explanation. This part of the film has been criticized by many for being a sop thrown to the audience. I disagree. After all, the movie came out in 1960, and by the standards of the time some explanation seems in order, and Dr. Simon Oakland is as good a man for the job as I can imagine. His analysis of Norman's pathology is cogent and extremely well delivered. Yet throughout his speech, with all its Freudian brilliance, the doctor offered a take on the story that we in the audience, even if we can accept it, can never be satisfied with. He can explain the character of Norman Bates rationally, but he cannot make our response to his story and its effect on us feel ultimately safe, feel somehow in control and finalized. Yes, one can put people like Norman under the microscope, and even dissect what one sees, but this doesn't stop such events as unfolded in the movie any less likely to occur. Ask Milton Arbogast. In conclusion I'd like to say that great films are made up of outstanding little things, not just big moments or fancy effects. There is in fact nothing fancy about Psycho, which is on the surface is a somewhat plain-looking movie. Only when one looks beneath the surface does one see the teeming millions of small things,--gestures, glances, sudden changes in lighting, razor-sharp editing, and all above the refusal on the part of the director to let any one factor dominate--that we understand the meaning of the word genius, the meaning of the word creative.
Most modern-day horror films make the killer to be an absolutely inhuman, grotesque, unimaginable monster in order to scare the audience out of its wits. Most of the time, however, these stereotypes create a generic murderer a raving, ranting, clearly demented psychopath. One of the few memorable cinematic killers that does not adhere to these restraints and cliches is, of course, Anthony Hopkins' Hannibal Lecter, whom manages to effectively cause the audience to recoil without such drek as the aforementioned devices.Anthony Perkins' skillfully crafts his performance as Norman Bates, <more>
avoiding a ranting, raving, drooling, murder-happy, manic characterization; instead his performance as Norman is subtle, creepy, cool, and unsettling. He is brilliant; from his quiet conversations with Marion Crane amidst the stuffed birds, to his weasling wimpiness when confronted by Arbogast, his performance is so exact that it chills the viewer, all without the unnecessary disturbing images prevalent in more modern films read The Cell, Henry: Portrait of A Serial Killer .Perkin's fine performance, a tight script, and Bernstein's classic score make Psycho a film that is now and will always be remembered as one of the pinnacles of the horror genre.
I just got this film for Christmas.Since it is black and white I thought I wouldn't be interested. How wrong I was. From the start of the film,it grabs you by the throat and drags you into the world of Norman Bates.Although the 'shower scene'has been spoofed in so many other films,seeing it for the first time is truely tense. Don't watch the remake,watch this,and read the book.
This is one to watch again and again. (by salatiello)
Alfred Hitchcock's crisp efficiency is not unlike that of Norman Bates Anthony Perkins , the dutiful son who cleans up after his mother in the landmark thriller "Psycho." Not only is this a masterfully directed suspense chiller, it actually set standards by which all fright films since have been measured. The cinema has produced some great scores, but Bernard Herrmann's music is incredibly enhancing and simply unforgettable, one of the best ever and it did not even get an Oscar nomination for Best Score . The more I watch "Psycho," the more I prefer the first <more>
half, with its sense of dread and a fascinatingly cool Janet Leigh Oscar nomination for Best Supporting Actress . Hitchcock, of course, never won the Best Director Oscar, but was nominated for "Psycho," one of 1960's biggest box-office hits. Shockingly, Anthony Perkins, in a career-making role and one of the most famous performances in screen history, failed to win a Best Actor nomination -- probably because the performance was too edgy and disturbing which is what made it great . Some scenes are dated, of course, but this film almost never falters. It gets a "9" and a very high nine at that from me.
i had to give another comment on Alfred Hitchcock's Psycho. in my first comment i said it was ok, but one night i had nothing to do and Psycho was on so i watched it and this time i loved it i saw the sequels first and saw the boring remake first so all the suspense for me was gone watching the original, but now i see what a classic Psycho really is, Anthony Perkins was great and is so under rated as well, i give Psycho 9/10
Hithcock masterpiece in his most accomplished and perfect movie (by ma-cortes)
This famous film with known story tells about Marion Crane Janet Leigh ,she works in a Phoenix Arizona office,when his employer trusts her a money.Seeing the opportunity to take the cash and beginning a new life along with her fiancée Sam John Gavin .Larcenous Marion leaves Phoenix and heads with her car toward California where her lover with debts is owner a store.When is caught in a storm and pursued by a policeman,she leaves the highway and enter to Bates hotel.The hotel with twelve rooms and 12 showers is managed by a strange young who seems to be submitted by his overbearing <more>
mother,she's leaving into a creaky mansion nearly to hotel.Then,rare thing start to happen.Later a detective named Arbogast Martin Balsam ,her sister Vera Miles and Sam John Gavin are looking for to Marion,asking help to sheriff John McIntire .Psycho was not only Hitchcock's biggest successful movie,but was a phenomenon in its own right.The picture is a magnum opus of the terror genre and its immediate impact and its future influence was enormous and cannot be over emphasised.It's the quinta-essential shocker that initiated an authentic sub-genre about psycho-killers continuing until nowadays.The shower images is one of the most studied ,copied and analysed sequences in cinema history and has obtained a notoriety what exceeds of the movie itself.Terrific performance by Anthony Perkins in an immortal role as Norman Bates and sensational Janet Leigh with Oscar nomination included that was the only one of her career.Inventive and superbly constructed plot,filled with delicious black humor, by Joseph Stefano based on Robert Bloch's novel.The highlight film is,of course,the shower scene,it was made 70 cameras to shot the 45 seconds of footage and the creepy sound effects were realized by stabbing a knife into a melon.Magnificent main titles by Saul Bass,he's usual on Hitcock films.Excellent black and white-Hitch thought it would be gory in colour- cinematography by John Russell.Bernard Herrmann'legendary musical score copied and endlessly imitated aids to create a thrilling atmosphere.Film is directed with exquisite taste and intelligence by the master Hitchcock who makes an impeccable control of every scene and maneuvers your emotions, infusing with a deliciously macabre wit,it makes ¨Psycho¨far superior to the several movies what tried duplicate,these are the following: PsychoII 1983 Richard Franklin,PsychoIII 1986 Anthony Perkins and for cable television:PsychoIV 1990 Mick Garris.Psycho'Hitchcock belongs his best period in the 5os and 60s when he produced his finest work,perfecting the art of suspense in a series of masterpieces,Dial M,Rear widow,Vertigo,North by Nortwest,Birds and specially Psycho what are still studied and copied today.Rating: Indispensable and essential classic movie.
The movie starts off with a woman stealing some money and landing up to a deserted motel I know it sounds like a cheap horror movie and the rest of the movie is about what happens to her next. I'm sure when people from 60's first watched it they were terrified due to the newer type of suspense and terror but today if anyone watches it he would be able to predict everything except may be the climax.This movie is not for our time Only movies like ring could perhaps scare now , this movies time has PASSED. Now, PSYCHO is only for people from that era or the people from movie-making <more>
business.It has got few thrills but it is nothing compared to horror/thriller movies made these days.It surely did sound great in 1960's but now if anyone tries to see it for the first time as I did then I assure you, you will be regretting why you even rented or bought it. I wouldn't recommend it to anyone neither the thriller addict nor a normal person.It isn't simply worth your time and money.4/10 3 points just for it's climax