Psycho III (1986)
5/10
A decent sequel
30 May 2004
After having seen the wonder of the first Psycho, and the mediocre horror-film reminiscent of contemporary slashers that was Psycho II, I was looking forward to seeing this, the third installation to the series. I am not exactly disappointed by it, as I wasn't really expecting anything particularly good. It's decent, as Psycho II also was. It builds a little more on the twist of Psycho II(I won't reveal that here, for anyone who hasn't seen it), and though it did an OK job, I still found it to be too far-fetched to make sense, like the first one did. The twist in this one barely even made sense at all, and was almost totally unbelievable. The killing seemed more or less random, which wasn't a problem of the first, and(to the best of my recollection) not the second one, either. In this one, they just seemed to knock off minor characters whenever the film dropped in pace. The plot is reasonably good, quickly grabs your attention and keeps it throughout the entire runtime. It never really drops in pace for too long at a time, and you never lose interest in it. The acting ranges, of course Perkins pulls off the same excellent performance he also did for the first two. The characters were reasonably well-written and credible. All in all, this is a decent sequel. I recommend it to Psycho fans who want to see the entire series, but be advised that the film has a lot of ridiculous scenes, and the twist almost makes the very bad twist of Psycho II seem like the best twist since the twist of the original Psycho. 5/10
8 out of 14 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed