The Most Confusing Movie Endings Finally Explained
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 31 май 2024
- Wondering if "Total Recall" is all a dream or if Rick Deckard is a replicant in "Blade Runner?" If you've been stumped by the ending of a film recently, there's a good chance it's on our list - and we're here to let you know what's really going on.
#DonnieDarko #Looper #Tenet
Donnie Darko (2001) | 0:00
Enemy (2013) | 1:20
American Psycho (2000) | 2:34
Silent Hill (2006) | 3:43
Tenet (2020) | 5:02
Predestination (2014) | 6:18
Blade Runner (1982) | 7:30
Arrival (2016) | 8:48
Shutter Island (2010) | 9:58
Total Recall (1990) | 11:18
The Lobster (2015) | 12:35
Hereditary (2018) | 13:43
Looper (2012) | 14:58
Us (2019) | 16:15
Mother! (2017) | 17:33
Jacob's Ladder (1990) | 18:52
Vanilla Sky (2001) | 20:05
Read Full Article: www.looper.com/2860/confusing-... 
Развлечения
![Roddy Ricch - Survivors Remorse [Official Music Video]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/J5IeFzr2GgE/mqdefault.jpg)
What movie ending still confuses you to this day?
The Possession - 1981
The Ninth Gate - 1999
Constantine - 2005
The Prestige - 2006
Black Swan - 2010
The Witch - 2016
The Lighthouse - 2019
The Hole In The Ground - 2019
Inception - 2020
Gretel & Hansel - 2020
Lamb - 2021
Nope - 2022
Beau Is Afraid - 2023
Here's one that has no official solution, and over 40 years of speculation: John Carpenter's The Thing. The reason: It was felt in test screenings that the planned original ending where Mac and Childs get rescued and both tested and found to be human was too much of a happy ending. So, Carpenter has it just end with no resolution. And that debate is perhaps one of the reasons the movie is still in everyone's minds, beyond the epic effects and body horror and paranoia/thriller aspects. The great paradox of cliffhangers is that we simultaneously love and hate them. The logical part of our minds absolutely hates being denied resolution, but that causes our curiosity to shift into overdrive and our creative sides to take hold and try to work with our logical side to figure out possible solutions.
Triangle
your channel's existence and income is the most confusing thing here.
beverly hills chihuahua
Predestination is a TRIP of a film! I highly recommend it.
In the first scene of “American Psycho” when Patrick Bateman is at that fancy restaurant with his colleagues, he points out “Paul Allen” across the room and it’s not the Paul Allen (played by Jared Jeto) we see later on in the film. This key moment shows how naïve and careless almost every character in the movie is.
I watched Donnie darko once only a few years ago after someone told me they didn't understand the ending. I told them after that the movie took place in a second reality and that he was seeing things from what had already happened and sacrificed himself in the third one.
The ending of Donnie Darko isn’t even the “confusing” part! The rest of the movie is where the mystery lies
Yeah, 100%. Why is it happening to him? Is the question not whats happening to him.
And why is he the one who's able to perceive what's going on?
Best way to understand Donnie Darko is ply it in reverse, put it back in the DVD case, wrap it in brown paper, tie it counterclockwise, wrap it in a plastic bag then shoot it out of a cannon into the heart of the freaking sun!!!
Then watch another movie (possibly starring Nic Cage although this part is optional).
I believe great films like Donnie Darko,Blue Velvet and Mullholland Drive don’t need to be understood. Like great art ( which these films are) you just look,get absorbed and enjoy the beauty , maybe because they’re gorgeous or wonderfully ugly ✌🏻
Nothing to understand, art house project.
_Silent Hill._ One of the few movies that Sean Bean survives. 😂😂😂
No David Lynch movies but many of Denis Villeneuve. Interesting
David Lynch is one of my favourite directors(John Waters being another). I don’t understand how they could leave Lynch off this list?🤔
@@CashelOConnolly exactly
It could be because there are no consensus interpretations of Lynch. 😂
That’s why I love his stuff so much. No two people can watch Eraserhead and get the same experience.
Looper never decided to work with his future self. Throughout the film he was trying to close his loop.
You know, I always found something strange in Total Recall-when Dr Lall calls Bob and tells him “it looks like we have another schizoid embolism-then when he runs into the room she says that they “hit a memory cap”-no further mention of the schizoid embolism-until the middle of the film when Dr Edgemar visits him in the hotel and tells him that that’s what he’s going through. Then there were other things that were puzzling-the reactor at the end bears a strong resemblance to the picture of pylons Dr Lall had showed him in the beginning. The woman they create for him looks exactly like Melina in this dream. And the technician at Recall talks of “blue skies on Mars”-which is exactly what happens at the end. Yeah, the more you look at it the more likely it is that it’s a dream. Even when Lori(Sharon Stone) appears with Dr Edgemar her expression isn’t easy to read, but if you look real close you can see her eyes are moist indicating she’s indeed grieving what’s happened to her husband. Then after killing Edgemar-the walls literally crash in just as Edgemar said they would! Yeah-schizoid embolism is what happened.
My brother cut out the waking up scene of the movie. And after Arnaldo fell asleep it went to him getting home and meeting his friend that he kills. The cut scene was put at the end. And the movie ended with him in a johnny cab ,confused, riding home. It was interesting.
Dropped the ball on Total Recall fact-checking. Director has gone on record stating that both angles exist as separate realities, thus both are correct.
I love movies like these.
I almost quit when I heard, "He seduced his younger self, and she got pregnant."
Right. How is that possible?
The telltale sign in American Psycho that Patrick Bateman never killed anyone was his _obsessive compulsive disorder._ There is no way he would stab a woman to have her bleed in his bed; chop a head off in his his living room, or allow his face and body come into contact with blood. This is a man who slides a coaster under a glass to prevent water rings on his table, insists that a spoon be put in the carton, and washes his gloved hands after making contact with a gay man.
Then there was the fact that no one in the apartment woke up to a revving chainsaw in the middle of the night. No authorities were called after Patrick smeared a freeway of blood through his apartment foyer with his _Jean Paul Gaultier_ overnight bag. Patrick is to much of a compulsive neat-freak to play such a messy game like murder.
The Thing! Would we ever get a definitive answer!
Heh. As far as I am concerned the definite answer is in the 1938 novella the movie is mostly based on. And that ending is different, more survivors who seem to be certainly human, and they not only do defeat the monster, in the end they are planning what to do with the new technology they are getting from the saucer it nearly constructed at one point. The movies are just "what if" musings because they are borrowing, or adapting, not the original.
BTW, Carpenter's movie is, except for the ending, a fairly close adaptation. In the novella the ending is still scary, because while the humans win, they are well aware that it may be just a temporary retrieve because who knows what else there is out in the stars, considering what kind of creature the first alien they have seen was. And no idea if there might even be another "thing" somewhere near them, frozen in ice, but for how long? And no idea if humanity will be able to deal with what might come next. Or what they might meet if they venture out themselves. Very much a "dark forest" story, in spite of that seeming happy ending, they find out that there definitely are monsters. But not what kind of monsters, except for that one sample they got lucky with, and even with that one they know they will lose if another gets on Earth somewhere more hospitable to life than Arctic or Antarctica.
@@pohjanakka4992 You know what, this helps, I'm just gonna choose to believe that they were both human in the end and survive.
MacReady is the Thing.🤫
12:22 but he dreamt about melina before he even went to recall, ehh? Ehh? Not so cut n dry, lol
I love what you do
The book for Total Recall is even crazier than the film. In the film, a construction worker named Quail chooses a memory as an agent and then it turns out that he was really an agent whose memory had been erased. But that's when the fun begins in the book, because Quaid demands a new, more pleasant memory of a more exciting life from his former employers and they agree. He is then placed with a psychiatrist to figure out what his own personal desires are. When he was young, Quail used to fantasize that as a child he came across minuscule rodent-like aliens that were going to launch a full invasion of Earth with their superior technology. However, young Quail was so kind to and accepting of the aliens that they decided to hold off on their invasion as long as he was alive. While finding the fantasy narcissistic, his commanders agree to plant the memories at Rekal. To everyone's shock, those memories turn out to be real as well.
The part I don't understand about Jacobs Ladder is that, if he dies in Vietnam and he is just having visions than how does he know exactly how things in the future are, such as certain technologies?
Vanilla sky was the most devastating movie for me personally
Unfortunately i watched it during the time when the girl I loved i proposed and she eventually said she'll take whole month to decide whether to Say "Yes" or "No" to my proposal
I was so stupid that If it's love the other person don't have to think
And when You have to think then it's not love just selection and sorting ur best option
So yeah devastating effects of watching this Movie during unstable times but eventually enjoyed it more during those times ❤
You learn from your mistakes
More strength to you✨ Hope you have moved on completely by now and if yes, happy for you🎉
I think taking time to consider a marriage proposal is appropriate. The notion that one person can take their time to consider marriage and if they're ready before popping the question, but the other person should decide on the spot, is insane. Movies make it seem romantic, but it's insane. You need to discuss these big steps together, and take time to think, discuss and decide together that you're both ready. Love is a nice foundation, but it doesn't build a life together. You need respect, communication, patience, understanding, trust, and maturity. You should propose already knowing you're both on the same page. And if you do it without knowing, then you owe the other person time to think.
Time traveling rabbit gave him an out to an epic lifetime of disaster, loneliness, and self loathing. I had the theory it would be continued with Donnie grown up, while working hrough his pain, becomes obsessed over trying to undo his past. In order to prevent a complete time paradox develops the rabbit suit, goes back in time, then convinced his younger self to self eliminate but for a greater good! That's just a fun continuance that would be fun to explore.
I would also add southland tales. "The nines" is also a strange movie but kind of gets wrapped up at the end.
Thanks for not saying or putting the spoiler in text as the very first thing. I wish you would do all of your "movie list videos" this way. It's nice having time to skip a segment.
I HATED Jacob’s Ladder when it came out because it was An Occurrence at Owl Creek Bridge. I felt robbed by the ending.
In Tenet, think of Neil like Jake Gyllenhal’s character in Source Code… or like a time remnant from The Flash…there are probably many copies of Neil lying dead around the world from having stopped OTHER bombs from going off.
No. Tenet is not a multi timeline film. There is only a single timeline, you are only watching it from the perspective of the initial protagonist. If you watch closely, all reversed time versions are there, all counter reversed versions are also there.
Also, the timeline is that if a deterministic timeline. You can not change an event once it has happened, or attempting to causes the event etc. It will always happen that way. There are no branching timelines. There are no other dead copies of Neil.
@@darketernal3: The algorithm will eventually be reassembled and the future will make another attempt with the knowledge that this particular plan failed… they will try something different, Neil will die again somewhere else stopping _that_ plan. It is reasonable to assume it happened before. The explanation they give in the movie is a lie to keep their people in line. There _are_ multiple timelines, that’s what the pincer manoeuvre manipulates… it makes sure the bomb going off occurs in a tangent timeline, the only remaining evidence of which is the corpse of Neil.
@@darketernal3 : Weird that my comment calmly explaining why this person is wrong was deleted… to recap: the algorithm will be rebuilt/reassembled and the future will make another attempt, with the knowledge that this one failed, and try something different. It is reasonable to assume the film does not depict the first Tenet pincer maneuver… which DOES use multiple timelines to compartmentalize the event of the bomb going off in an alternate reality. Tenet lies to their team about there being only 1 timeline to keep them in line.
You guys need to make a part 2 and put "The Little Things" on it... 😏😂😂😂
I still have no understanding of Tenet... ..
About Mother - one thing that confuses me about the whole thinking is that humans are NOT something separate, we are as much a part of the biosphere, and born of it, as something like ants or whales or grasses are. So if you think of "Mother Earth" as something like a conscious being that does create everything here, well, I suppose you could think of humans as the failed experiment. But she is still quite capable of wiping us out, because of course we are not her first creation destructive to what the biosphere had been like before that. It has happened many, many times before. And she also seems quite capable of handling any temporary setbacks like near wholesale destruction of whatever the biosphere was like, she just builds anew. Might take a few million years, but what is time like that to her... She is not a weak, or even a particularly nice mother in that sense. More like a ruthless mistress.
I think portraying her as weak, and at our mercy, might be underestimating her in a big way. Mistaking a tiger for a little cuddly bunny.
And one of her aims seems to be filling every possible niche with the life she has created. She is quite the expansionist. So... if humans have a reason, for her, might that be for getting HER creations off this one planet? We seem to be the first life form that might be able to do that, after all. Perhaps that is our purpose. For her.
I love the movie Donnie Darko… it’s the first movie where we really got to see Jake Gyllenhaal shine as an actor. And he has so much intensity and depth he was the perfect actor for this part. also perfect for “ nightcrawler” 20 years later.
I actually love the plot of Donnie Darko, and if you watch it enough times it’s actually pretty straightforward… It wasn’t even a “ life-sized, bunny rabbit” or even an imaginary friend, as Donnie claimed him to be with his therapist. Somehow the jet engine landed on him and it transported him to two weeks prior. Everyone thought Donnie was crazy. He wasn’t He was actually
A genius, and a psychic, could see the future etc. He did “hallucinate”but his bunny rabbit is actually a real boy named Jack in a Bunny suit on Halloween running over his girlfriend after leaving grandma deaths basement to look for clues. The boy under the bunny suit is speeding and ends up. Just running over his girlfriend…. He’s dressed in that giant bodysuit and takes off the head shocked at what he’s just done… that’s when Donnie Darko kills him. Danny believes that it’s “The Rabbits” (I believe his name is Jack, ? And he’s brought up several times by other characters, including Patrick Swayze‘s character, who refers to him in past tense. But Donnie kills him not just because he killed the girlfriend, but he believes it’s his fault for everything that’s transpired. but really, the body is just a manifestation… A physical form or a ghost you could say because when the rabbit takes off his head in the movie theater, he has a bullet wound that went right through his eye (the bullet wound from Donnie shooting him)…. He’s guiding Donnie through the events they have already happened… Donnie just doesn’t remember it because technically Donnies already dead but he doesn’t know it yet. so he just follows his instructions to “save the world”… OK maybe writing it out like this it still sounds confusing lol. But trust me once you’ve watched it enough especially the directors cut the pieces all come together.. I’m not big on remakes especially since I think this is a bit of a masterpiece and cult classic… that being said… I think they could’ve done a prequel talking about Grandma deaths backstory since she turned out to be an intra-goal part of the plot
Total recall was based on a sci-fi short story that is as far from the film as “do androids dream of electric sheep” is from Bladerunner
So happy to see Silent Hill here! 😃
Jacob's Ladder is based on the Tibetan Book of the Dead
After watching this video, I can confidently say I'm left more perplexed than I was before watching this video. 🤔 Thanks Looper...
Ok, so someone please explain to me this...
In "Predestination," if he was both his own mother & father, than who were his grandparents? 🤔
There are none. He is in a time loop. In the short story - "All You Zombies" by Robert Heinlein the movie is based on, he knows his own origin, knows he created himself, after he founds out about time travel he travels back in time and does seduce his younger, female self because he has figured out he is her, and her child too, and knows he has to do that if he wants to be born. In the end he ponders that he knows EXACTLY who is and where he comes from and how he was born, and wonders where all these other humans have come from.
I don't actually remember how the time travel is explained in the movie, but in the short story he doesn't invent it, he gets hired by an agency that uses it. And figures out his origin and what he needs to do to make sure he is born after that.
You didn't have all the answers since you did not explain the Lobster plus most of this were not that complicated.
Declare is not a replicant… do your research. Both the writer and Harrison Ford say that he is not a replicant. And he couldn’t be a replicant in 2049 because he’s an old man and several several decades have passed. He has a human that had a child with a replicant, Rachael.
It makes sense if you don't think about it!
*Paul Verhoven contradicts Total Recall's movie's story, because nowhere does it say Rekall's clients experience their fantasies within a dream. Even the company's guy explains it to Quaid as, "As real as any memory in your head.", and, "...a longer trip will cost you a little more, because it's a deeper implant.". Not a longer "dream". So, the company implants memories, for immediate recall, not, acted-out experienced dreams, according to its script. Therefore, Everything Quaid is experiencing is happening in real time. And I didn't even mention the fact that Quaid was experiencing pain (which you don't, in dreams).*
The Directors Cut of Donnie Darko makes more sense and is actually really good.
Thanks for the clarification because some of these are truly didn't get.😊.
Being your own mother and father is wild.
I’ve never been a fan of Ethan Hawke, but Predestination was an excellent film, and gave me a definite respect for his abilities as an actor.
This better be good. I’ve seen this movie 8 times
SO basically, he pulled a Christopher Bowes: he used the Time Cube and the Crystal Coconut to become his own father and his own mother. Then, once he was born, he came out with a drinking horn.
Here's a collection of spoilers for movies that are not really confusing by the end of the film... Hopefully you haven't wanted to see any of these!
Note how most of these "confusing" endings are time travel related... why do people seems to have such a problem understanding temporal causality?
Donnie Darcko you say?
Oh man, now I gotta go back and watch all these movies again. Good.
the 2nd movie wasn't called enemy, if you're talkin bout jake g finding out he has a "double" that's an obscure actor that he tries to track down after attending a secret meeting of men to watch a women seductively stomp out a tarantula.
then at the end of the movie there's a giant one in his room
it's about commitment... he has a wife and DID/MPD and doesn't realize it. so he sees his wife as a giant spider at the end.
it was never called enemy so idk what you are talking about.....
enemy is a classic
Donnie Darko
ok i think i get get it.... but can you break it down and explain it to me like I'm 5 !?
What's so confusing about the Donnie Darko ending?
Predestination better have given credit to Heinlein and his story "--All You Zombies--"
😁I'm sure it is coincidence.🙄
It does. The movie is quite officially said to be an adaptation of the short story. In interviews the directors have said that they decided to "trust the story" and remain as close to it as possible.
Tenet was good, but the motivation for the villain is dumb AF 😮💨
How is Fight Club not a part of this list?
What was hard to understand about Fight Club?
@jamesbrice6619 do you bit remember the ending? _____ shoots himself, only tyler dies, then ____ & Marla hold hands & watch the world burn
@@toulawm386 they watch the buildings collapse that will end debt. I don't see anything confusing about it.
HE SHOOTS HIMSELF IN THE HEAD
The director of American Psycho has apologised for making the film ambiguous. She’s on record as saying Patrick Bateman was definitely killing people and not delusional about killing anyone 🔪🩸
P.S IMHO Deckard is a replicant
Okay you didnt explain American psycho
The most confusing thing about Tenet was why Nolan hired John David Washington
....at lobster still not confused wtf?
An ambiguous movie ending doesn't necessarily mean it's confusing. It's only confusing if one lacks the capacity to think about the film after the curtain comes down and the house lights turn on.
r/iamverysmart
Before the movie Total Recall was released I saw the movie for free after the credits rolled the Nurse at the beginning of the procedure looks into the camera and says how was that? As we left the theater we were asked if we liked the ending
All the good movies on this list are not confusing. Good story telling does a great job at walking u through the story, while treating the audience as more cleaver than most bad movies give the audience credit for.
Here’s an explanation of Silent Hill, the film - it was dumb. They strayed too far from the source and ballsed it up.
I’m not even going to touch Predestination.
The film adaptation was okay but is far off from the game and novel. Aside from the main protagonist being female instead of male, the other biggest difference is that the movie plays more off of a literal demon aspect, where-as the game plays off of the main character's internal struggles with his own demons and the hell that is happening within his own mind.
Total Recall is obviously and clearly avdream
Dang it!!! Still waiting for an appropriate explanation for Mullholand Drive
WHAT WAS CONFUSING ABOUT HEREDITARY ?! SERIOUSLY EXPLAIN
I'm surprised you went with Shudder Island over Inception
Ya a lot of these movies mentioned aren't too confusing if you pay attention. I would have preferred inception as well
Don't watch this video, just look at the movie titles and go watch the movies !
thank you . ( 2024 / May / 21 )
Donnie darko still doesn’t make sense but nice try
Watch it again
I'm still confused with lost highway no matter how many times I've seen it
Lost Highway took me awhile to figure out too. If I recall correctly, everything that happens after the, I dunno 30 minute mark, is either a dream/nightmare or its a hallucination.
what in the bot comments
Donnie Darko hasn’t been explained lol there’s no definitive answer. Stop
Tenant is always going to be confusing as even in this clip.. i literally can’t understand you. Worst “artistic” audio mixing ever. Don’t lie, y’all can’t understand most of what is said. Don’t wanna hear about the mask and time argument. Have to give this one of his films a boo sincerely sadly.
confusing ? only for you
So in half of these movies the hero is also the villain, either related to a split personality or time travel. Not very original.
Worst donnie darko explanation ever
ffs. Tenet never happened. guy died in the beginning while captured on rails
Tenet is Christopher Nolan's worst movie and also had the worst acting main character.
yeah it was weird
Only dumb people hate tenet😂
The only thing confusing about Tenet is why John David Washington was cast. So terrible. Someone needs to tell him his face needs to move when he's acting. Dude literally failed as a pro athlete then did one supporting role and immediately after went to starring in A list director movies. Example of nepotism at its worst
😊 agreed and the sound is bad
God Us was not a good movie or confusing. In the first scene when she met her double i knew they switched. I spent the entire movie praying that wasn't the big twist at the end only to be sadly let down.
shutter island: in the end they bring him to the lighthouse like he expected for a lobotomy and/or experiments. hes probably a real cop given halucinogens through the cigarettes.
1st lol
Get out was a garbage movie, Us was even worse!
Predestination is a great movie
Why do people keep giving Denis Villeneuve money to make pretentious dull films? Now he's making the Space Osama Bin Laden saga - yay soon we get Star Slug Stalin! Sigh.
As fro shutter Island - how do people not realise the stupid twist in the first five minutes? Scorcese owes me the time I wasted watching that film back.
Just about all these movies sucked
And your taste comes into question. Some were not great, but some were fantastic.
And yet, at the end... you explained nothing. Good one, Looper.
If you've been stumped by the ending of a movie recently, there's a good chance its on our list..... proceeds to show a 23 year old movie.
Ridley Scott, this old... fart. Once he said "Dekker is human, because the movie suppose to show that replicant (Roy) could be more human that the real human". Now he says something different :/
Also the book....I thought in book Deker is a human.