Anthony Perkins, Vince Vaughn, and Freddie Highmore all played/is playing Norman Bates in Psycho (1960), Psycho (1998), and Bates Motel (2013-) respectively. (SPOILERS)
'Psycho' (1960) is in my books an effective psychological horror flick, good but not great. I can already feel hellfire and accusations of blasphemy raining down upon me as I type, but I must confess to just not loving the film as most people/Hitchcock fans seem to. It has a terrific sense of atmosphere, and some brilliantly directed scenes, but the cumulative effect just never really adds up for me. I certainly would not call it Hitchcock's masterpiece (that's either 'Vertigo' or 'Saboteur' for me) since it is let down quite considerably by some of the supporting actors, I've never been enamoured with the whole third act, and that final psychiatrist's monologue does hurt it a bit.
In contrast to most of the other cast members (with one glowing exception), who mostly just sort of stroll into the film and out of it without making much of an impact, Anthony Perkins enters the film and makes his presence both felt and not felt (if that makes any sense) with incredible ease. 'Not felt' in the sense that Norman Bates is an incredibly withdrawn, shy man. Perkins is incredibly good in the opening scenes theough his character creation of Norman as someone you could easily see being pushed around and berated by his mother, and having little to no day-to-day social interaction. Every little nervous tic, the way he reacts so eagerly yet awkwardly towards Marion Crane (Janet Leigh) and her friendly disposition, that soft, soft voice of his and his smile which strikes the perfect balance between the young man trying to make a good impression, and the confused man insecure about his attempts. It's a wonderful start to the performance as we learn so much yet also so little about who Norman is, since Perkins does not give the game away just yet.
Leigh and Perkins have terrific chemistry and it is unfortunate how short-lived their dynamic is. We learn a bit more of what makes Norman what he is when he is discussing his hobby of taxidermy and his relationship with his mother, and it's amazing how he jumps from being a passionate animal-lover to a deeply disturbing mommy's boy without ever lpsing sense of who Norman is. Perkins rightly maintains Norman as an enigma, but one who feels his defences broken down gradually by Marion. Leigh's tenderness works incredibly well in first bringing out the soft side of Norman before bringing it back over the edge with his love-hate relationship with his 'mother'. The way he talks about 'Mother' is so unsettlingly viscreal, from his trembling voice to his fearful eyes with a tinge of venom in them that you can almost feel the very presence of the woman herself. Perkins makes both the odd and quirky Norman, and the unsettling and quite possibly deranged Norman, a realistic character and yet a highly enigmatic one, especially in contrast with the straightforwardness of Leigh's great performance.
Well once Leigh leaves the picture, in my books so does any potential for true greatness in the film. Her death scene is effectively jarring and Perkins' reactions in that scene are great as he makes such a strange and disturbing figure oddly sympathetic. He shows the guilt and fear of Norman so viscerally that despite having become so attached to Marion Crane, we almost root for him to get away with disposing of her body. Afterwards however, I kind of feel all the potential of Perkins' characterisation is kinda thrown out of the window, for various reasons.
Firstly he is not really given anyone else to work with. Vera Miles and John Gavin unfortunately become the focus of the film for much of the latter second act, and the third act, and they are rather dull. Martin Balsam as Aborgast is actually rather good and strikes a pretty interesting dynamic with Perkins in their one scene together, his casual yet forceful approach working well alongside Perkins' slowly crumbling facade of cheeriness. Unfortunately his performance is cut short, no pun intended, though the viscreal impact of his departure is amazing, though I have to credit Hitchcock more than Perkins for that. Secondly, Perkins kind of just starts to go round with his characterisation in cocentric circles by the second half, he continues to put the audience off with his secretive, unsettling nature but it's not nearly given as much dramatic heft as his first half of his performance. The enigma is too distanced from the audience to let Perkins to find new ways of showing the underlying madness of Norman till the very end.
The twist, I feel, of Norman and 'mother' being one person is not one of my favourite Hitchcockian twists since it is fairly rushed and overly expositioned. It's not perfectly executed, even though I like the idea behind it, and Perkins handles it well. It makes sense alongside his performance thus far, though he's not given enough time to truly shine in all his revealed deparavity. Instead of the psychiatrist's monologue I definitely would have much preferred a longer extension of Perkins' final scene, since at the end of the film I felt like Perkins had definitely succeeded in shocking me, but there was potential for more. His final reaction shot from confusion to his 'mother' persona is great though, shame about those sequels which failed to build on from this interesting case of dual identity.
The twist, I feel, of Norman and 'mother' being one person is not one of my favourite Hitchcockian twists since it is fairly rushed and overly expositioned. It's not perfectly executed, even though I like the idea behind it, and Perkins handles it well. It makes sense alongside his performance thus far, though he's not given enough time to truly shine in all his revealed deparavity. Instead of the psychiatrist's monologue I definitely would have much preferred a longer extension of Perkins' final scene, since at the end of the film I felt like Perkins had definitely succeeded in shocking me, but there was potential for more. His final reaction shot from confusion to his 'mother' persona is great though, shame about those sequels which failed to build on from this interesting case of dual identity.
In the end, I feel Perkins gives a great performance in the first half of his performance, and lays the necessary seeds for the final reveal. However after that shocking first twist he's not given nearly enough to do other than just continue being creepy and unsettling which is a shame, but this is still a mostly impressive, occasionally amazing performance which reaches great heights, though he can't quite maintain them.
Psycho (1998) is one of the more pointless remakes ever, as it is basically a shot by shot recreation of the of the original. Gus Van Sant is not one of my favourite directors but I don't usually mind his films as they are all usually interesting one way or the other, despite his very milquetoast approach to direction (I do enjoy 'Elephant' and 'Good Will Hunting' quite a bit) but the sheer blandness of this film really fails to give me any sort of enjoyment, whatsoever. Not even in a 'so bad it's good', 'The Room'-esque manner. I guess one good thing about it is Julianne Moore in a very thankless role, who I actually found rather good and a considerable improvement over Vera Miles.
What Vince Vaughn does here with Norman Bates is that he tries to play the EXACT same notes as Perkins did with his performance. It's so glaringly obvious that Van Sant's attempt to mimic each shot of Hitchcock's scenes necessitated Vaughn to copy Perkins, and it's not a seamless transition at all. I guess like Perkins he seems off in every scene, but in a different way; whereas Perkins' Bates manner was slowly revealed to be off-putting through his gradual characterisation of Norman, Vaughn just doesn't seem comfortable in his own skin from the very start. As in he seems almost like one of those aliens from 'Invasion of the Body Snatchers' taking over Vince Vaughn's body, or Vince Vaughn from 'Swingers' being filmed on a drunken prank by Jon Favreau.
Vaughn just fails at not only being creepy, but being interesting at all. By trying to mimic Perkins' performance he really can't make anything worthy of discussion come out of the role, since he basically enforces unflattering comparisons by he and Van Sant's approach. Vaughn can be a good actor, as he's shown in 'Thumbsucker'; but he is firstly just so incredibly miscast, and secondly takes on the role in such a dull manner, that really I see no reason to go on discussing his performance. It's that dull.
I rather love 'Bates Motel'. Its first few episodes do take a while to really get going but once it starts turning the suspense and psychological elements up it becomes a pretty fascinating exploration of two very fascinating characters.
Freddie Highmore, known best for his endearingly sweet child performances in the likes of 'Finding Neverland', 'Charlie and the Chocolate Factory', imbudes some of that sweetness into his rather adroably awkward character conception of Norman Bates. He's polite, affable to others, and quite winning actually in how shy yet eager he is to make a good impression on the inhabitants of the new neighbourhood he's moved into. It's definitely the most slight aspect of his portrayal of Bates but he handles it rather well.
The other side of his performance is his intensely strong bond to his mother, Norma (Vera Farmiga). The two actors work incredibly well with one another in conveying this very specific type of love, one which is warm yet of-putting. What's remarkable is that they really do take very contrasting styles to their approaches--Farmiga is more overt, Highmore understated--yet together they mesh perfectly. Highmore is great in showing that unlike his brother Dylan, he is very much a mummy's boy, which lies at the root of all his psychological problems--and one of the great things about television is that time is permitted from this transition from underlying madness to full-blown psychopathy. I particularly love how Highmore, in the third season, begins to gain the upper hand in his relationship with Norma and gradually begins to assert himself, but still retains weakness and subservient hints of some greater affection, which Farmiga shows very well with the sheer intensity of her overbearing portrayal.
At the beginning of the show Highmore is actually uncannily reminiscient of Perkins in how he pays heed unquestioningly to every command of his mother's. 'Bates Motel' is not canonical with the original but it would certainly work as such, as Highmore's individualistic style both works as its own, and as a foreboding sense of what's to come. One reservation I do have with the show is that it's supporting characters/subplots aren't quite interesting enough to measure up to the central relationship, but it only goes to show the strength of Highmore and Farmiga's portrayals that their interactions with the townspeople always bring a bit more out of them.
The Oedipal complex in 'Bates Motel' is handled incredibly well as it takes quite a while for it to ne explicitly stated. Highmore is great in showing fleeting glimpses of sexual frustration towards Norma, and gradually finds his way into a fuller realisation of just how messed up Norman Bates really is. In the episode, 'The Last Supper', when he finally is questioned directly about his attraction to his mother, his reaction is absolutely pitch perfect. The love he conveys is incredible in that it's wholly creepy and yet, oddly tragic; Highmore approaches these mostly silent scenes of repressed lust so amazingly well that you can't help but kind of feel for him. It's in those silent glares and hollowness of his voice when handling his jealousy with his mother's lovelife that Highmore shines most brightly. He is suitably creepy but also incredibly sympathetic.
Of course when talking about Norman Bates we have to talk about killing, and interestingly enough Highmore is the only Bates we actually get to see kill someone onscreen. In this respect Highmore is amazing. The first season is essentially a slow-burn towards Norman's first kill, the second and third a depiction of the ensuing fallout (and a lot more killing). The killer within him is slowly brought out by Highmore that when he does kill in defence of his mother it completely makes sense, but his viscerally amazing depiction of pure fury and later, anguish, in his murder (s) is amazing. The dual personality of Norman/mother is played perfectly by Highmore as a facet, but not all-encompassing, of his insanity, and it is amazing to see how he strikes the perfect note between an uncontrollable madness that stems from his Oedipal attraction, and a more measured, cold-blooded and assertive psychopath who learns to kill with increasing efficiency.
Well there goes, my comparisons of the three portrayals of Norman Bates I've seen. I must confess that Highmore's review is incomplete in the sense that 'Bates Motel' has yet to reach its full conclusion. So if he really fucks up in the latter stages of his transition into the Norman Bates we know and well, um...then the standings might change. But I doubt it. Highmore's portrayal of Bates' conflicting impulses and his gradual progression from insecurity to jealousy to madness, which could easily have been too scattershot but in his hands is pure brilliance, and I would say that he does have an incredibly fascinating arc to explore, something which Perkins does not have. Although don't get me wrong I think Perkins is great too. It's just that he does not nearly have as much he can do with the role.
1. Highmore (5/5)
2. Perkins (4.5/5, verging on a 5)
3. Vaughn (1/5)
Next Up, my next major Head-to-Head will probably be with Deborah Kerr and Julianne Moore, 'The End of the Affair' (though I need a bit of time to find/re-watch the 1999 version first), I may do another smaller set of reviews before that though from Luke, Louis and GM's recommendations.
Photo credits:
Wikipedia
What Vince Vaughn does here with Norman Bates is that he tries to play the EXACT same notes as Perkins did with his performance. It's so glaringly obvious that Van Sant's attempt to mimic each shot of Hitchcock's scenes necessitated Vaughn to copy Perkins, and it's not a seamless transition at all. I guess like Perkins he seems off in every scene, but in a different way; whereas Perkins' Bates manner was slowly revealed to be off-putting through his gradual characterisation of Norman, Vaughn just doesn't seem comfortable in his own skin from the very start. As in he seems almost like one of those aliens from 'Invasion of the Body Snatchers' taking over Vince Vaughn's body, or Vince Vaughn from 'Swingers' being filmed on a drunken prank by Jon Favreau.
Vaughn just fails at not only being creepy, but being interesting at all. By trying to mimic Perkins' performance he really can't make anything worthy of discussion come out of the role, since he basically enforces unflattering comparisons by he and Van Sant's approach. Vaughn can be a good actor, as he's shown in 'Thumbsucker'; but he is firstly just so incredibly miscast, and secondly takes on the role in such a dull manner, that really I see no reason to go on discussing his performance. It's that dull.
Freddie Highmore, known best for his endearingly sweet child performances in the likes of 'Finding Neverland', 'Charlie and the Chocolate Factory', imbudes some of that sweetness into his rather adroably awkward character conception of Norman Bates. He's polite, affable to others, and quite winning actually in how shy yet eager he is to make a good impression on the inhabitants of the new neighbourhood he's moved into. It's definitely the most slight aspect of his portrayal of Bates but he handles it rather well.
The other side of his performance is his intensely strong bond to his mother, Norma (Vera Farmiga). The two actors work incredibly well with one another in conveying this very specific type of love, one which is warm yet of-putting. What's remarkable is that they really do take very contrasting styles to their approaches--Farmiga is more overt, Highmore understated--yet together they mesh perfectly. Highmore is great in showing that unlike his brother Dylan, he is very much a mummy's boy, which lies at the root of all his psychological problems--and one of the great things about television is that time is permitted from this transition from underlying madness to full-blown psychopathy. I particularly love how Highmore, in the third season, begins to gain the upper hand in his relationship with Norma and gradually begins to assert himself, but still retains weakness and subservient hints of some greater affection, which Farmiga shows very well with the sheer intensity of her overbearing portrayal.
At the beginning of the show Highmore is actually uncannily reminiscient of Perkins in how he pays heed unquestioningly to every command of his mother's. 'Bates Motel' is not canonical with the original but it would certainly work as such, as Highmore's individualistic style both works as its own, and as a foreboding sense of what's to come. One reservation I do have with the show is that it's supporting characters/subplots aren't quite interesting enough to measure up to the central relationship, but it only goes to show the strength of Highmore and Farmiga's portrayals that their interactions with the townspeople always bring a bit more out of them.
The Oedipal complex in 'Bates Motel' is handled incredibly well as it takes quite a while for it to ne explicitly stated. Highmore is great in showing fleeting glimpses of sexual frustration towards Norma, and gradually finds his way into a fuller realisation of just how messed up Norman Bates really is. In the episode, 'The Last Supper', when he finally is questioned directly about his attraction to his mother, his reaction is absolutely pitch perfect. The love he conveys is incredible in that it's wholly creepy and yet, oddly tragic; Highmore approaches these mostly silent scenes of repressed lust so amazingly well that you can't help but kind of feel for him. It's in those silent glares and hollowness of his voice when handling his jealousy with his mother's lovelife that Highmore shines most brightly. He is suitably creepy but also incredibly sympathetic.
Of course when talking about Norman Bates we have to talk about killing, and interestingly enough Highmore is the only Bates we actually get to see kill someone onscreen. In this respect Highmore is amazing. The first season is essentially a slow-burn towards Norman's first kill, the second and third a depiction of the ensuing fallout (and a lot more killing). The killer within him is slowly brought out by Highmore that when he does kill in defence of his mother it completely makes sense, but his viscerally amazing depiction of pure fury and later, anguish, in his murder (s) is amazing. The dual personality of Norman/mother is played perfectly by Highmore as a facet, but not all-encompassing, of his insanity, and it is amazing to see how he strikes the perfect note between an uncontrollable madness that stems from his Oedipal attraction, and a more measured, cold-blooded and assertive psychopath who learns to kill with increasing efficiency.
Well there goes, my comparisons of the three portrayals of Norman Bates I've seen. I must confess that Highmore's review is incomplete in the sense that 'Bates Motel' has yet to reach its full conclusion. So if he really fucks up in the latter stages of his transition into the Norman Bates we know and well, um...then the standings might change. But I doubt it. Highmore's portrayal of Bates' conflicting impulses and his gradual progression from insecurity to jealousy to madness, which could easily have been too scattershot but in his hands is pure brilliance, and I would say that he does have an incredibly fascinating arc to explore, something which Perkins does not have. Although don't get me wrong I think Perkins is great too. It's just that he does not nearly have as much he can do with the role.
1. Highmore (5/5)
2. Perkins (4.5/5, verging on a 5)
3. Vaughn (1/5)
Next Up, my next major Head-to-Head will probably be with Deborah Kerr and Julianne Moore, 'The End of the Affair' (though I need a bit of time to find/re-watch the 1999 version first), I may do another smaller set of reviews before that though from Luke, Louis and GM's recommendations.
Photo credits:
cinemajam.com
pixshark.com
Very brave of you to say Psycho is just good. I think it's brilliantly directed and acted, and the movie itself has many layers, but the psychiatrist's monologue hurts a bit the whole experience. The remake of Psycho is horrendous, never want to see that again.
ReplyDeleteThank you very much for putting Kerr and Moore Head to Head \o/
Thanks. I feel a bit bad that I can't promise that they'll be definitely next though, as I've exams coming up, so I might do some other matchups (smaller) before that big matchup.
ReplyDeleteI promise I will definitely do not only Kerr and Moore, Van Johnson and Fiennes, Cushing and Rea, maybe even Mills and Hart
I've only seen Perkins, who is terrific although I don't love him as much as everybody else. I think Janet Leigh is insanely overrated, she's good but nothing really amazing. Shirley Jones deserved her win.
ReplyDelete1. Perkins (5)
ReplyDelete2. Vaughn (1)
Haven't seen Bates Motel, but I should, although my time's been very much occupied by Hannibal.
I've seen a little bit of Bates Motel, but not enough to really comment on Highmore's work. I suppose I liked Perkins more, but I'm in full agreement on Vaughn. I do think a great deal of the awkwardness came from van Sant's direction as it seemed like he demanded the actors physically replicate things the original actors did which were just naturally part of their performances but in the remake are forced adjustments to keep the shots looking the same.
ReplyDelete