While I know I'll anger a lot of thriller fans, here's my two cents: this is one of the least enjoyable Hitchcock classics. To clarify: if you compare Psycho to North by Northwest, Strangers on a Train, Vertigo or Rebecca, I can't see how any self-proclaimed film fan wouldn't conclude that it falls considerably short. Even other Hitch classics I don't particularly love or hate (such as The Birds, Rear Window or Marnie) trigger a wider emotional response than the pretty simplistic shock effects which are all Psycho has to offer. Of course there's some great cinematography, but it isn't backed by any involving factors other than sheer horror, or the kind of hammy pseudo-psychology Hitchcock already tried his hand on in Spellbound.
My reasonably kind rating of seven out of ten is mostly motivated by its historical importance - even if you take into account that Peeping Tom, which I think is a far superior film with a similar theme, relentlessly flopped earlier in the same year - as it opened the mainstream public's eyes regarding the horror/thriller genre. But if you've seen Psycho once (which, in fact, any film fanatic should), to me there's no real reason to watch it again.
My reasonably kind rating of seven out of ten is mostly motivated by its historical importance - even if you take into account that Peeping Tom, which I think is a far superior film with a similar theme, relentlessly flopped earlier in the same year - as it opened the mainstream public's eyes regarding the horror/thriller genre. But if you've seen Psycho once (which, in fact, any film fanatic should), to me there's no real reason to watch it again.