They do not make films like this one any longer. Usually this sentence when found in the review of a movie is supposed to be appreciative. Not in the case of Brian De Palma's Obsession. The film is made in 1976, the year Hitchcock was making his last movie, and owes a lot to the style of story building and telling, and to the cinematographic tricks of the master. One thing is however missing - the element of novelty and permanent search that was characteristic to Hitchcock, which made each of his movie different from the previous. Obsession is a film a la Hitchcock without the surprises. Even worse, without the humor.The idea is interesting and 'Obsession' may have been one of the first to use it. A rich man's wife and girl are kidnapped and a fat ransom is demanded. The man (acted by Cliff Robertson) decides to call the police, and the story turns into a tragedy when the car with the kidnappers, the wife and the girl explodes in the events following the police action. The hero is overwhelmed by remorse and guilt for his decision to turn to the police rather than just pay the ransom. 16 years later, in the same place where he first met his wife, he meets a young woman with a striking resemblance. He falls for her, and ends by asking her into marriage. Actually, here are some of the good moments of the film. Is he really in love or is the guilt driving his actions? Is he attracted by the young girl or by the memory of the deceased wife (double role for Geneviève Bujold)? Can the past be really fixed that easy? All is almost fine with the questions, the problem is with the answers and the way these are given. The way the conflict is solved is predictable in the big lines. There are some surprises at the very ending, they do not change to much of the essence of the story, and make the final scenes very hard to sustain in facts and in the psychology of the characters. In order to present the facts in the past, director Brian De Palma uses a technique inside the flash-backs which I did not like too much, probably because it was not built well visually (cannot tell more, would be too much of a spoiler). Techniques from Hitchcock's films are reused intensively, especially the musical score, but they seem already out of fashion already for the mid-70s. So is the style of acting, especially of the lead character acted by Cliff Robertson. On the other hand watching Geneviève Bujold is a real pleasure, it is her that maestro Hitchcock would have loved to include in the cast of one of his movies.'Obsession' fails in my opinion and to my taste first of all because it tries to explain too much. I think that explaining less and trusting the cinema viewers to fill in the missing details would have been better.

Overshadowed by De Palma's own cult-classic CARRIE (1976) in the same year, OBSESSION ostensibly is De Palma's homage to Hitchcock's VERTIGO (1958) about a man, who is obsessed with a woman who is (presumably) dead, is given a second chance from her doppelgänger with a sinister scheme lurking behind. Although De Palma's execution lacks the professional attentiveness to the details, e.g. the obtrusive anachronism of the opening scenes supposed happening in the 1950s, thanks to Schrader's uncanny screenplay; the atmospheric craftsmanship of D.P. Vilmos Zsigmond (1930-2016), the master-hand who has just left us in the 1st January; and Bernard Herrmann's (the original composer of VERTIGO) Oscar-nominated solemn score, which is grandiosely awe-inspiring right from the ominous opening credits, OBSESSION is undeservedly being categorised as a shoddy pastiche, and deserves a better recognition for its own sake.Even in the fantastic cinema realm, the encounter with a woman who looks very much alike his dead wife, 16 years after her unfortunate death, at the exact locale, is too much a stretch to pull it off as a pure coincidence, but American real estate businessman Michael Courtland (Robertson) believes firmly. The story starts in the late 1950s, on the night of their 10th wedding anniversary, Michael's wife Elizabeth (Bujold) and their daughter Amy (Blackman) are kidnapped, and choosing to follow the police department's advice, Michael uses blank notes instead of real money as the ransom, the plan backfires with all the kidnappers and hostages dead due to a dead collision and explosion. 16 years has passed, Michael has to live through the consequences and has been deeply mired in self-accusation and remorse, during a business trip to Florence with his business partner Robert (Lithgow), miraculously he meets a young Italian girl Sandra Portinari (Bujold) who looks exactly like Elizabeth, and is doing some preliminary work to the restoration of a fresco of Madonna and Child in the church where he and Elizabeth met for the first time. Their very first conversation is about art restoration, and betrays Michael's preference of refurbishing the beautiful facade to digging up the truth beneath. Mutual attractions kindle, Michael's backstory is frankly accepted by Sandra, and a speedy marriage is under the way. Michael is believed to given a second chance from Elizabeth, to redeem the haunting guilt, until Sandra is kidnapped by the same fashion, this time, can he right the wrong or is there some bigger scheme involved?There is a simple and plausible explanation of the resemblance between Elizabeth and Sandra, but one wonders whether the story will advance into an incestuous scandal (considering American audience's priggish taste), and it turns out De Palma and Schrader are actually carrying this take- no-prisoners approach until the finale, where De Palma's suspenseful style reaches its trance-like apex, all is drawn to a split-second decision whether it will end as a gut-punching shocker or a less disturbing but also less convincing reconciliation. Even though it opts for the safer option in the eleventh hour, the film is still an effective thriller to say the least, leaving audience to wait for the axe to fall until the very end.Performance-wise, Oscar-winning actor Cliff Robertson's turn as a guilt-ridden husband hopelessly having recourse to a second chance to do the right thing is too broad and sometimes even a bit wooden apart from the glistening light in his eyes when he meets Sandra, surely is less compelling than his co-star Bujold, whose baby-face brings out a great effect in the key moments with De Palma's sleight-of-hand where the truth is replayed from her troubled mind, and one important factor that we can buy this tall-tale is her deceitful callowness; whereas Lithgow, offers his best annoying mannerism in spite of showing almost no ageing during a 16-year gap apart from a convenient moustache. On a whole, OBSESSION is singularly enjoyable, not as excellent as VERTIGO, but not a forgettable dud either.

Brian De Palma has never denied that his main influence is the work of Alfred Hitchcock, yet, his early movies especially, have often been unfairly dismissed as rip-off's. This, of course, is simply not true, and I argue that De Palma allow his films to flourish with his own sense of style and intrigue, while closely following themes that the great master observed himself. Of all his more Hitchcockian productions, Obsession is one his least remembered when compared to the likes of Dressed to Kill (1980) or Body Double (1984). It's certainly one of De Palma's more ludicrous and often outright barmy films, but there is much to enjoy here in a guilty sort of way.In 1959, wealthy real estate developer Michael Courtland (Cliff Robertson) receives a ransom note demanding $500,000 in cash for the return of his wife and daughter. The police are notified, and following a botched arrest, his wife and daughter are killed in a getaway car. Fifteen years later, Michael, who seems to exist in a state of reserved grief, arrives in Florence with his friend and business colleague Robert Lasalle (John Lithgow) to tie up a land deal. While visiting the church he met his wife years before, he meets a young painter named Sandra (Genevieve Bujold) who is the exact doppelgänger of his dead wife.For all its frequently ridiculous and quite predictable twists and turns and overwrought melodrama, Obsession succeeds thanks to some stylish direction from De Palma and Bernard Herrmann's lavish, Oscar-nominated score. You can see the ending a mile away, but it does include a nice twist that borders on the repulsive, and with Robertson's subdued performance and Lithgow's reliable charismatic sidekick, the film never becomes quite as silly as it really should be. The main influence here is obviously Vertigo (1958), but retains none of the psychological mystery of Hitchcock's masterpiece, taking a more direct thriller route instead. Don't expect any plausibility (even the most absent-minded viewer could pick apart the plot), but if you can put this aside - or even welcome it - Obsession is a memorable little thriller that is surely due a small revival.www.the-wrath-of-blog.blogspot.com

OBSESSION, Brian de Palma's answer to Hitchcock's VERTIGO, is the most disappointing film I've seen from the director yet. Despite his steadfast direction and some not-bad performances from the central actors, this is a huge letdown of a film, purely due to the film-flam nature of the storyline. The truth is that it just doesn't hold together under close scrutiny. The whole plot hinges on a conspiracy of sorts which is so ridiculous, so unbelievable, that it could only appear in a movie.The story opens with ageing Hollywood heartthrob Cliff Robertson losing his wife and daughter during a kidnapping attempt. So far, so good. Unfortunately, the story then cuts to twenty years later and loses any of the focus or interest it had previously generated. It becomes a cheesy, '70s-era romance that goes nowhere, taking an age to build to that aforementioned ridiculous climax that asks the audience to swallow a wholly unbelievable plot. It's impossible.Robertson is passable as the lead actor, but he never lights up the screen in the way a Stewart, Grant or Peck would have done. He's definitely second-rate material. Genevieve Bujold, as the subject of his affection, is better, but not as good as Margot Kidder in de Palma's previous SISTERS. John Lithgow is a disappointment in the acting stakes, especially given his performance in the much better BLOW OUT. All in all, this is the most disappointing de Palma film I've watched yet, at least up until his work in the mid-'90s.