Welcome, everyone, to Horrorfest 2020, our annual event where I, Red Lanyard, tell you about terrific (and sometimes absurd) horror movies during the month of October to help you prepare for Halloween, the most wonderful time of the year. This year for Horrorfest, I’m structuring my pieces around various icons of horror–the people, either real or fictional, who have made our beloved genre the delightful niche and multi-million dollar industry that it is today. This first week, I’ll be highlighting some of the fictional antagonists who have carried the horror genre on their backs, briefly discussing what they’ve contributed to our macabre hobby and a recommendation for you to watch. Enjoy!
Norman Bates (Psycho)
Doing an absolute 180 from yesterday’s Chucky article, today we’re discussing the oldest character this week and, arguably, the most influential and terrifying. Norman Bates is the villain of Alfred Hitchcock’s 1960 film Psycho and owner of the Bates Motel (yeah, that snoozefest of a TV show from a few years back). Psycho is perhaps Hitchcock’s most famous film, and it easily has some of the most iconic cinematic imagery that would go on to influence horror and especially the slasher movement more than a decade later. While I wouldn’t call Psycho a slasher movie, and Norman himself isn’t a traditional slasher antagonist, he is quite possibly the scariest member of this week of Horrorfest.
Let me start by saying that the psychiatrist’s monologue at the end of the movie is, of course, outdated. This is understandable considering the growth and outright research revolutions that have taken place in the field of psychology since 1960. Hell, even in 1960 the description of split personalities in Psycho was pretty misinformed. Which is why I argue that the psychosis of Norman Bates is in no way what makes him scary. As delusional as he is, delusion is not inherently terrifying (at least not for the people witnessing it rather than experiencing it). However, after all these years and after all the progress psychology has made, Norman Bates remains as disturbing and unsettling as he first appeared 60 years ago. Why?
Because he’s real. I would guess most of us, if not all, have encountered someone in our lives who was very Norman Batesy. The initial charm followed by surprising verbal aggression, the grasp on social etiquette that’s sufficient enough to be engaging but not sufficient enough to not reveal the darker sides of a personality. I would contend that the most impressive part of Psycho is not the signature cinematography, nor the excellent acting, nor the legendary twist ending. The most impressive part of Psycho is how damn real Norman Bates feels. Despite the limited psychological knowledge they had in the 60s, Hitchcock was able to very accurately portray the unsettling personality of a psychopath that still registers today. Take away the maternal delusions and any waxed philosophy about the fragility of the human identity, and you still have a villain who is downright recognizable. Sure, we may have dreams that scare us, and the imagery of a chainsaw-wielding maniac or macabre animated doll gives us a fright. But if you watch Psycho (which you absolutely should), nothing compares to the disturbing feeling that people like Norman Bates are quite real.
