Psycho II

1983 "It's 22 years later, and Norman Bates is coming home."
6.6| 1h53m| R| en| More Info
Released: 03 June 1983 Released
Producted By: Universal Pictures
Country: United States of America
Budget: 0
Revenue: 0
Official Website:

Norman Bates is declared sane and released from the facility in which he was being held, despite the complaints of Lila Loomis, sister of his most famous victim. Is he really cured, or will he kill again?

Watch Online

Psycho II (1983) is now streaming with subscription on Starz on Hulu


Richard Franklin

Production Companies

Universal Pictures

Psycho II Videos and Images
View All
  • Top Credited Cast
  • |
  • Crew

Psycho II Audience Reviews

Forumrxes Yo, there's no way for me to review this film without saying, take your *insert ethnicity + "ass" here* to see this film,like now. You have to see it in order to know what you're really messing with.
Kien Navarro Exactly the movie you think it is, but not the movie you want it to be.
Kaelan Mccaffrey Like the great film, it's made with a great deal of visible affection both in front of and behind the camera.
Fatma Suarez The movie's neither hopeful in contrived ways, nor hopeless in different contrived ways. Somehow it manages to be wonderful
Paul Magne Haakonsen To me then it is sort of odd to make a sequel 23 years after the release of the first movie."Psycho II" was adequate in terms of entertainment, and had an okay story. But it just never reached the same level of its predecessor.It was certainly nice to see Anthony Perkins back in the role of Norman Bates, and also nice to see Meg Tilly perform in this movie.This turned out to be an adequate movie, although you shouldn't get your hopes up for something outstanding. Nor does it really live up to its predecessor in terms of originality or entertainment."Psycho II" hardly has enough contents to support multiple viewings.
TheLittleSongbird The 1960 'Psycho' is one of Alfred Hitchcock's greatest films and while it is high up in my list of "scariest films of all time" it doesn't stop it from being a personal favourite. Mainly for the cinematography, Hitchcock's direction, the music score and Anthony Perkins.Hearing that 'Psycho' had three sequels, my immediate reaction was what's the point especially considering the fiasco that was the 1998 remake. It did strike me initially that 'Psycho' was perfect as it was and didn't need a sequel, let alone three as well as a telefilm spin-off and remake. The first sequel, finally getting round to watching the sequels after a little arm twisting, turned out to be surprisingly good. Not just being a worthy follow-up but also a well above average film in its own way. Is it as good as Hitchcock's film? Not a chance, not as scary or as suspenseful. But considering that expectations were dubious 'Psycho II' was so much better than expected.'Psycho II' starts to drag ever so slightly towards the end and occasionally feels a touch over-plotted. Sadly too the ending is ridiculous and undermines the actually very neat execution of the rest of the film.On the other hand, 'Psycho II' boasts some very stylish and moody cinematography and the setting is still eerie even in colour. Jerry Goldsmith proves himself to be a more than worthy successor to Bernard Hermann, enormous shoes to fill considering Hermann's score in the 1960 film is one of the most iconic chilling music scores in cinema. Goldsmith's score here is lush and ominously haunting without ever intruding.Franklin directs beautifully, having a real knack for creating a creepy atmosphere and suspenseful touch, not quite the unequalled Hitchcockian touch but it is the closest the sequels ever get to having anything resembling it. The script is clever and taut with some touches of darkly wicked humour, while the story is on the most part very neatly paced, highly atmospheric and always coherent with some very imaginative twists.As for the performances, they are also strong. Anthony Perkins returns in his most iconic role and proves that only one person can play this character. Meg Tilly and Vera Miles are very credible too while Dennis Franz and Robert Loggia provide some necessary grit.In summary, surprisingly good and worthy first sequel to a classic. Doesn't disgrace it at all. 7/10 Bethany Cox
Desertman84 I got to Psycho II after watching the 1960 Alfred Hitchcock original horror classic and the 1998 disastrous shot-for-shot remake version of Gus Van Sant versions of Psycho this weekend.Although I must say that this movie is a sequel and it was released 23 years after the original film,I must say that this film Psycho II whose screenplay was written by Tom Holland and directed by Richard Franklin was definitely surprisingly entertaining.In this film,Norman Bates,who was portrayed once again by Anthony Perkins,is just being released from jail and the psychiatric institution after he was found guilty of murdering Marion Crane.The sister of Marion,Lila Loomis,portrayed once again by Vera Miles,signs a plea against the release and thinks that Norman is once again capable of committing another murder.But the court rejects her plea and we find Norman once again free and staying at the Bates Motel.Norman's adjustment to society after being away from it for 22 years starts alright until things fall apart when "Mother" starts to appear again.This provokes Norman into returning his old habits as a murdering psychotic with the use of a knife while wearing mother's attire. Surprisingly,events to the past have led the antagonists to want Norman to return into his old murdering habits.No question that Psycho II wants the viewer to have a vivid memory of the events of Hitchcock's Psycho to get a better appreciation of it.People who aren't familiar of the original will not really realize why these antagonists wants Norman into killing again.Added to that,the sequel will give the person a better knowledge of Norman's characterization particularly his relationship with his "Mother" and would probably empathize with him if people just allowed him to rejoin society for good without the antagonists' objective for revenge.With regards to performances,I think that Anthony Perkins does well as Norman Bates.The characterization he provides for Norman would allow the viewers to get to know more about him and a better appreciation on the events of his life and development as a person.Overall,I would rate Psycho II as a great sequel.Personally,I would classify it as the ultimate sequel of the horror classic as it ties the events from past and comes a great story with it. Too bad that as a stand alone film,the viewer would have less appreciation of it and might even consider it a poor film.So make sure to watch the original first before watching this sequel despite the 23 year gap between those films.
PimpinAinttEasy Dear Richard Franklin, you did manage to make it big in the US with the sequel to Psycho. I enjoyed your Road Games the same week that I watched Psycho 2.Anthony Perkins sure worked in some unusual films like Psycho and Pretty Persuasion before he did Psycho 2. He did look pretty haggard in this film.What were you thinking casting Meg Tilly? She was awful. Physically unattractive and not much of an actress either.The idea to portray Norman Bates as a victim was a good one. Dennis Franz was awesome as ever, trying to mess up Bates civilian life. No wonder De Palma gave him some great roles.The plot was flimsy but intriguing and left the viewer wondering at the end. This was a really solid sequel. It did have some great shots of the house and the motel.There was hardly a dull moment. It was very enjoyable. It is almost like a film of the 60s made in color.Best Regards, Pimpin.(7/10)