Contrary to Popular Opinion, Simon Oakland Ending is NECESSARY

i have been a fan of "Psycho" for decades, and have noted the rather silly attacks
on the ending of the picture, in which the psychiatrist (Simon Oakland) explains
what happened. I've read that it's "unnecessary", "dated", "pointless" and so on.

I flat-out disagree.

Without such an ending, there would be so many unanswered questions. The
psychiatrist scene brings the viewer closure because, even today, it would not
be clear as to WHY Norman was in drag, and WHY he did this. We need this
explanation so as to have a satisfying ending.

The scene, as is, is brief, well staged by Hitchcock, sharply acted by Oakland, and
the economy of dialogue is perfect. Not too much, not too little. We need to
see that Lila and Sam finally GET this whole bizarre tragedy. And the scene leads
perfectly into the officer who says, "He feels a bit of a chill. Okay if I bring him this
blanket?" Then POW...after we - AND a stunned Sam and Lila - know everything,
we get that cherry on the sundae with Norman's - and his mother's - final scene.

My opinion is vastly in the minority. Surely, there are others who share my opinion.