Submit Your
2010s
List

I didn't understand the ending to Obsession (1976). SPOILER

Tools    





Movie Forums Squirrel Jumper
SPOILER WARNING OF COURSE

So I watched the ending, and I do not understand why did the villain, Robert, confess the while crime to Michael at the end? He even gives the money back to Michael, which he tricked Michael into giving him.

Wasn't the point of Robert's crime to get the money and get away with it? So why give it back and confess everything? I just didn't get where Robert's change of heart was coming from, or what caused him to do that. What did I miss, if anyone has seen it, and can help?

Another thing is, is near the beginning of the movie, when the kidnappers get their ransom, they find a tracking device in the attache case, and they see that the money is not there, and just blank papers instead. I'm assuming that Robert switched the money with the blank papers. But wouldn't he police notice that the money has been switched out when planting the tracking device? Or did Robert not switch out the money for blank paper, and Michael actually had no intention of paying with real money?



SPOILER WARNING OF COURSE

So I watched the ending, and I do not understand why did the villain, Robert, confess the while crime to Michael at the end? He even gives the money back to Michael, which he tricked Michael into giving him.

Wasn't the point of Robert's crime to get the money and get away with it? So why give it back and confess everything? I just didn't get where Robert's change of heart was coming from, or what caused him to do that. What did I miss, if anyone has seen it, and can help?

Another thing is, is near the beginning of the movie, when the kidnappers get their ransom, they find a tracking device in the attache case, and they see that the money is not there, and just blank papers instead. I'm assuming that Robert switched the money with the blank papers. But wouldn't he police notice that the money has been switched out when planting the tracking device? Or did Robert not switch out the money for blank paper, and Michael actually had no intention of paying with real money?
Robert did not want the money, he wanted to be put in charge of the project by making Michael look insane and more broadly, revenge on Michael. Michael's suddenly withdrawing tons of money from the project's bank account without contacting the police about a kidnapping would look very suspicious to the board and Michael would almost certainly be fired. When Robert switches the money for blank paper he's "protecting it from Michael."

When Robert confesses this to Michael, he's basically rubbing salt in his wounds before he kills him, but this of course backfires.

For your second confusion:
In the beginning of the movie, the police, not Robert put in the blank paper because "the kidnappers would be more vicious if they had the ransom." This actually ruined Robert's plan.

I have no idea if the original poster will see this answer, but what the hell I love this movie.
__________________
My ratings are generally skewed towards the positive side.



Movie Forums Squirrel Jumper
Oh okay, thanks. I see it now. But at what point of the movie is it established that it's about revenge over money? Also, why would the kidnappers be more viscous if they had the ransom? This seems kind of counter-intuitive, doesn't it?



Oh okay, thanks. I see it now. But at what point of the movie is it established that it's about revenge over money? Also, why would the kidnappers be more viscous if they had the ransom? This seems kind of counter-intuitive, doesn't it?
Well, I wouldn't say it's just revenge since Robert also wants to be in charge of the project. We learn that these are his motives when he's explaining his plan to Michael, you might've missed that line and that's why you're confused.

I think the police's logic was that if the kidnappers had the money, they'd have more to lose if they were captured. Though a big point of that scene was that the local police weren't great at these kind of negotiations and that their meddling killed Michael's wife. (which is why Michael doesn't go to them when Sondra is kidnapped later).



Movie Forums Squirrel Jumper
Oh okay, well I know that Roger seemed to want more control over the project, but a kidnapping and ransom plot seems like such a huge stretch to give yourself a promotion in your job though, if that's what you want, and you are not interested in all the ransom money.

For the second point, if the police switched the money for paper, if the kid died then wouldn't the police have a lot to be embarrassed about then, since they could be blamed for causing the kid's death, if they switched out the money?



Oh okay, well I know that Roger seemed to want more control over the project, but a kidnapping and ransom plot seems like such a huge stretch to give yourself a promotion in your job though, if that's what you want, and you are not interested in all the ransom money.
Yup. His plan was probably more complex than it had to be, but so was the villain's plan in the Vertigo (1958) which this movie is a love letter to.

For the second point, if the police switched the money for paper, if the kid died then wouldn't the police have a lot to be embarrassed about then, since they could be blamed for causing the kid's death, if they switched out the money?
Well they didn't switch the money out under Michael's nose, so much as convince him not to pay the ransom in the first place. I think there were some other factors that caused the deaths but I don't remember them exactly.