Psycho III: Hear Me Out... It's Actually Kinda Brilliant?

Okay, horror hounds, let's talk Psycho III. I know, I know, a lot of people write it off as a cheesy cash-grab, especially stepping out of Hitchcock's shadow. And yeah, Anthony Perkins directing himself is...a choice. But I actually think the movie has some legitimately interesting things going on, especially if you look at it as a character study. It's not Psycho, obviously, and it doesn't even reach Psycho II's heights, but it is, dare I say, GOOD. My theory is that Perkins knew he couldn't recapture the magic of the original, so he leaned into the absurdity of Norman's psychosis. The whole Maureen Coyle/Marion Crane doppelganger situation is, like, screaming Freudian themes, and the 'Mother' stuff is cranked up to eleven. But it's the little things, too. The way Norman's always struggling to maintain this facade of normalcy, even as he's clearly spiraling out of control. That scene where he's building the birdhouse and almost accidentally crushes it? That's Norman in a nutshell. It's a visual metaphor for his fractured psyche. Even the over-the-top gore feels intentional, a way of saying, "Look, we're not trying to be subtle here." Plus, I think they were playing around with how people viewed the first two movies. They knew people wanted more of Norman, more of the 'Mother' persona. So they gave it to them in spades, but with a wink and a nod. My biggest gripe is that the movie doesn't let Duayne live, he was a fun character that helped put Norman on the edge. I wish one of the hookers had lived too, but that is just because I love scream queens. Maybe I'm reading too much into it, but I think Psycho III is way more self-aware than people give it credit for. It's not a traditional horror masterpiece, but as a dark, comedic exploration of Norman Bates's deteriorating mental state? I think it's kinda brilliant. What do you guys think? Am I totally off my rocker here?