Buckle up, movie buffs – imagine the thrill of a legendary killer from the silver screen stepping back into the spotlight after decades in the shadows. That's the heart-pounding allure of legacy sequels, those cinematic comebacks where iconic stars dust off their most unforgettable roles. But here's where it gets controversial: while many hail recent hits like Top Gun: Maverick as the pinnacle, I'm here to argue that the crown for the very first true legacy sequel belongs to Psycho II, not the usual suspects. Let's dive in and unravel this debate, exploring how it all started and why it still matters today.
We're smack in the middle of the legacy sequel boom, often dubbed the 're-quel' by savvy fans and critics alike. In simple terms, a legacy sequel revives a beloved character or story with the original actor reprising their role after years – sometimes even decades – have passed. Picture Tom Cruise soaring back as Maverick in Top Gun: Maverick, raking in a whopping $1.5 billion worldwide 36 years after the original. It's a formula that's captivated audiences, proving that nostalgia, when done right, is a box-office goldmine.
Yet, if we zoom in on genres, horror stands out as the undisputed king of these revivals. Think of David Gordon Green's Halloween trilogy, where Jamie Lee Curtis returned as the resilient Laurie Strode. The first two films smashed it at the box office, but the third? Oh boy, that's the part most people miss – it stirred up a hornet's nest of controversy, with fans divided over its twists and turns. Then there's Scream 5, a massive success that cleverly blended legacy with a soft reboot, setting the stage for Scream 6 and now Scream 7, which is leaning fully into that nostalgic resurgence. And don't forget The Exorcist: Believer or the recent I Know What You Did Last Summer redux – these films keep the chills coming by resurrecting familiar faces and fears.
So, where did this legacy sequel trend truly begin? Plenty of folks point to Halloween H20 as the trailblazer, a direct follow-up to the 1978 original Halloween, with Curtis reprising Laurie 17 years after Halloween II. Others nod to Wes Craven's New Nightmare as an early pioneer, though it's more of a clever meta-take on the franchise – a groundbreaking concept that's brilliantly ahead of its time and absolutely worth watching in 4K via the new Nightmare on Elm Street box set (https://www.joblo.com/is-the-elm-street-4k-collection-worth-an-upgrade/). But here's the twist I want to explore: in my view, legacy sequels trace back even further, and Psycho II deserves the title of the first genuine one.
Released back in 1983, Psycho II brought Anthony Perkins back as the infamous Norman Bates a full 23 years after Alfred Hitchcock's groundbreaking thriller. At the time, Universal Studios faced a storm of skepticism – who on earth could match the 'Master of Suspense' himself? Critics and fans alike thought it was a risky gamble, bordering on madness. But against the odds, Psycho II earned solid reviews and became a box-office winner, paving the way for Perkins to direct Psycho III himself just three years later, embracing the wild, ultra-violent slasher vibes of the 1980s.
What sets Psycho II apart is its elegance – it masterfully blends Hitchcock's suspenseful style with the bloodier thrills of the decade. The director, the remarkably underrated Australian filmmaker Richard Franklin, brought his A-game here. For context, Franklin also helmed one of the best thrillers of the era, Road Games (https://www.joblo.com/road-games-revisited/), a gripping tale akin to Rear Window but with high-stakes truck chases that keep you on the edge of your seat. In Psycho II, we get a bona fide legacy sequel: Perkins reprises Norman, and Vera Miles returns as Lila Crane, fueled by a burning quest to avenge her sister Marion's brutal shower murder from the original (where Norman, possessed by his mother's spirit, wielded the knife).
And this is where things get really intriguing – Psycho II portrays Norman with genuine sympathy. Fresh out of the mental institution from the first film, he's desperately rebuilding his life, only to face unrelenting judgment. Lila sends her daughter, played by the talented Meg Tilly as Mary, undercover to infiltrate Norman's world and push him back toward madness. Yet, as the story unfolds, Mary – and by extension, the viewers – starts to empathize with Norman. When new killings erupt, you find yourself rooting against him being the culprit. Perkins infuses the character with profound depth, elevating the iconic role, even as the sequels have sadly faded into obscurity, often dismissed as cheap knockoffs. But they shouldn't be – Psycho II stands as an exceptional film, rich in character and tension.
What's even more fascinating is how Psycho II eerily foresaw the explosion of legacy sequels we'd witness in later years. Public attitudes have shifted dramatically since 1983, when revisiting Norman felt a tad tragic for Perkins, tied down by typecasting in the interim. Today, these comebacks are celebrated as triumphant milestones in an actor's journey, a chance to honor their legacy. Of course, not every attempt hits the mark – take Mark Hamill's Luke Skywalker in The Last Jedi, where many fans felt his farewell was underwhelming. Still, crowds keep flocking to theaters for these reunions.
But here's the controversial angle: Is Psycho II truly the originator, or are we overlooking earlier efforts? Some might argue it was too niche or not 'pure' enough, while others see it as the blueprint that modern blockbusters emulate. What do you think – does revisiting old horrors through legacy sequels enhance the genre, or does it risk diluting the originals? Do you agree that Psycho II deserves its spot in the hall of fame, or should we crown another film? Share your thoughts in the comments – I'd love to hear if you've got a favorite legacy comeback that shocked you or let you down!
