- 2 days ago
Ambiguity at its most brilliantly annoying.
Category
🎥
Short filmTranscript
00:00Though it may feel like ambiguous non-committal endings are becoming increasingly common in
00:04cinema nowadays, there is a reason for it. The good ones get the discussion going and
00:10it never really stops being interesting no matter how long it's gone on for.
00:15The following 10 movies then, all Shoe of Fire classics in one way or another,
00:19ask the viewer to do all of the mental legwork by figuring things out for themselves and
00:24we love them for it. So I'm Josh from WhatCulture.com and these are 10 movies that
00:29made you work out the answer yourself. 10. Blade Runner
00:33The question, is Deckard a human or a replicant? This question has tortured Blade Runner fans ever
00:39since the film's original 1982 theatrical release and Ridley Scott's subsequent director's cut and
00:45final cut only further fueled the debate. The main evidence pointing to Deckard himself being a
00:51replicant is the fact that Gaff leaves him an origami unicorn at the end of the movie.
00:56Considering that Deckard had a dream involving a unicorn earlier on in the film,
01:00it implies that this character is aware of Deckard's dreams due to him being a replicant.
01:06Opponents of this theory though argue that it could merely mean that humans and replicants share the
01:11same dreams, further blurring the line between what is and isn't human. Plus, Deckard being saved and
01:17spared by Batty at the very end of the movie is robbed of so much of its emotional impact if he is
01:22indeed just another replicant. Somewhat predictably and aptly though, Blade Runner 2049, the sequel,
01:29refused to shed further light on Deckard's identity. Though the fact that he didn't run through walls
01:34as Kay did has been interpreted as further evidence that he is in fact human.
01:399. American Psycho
01:41The question, how much of Patrick Bateman's killing spree, if any, actually happened and how much of it
01:47was merely imagined by him? American Psycho concludes with murderer Patrick Bateman going on a hilariously
01:53over-the-top killing spree as the police chase him down and he eventually makes a desperate final
01:58confession for all of his murderous misdeeds. Then the following reveal shows that there's actually
02:04no physical proof of Bateman's acts and that his secretary Gene discovered profane scribblings in
02:10his journal, which seemed to suggest that his rampage was pure fantasy. There's even the suggestion
02:15that Bateman isn't even who he says he is, as the film ends on a chillingly non-committal note.
02:21Some believe that Bateman's rampage happened mostly as depicted, but his delusional mind
02:26exaggerated some of the sillier aspects. Others feel that he killed everyone minus Paul Allen,
02:32who was said to be alive at the end of the movie, and some suspect that he didn't even kill
02:36a single person. The film's slippery logic and unreliable protagonist make all three theories
02:42valid in their own way, though the filmmakers and actors have stated conflicting theories as to
02:47which one they think is legit. Number 8, The Shining. The question, what was the meaning behind the old
02:53Overlook Hotel photograph which features Jack Torrance despite being taken in 1921, some 60 years
03:00before the movie's events took place? Director Stanley Kubrick has suggested that this scene was meant to
03:06imply that Jack was the reincarnation of a previous hotel caretaker, which lines up with the spectral
03:12butler Grady creepily telling him, you've always been the caretaker. Some fans however have theorised
03:18that the picture represents Jack's soul being absorbed by the hotel, and the other party guests
03:23in the picture are perhaps even other people claimed by the Overlook itself. This would also fit well
03:29with Grady's line, that Jack is trapped in that single moment in the photograph forevermore,
03:34destined to always be there now. So whether you take Kubrick at his word, or accept that a creator's work
03:40no longer explicitly belongs to them once it's out in the wild, it's a tantalising mystery that's baffled
03:45fans for almost 40 years. Number 7, Birdman. The question, what happened to Riggan after he climbed onto
03:52the ledge of his hospital room? There are a bunch of theories here, so let's run them down. Some believe that
03:58the character died from shooting himself on stage, and the film's final scenes are nothing more than his
04:04dying hallucination, which would explain why it's almost comically idyllic. Conversely, there's the
04:10rather out there theory that suggests that Riggan can actually fly, which at least makes a little more
04:16sense as we do see his daughter Sam looking up to the sky after clearly not seeing his corpse at the foot
04:21of the hospital. Perhaps the most plausible suggestion though is that the character really did jump out the
04:27window and die, and Sam's reaction is merely her entering a fantasy world where her father flies away, rather than
04:33splats violently on the pavement below. Unlike Kubrick, director Alejandro Iñárritu has refused to offer his own
04:39interpretation of the finale, and given the film's generally surreal quality, it's hard to fully commit to one
04:45defining theory. Number 6, Total Recall. The question, was Douglas Quaid actually a secret
04:51agent owes his trip to Mars merely an implanted memory. Total Recall goodly plays with reality
04:57throughout its runtime, goading the audience to consider whether the events they're watching are
05:01actually playing out at all are merely the result of a fabricated memory within Quaid's mind. After all,
05:07when Quaid goes to recall, the shell plot of the movie is basically laid out to him, and a technician even
05:13mentions the blue sky from the very end of the film, suggesting that we are experiencing this false
05:18memory all the way to the credits. Some fans believe though that the schizoid embolism Quaid appears
05:24to suffer is merely part of the fantasy, to better convince the recipient that the secret agent
05:30adventure is legit. Others, of course, are dead set on Quaid's adventure being real, while director
05:35Paul Verhoeven won't give one side credence over the other, as suits the film's reality warping core
05:41theme wonderfully. Number 5, Lost in Translation. The question, what did Barbara whisper in Charlotte's
05:47ear? When asked about the famously ambiguous ending to her film, writer-director Sofia Coppola stated that
05:53the line was improvised by Bill Murray himself, and only he and Scarlett Johansson know exactly what was
06:00said between their characters. However, a video emerged online in 2007, which claimed to reveal the
06:06whisper through post-processing techniques, with Murray apparently saying, quote,
06:11I have to be leaving, but I won't let that come between us, okay? End quote.
06:16Yet, the muddy quality of this audio means that it's hardly definitive proof.
06:20While there have been countless other attempts by internet sleuths to decode the source audio,
06:26not one of them has been especially convincing. We know he says something poignant and meaningful,
06:31but beyond that, it's forever destined to be a mystery. Number 4, The Thing.
06:36The question, at the end of the film, who is infected by the extraterrestrial life form,
06:41McCready or Childs? John Carpenter's ferocious sci-fi horror film ends on an all-timer classic
06:48cliffhanger, reinforcing the movie's overarching theme of paranoia by having the two remaining men
06:53committed to freezing to death to ensure that the alien doesn't escape out into the world.
06:58Most of the prominent fan theories out there seem to point towards Childs probably being the thing,
07:03though, as his breath isn't really visible in the low temperatures, which could suggest that he's not
07:08human. Also, a more adventurous suggestion is that McCready placed gasoline in the bottle of the alcohol,
07:14and when Childs drank it without spitting it out, it indicated that he was indeed the thing,
07:19which wouldn't know the difference in taste between the two substances. Some believe this is
07:23why McCready laughs after Childs takes a sip, as he finally knows the truth. The mutually issue of
07:29destruction on the basis of distrust is pivotal to the ending's bleak power though, so while it's fun
07:35to try and figure it out, the lack of concrete answer is kind of the entire point. Number 3,
07:40Inception. The question, was Cobb still dreaming or not? Christopher Nolan's ingenious sci-fi thriller
07:46had just about everyone debating its agonizingly ambiguous final image, where the spinning top totem is
07:52either still spinning or beginning to wobble, depending on your interpretation. The important thing to
07:58remember, of course, is that this was Mal's totem, not Cobb's, which has been theorized to,
08:03in fact, be his wedding ring. Nolan suspiciously obscures the ring from view during several pivotal
08:09scenes, presumably to keep the film's mystery keenly intact. Likewise, the director himself
08:14has refused to confirm the truth, but he has noted that viewers need to recognize that, in those final
08:20moments, Cobb has just accepted whatever reality has been presented in front of him. At this point,
08:25he doesn't care, he just wants to be with his kids, whatever form that takes. And dream or not,
08:30he has embraced this wholeheartedly, and that's seemingly more crucial than what the nature of
08:35his reality actually is. Number 2, Under the Skin. The question, where did the alien creature come from,
08:42and what's she doing on Earth? Jonathan Glazer's 2013 masterpiece is one of the greatest sci-fi films
08:48of the 21st century so far. And a big reason for that is how terrifically, ominously vague it is.
08:54Scarlett Johansson's otherworldly entity shows up out of nowhere, resembles a human,
08:59and spends her time in Glasgow trying to figure out humanity. Where she came from,
09:03how she arrived on Earth, and her intentions are never even remotely explained, giving the audience
09:09an awful amount of leeway to cobble together their own theories. Though Michelle Faber's book has its own
09:15set of answers, given how unfaithful the movie generally is to it, it's not really reasonable to
09:20expect any meaningful parity between the two sources. In the book, the alien is sent to Earth by a
09:26corporation on her home planet to farm humans for food, which would explain how much screen time is
09:32devoted to her feeding process in the film. However, the film also makes no indication whatsoever that
09:37she's stockpiling any of the human remains. Number 1, Rashomon. The question, who is telling the truth?
09:44Akira Kurosawa's 1950 drama is the ultimate cinematic statement about the flimsy reliability
09:49of eyewitness testimony and the fleeting quality of truth. In regard to the central case of the
09:55murdered samurai, the stories of the bandit, the wife, the samurai as told through a medium,
10:00and the woodcutter are all subject to their own fair share of scrutiny. And the entire point seems to
10:06be that, due to their own agendas, none of the witnesses can bring themselves to deliver a proper,
10:11truthful rendition of events. The fun of the movie isn't trying to figure out whose story is the
10:17correct one, or the most correct at least, but if Kurosawa had concluded the film with a concrete
10:22answer, it would have torpedoed the movie's brilliant meditation on the elusiveness of the
10:27supposed truth. If nothing else, it provokes a fascinating discussion afterwards and remains
10:33fiercely provocative so many decades later. So that's our list, I want to know what you guys think
10:38down in the comments below. Where do you come down on these movie endings, and are there any other
10:43hotly debated ones I missed off here? While you're down there as well, can you please give us a like,
10:47share, subscribe, and head over to whatculture.com for more lists and news like this every single day.
10:52Even if you don't though, I've been Josh, thanks so much for watching, and I'll see you soon.
Be the first to comment