Alfred Hitchcock, the director of the incredible original "Psycho" film, despised the very concept of sequels and refused to make even a single one during his film career. Movies like this are exactly why.
For a basic plot summary, "Psycho III" sees Norman Bates (Anthony Perkins) still running his hotel business and still harboring the embalmed corpse of Emma Spool, his supposed "real mother". When a young nun (Diana Scarwid) who bears a striking resemblance to Marion Crane needs a place to stay, Norman takes her in and clashes with "mother" once again.
The strange thing about this movie is that, storyline-wise, it really isn't all that bad. Basically, it isn't just bad for bad's sake, and director Perkins does a great job of re-creating the continuity from "Psycho II" and making this film feel like part of the anthology.
The problem, though, is that "Psycho III" doesn't know what kind of flick it is. It tries to be a slasher film for a while, but the overall Psycho narrative doesn't lend itself to that. It also tries to look at Bates' insanity from a new perspective, but only ends up muddying the waters even further. Plus, a religious aspect is introduced into the narrative, but doesn't accomplish anything in terms of character development.
Thus, this seems to me to be a film that started off with great intentions, but quickly descended (production-wise) into a nightmare. A few moments are decent enough for the franchise fans to keep watching, but others will just find it stupid. This effort can easily be skipped in the series.
For a basic plot summary, "Psycho III" sees Norman Bates (Anthony Perkins) still running his hotel business and still harboring the embalmed corpse of Emma Spool, his supposed "real mother". When a young nun (Diana Scarwid) who bears a striking resemblance to Marion Crane needs a place to stay, Norman takes her in and clashes with "mother" once again.
The strange thing about this movie is that, storyline-wise, it really isn't all that bad. Basically, it isn't just bad for bad's sake, and director Perkins does a great job of re-creating the continuity from "Psycho II" and making this film feel like part of the anthology.
The problem, though, is that "Psycho III" doesn't know what kind of flick it is. It tries to be a slasher film for a while, but the overall Psycho narrative doesn't lend itself to that. It also tries to look at Bates' insanity from a new perspective, but only ends up muddying the waters even further. Plus, a religious aspect is introduced into the narrative, but doesn't accomplish anything in terms of character development.
Thus, this seems to me to be a film that started off with great intentions, but quickly descended (production-wise) into a nightmare. A few moments are decent enough for the franchise fans to keep watching, but others will just find it stupid. This effort can easily be skipped in the series.