Hitchcock's use of lighting in Psycho to create suspense

¶ … redundant and does not really do anything to set up your position. Also, your introductory arguments that Psycho is the very first suspense horror film ever can easily be refuted by anyone with a background in film. You repeatedly say "Hitchcock, like many other filmmakers…" which actually makes your position weaker since it appears you do not consider Hitchcock to be innovative in any way including his lighting techniques The second paragraph offers some promise because this is finally where the reader gets to see what you are going to argue. However, as soon as you begin to attempt to explain your first argument -- lighting mimics plots structure -- you lose the audience. You do not transition between your claims and the entire second paragraph sounds disjointed and incomplete. Furthermore, the examples you use in the second paragraph do not fully support your claims and add to the confusion. You need to focus your arguments, explain exactly what you mean to say, and not use generalizations. The third paragraph also needs major revision. You are too repetitive, but do not say anything. You talk about mystery, but do not explain what mystery is or how it portrayed in the film. I am surprised that throughout your paper and attempted explanations, you do not reference the scene where Lily is in the Bates house and is about to be attacked by Norman dressed up as his mother and how the swinging light makes this scene more terrifying and suspenseful. Finally, your conclusion is as confusing and unsubstantiated as your introduction.