  Regardless, the theory faces bigger problems, one of which is that  there is reason to believe that entertained uncertainty is not  necessary for suspense. There are numerous cases where knowledge of  the outcome can make a narrative more, not less suspenseful. For  instance, the first time one watches Hitchcock’s Psycho  (1960), one may feel mild fear for Marion Crane as she chats with  Norman Bates in the hotel office. Filled with stuffed, menacing  birds, the office creates an aura of danger, but viewers have no  reason to suspect that in the next couple of minutes Norman will bury a carving knife in Marion’s chest as she showers. However, on a  second viewing, one feels a great deal more suspense during the  office scene. Norman’s disturbance seems obvious on repeated  viewings. How could Marion fail to see it? One wants to scream “Get  out of there!” The reason why the office scene in Psycho is  more suspenseful on subsequent viewings cannot be that audiences are  entertaining the idea that the outcome is as uncertain as it was on  their first viewing, since the first viewing is not as suspenseful as the second. 