The original Psycho is one of the best films of all-time, regardless of genre, but the remake feels completely pointless. Such a classic film really didn't need to be remade.
This is probably the most faithful remake ever made, as the vast majority of shots and scenes are taken from the original. It's worth seeing once just because it's so unique, although its uniqueness paradoxically comes from trying to slavishly copy another film.
It's directed by Gus van Sant and I like some of his other films like Elephant, Milk, and Goodwill Hunting. But this is definitely not one of his better films and I'm sure I'll never watch it again. Gus van Sant was quoted as saying he remade Psycho so "no one else had to", which is a perplexing justification to the say the least.
Also, Vince Vaughn is nowhere close to as good as Anthony Perkins. And I didn't need to see him pleasuring himself in one of the few scenes that are different from the 1960 version.
William H. Macy and Anne Heche are decent, but nothing special.
The movie was a box office bomb, making only 37 million dollars worldwide and it's easy to see why. No one was asking for this, and 38 years after the original, many younger people probably don't even know about the Hitchcock film. I'm not sure who this was for.
As far as I'm aware, no one has tried to do a shot for shot remake like this since then (besides Haneke remaking his own Funny Games), and that's probably for the best.