'Psychosis' is an example of a movie that I'm sure read brilliantly onpage. The story is there, old English house, horror writer retreat;descent into madness, at times it reminded me of the Demi Moore film'Half Light' although that's an example of how it should be done. Thesetting of 'Psychosis' is spot on creating a country atmosphere similarto 'Watcher in the woods'. However hampered by wooden acting (save forits two leads) and stilted dialogue, it's hard to warm to thecharacters or become engaged in the story.
Charisma Carpenter and Paul Sculfor are both easy to watch and had theybeen given a slightly bigger budget, tweaked dialogue and bettersurrounding actors then this could have been a winner. There is somechilling vision in the film (notably the tent scene at the start withthe man licking the feet, cryptic I know but I don't want to spoilanything) but that vision seems to fade into clich?s very quickly.There is a twist, it's a small one but unique and again showedpotential for something better.
I watched this because I am a Charisma Carpenter fan so to other fansout there I will say its better than Scyfy's awful 'House of Bones', soif it comes down to the two watch this one.
EDIT- At the time I was writing I was not aware that it was in fact a"Remake" of the second story in the 1983 film "Screamtime". Thereforeyou can understand why I thought that it was a direct rip off of thisparticular movie. For your enjoyment here is my original review andfeelings written before knowing it was a 'remake'::
I will keep this review short but I'm still in shock after seeing thismovie. Not because it was scary, not because it shocked me, not becauseI was bowled over by its brilliance. No, simply because I've nevershook my head in disbelief at such outright plagiarism in amovie.Clearly the Director was really really hoping that no one hadever seen the fantastic little anthology horror film "Scream time" from1983, more specifically, the second story in this film "Dream house".Now the stories in "Scream time" are relatively short since it's ananthology movie so in order to pad out "Psychosis", the director had atleast to attempt to introduce some other little elements to attempt tokeep things interesting before the scene for scene stealing begins.Unfortunately these elements are dull, lots of sex which is notthrilling in the least and flat acting. The movie falls flat veryquickly overall to be honest and towards the end and dotted throughout,the 'hallucinations' of Charisma Carpenter are about the mostinteresting thing happening. Her name is the most charismatic thingabout the movie, it's never scary due to some dull direction,predictable soundtrack and characters that are never in the least bitlikable at any point. It starts off initially with a "slasher film"type prologue which really does nothing for the rest of the film, onlyserving to confuse and then we watch as Carpenter slowly descends intothe "Psychosis" of the title. On my first viewing I already picked upon how much it was stealing from the "Dream house" episode of "Screamtime" to the point where I was pointing out things before they evenhappened. I could not believe it. The director should be rightlyridiculed for such stealing and I'm sure more and more people will pickup on this as they see it. It's a shame because movies like this willget lots of exposure and acclaim from people none the wiser where as"Scream time" remains unreleased on DVD anywhere in the world and is afar more scary and interesting little 80's film. Spoilers------Charisma's Hallucinations are wholesale lifted from "Dream house". Thiswill make sense if you've seen it. She constantly see's someone inblack playing with a football outside in her garden but when she goesout to tell him off she's gone. 'Dream house' -The main actressconstantly see's a little boy riding on a bike outside in her gardenbut when she goes out to tell him off she's gone. In "Psychosis" thehusband calls a Psychic to the house to investigate after Charisma hascomplained about all the visions she's been seeing and the psychictells Charisma that there is nothing there at all.
Almost exactly the same scene happens in 'Dream house' and the Psychictells the husband she is possibly mad.
Towards the end, when the murders start to play out more extended, themadman stabs the victims repeatedly and at one point, charisma grabs atelephone and throws it at the vision, (the madman is strangling thevictim using the telephone) which promptly vanishes. In "Dream house",the murders are playing out and the actress grabs a telephone andthrows it at the vision of the man stabbing and strangling the victimwith the telephone wire which promptly vanishes.
At the end, Charisma's husband (Charisma is in a mental hospital afterall this) greets the "new owner" and we are introduced to the newpeople moving in, all of whom we've seen previously in the visions likethe man playing with the football etc. The husband says goodbye andgets into his car where he has his throat slashed by the madman andgoes into a fit, holding his foot down on the accelerator and the radiosays that a crazed murder has escaped from a mental hospital and is onthe loose. In "Dream House", exactly the same thing happens. Thehusband welcomes the new owners, says they hope they will be happythere and all around him, the people we have seen being murdered areworking around him, like the decorator painting the window and the boyriding the bike. The husband gets into his car and is attacked frombehind, has his throat slashed and goes into a fit, holding his footdown on the accelerator. The radio announces that a crazed murderer hasescaped from a mental hospital and is on the loose. It's quite sad thatit's so obvious really. Clearly this director though he would get awaywith it but I reckon it's going to come back on him at one point oranother. Watch "Scream time" and the "dream house" episode if you canget a copy. It's infinitely better than this poor excuse for a copy ofa movie.
Just saw this a couple of days ago, and am still wondering why this wasmade. First off the plot for this film could barely of filled a 10minute short, and yet was stretched to fill the duration of this socalled feature. All the layers that the director mentioned he added inthe making of made no sense, didn't go anywhere and added nothing tothe film. Acting was beyond poor, especially by a certain lead man.Lighting seemed flat. On the upside, some of the special effects seemedpretty well done (a fake head in particular) but are not enough to savethe film.
The only interesting thing on the DVD was the making of, and interviewwith the cast. Maybe they should have got that guy to direct instead.
Watch at your own risk.
Just terrible. Bad acting, bad script, pacing was 100% predictable andthere was not one clich? left uncopied. The only press this is going toget is from extraneous, irrelevant tabloid schlock. Once the film isseen by more than just the makers of the movie, its going straight tothe bargin bin. There were a few redeeming special effects but tossedin but with the nonsensical storyline, it hardly saves the movie. Toadd a twist convincingly, you have to make us care about theprotagonist, there was no one in this movie that didn't look like theyjust walked out of a spray tan booth and teeth whitening salon. Justaged actors who seem to think by flashing a smile and looking pretty,they can compensate for their plastic personas. Did not enjoy this onebit sad to say. Funny that almost all of the 20 something votes forthis film are 10/10, wonder where that came from? I would suggestavoiding.