Psycho

The novel itself does indeed provide a more nuanced story and, probably for the era in which is was published, is much darker than the film.

 

Psycho was published in 1959 and I have no doubt that it was absolutely horrific in it's day.

 

Norman Bates is described in the book entirely differently to the way he was portrayed in the film by Anthony Perkins. As a result of this he was more frightening. He liked to drink for one thing but as you are reading it becomes obvious that it's not just the drinking that causes the mayhem. And mayhem is what is caused. We learn through the fullness of time that Mary isn't the first one that Norman killed and she won't be the last. The book does a very good job of hiding the true nature of Norman until near the end and then explains it fully at the end. There is one plot hole which is fairly large but doesn't detract from the story and comes very near the end anyway.

 

I pretty much knew what to expect, the story is fairly well known, but the details provided in the book do make it almost entirely different to the film (as far as I remember the film).

 

It's an easy and quick read but not for someone who doesn't enjoy horror. With that in mind, highly recommended.