PSYCHO UNCUT - exactly what is different? (1 Viewer)

[moviebuff75]

New theory:
The LaoD asks Hitchcock to cut the stabs from 4 to 2. Now, he prefers the last stab anyway. He cuts the first one ( you can hear the extra stab). Now he has three to choose from. Since it is a continuous shot, he can only cut the first or last. He cuts the first two and keeps his shot. No scream, as dubbing isn't completed.
The scream sounds like the actor in the German version who does the other groans. Hitch adds this scream .
The uncut version is sent internationally and the since the scream has its place on the track, it comes after the first stab. The other stabs are looped.
So, he wanted the scream with the one stab, as the scene fades to black. Universal sticks with his wishes and places the scream after the last stab on the uncut version.

 

[Bryan Tuck]

My larger point about that was not that we would be confused whether or not Arbogast was killed (in the later edited version). It was more that Hitchcock would not have taken the too quick and easy route of suggesting a single knife plunge is all it takes for Arbogast to be "dispatched quickly, cleanly, no muss and fuss and with no option of an off screen struggle n place with frail old "Mom" resulting in so much as a sprained pinky finger."

It invites a question of plausibility that I would say Hitchcock was in no mood to invite or allow in this movie. Moreover, it just didn't fit the style of this Hitchcock movie or the way "Mom" did things.

If so, then "Mom" got much more skilled and precise with a knife after having to plunge it into the nude body of a small female many, many, many times to kill her and even that was not instantaneous vs a swift and easy single stroke through suit jacket, shirt and likely t-shirt of a bigger, stronger man.

And in the former he used the celebrated prolonged close-up and spiral shot of her open eye in part to make sure we knew she was definitely dead. I believe this was a movie where Hitchcock wanted us to experience a particular kind of wild, raving, vicious, merciless and relentless attack in the killings. Not the usual movie cliché one and done bit as the later edited version gave us.

Fair enough. And like I said, I'm not disagreeing that the longer version was what Hitchcock intended. I'm just saying that from the available evidence and my own understanding of the way post-production was usually handled in the 1960s, I'm still not convinced US theaters got that fully uncensored version.

It's not quite the same thing, but I was in my 20s when STAR WARS EPISODE II: ATTACK OF THE CLONES came out in 2002. It was widely known that there were some minor differences between the 35mm prints and the DCPs (then a brand-new format). When it was released on DVD, the assumption was that it would be the DCP version, since Lucas had made some "final" tweaks (haha) to that one. However, I was certain that the dialogue at the end of the scene between Anakin and Padme after he's killed all the Tusken Raiders ("I'm a Jedi; I know I'm better than this.") had not been in the DCP or 35mm theatrical versions (I'd seen both), and I remember some discussion about it online. But now, in 2022, I can't find any evidence of that, and most information states that the extra dialogue was in fact in the DCP version (though not the 35mm).

Anyway, I'm willing to accept my memory might be faulty on this, and that was only 20 years ago. Memory is funny, and it can sometimes be influenced by a variety of outside factors.

I don't really care about being "right" on this whole PSYCHO thing, but as a student of film history, I'm just interested in having accurate information out there.

New theory:
The LaoD asks Hitchcock to cut the stabs from 4 to 2. Now, he prefers the last stab anyway. He cuts the first one ( you can hear the extra stab). Now he has three to choose from. Since it is a continuous shot, he can only cut the first or last. He cuts the first two and keeps his shot. No scream, as dubbing isn't completed.
The scream sounds like the actor in the German version who does the other groans. Hitch adds this scream .
The uncut version is sent internationally and the since the scream has its place on the track, it comes after the first stab. The other stabs are looped.
So, he wanted the scream with the one stab, as the scene fades to black. Universal sticks with his wishes and places the scream after the last stab on the uncut version.

On the other hand, we all might be overthinking this a bit.

 

[moviebuff75]

I will contact someone and see about answers.

 

[moviebuff75]

BTW, I don't know how much was cut in Canada, but I just watched a 1964 CBC interview with Hitchcock. They showed a clip of the Arbogast murder and it was cut.
The uncut version with the scream at the end also give the murder a sexual connotation.

 

[Bryan Tuck]

BTW, I don't know how much was cut in Canada, but I just watched a 1964 CBC interview with Hitchcock. They showed a clip of the Arbogast murder and it was cut.

I found the show I think you're talking about, and although it's certainly possible they would have edited something out of the clip, the scene is cut the way it is in the shorter version of the movie (with just the third stab and fade-out on the fourth). So that's definitely interesting.

I was digging around for old newspaper clippings to see if anything was ever reported about the cuts, and all I've found was a generic blurb about Europe and Latin America seeing "saucier camera angles." But from the context, that may have been some misreporting about the opening hotel scene.

However, I did find something else that was truly amazing. Months before the film was released with the marketing telling people not to be late and not to give away the ending, here's Lurene Tuttle (who played the sheriff's wife) blowing the whole thing to Hedda Hopper:

 

[moviebuff75]

Geez...I wouldn't trust her with a secret!
To be honest, I've seen more violence in a Gunsmoke episode from that era, than Psycho. It's the subject matter that's revolting.
I have a feeling that the Arbogast scene was cut before release.

 

[mskaye]

Geez...I wouldn't trust her with a secret!
To be honest, I've seen more violence in a Gunsmoke episode from that era, than Psycho. It's the subject matter that's revolting.
I have a feeling that the Arbogast scene was cut before release.

I would never use the word revolting to describe one of the most astoundingly artistic, creative and probing autopsies of the f-d human condition than PSYCHO. Google "the shadow" in the psychological sense and PSYCHO demonstrates it. It's a flat out masterpiece. And I can't wait to watch the new 4k (arrives tomorrow!)

 

[Cineman]

I found the show I think you're talking about, and although it's certainly possible they would have edited something out of the clip, the scene is cut the way it is in the shorter version of the movie (with just the third stab and fade-out on the fourth). So that's definitely interesting.

I was digging around for old newspaper clippings to see if anything was ever reported about the cuts, and all I've found was a generic blurb about Europe and Latin America seeing "saucier camera angles." But from the context, that may have been some misreporting about the opening hotel scene.

However, I did find something else that was truly amazing. Months before the film was released with the marketing telling people not to be late and not to give away the ending, here's Lurene Tuttle (who played the sheriff's wife) blowing the whole thing to Hedda Hopper:


View attachment 150977 View attachment 150978

I am always fascinated by how much of what was supposed to be a shock or a surprise to the audience (and was at the time) was given away prior to the release of PSYCHO.

Even Hitchcock tells us a murder takes place in the shower in his famous comedic trailer for it, which I never saw prior to my first viewings of it. So when Marion steps into that bathroom it should have come as no surprise to anyone who saw it that she was going to be murdered by someone who "crept in" with the sound of the approach drowned out by the sound of the shower.

Same for Arbogast's murder. Hitchcock goes into comic detail about how the fellow tumbles down those stairs and meets his demise at the bottom. There is only an obvious post loop of him replacing a reference to the murderer as a "he" or a "she".

I would say even the opening credit for Janet Leigh suggests she will turn out to be a more of a temporary player in the movie than the leading character all through it from beginning to end, contrary to what those first 40 minutes or so are strongly suggesting.

 

[moviebuff75]

I wasn't knocking the film. I was talking about the subject matter. The film is absolutely a masterpiece! I wouldn't be trying to figure out the restoration to make sure it hasn't been harmed, if I didn't love it! However, it is a Horror film.

 

[mskaye]

I wasn't knocking the film. I was talking about the subject matter. The film is absolutely a masterpiece! I wouldn't be trying to figure out the restoration to make sure it hasn't been harmed, if I didn't love it! However, it is a Horror film.

I know you didn't mean to knock it. I just think while incredibly insightful, disturbing/troubling - Hitchcock of course knew better than anyone in cinema how to make an audience complicit in these troubling behaviors and situations - it's too stylized to be revolting. Far from revolting, I find it riveting, moving and beautiful - his directorial choices and the entire creative approach (the music!) to this film are just so inspired. Even (especially) the violence. Ditto Anthony Perkins in one of the most iconic screen performances of all time.

 

[Mark B]

This thread reminds me of the true crime youtube channels where people speculate about missing people for months and when the truth comes out they hang on to their speculative theories and won't acknowledge the facts. I for one do not doubt Bruce's word on this one for a second.

 

[Bryan Tuck]

Is there any source for reliable records from the Legion of Decency, particularly involving the dating of their ratings?

On the web, I am seeing Psycho listed as being rated both "C" (Condemned) and "B" (Morally objectionable in part). Is it possible that the LofD rated the film prior to its initial release as "C", but then re-rated the film when it was being prepared for network showing, and it was the edited cut that was given a "B"? Might the network have demanded the film be cut for a "B" from
the LoD before it could be shown on the Network and it is those discussions that the AFI is refering to?

Here's a page from the June 25, 1960 issue of The Tablet, a Catholic newspaper in Brooklyn. PSYCHO is listed with the films rated "B."

 

[Matt Hough]

Even Hitchcock tells us a murder takes place in the shower in his famous comedic trailer for it, which I never saw prior to my first viewings of it. So when Marion steps into that bathroom it should have come as no surprise to anyone who saw it that she was going to be murdered by someone who "crept in" with the sound of the approach drowned out by the sound of the shower.

Of course, in that famous trailer, it's Vera Miles who screams in the shower after Hitchcock pulls back the curtain.

To be fair, I had never seen the trailer before I saw the movie for the first time (or second time some years later), so the first time around, everything was a shock, and I was completely unprepared for it!

 

[Charles Smith]

Me neither. The first time I saw that trailer was at a Hitchcock retrospective in early 1973, and it was quite the discovery. If it was mentioned in any of the books back then, it went right by me.

(I didn’t see the film until a mid-1960s rerelease. I’ll have to find the exact date of that. I wasn’t permitted to see it in ‘60 when I was all of ten.)

 

[Charles Smith]

I was completely unprepared for it, too. I had, however, just read the Bloch novel, so I knew the gist of the goings on, and of course the first main spoiler. But my imaginings and expectations were no match whatever for what Messrs. Hitchcock, Herrmann, and the rest had in store for me. I slept not a wink that night.

 

[Josh Steinberg]

By the time I saw the movie it was already a legend, so I knew that the big twist was that you go in thinking the movie is all about Janet Leigh and then she dies early on. Even knowing that was going to be the case, and even having seen excerpts from the shower scene before, it was still unnerving as hell.

In a way this all worked in my favor because all I had ever heard about the movie was Janet Leigh dying in the shower before the end of the movie - so once she was out of the picture, I had absolutely no idea what was going to happen for the rest of its running time. That wound up being extra suspenseful, going from knowing everything to nothing so quickly.

 

[usrunnr]

I dropped my Three Musketeers bar on the floor during the shower scene when I saw it at the Pomona United Artists theater first release. I was 13. My parents were clueless and hadn't known to warn me. I think I was in shock for the next 24 hours or so. Maybe still.

 

[TravisR]

Me neither. The first time I saw that trailer was at a Hitchcock retrospective in early 1973, and it was quite the discovery. If it was mentioned in any of the books back then, it went right by me.

I saw the trailer on AMC back in the early 90's and couldn't believe a.) how long it was and b.) how it used footage shot exclusively for the trailer.

 

[Bryan Tuck]

I am always fascinated by how much of what was supposed to be a shock or a surprise to the audience (and was at the time) was given away prior to the release of PSYCHO.

Even Hitchcock tells us a murder takes place in the shower in his famous comedic trailer for it, which I never saw prior to my first viewings of it. So when Marion steps into that bathroom it should have come as no surprise to anyone who saw it that she was going to be murdered by someone who "crept in" with the sound of the approach drowned out by the sound of the shower.

Same for Arbogast's murder. Hitchcock goes into comic detail about how the fellow tumbles down those stairs and meets his demise at the bottom. There is only an obvious post loop of him replacing a reference to the murderer as a "he" or a "she".

I would say even the opening credit for Janet Leigh suggests she will turn out to be a more of a temporary player in the movie than the leading character all through it from beginning to end, contrary to what those first 40 minutes or so are strongly suggesting.

I guess it's also true that information wasn't disseminated as quickly as it is now. You couldn't go watch that trailer on YouTube or anything, and even if you had, the actual visceral shock of the shower scene wasn't completely given away (much less the identity of the killer).

And Hedda Hopper's column was syndicated to other papers, but not sure how many.

 

[Ronald Epstein]