Watch
Psycho II
Your probable score
?

Psycho II

1983
Suspense/Thriller
Crime
1h 53m
Your probable score
Avg Percentile 41.82% from 614 total ratings

Ratings & Reviews

(614)
Compact view
Compact view
Rated 06 Oct 2015
80
77th
Meg Tilly drives me psycho. Psycho II does the impossible: it's not garbage. Never before has a movie talked about "toasted cheese sandwiches" so much, it's nonstop.
Rated 07 Jul 2020
60
36th
Suffers a bit primarily by not being a Hitchcock film, and ends up feeling like a slightly watered-down slasher. That said, Perkins reprises his role to an enjoyable degree, and Tilly has her charms. It definitely gets a bit nuts, but that somehow seems appropriate. Oddly entertaining.
Rated 22 Oct 2010
60
26th
As bad as the idea of a sequel sounds, it actually isn't nearly as bad as I thought it would be.
Rated 13 Oct 2018
6
70th
I've seen the original Psycho at least a dozen times spanning twenty years but have just now in 2018 watched this for the first time. And... I'm not sure if it's good, but it is certainly interesting, taking a somewhat more thoughtful approach with Norman, showing some sympathy for him while still finding room for some slasher movie violence and lunacy. Very odd but intriguing. Crushed on Meg Tilly a little.
Rated 31 Oct 2014
75
45th
Actually kind of rules. Heavily flawed but the general plot is strong enough that it holds together, even if it gets a little too crazy in the end.
Rated 17 May 2020
82
80th
If Psycho was Norman finally reaching his rock bottom of violent psychosis, Psycho II is his attempt to climb out and fight for redemption. It's a refreshing, thoughtful take with a decent dose of mystery when this could have just been written as a straightforward lurid, gory, 80s slasher, Norman Bates hacking and slashing his way through a neon nightmare (hello again Psycho III!). PERKINS IS AWESOME. also meg tilly!
Rated 23 Dec 2012
85
81st
A masterful horror film burdened by its connection to a classic, though the predicament pushes Franklin towards a rich exploration of movie iconography, equal parts reverence and regeneration.
Rated 15 Mar 2017
69
22nd
Presumably made to cash in on the popularity of slasher flicks, at least this makes an effort to try & live up to its predecessor instead of slumming w/ its offspring. There is a compelling mystery (though it takes an hour to show)& the last 10 minutes are legitimately surprising, clarifying some of what's come before. The big problem is the first hour which is stuffed with contrivances designed only to get people killed, plotholes & a mountain of implausibilities, only some which get explained.
Rated 07 May 2020
55
35th
Psycho II is a weirdly fascinating movie. It doesn't quite want you to know who you're rooting for or why it's being made for that matter, but it drags you along for the ride anyways. It's definitely better than you'd expect a sequel to be, but still not necessary. Definitely one of the weirder movies in this marathon, for me.
Rated 14 May 2019
76
68th
Norman is so sympathetic here, it's a a bold choice to frame the killer from the first film as the good guy for the sequel and Anthony Perkins completely makes it work. The only major issue is just that it tips its hand a little too early in revealing the machinations.
Rated 02 Mar 2009
57
46th
Surprisingly potent sequel. This is a well-crafted mixture of black humor and slasher horror but gets a little out of hand as it nears its confusing conclusion -- and runs about 10 minutes too long. The blade-down-the-throat scene is a highlight; look for the Hitchcock cameo in Mrs. Bates's bedroom.
Rated 10 Oct 2013
78
85th
Anthony Perkins describes the movie as being shot in "black and color" as opposed to black and white. I don't know why, but I think that's awesome. This is above average and does well in paying tribute to a suspense film it could never hope to match. I recommend you watch it on a portable while in the shower.
Rated 25 Sep 2018
42
40th
watchable
Rated 29 Aug 2007
81
46th
I own it and therefore I'll never give it lower than an 80. This is a much better movie than you are anticipating and you should definitely watch Psycho first.
Rated 28 Jul 2020
59
27th
59.2.
Rated 12 Oct 2022
48
44th
It's surprising that this is as decent as it is, what's even more surprising is that the third one is better.
Rated 08 Mar 2009
2
0th
"...the film clearly could have been much worse."
Rated 07 Oct 2018
80
86th
It obviously falls short when compared to Psycho. However, nearly every horror/suspense movie would fall short if compared with Hitchcock's masterpiece. So to leave a review at just that would be to do this film a disservice. It isn't some corporate cash-in but instead is an intelligent, psychological tale that is clearly respectful, reverent even, of the original. Making Norman a victim of his own psychosis was genius and Perkins' acting is sharp as ever. Meg Tilly is brilliant as Mary as well
Rated 20 Feb 2008
32
24th
Less successful sequel but the ending was nicely build.
Rated 21 Mar 2008
30
4th
Why oh why.
Rated 08 May 2016
70
71st
It's ultimately a pointless sequel that was made to cash in on the slasher trend, but Aussie director Franklin somehow makes it work, paying tribute to the original without copying it. Perkins reprises his classic role of psychotic mamma's boy Norman Bates 25 years later to chilling effect, even if he is a little hammy, and the plot has enough fresh twists and turns to keep you guessing. The death scenes are memorable and seemingly influenced by Giallo, and the pace is brisk.
Rated 31 Mar 2019
75
33rd
stylistcally lacking in everything that made the original special
Rated 31 Dec 2012
70
67th
Very surprising.
Rated 24 Oct 2016
84
38th
Certainly ot a classic like the original ,however II is quite better than your as average thriller..suspenseful and well crafted...
Rated 31 Mar 2007
80
68th
Surprisingly good
Rated 17 Sep 2011
50
11th
I don't think you can see Psycho II without having seen the first, but it really is more of a standalone-type of film. It has a completely different approach and tone to it and it nothing like Psycho. The acting is pretty bad, but the movie was okay overall.
Rated 19 Apr 2022
83
88th
Lost me at the end ngl
Rated 12 Apr 2013
55
6th
Terrible! It was hard to stay awake.. but somehow I liked the main actor :P, talking about overacting..
Rated 03 Oct 2017
70
72nd
Disrespectable with the original. That's why this is so delicious. All the elements are here -- not just mansion and motel, but knife, basement, mom's clothes. For the first time we have full access to Psycho's mind -- yet limited by Bates' own inner narrative of "Bates wasn't my mom, she just raised me; mom is calling me, she wants to meet me". Franklin approaches gore and slasher with such confidence in framing -- diagonal shots FTW. Beautiful take on a canon film that dares to be original.
Rated 12 Jul 2020
75
58th
Norman Bates (Anthony Perkins) returns home from the institution after being declared cured. He tries to return to 'normal' life and befriends fellow worker Mary (Meg Tilly) at the diner where he now works. But he starts to doubt his sanity again when he starts seeing reminders of his dead mother and people start dying again. Is he back to his old habits? Surprisingly effective sequel released decades later find Perkins in fine form as Norman.
Rated 23 Jul 2007
55
41st
My fave of the sequels, which follows the laws of diminishing returns all to well unfortunely. Still, not a patch on the original. Toe knee :-)
Rated 10 Feb 2011
70
37th
Decent sequel.
Rated 26 Nov 2012
75
56th
Surprise Surprise. It's good.
Rated 02 Aug 2013
49
36th
I have to echo most of other reviews - this sequel is better than you would expect, but that doesn't mean the film is actually good. The twist can be seen miles away. What I really liked in this film is Meg Tilly. She looks like some kind of cute wild animal.
Rated 15 Dec 2008
75
38th
not a great sequel but it was still pretty entertaining, better then parts 3 or 4 by a long shot.
Rated 18 Dec 2006
40
10th
It could've been worse, but this has absolutely no reason to exist.
Rated 20 Oct 2013
75
63rd
Liked this way more than I thought possible. Kept me guessing way more than I'd thought, though I'm still not sure about the sure ending... but maybe thats a good thing? The original Psycho had many things going for it, but are you really gonna say the ending way one of them? Reeking of a strangely weird understanding of psychology as it did.
Rated 02 Mar 2007
20
4th
Poor.
Rated 03 Nov 2017
67
20th
This film does try, it is not just a mindless sequel. However some of the plot twists are not satisfying. The cast does a good job here. Overall this film is not as good as the original.
Rated 18 Oct 2022
76
48th
I was wrong
Rated 22 Sep 2018
60
24th
Although many horror sequels are godawful, this one is...okay. Jerry Goldsmith's score is wonderful, as is Perkins' performance as a Norman Bates who genuinely fears losing his mind again. Some of the plot retcons (which was then retconned further by later sequels!) are pretty terrible though.
Rated 26 Apr 2020
64
41st
Anthony imPerkins
Rated 21 Jan 2009
70
46th
far project from prototype but also not the worst
Rated 25 Jul 2010
70
27th
a decent sequel to the original, i didn't think it was overly great but it was good to see where Norman Bates was 23 years later
Rated 19 May 2013
30
15th
For everyone claiming that unnecessary, money grab sequels are a new problem in Hollywood, this film is Exhibit A in the case that it''s been going on for decades
Rated 31 Aug 2015
68
13th
As a sequel (which i normally don't enjoy) This one is surprisingly watchable.Slasher with a nice mix of humour. Just don't bother with any after this one!
Rated 04 Dec 2009
57
26th
A well-acted successor. Perkins and Miles reprise their original roles in this ingeniously plotted but not especially scary thriller.
Rated 17 Apr 2018
76
52nd
Even through there was no way this film could ever live up to the original. Perkins and Franklin gave it their best shot. The result is a suitably tense and well acted sequel. One good enough be labeled: Underrated.
Rated 24 Dec 2015
85
53rd
Surprisingly worthy, by the director of the even better Road Games.
Rated 10 Mar 2020
44
43rd
Better than it has any right to be. By this I don't mean it's good at all: it isn't. But it could've been way worse, tbh. But again, it is bad lol. The script is bad, the dialogues are just odd and nonsensical a lot of times, overall quite messy; it's bad but it could've been worse. That resumes it, basically. Also, the ending is... a big "huh...?" moment.

Collections

Loading ...

Similar Titles

Loading ...

Statistics

Loading ...

Trailer

Loading ...