The Relevance of the Director

Horror and suspense is a genre that has been given a truly important place in the history of film art as such. Favorite among many, these genres have won over countless fans and many of these films quickly achieved cult status because their great preservation over time has made them great classics, for better or worse, when talking about the history of cinema, it is almost compulsory to mention at least one horror film.

There are many horror characters who have earned an important place in the pop culture internationally, to mention just a few we could have Jason Voorhees, Freddy Krueger, Alien, Predator and even the classic monsters like Frankenstein, Dracula, The werewolf and a great etc.. They are just demonstrations of how this genre has taken root in our popular culture and are an important part of the film industry. But how did all this happen? How is it that images created with the aim of frightening the viewer, have reached the heart of these and have become pillars of cinema? Could it be because of your clever scripts? The advertising campaigns? The latter might be equally valid answers, but personally, I really doubt whether these films would have reached the cult status they have today if the hands at the helm had been given to a bad director.

A director is a fundamental piece in the production of a film, although, the scriptwriter writes the story to be carried out, the director is the one who must give his vision of the project, is the one who must take the times and tells the actors what they should do and when it should be done, a director is the brain within the film.
The genre of terror has great cinematic geniuses, but few have taken the suspense to such a level as the great Alfred Hitchcock, who today is still considered as "The Master of Suspense", not in vain, because absolutely all his films were converted into cult works, which are still considered as the great exponents of the genre. All this was achieved through the exploitation of tension and the way in which he pushed his characters to the limit, so that the spectator himself could feel identified with the events that took place there. A great way to play with different emotions.
One of the greatest demonstrations of the importance of a good in the world of cinema can be found in his most famous film, Psychotic. A film that was completely dedicated to mystery and suspense, without the use of monsters or special effects, could generate in each of its scenes a feeling of suspense, tension and anguish by putting us in the expectation of each of the possible situations that could arise within the enclosure.
The relevance of the film Psychotic, in the world of cinema, reached such a point that it even received a remake in 1998. This idea had only one objective: to "relive" the sensation caused by the original film, but this time, in colour.

The original idea was attractive in the first instance, since it did not seek to alter the original idea of the film, it did not seek to reinvent it, the film was literally to copy almost flat by flat the scenes of the original film and thus, the idea of preserving the legacy left by Master Hitchcock.
However, despite the above, the film was poorly received in almost every respect. Although the film, directed by Gus Van Sant, had excellent production and casting, many agreed that the film felt "lacking in personality".
Not because of the "unnecessary remake" (as it was called at the time), but because of the evident lack of direction in the actors and the bad musicalization and the null atmosphere of suspense that this film could create.
As you can see, the case of Psicosis is one of the most obvious examples of the importance of a director in the production and development of a film. The remakes are not always bad ideas, but they should always be left in the most capable hands and especially when they are projects as delicate as almost "untouchable" films as a cult classic.