Before I watched this movie, I thought it was some kind of horror movie with supernatural elements, so I was more scared. After watching it, I found out that it was a horror movie with a criminal color. The following is just to express my personal opinion.
The first is about forty-five minutes ahead, about the story of the heroine who stole 40,000 yuan and ran away. Maybe I didn't take it seriously enough, but the question is, isn't the 40,000 yuan to help Sam pay off the debt? In the end, he ran away by himself and did not tell anyone his whereabouts.
Regarding the plot design of the $40,000 in the early stage, I actually did not understand the plot of the $40,000 at first, but after thinking about it, I think $40,000 serves as a clue for the film to connect different plots. If Marion didn't steal $40,000, but committed other crimes (of course, it should be unlikely according to the character), so there is no plot of hiring a private detective (the purpose of hiring a private detective is to not solve the problem of stealing money legally. problem), and the police should investigate the case later. If Marion is just a missing person, whether the police can find the Bates Hotel is another matter. by Norman). In addition, maybe $40,000 can better reflect people's balance between money and human life. Maybe the owner of $40,000 only cares about "where is my $40,000?" It was Marion who caused him to lose his money. But I also agree with the other idea, that is, the director wants to avoid the audience coming up with the view of the story behind.
In the end, there seems to be a contradiction between the confessions of the psychiatrist and the mother, Norman, because I watched it with my roommates, so I immediately shared my views with them after reading it.
The psychiatrist said he learned everything from Norman's mother, and the psychiatrist also said that Norman's mother killed the man. But later from the confession, Norman's mother said: "How sad when a mother has to convict her own son." The dialogue between the two seems to be contradictory? I think either the psychiatrist has something and deduces from the dialogue that the murderer is the mother; or the Norman personality tricked the psychologist into thinking that his mother was the murderer, but he actually killed the person himself.
The psychiatrist also said that the mother's personality occupies the body for a long time, but why does the mother's confession say that she is powerless and can't do anything?
However, I have also seen other film reviews saying that Norman loves his mother very much. In the film, he also said: "A son's best friend is his mother." I think it is precisely because Norman has an Oedipal complex, So he felt that his mother would be jealous of the girls who were close to him (the psychiatrist also said in the film "Norman felt that his mother was jealous of him"), and Norman himself may have very much hoped that his mother would be jealous of those girls, and hoped that his mother would treat those girls Killing, so when Norman committed the murder, he would put on his mother's clothes to commit the murder, creating an illusion for himself that "it was the mother who was jealous of these girls and killed these girls".
In the video Norman shouted "I'm Norman Bates!" when he took a knife to assassinate the heroine's sister Is his own son the murderer?
However, we can't see the dialogue between the psychiatrist and Norman. Which view is right? I think each has its own reasons. In the world of psycho, as normal people, who knows?
Finally, congratulations to edg for winning the championship.
View more about Psycho reviews
