Maybe it's because I haven't watched suspense and reasoning movies for a long time. After watching it for a long time, I haven't understood who the real murderer or the second split personality is. It felt a little messy. I thought she saw herself in her eyes, which made me startle, but if it was his mother later, it would not be so scary to think about. The ending surprised me a lot, it's a really good ending. Draw a circle for the two. But it's still a bit far-fetched. It's the kind of sloppy account of a murderer who has never appeared in a few minutes without any foreshadowing and clues. Even by the end of the film, I can't believe that it is the real murderer. It is the director who has been guiding you. The people who made you think they were the murderers in front of you believed that they were the murderers, but they didn't, and finally told you who the murderer was, but you couldn't believe it, and you were even thinking about who the real murderer was. The soundtrack has the same feeling as before, the actors' acting skills are great, and there is a sense of substitution. But it still lacks the consternation and exclamation that Hitchcock brought me. The movie really tests a person's wisdom, emotional intelligence and feelings! Is Mom Really the Murderer?
Norman seems to know who the murderer is from the beginning to the end. He repeatedly said that his mother did not die, but his mother did it, but the doctor has been guiding him, thinking that he has not recovered well, thinking that he is mentally ill , said that Mary's mother and daughter did it, he must know that Mary was not the murderer, but he didn't say a word at the police station, why did he say that, because no one died after Mary's death, and he had no evidence to prove the case It was someone else who did it. He just sat at the table to eat and prepare tableware, especially the shovel that appeared in the previous shot. He was ready for the arrival of his mother, and he knew that this woman was the murderer. Then he split again and returned to the way he was in the first part.
We are not only a bystander, but also a sense of Mary's substitution. From distrust at the beginning, to trust, to thinking that he did it, we even thought that Mary's mother was the murderer, that Mary's split personality was the murderer, that it was him He had a split personality again but he didn't realize it. It was not until the end that I found out that maybe the truth is very simple. He said from the beginning that it was his mother, and we just didn’t believe it. As for why we didn’t believe it, it was because of the sequelae of the first film, which we believed in the first film. Well, it turns out that he has a split personality, and we no longer believe him. Who would jump into a pit twice, and it turned out that this deceived us all. In other words, who would believe the words of a mentally ill person or someone who has been mentally ill, just like in hunting, people naturally choose to believe the words of a little girl. As for the ending, he really came back again, this time I can't believe it.
As for why he didn't tell the police, maybe he thought the police wouldn't believe his words, or maybe he thought he wasn't cured and treated him as a patient. It's also possible that he's going to take care of it himself, take care of his mother and put her by the window, and the hotel will open!
View more about Psycho II reviews
