Writer-director Ti West’sX, set in 1979 and starring Mia Goth, was an adequate slasher genre exercise. The prequel, Pearl, set in 1918 and starring Mia Goth, was an excellent character study, and, in a very welcome surprise, one of the best horror movies of recent years. Now MaXXXine, set in 1985 and starring Mia Goth, is an 80’s horror pastiche, driven more by aesthetic and style than character or even genre. There are touches of 80’s horror, slashers, thrillers, and sleazy low budget movies in general. Everything coalesces fairly well though the ending becomes unwieldy and disappointingly anticlimactic despite an 80’s inspired poolside shootout. If an exploding head is a letdown, then you have made some mistakes with your movie.
Mia Goth stars as Maxine Minx, sole survivor of the “Texas Porn Star Massacre” depicted in X, who is now an adult film star living in L.A. and trying to break into mainstream movies. Her big chance comes when she is cast in the low budget but highly anticipated horror sequel, The Puritan II. Then she begins receiving cryptic notes about her past, her co-workers begin turning up dead after saying they are going to a party in the Hollywood hills, and she is being followed by a sleazy private detective working for a mysterious figure.
Unfortunately most of the great cast is underserved by the material. Bobby Cannavale has some fun moments but still feels underused as an L.A. detective who originally wanted to be an actor. His partner, played by Michelle Monaghan, has decidedly less to do. Giancarlo Esposito and his fabulous wig have too few scenes as Maxine’s agent. However, it’s clear that Kevin Bacon is having a good time as the sleazy private detective with a super heavy New Orleans accent. The performer with the stand out role is Elizabeth Debicki as the director of the horror movie. She is a non-threatening but steely and intimidating presence. Her tall figure looms over Goth in the few scenes where Goth gets to hint at being vulnerable and out of her element. That was the key to Pearl’s success: Mia Goth was able to show a vulnerable side as well as a psycho side. Here we have Maxine, determined and ambitious, with bursts of violent rage that hint at more beneath the surface; but we never get more. An early scene of Maxine delivering a violent comeuppance to a menacing male and another scene of her punching someone in the head while “St. Elmo's Fire” plays in the background–the highlight of the movie which has forever changed what I'll think about when I hear that song–promise a more volatile character and a more exciting movie. Even the action packed climax makes the inexplicable choice to mostly sideline Maxine both physically and dramatically. Ultimately, and most unfortunately, the person most underserved by the script and approach is Mia Goth. This is nowhere near the showcase for her great talent that Pearl provided (it's worth noting that Goth co-wrote the screenplay for Pearl ).
Setting the story against the real-life Night Stalker killings in Los Angeles is unnecessary as it seems to be more for ambiance than anything else since the murders of Maxine's friends are clearly not by the Night Stalker. The production design, costumes, and soundtrack do such a great job of establishing the era that no extra atmosphere is needed. This is not the sleek, dazzling New Wave version of the 1980's that we see so often in 21st century movies and TV shows. This is the dingy, lived in 1980's that would give way to the grunge era of the early 90's. The cars are square and look ugly, the characters drink New Coke from a beat up vending machine, and there is more brown and beige than anyone who lived in the 80’s cares to remember. When it comes, the violence is shown in close up and is gory and stylish but also empty and lacking visceral shock; it is just more ambiance.
MaXXXine is by no means a bad movie, but its best scenes are moments that promise a better movie. There is enough going on that MaXXXine feels like it is doing its own thing, more than a paint by numbers exercise like X. Mia Goth still shines but not as bright as in Pearl, far and away the best of Ti West’s “I’m a star” trilogy.
The Abominable Dr. Phibes is one of the best Vincent Price movies, if not the best. It is a totally fantastic, wildly entertaining movie that I’ve written about before and could write about even more. It has to be seen to be believed. Topping a movie like The Abominable Dr. Phibes is pretty much impossible, but the sequel, Dr. Phibes Rises Again, comes very close.
If you haven’t seen the first film, not to worry, as the sequel opens with a narration and recap. Dr. Phibes (Price) was an Egyptologist who was horribly disfigured in a car accident and presumed dead. He actually survived but wears an incredibly realistic mask of his former face and can speak only through a special device connecting his neck to a speaker. Due to medical neglect his beloved wife, Victoria, died, but Phibes has her preserved in a suspended state. The Abominable Dr. Phibes had Phibes taking elaborate revenge on the team of doctors who failed to save his wife. Dr. Phibes Rises Again has him seeking the hidden River of Life in Egypt that will revive his wife and give them both eternal life.
Dr. Phibes’s rival in the search for the River of Life is an archeologist named Darrus Biederbeck (Robert Quarry) who steals an ancient papyrus scroll from Phibes. So, Dr. Phibes unleashes his elaborate wrath on Beiderback and everyone standing in his own path to the River of Life. Biederbeck is arrogant and suspicious, and while he eventually earns some sympathy he never quite comes off as a hero or protagonist. Phibes, of course, is a murderous mastermind whose preferred execution method is elaborate and ridiculous devices, but in this film he comes across as more of an anti-hero; in the first film he was a charismatic and sympathetic villain. The closing credits group Phibes and Biederbeck together under the heading “protagonists” but Phibes is the character you are rooting for, or at least find more entertaining.
Many of the distinct stylistic elements that made the original film so memorable are also in the sequel. The elaborate art-deco design of Phibes’s lair is replicated in his Egyptian lair. His band of automaton musicians, The Clockwork Wizards, are now The Alexandria Quartet. Phibes’s beautiful but silent assistant, Vulnavia (this time played by Valli Kemp), is once again ready to help. And of course, Phibes still kills with ridiculous methods. One of the simpler kills involves distracting a man with a mechanical snake while a real snake attacks. Other deaths include but are not limited to: a raptor pecking someone's face to death and Phibes and Vulnavia faking a sandstorm to cover up the sounds of a man being crushed in a box. Robert Fuest returns as director for the sequel and once again his background in production design provides an exquisite, fun, and distinctive look.
Dr. Phibes was one of Vincent Price’s favorite roles and it is easy to understand why. Phibes is technically a villain but is sympathetic; he is vengeful but not hateful. He is devoted to Victoria and thanks to Price’s performance, Phibes’s love comes across as genuine and true instead of obsessive. Phibes is also a silent character, sort of. Since he must be connected to a machine to speak, his lips do not move while he talks, meaning that Price acts along to a recording of his voice. If acting is reacting, then Price gets to do both with the same character in the same scene in the same performance. The phonograph crackle of the speaking machine adds a nice eerie layer to the dialogue and monologues delivered wonderfully by Price. Dr Phibes is indeed one of Price’s best performances.
The Phibes movies are not scary but they are excellent horror entertainment. They are campy, pseudo-slasher movies. If you ever wondered what the SAW movies would be like if all of the gruesome gore and cynical dread was replaced with fun, you should watch The Abominable Dr. Phibes and/or Dr. Phibes Rises Again. Like the original, the Dr. Phibes Rises Again revels in the ridiculous, the baroque, the weird. In one scene, Phibes puts someone in a catch-22 torture device. In another Vulnavia is wearing a sousaphone for no reason. The first time I saw The Abominable Dr. Phibes was on Halloween night in 2015. I watched Dr. Phibes Rises Again on also on Halloween night. Watching either film is a perfect way to celebrate the Halloween season.
For a long time both movies were very hard to find but thankfully they were recently released as a double feature Blu-ray. Both films will air on TCM as part of a late night Vincent Price marathon beginning on Tuesday, October 24th at 11PM CT with The Abominable Dr. Phibes followed by Dr. Phibes Rises Again at 12:45AM CT Thursday, October 25th. Dr. Phibes Rises Again is also currently streaming on Tubi and Freevee.
I was skeptical, more than skeptical actually, about a sequel to Top Gun thirty-six years later. Even though I enjoy the original very much, and am a big Tom Cruise fan, I was flat out dismissive after seeing the trailer. I was wrong. Very, very wrong. Top Gun: Maverick, a sequel that no one asked for, is not just a fantastic, entertaining summer action movie, it is a masterfully crafted, exciting, and fun movie that every big budget action movie should strive to be like. If it was released in the 1980’s or 90’s this might be just another action movie, but in 2022, Tom Cruise, as star and producer, and director Joseph Kosinski have created a dazzling technical achievement, a thrilling entertainment, and something truly special.
After his program testing experimental supersonic jets is shut down in favor of a drone program, Captain Pete “Maverick” Mitchell is called back to the Navy’s elite pilot training program known as Top Gun. However, Maverick won’t just be teaching young pilots, he will be training them for an almost impossible mission deep in enemy territory. Like the first Top Gun movie, the “enemy” is never specified or seen up close. Like the first Top Gun, this film can be seen as patriotic Navy propaganda or an elaborate recruitment video. However, like the first movie, Top Gun: Maverick is neither political nor mindless. It is a thrill ride with enough sense to allow room for characters to grow and even emotions to build.
This older version of Maverick is a more mature character, deeply informed by the tragedy in his past, the death of his best friend and F-14 Tomcat partner, Goose (played by Anthony Edwards in Top Gun). Maverick is concerned with the safety of his students, but not his own. It is interesting to note that in Top Gun, characters are referred to almost exclusively by their call signs. Before watching the sequel I could not have guessed Maverick's real name. In Top Gun: Maverick, he is called Pete more than a few times. In the training scenes and in the air, Tom Cruise shows us Maverick. In the scenes on the ground, in scenes showing concern and vulnerability, Cruise lets us see Pete Mitchell. I’m a huge fan of Tom Cruise’s Mission: Impossible movies, but this movie's Oscar nominated screenplay allows for character driven acting that we haven’t seen from Cruise in a while.
Jennifer Connolly plays Penny, a divorced mother and owner of a bar in Fighterown, USA, the location in San Diego of the Top Gun training facility. She is also an old flame of Maverick. They reconnect in a pretty amusing scene of him violating her bar policy and having to pay for everyone’s drinks. But there are other scenes where Connolly gets to play a mature character, not just a trophy. These more intimate scenes I enjoyed as much as the rest of the movie.
The other important relationship for Maverick is with Bradley Bradshaw, callsign Rooster, who is Goose’s son and also a Top Gun pilot. I’ve been no fan of Miles Teller, but he does a fine job as Rooster, the cautious flyer with a chip on his shoulder. Maverick pulled strings to set back Rooster’s career as a Navy pilot to keep him safe. Now, Maverick must decide on sending Rooster on a mission with slim chance for survival. Visually, Teller is essentially cosplaying Anthony Edwards as Goose; his entrance is played on the right side of parody. Character-wise Teller and the screenplay avoid the pitfalls of this kind of character; he never comes across as whiny or over burdened, nor is he simply a rehash of Goose. I would have liked more time with the other new pilots (Hangman played by Glen Powell and Phoenix played by Monica Barbaro) but, as is, they are all the movie needs.
Maverick’s biggest supporter, and the reason he still has a Navy career, is his old rival turned friend, Tom “Iceman” Kazansky (Val Kilmer), now an admiral and commander of the U.S. Pacific Fleet. Iceman is suffering from throat cancer, similar to what Kilmer experienced recently in real life, so he and Maverick communicate via text messages. Kilmer has only one scene where he and Cruise meet face to face and it, like so much of the movie, avoids pitfalls even though it plays out how you might expect. It is a wonderful and emotional character focused scene.
Top Gun: Maverick received 6 Oscar nominations, including Best Picture, Adapted Screenplay, Original Song for “Hold My Hand” by Lady Gaga and Bloodpop, Visual Effects, Sound, and Editing. Curiously absent is a nomination for the outstanding cinematography by Claudio Miranda. It is not just that there are great landscapes captured from the air by zooming jets. New techniques were developed to mount the IMAX quality cameras to the jets and Miranda worked with Sony to develop cameras that would fit inside the F-18s. This thrilling point of view footage combined with the excellent and rightfully nominated sound design really make you feel like you are in the jets, flying at supersonic speeds, trying not to blackout as the jets and pilots are pushed to their limits. Cruise made it well known that this movie used real jets and real G-forces and not only did I feel that in the theater, I even felt it watching at home on my regular TV with a regular sound set up. The cinematography and sound and editing and visual effects do more than just create thrills; they effectively convey the danger facing the pilots, which enhances the drama, which in turn adds another layer of substance.
The references to the first Top Gun are more than just pandering winks and nods. Miles Teller plays “Great Balls of Fire” on a bar piano just like Anthony Edwards did in Top Gun, but this segues to a flashback to the first movie that builds drama while also functioning as exposition. The ending feels contrived but action movies, like horror movies, don’t have to be realistic, they just have to be good and Top Gun: Maverick is the best of the best.
Nominees: Tom Cruise, Christopher McQuarrie, David Ellison, Jerry Bruckheimer, producers
Director: Joseph Kosinski
Screenplay: Ehren Kruger and Eric Warren Singer and Christopher McQuarrie; story by Peter Craig and Justin Marks; based on characters created by Jim Cash & Jack Epps Jr.
Cast: Tom Cruise, Jennifer Connolly, Miles Teller, Jon Hamm, Glen Powell, Val Kilmer
Production Companies: Paramount Pictures, Skydance, TC Productions, Don Simpson/Jerry Bruckheimer Films
Distributor: Paramount Pictures
Release Date: May 27th, 2022
Total Nominations: 6, including Best Picture
Other Nominations: Adapted Screenplay-Ehren Kruger, Eric Warren Singer, Christopher McQuarrie, Peter Craig, Justin Marks; Editing-Eddie Hamilton; Original Song-Lady Gaga, BloodPop for "Hold My Hand"; Sound-Mark Weingarten, James Mather, Al Nelson, Chris Burdon, Mark Taylor; Visual Effects-Ryan Tudhope, Seth Hill, Bryan Litson, Scott R. Fisher
This is my favorite time of year, second only to Christmas. Autumn has arrived, the weather is cooling down, and October becomes the month-long celebration of scary movies called Shocktober. So, for the days leading up Halloween I’ll be posting some horror movie recommendations to help you celebrate Shocktober.
Night 6: Sequel Night
“And Jesus said to the man who was possessed 'what is your name?' and he answered, 'Legion, for we are many.'"
When author William Peter Blatty got the chance to direct an adaptation of his
novel Legion, an indirect sequel of sorts to his infamous novel turned
horror cinema touchstone, The Exorcist, he made a pretty faithful
adaptation, as you might expect. However, unhappy executives at Warner Bros.
demanded reshoots, including adding an exorcism and changing the title to The
Exorcist III. The final theatrical version was dismissed by audiences at the time and has only recently
received a fair reevaluation by cinephiles and horror fans. When I finally saw The
Exorcist III last year, I was pleasantly surprised, and chilled, even
despite obvious scenes of studio interference.
In 2016, Shout Factory released a Blu-ray restoration,
including a director’s cut with Blatty’s original footage, long thought to be
lost. To restore the missing scenes, the director’s cut, titled The Exorcist III: Legion, used footage from VHS copies of the original dailies, so
there is a dramatic shift in quality at times. It may not be exactly Blatty’s
original version but is closer to his novel. Overall, the two versions are not
drastically different, until the climax, even the intensely creepy tone is mostly
unchanged.
George C. Scott plays Lt. Kinderman, a Washington, D.C.
detective investigating a series of brutal Christian themed murders. The
forensic evidence points to a different killer for each murder but the
similarities between the killings point to the infamous Gemini Killer, who was
executed years ago on the same night a certain exorcism was performed on a
certain girl resulting in the death Father Karras, a Jesuit priest and friend
of Lt. Kinderman. The case takes an even stranger turn when Kinderman finds a
mysterious patient in a hospital psychiatric ward, Patient X, who claims to be
the Gemini Killer and resembles Father Karras (Jason Miller reprising his role from the first film).
Blatty’s novel is a murder mystery that meditates on
theology and good and evil. Both film versions play like a mystery whose
solution happens to be supernatural with the theatrical emphasizing the horror
aspects and Legion emphasizing the psychological. The ending of the
theatrical version doesn’t feel so much tacked on as it feels poorly set up. A
priest character added in reshoots is introduced at the beginning and then is
forgotten about until the climax when it seems like he shows up out of nowhere.
Still, the exorcism sequence makes good use of special effects and bloody,
gruesome sights, even if they are out of step with the rest of the movie. The
ending of Legion is a low key, almost anticlimactic note that leaves you
wondering about Kinderman’s final action.
Without a doubt the reason to watch either version is for
the chilling and frightening performance of Brad Dourif as the Gemini
Killer/Patient X, though only Legion contains his full performance. He
really steals the whole movie and keeps it from being just another middling
sequel. Even though he’s restrained in a straightjacket, Dourif exudes such
intensity that he still comes across as a real malevolent danger. These scenes
with light pouring though windows of his cell are
wonderfully creepy. In one shot Dourif leans back into the shadows and his eyes
become glowing red dots. Amongst all of the horror effects and other chilling
scenes, his performance, even in its reduced form in the theatrical version, is
either movie’s most terrifying element.
The Exorcist III works as a slow build to a spectacle laden finale and Legion
works as an intriguing psychological horror film. The Exorcist III is
now widely available on Blu-ray and various streaming services. The director’s
cut is only available as a bonus feature of the Blu-ray release
for now. Of course, neither version comes anywhere close to the terrifying
level of The Exorcist, directed by William Friedkin, but both succeed on
their own terms.
Happy Halloween! The countdown is over and Halloween is finally upon us. Tonight, hopefully, you'll be relaxing, eating some candy, and watching a scary, or not-so-scary, movie. There are a lot of options for tonight and I hope I've been of some help. Here is my final recommendation to help bring an end to Shocktober:
Halloween III: Season of the Witch is universally
reviled for a single reason: it does not have Michael Myers. In recent years Halloween
III has picked up a small following, but for the most part it is shunned by
fans of the franchise and horror fans in general. This film is underseen, underrated,
over-bashed, and deserves a reassessment. It certainly has its share of flaws
to be sure, but if given a chance on its own terms, this is good over-the-top
horror entertainment.
A bit of background. Halloween II(1981), directed by Rick Rosenthal, continued the story
of Laurie Strode, Dr. Loomis, and Michael Myers on the same Halloween night as John Carpenter's original film and, unlike the first film, ended very, very conclusively. With Halloween III, written and directed by Tommy Lee Wallace, the idea was to take the film series in a new direction as an anthology film
series with each subsequent sequel taking place around Halloween but having a
different story and characters. This seemed like a good idea because, after
all, there are more spooky things that can happen on Halloween besides a
killer wearing a mask. Why not take advantage of a title as broad as “Halloween”?
The film flopped, a harsh backlash ensued, and there wouldn’t be another Halloween
movie until four years later with Halloween 4: The Return of Michael Myers.
This film begins with a toy store owner being taken to a hospital. He is clutching a Silver Shamrock
brand Halloween mask and says, “they’re going to kill us all.” A
mysterious man in a suit sneaks into his room, kills him by crushing his face, then
kills himself by blowing himself up in a
car. Dr. Dan Challis (Tom Atkins) witnesses this and is determined to get
answers. He finds out the murder victim recently visited the headquarters of the Silver Shamrock toy company. Ellie (Stacy Nelkin), the toy store owner’s daughter, teams up with Dr. Challis to find out
who and what is behind her father’s murder. They travel to the isolated
headquarters of Silver Shamrock and uncover the company’s sinister plan for
Halloween night.
Dan O’Herlihy gives a good performance as Conal Cochran, the
head of the evil company. His light, lilting voice makes him seem harmless in
certain scenes, like when he’s giving a tour of the factory, but it also makes him especially
villainous in other scenes. Cochran’s plan is to return Halloween to its
ancient, sacrificial roots by killing countless children all over the country
through the popular masks. We see a demonstration of this at the factory and though
it is not especially gory or graphic, it is pretty intense and might be a
dealbreaker for some. A kid wearing one of the special Silver Shamrock masks
collapses when a device in the mask is activated by a signal from the TV and his head caves in and snakes
and bugs crawl out from the under the mask. The special effects for the other
horror scenes are pretty gross but great effects. There are certainly more
graphic and gory images in other horror movies, but these scenes are not for
the squeamish. The practical makeup effects add a sense of reality to the
grotesque sights and are effective to say the least.
There are subtle touches sprinkled throughout Halloween III
that pay tribute to the original but also let the audience know this film means
to do its own thing. The title sequence of John Carpenter’s film is a shot of a
jack-o-lantern next to the opening credits. The title sequence of Halloween
III is a close up of rows of orange dots that are revealed to be a
jack-o-lantern on a TV, but the font style of music are different. In John Carpenter’s Halloween, characters watch classic black
& white horror movies on TV. In Halloween III, the characters watch John Carpenter’s Halloween on TV and a commercial refers to it
as “an immortal classic.”
I can understand the frustration and confusion felt by fans
and audiences in general at the time and even now, especially since this is a
numbered sequel implying that it comes in sequence or is strongly tied to the
original. It feels weird that it is included in the Blu-ray box set, but I’m
glad it is. Halloween III stands out and stands alone and that is what is great about it.
Halloween III is not on the same level as the original, but it is certainly
more entertaining some of the other Halloween sequels. I’ll admit that like many I was dismissive of this film sight unseen but my enjoyment of it has only grown. The Silver Shamrock commercial advertising
the masks and counting down the days until Halloween goes “Happy happy
Halloween Halloween Halloween” set to London Bridge is Falling Down and it’s a
real earworm. It’s why I call the final night of my 13 Nights of Shocktober
“Happy Happy Halloween” and inspired the idea of a countdown. No sequel or
remake can come close to John Carpenter’s incredible (even immortal) classic,
so why not try something different? It’s goofy at times, scary at times, and
lots of Halloween fun.
This is my favorite time of year, second only to Christmas. Autumn has arrived, the weather is cooling down, and October becomes the month-long celebration of scary movies called Shocktober. There are a lot of horror movies out there, but as a genre, horror is still looked down upon by some mainstream critics and moviegoers. It doesn’t help that, admittedly, there are so few quality horror movies made but, like comedy, it’s a very difficult and subjective genre. So, in the days leading up Halloween I’ll be posting some recommendations for scary movies to help you celebrate Shocktober.
How could anyone dare to make a sequel to one of the
greatest films ever made by one of the greatest directors that ever lived? How
could a sequel ever live up to the original Psycho, especially when it’s made
22 years later? Would it be just a schlocky 80s slasher embarrassment? Well,
no. It’d be impossible for any film to live up to Alfred Hitchcock’s 1960
masterpiece, but when taken on its own Psycho II is a very good, solid, and
satisfying movie. In the shadow of Psycho, Psycho II is a successful sequel.
Anthony Perkins reprises his role as Norman Bates. Norman has been found not guilty by reason of insanity of the murders in the
first movie, and now, 22 years later, he has been declared sane and released
into normal society. Vera Miles also returns as Lila Loomis, formerly Lila Crane, the
sister of Marion Crane who was murdered so famously in the shower. Lila strongly
objects Norman’s release, protesting in court that he is still a homicidal maniac. However, Norman moves back home and takes a job as a cook at a local diner where
he meets and awkwardly befriends Mary, played by Meg Tilly. When Norman finds
out that she has nowhere to stay he offers her a room in his house; it’s as
awkward as you might expect, but they become unlikely friends.
Anthony Perkins, who was so memorable in the first movie, is
still great in the role of Norman, but this time he gets to play a different
take on the character. This Norman is aware of his troubled past, that Mother
was all in his head, and is doing his best to be a normal, regular citizen.
However, it seems that no one else is ready to have Norman back, everyone still
sees him as a psycho. Suspicious things start to happen almost as soon as
he arrives back home. He receives mysterious notes and phone calls from “Mother.” Is
he slipping back into insanity? Is someone playing a mean prank on him?
Norman finds out that while he was away a sleazy motel manager, played by
Dennis Franz, turned the Bates Motel, which Norman still owns along with the house,
into what he sheepishly refers to as “an adult motel.” He fires the manager
who is murdered shortly thereafter by a mysterious figure.
Psycho II is a full blown slasher movie. There is a body
count and a kills are graphic, but unlike other 80s slasher movies, there is
more than just the kills to this movie. There is a real mystery and intriguing
plot. A lot of care and thought went into this slasher sequel; which is a rare
statement to make. Norman is the prime suspect as more bodies pile up and people
go missing. Though she can’t account for
where he was for every murder, Mary believes Norman is innocent. She also believes there is someone hiding in the
house with her and Norman. We want to believe he's innocent too, not only because Mary
trusts him, but because Anthony Perkins is such an amazing actor that we just
cannot believe that shy, polite, sweet, meek Norman could ever hurt anyone (again).
Psycho II succeeds because of the smart script by Tom Holland and an extraordinary performance by Anthony Perkins. Perkins was so
good in the first movie as Norman Bates that audiences couldn’t see him as
anything else. Though he’s playing the same character, Perkins hits so many
different notes perfectly as Norman that Psycho II feels like a showcase to
remind you that he is a great actor. Psycho II plays with your assumptions
about Norman and expectations, or lack thereof, for sequels to deliver a sequel
that is a thrilling mystery with a twist (or two) of its own. There are many,
many sequels that are uninspired rehashes of the original film, but Psycho II
is one sequel that should not be underestimated.
