What the frick is confusing about the shining and the matrix
UFOs Are A Psyop Shirt $21.68 |
DMT Has Friends For Me Shirt $21.68 |
UFOs Are A Psyop Shirt $21.68 |
What the frick is confusing about the shining and the matrix
UFOs Are A Psyop Shirt $21.68 |
DMT Has Friends For Me Shirt $21.68 |
UFOs Are A Psyop Shirt $21.68 |
the shiting
the sneeding
Didn’t you se le epic documentary that explains crazy theories about the shining?
da moon landing was fake! when jack sees the ghost he’s talking about Apollo 11
?t=35
Those people don't think they're confused though
this list makes sense when you consider that half of the country are conservatives who can barely tie their own shoes
Tfw you realize 50% of the human population are double digit IQ and you still see people making it about politics
What's it like being bottom bell curve? Are there free snacks?
It's more like 60% now.
>Tfw you realize 50% of the human population are double digit IQ
It's a lot more than 50% because the IQ tests we use are standardized in mostly white populations. So 50% of the white population is double digit IQ.
oh shit.
You are delusional if you think the conservatives are the dumb side
>she believes in trickle down economics
>she believes the police state should grow and cops need more power and more gear
>she wants the government pushing corporations for literally send out a tweet supporting gay rights
wow you sound like a little bootlicker b***h lmao
I'm a man you frickin homosexuals, why do trannies live in your head rent free
You will never be a woman
They have on average five IQ points on you.
And yet it's leftists who seem to assume that a person with a dick and testicles can be a woman and that Biden won the election
Without referencing a debunked documentary made by a fugitive poo, can you please cite the specific court cases in which anyone proved Voter fraud? Many of the judges were Trump appointees. I'm sure you can provide verifiable evidence that Biden didn't win? :^)
>Without referencing a documentary which I'll try to discard as "debunked" without presenting any evidence and resorting to ad hominem non-arguments, can you please cite legal processes which have been stifled by dimwit leftists such as myself?
>Antonin Scalia mysteriously dies in his sleep right before Obama's second term ends
>judge presiding over a Jeffery Epstein case had her son assassinated on his front doorstep
>shitlibs and femoids are threatening and trying to assassinate conservative SCOTUS justices in their own homes
But I'm sure no judges were threatened over the 2020 election.
>A fat shitalian frick dying in his sleep is suspicious
you could have stopped at
>a person with a dick and testicles can be a woman
and took the W but then you had to say something completely moronic
Both are evidence of leftist stupidity in that they reveal their attempts to either curb the truth (women are women) or evade glaring questions (the 2000 Mules is but one resource about the shady dealings behind the 2020 elections)
Says the one who can't even say what a woman is lmao
Stuff like this makes more sense when your realize that most of the people around you are dumber and less educated than you.
It's kind of a cringe meme to say so but honestly it might be true.
There is nothing "cringe" about accepting that most people are fricking stupid. That's acknowledging reality.
Nah. It's cringe and what someone like you would call "midwit". If most people are stupid there's a good chance you are as well bit have duped yourself into believing you aren't (as stupid people tend to do). Therefore it's wise to not lambast the masses as stupid as it's very probable you're a part of that mass.
Wisest man in Athens knew that he knew nothing etc. etc.
Basically show some humility, wienerface
>Basically show some humility
No. It's not my fault that the average person has shit for brains. Virtually all of those movies are fairly easy to understand as long as you pay attention. I don't know why you're so determined to defend people who struggle to understand movies like The Shining and The Matrix. Maybe you're one of them?
Because they literally lack the capacity to understand it unless it's layed out for them. That's why Lynch filters even more people because his films are all about figuring it out yourself
This. It seems like the average person is not very capable of understanding subtext or allegory intuitively and drawing his own conclusions from movies. It's why women love movies that have "and they lived happily ever after" epilogues that show the main characters ten years later married and with kids, i.e. the ending of Harry Potter. They don't like it when movies are left up to audience interpretation, because it forces them to recall what they just watched and think critically about it. Even people who pretty much do nothing but watch movies can be incapable of this sort of critical thinking. You think I'm joking, but Roger Ebert famously got filtered by Godzilla 1954 of all movies.
No one likes audience interpretation endings, what are you talking about?
>t.midwit
If most people are stupid, doesn’t that mean they’re just have median intelligence?
No because intelligence isn't relative or contextual, it's a baseline.
Damn I guess I fall into the dumb side then…
Ironically, the second you say that, even jokingly, you automatically become smarter by acknowledging your limits. Just don't be merely self-deprecating, have a curious mindset and be open to learn.
I'm the eternal wagie highschool dropout, the only movie on this list that fricks my mind is the last action sequence in Tenet.
it's not they they're just stupider, it's that most people just tune out and absorb media passively.
No, it's just that the most popular films are going to receive the most votes. Like how Taco Bell is the "top rated Mexican restaurant in the USA". 99% of the population are going to say their local hole in the wall joint is the best and those places are going to get 30 votes each -- not hard to beat that.
People are just fricking moronic.
Primer isn't on that list, so it tells you it's bullshit. The viewers probably haven't seen a lot of movies, so these are comparatively more confusing
primer is only confusing when you're moronic enough to think it's about figuring out the timelines
t.reddit halfwit
yes, that's textbook reddit way of watching primer. Non-moronic people have realized it's not the point of the movie at all.
Only maybe 4 of these movies are even remotely confusing, some of these aren't confusing at all if you pay even a modicum of attention.
I hate current america so much it's unreal.
the only one of those even remotely close to confusing is 2001
how did he appeared on the photo?
he was sucked in by the hotel's spirit. it's a spooky ending without a rational basis
>he was sucked in by the hotel's spirit. it's a spooky ending without a rational basis
sooooo...confusing?
This is the most moronic take I've ever heard in any film. He wasn't fricking sucked into the hotel, thats what the hotel owner looked like and you're supposed to realize at the end that Jack was possessed by him from the very start. You never know what Jack actually looks like, you're watching the hotel owner.
lame reply. have a nice day
You're unironically moronic
Made by a 16 year old who watched the highest ranked movies on IMDB and calls himself a "film buff"
I still don't get Arrival's ending without it sounding moronic. Would someone care to explain in simple terms?
She learned how to see the future after learning the aliens language
language was a 4d language; she didnt 'see' the future the language enabled her a perspective all along her entire existence
Yeah I got that but it sounds moronic, isn't there a better explanation
she learned a magic spell and god gave her the phone number
it’s basically just Slaughterhouse Five. I actually called the entire premise of the movie like 5 minutes in. During the scene where she’s grieving her loss she’s like walking down a circular hospital hallway and I blurted out “time is a flat circle huh”. Fast forward to the end of the movie and my friend I was watching it with was like wtf
i remember the screenwriter fricking up big time when changing the story "because he didn't feel like being faithful to the original story since it was depressing" lol
in what way is it unclear? she connects with the ayyys and learns their language and because they don’t read and write like we do they can basically see the future. so she sees that she has a baby with renner and their kid dies of cancer or something as a young kid, she knows this and yet chooses to experience that pain and love and shit. but i never thought that she could prevent those things from happening, she just saw that they will happen. same deal with the bomb that kills? one of the ayyys they warned her but it went off anyway meaning they could foresee the event but not prevent it
>she connects with the ayyys and learns their language and because they don’t read and write like we do they can basically see the future
I get that, it's pretty evident. But it's just so moronic I don't want to believe it
It is moronic but what's so hard to believe about that?
brainlet shit all easily followed with careful watching except for maybe Mulholland Drive
>Primer
>Time Crimes
Explain Donnie Darko without looking it up.
NTA, and I haven't seen it in years, but from what I remember Donnie is a "troubled youth" whose teenage rebellious phase essentially leads him to rebel against fate. I pretty much forget how it ends besides he kills the guy who is Frank, but he eventually realizes that his death is necessary for the rest of the world, a big allegory for the rebellious teen becoming a productive adult
If I'm really off base lmk and maybe I'll watch it again, though probably not as I don't remember thinking it was that good
I only remember the Ending, but how does he time travel? Or is it Frank that time travels warning him of the plane crash.
I'll be honest, I only vaguely remember time travel. was there significant time travel before the finale where he agrees to die? if there is I have to admit having zero recollection of it.
Frank goes back in time to warn Donnie, Donnie then realises he's the cause of these deaths and time travels to where he dies saving everyone. Again the movie is confusing as frick even with repeat viewings, this movie also has a God subplot running throughout.
I mean Frank is a dead messenger from the future.
I didn't understand Mulholland Drive. It's frequently in 'movies men will never understand', so I wonder if it's a woman logic film.
>I didn't understand Mulholland Drive
no one does, lynch included.
I don’t understand it but I feel it and that’s all that matters.
SILENCIO
just shit my pants and I dont care
Show these people something like Stalker or El Topo and their heads would explode.
Nothing confusing about either of those though?
>What the frick is confusing about the shining
how did jack nickelsen get out of a frjdge?
Haven't seen Thinking about ending things but only 2001's ending and Mulholland Drive are confusing. Every other movie spells out the premise pretty hard. Btw, for anyone who hasn't seen Predestination, you gotta watch it. One of my favourite sci-fi movies ever. Hawke and the chick are incredible.
Hope The Game is at the 16th place, or else this list is absolute shit tier.
You're probably thinking to yourself none of these are confusing, and they aren't. But you should remember that every single time a super hero movie comes out these websites rake in millions of views explaining to morons what happened.
>Simple movie explained.
Feels like 90% of movies from before the year 2000 are pretty much irrelevant to zoomers
For many years now I watch redditors come on here talking about how Primer is a movie for cretin and simple man.
When you ask them for a complex movie they can never reply.
Primer is the midwit meme in movie form
Low IQ: This is too confusing, I can't keep track of the timelines!
Midwit: Here is my definitive chart that tracks the timelines in Primer.
High IQ: You cannot keep track of the timelines in Primer.
Movies such as Primer and Tinker Taylor Soldier Spy are simply edited in a way that's convoluted and they omit any exposition.
That doesn't make them any better, and stating that "oh I got them perfectly the 1st time around" is often used as a means of self-aggrandizing that sounds midwitish because it attempts to pretend their narrative is clearer than it is.
No he didn't. You're embarrassing yourself. Here are the several POSSIBILITIES he mentioned:
>In an interview with French film critic Michel Ciment, Kubrick said that the ballroom photograph suggests the reincarnation of Jack.
That's it. Not a word about who it was-- even Kubrick's suggestion sounds tentative and non-definitive. Anything else is speculation.
thanks for reminding me of that interview, felt it was worth it to go back to the horse's mouth:
How do you see the main character of Jack in The Shining?
Jack comes to the hotel psychologically prepared to do its murderous bidding. He doesn't have very much further to go for his anger and frustration to become completely uncontrollable. He is bitter about his failure as a writer. He is married to a woman for whom he has only contempt. He hates his son. In the hotel, at the mercy of its powerful evil, he is quickly ready to fulfill his dark role.
So you don't regard the apparitions as merely a projection of his mental state?
For the purposes of telling the story, my view is that the paranormal is genuine. Jack's mental state serves only to prepare him for the murder, and to temporarily mislead the audience.
And when the film has finished? What then?
I hope the audience has had a good fright, has believed the film while they were watching it, and retains some sense of it. The ballroom photograph at the very end suggests the reincarnation of Jack.
----
Personally what makes The Shining still interesting and resounding after all these years is that it is an exploration of unconscious family dynamics in a stripped spooky setting. The ghost paranormal stuff is icing on the cake.
Yes. As with several other great movies, it manages to keep these parallel lines (cabin fever triggering a familicide vs supernatural possession) feeding off each other.
Session 9 and Asylum Blackout, which ofc are no Shining but still interesting horror movies nevertheless, have that type duality going as well, each in its own way
Fight Club is only confusing if you didn't watch the last 5 minutes.
it's just imdb garbage
Tenet, I agree, is very confusing. If you got filtered by The Matrix you are beyond normie, though. This list is "didn't finish 6th grade" tier.
Tenet wasn't really confusing. They explain literally everything except for the ending which is very evident as well if you don't have ADHD
I was following the plot pretty okay but by the time the movie reached the end battle I was completely lost. Somewhere around the 3/4 mark there was just too much information to take in and I didn't know what was going on or why people were doing stuff anymore.
you did better than me, i was fricking lost right right from the start at the opera battle and train tracks confrontation.
what the frick was the point of the opera?
What was the dude on about talking about tenet and the hand gesture that never came up again?
Why did Sator try to steal the artifact in the middle of a heist with the purpose of getting him said artifact?
Who hid the artifacts in the first place and why? Was it Tenet/The Protagonist? Why not just keep them safe in the present where past/now dead Sator cant find them? Why did the future guys not just give them to Sator through the time capsule?
Tenet confused me because it's a shitty boring movie and I zoned out during the 500th exposition dump half way through
>Tenet confused me because it's a shitty boring movie and I zoned out during the 500th exposition dump half way through
Same. Doesnt help that the amerimutt main actor has no charisma and is the most boring bastard that ever exists haha
None of these movies are confusing, they just leave things open ended and up for interpretation. Just because they require a tiny amount of extra thought compared to, say, capeshit, they are considered confusing? Now picrel is an actual confusing movie.
Mulholland Drive is definitely confusing, don’t pretend like you got it on your first time through. Funny you post Eraserhead when it’s probably as unsubtle as you can get
>they just leave things open ended and up for interpretation.
how is that not "confusing" by definition? It's like you're afraid of that word because you're insecure about your intelligence.
>unanswered questions = confusion
Utter midwit take.
I have not seen all of these movies, but of the ones that I have, I would say that none of these are confusing. MAYBE Mullholland Drive, but all that needs is a second watch and pretty much all of your questions are answered. What is #2?
>Eraserhead
>confusing in any way
No
This is literally a joke. Seethe about it if you like, but I must caution against it.
>MAYBE Mullholland Drive, but all that needs is a second watch and pretty much all of your questions are answered.
then you ask random 100 people who said the same thing and everyone will give you different answer
>What is #2?
im thinking of ending things
>The child gasps in pain, and Spencer stabs its organs with the scissors. The wounds gush a thick liquid, covering the child. The power in the room overloads, causing the lights to flicker; as they flick on and off the child grows to huge proportions. As the lights burn out completely, the child's head is replaced by the planet seen at the beginning. Spencer appears amidst a billowing cloud of eraser shavings. The side of the planet bursts apart, and inside, the Man in the Planet struggles with his levers, which are now emitting sparks. Spencer is embraced warmly by the Lady in the Radiator, as both white light and white noise build to a crescendo before the screen turns black and silent
i get it's a surrealist film but it's not a stretch to not get what its ending is about
Two questions for you
1. what specifically did you find confusing, or perhaps most confusing, about Eraserhead?
2. what did the lady in the radiator represent?
it's been a while since i've seen the film. there's a lot of stuff i didn't get, but i didn't feel i had to "get" anything to appreciate the film, which i did. the opening and the conclusion, i have no frame of reference to understand them rationally other than in a visceral way. i don't know what the lady in the radiator represent, could be a lot thing since it's up to interpretation, the takeaway i got over the years reading about the film is that she represents death or suicide.
I thing I say when discussing Lynch's stuff, half-jokingly and half-serious, is that his major goal in every movie is to put to film the most uncomfortable sex scene possible. I would encourage you to re-watch the movie again with that in mind, specifically the opening and conclusion.
I never thought that the Lady in the Radiator had anything that grim about her and don't know why that became the de facto primary interpretation. To me, she comes across as maternal, and the ending represents Jack Nance rejecting fatherhood/ maturity by returning to a child-like state.
why'd he kill the woodpeckers
Not the same guy but I assume he means Eraserhead's allegorical aspects (something Lynch himself acknowledges and highlights) rather than its narrative, which is flimsy and obviously not the movie's main point.
>2. what did the lady in the radiator represent?
Reminder that this is a question that cannot be answered conclusively, and whoever attempts to do so would sound like a midwit by ignoring the scene's open-ended nature.
One of the true elements of intelligence is being comfortable not just with complexity, but with ambiguity as well-- accepting the fact that some interpretations are fluid rather than autistically airtight.
>this is a question that cannot be answered conclusively, and whoever attempts to do so would sound like a midwit
here's one of the issues I have with current day posters, and I do believe it comes from the reddit "gotcha!" types:
I'm not fricking challenging the guy. I'm also not shitting on him when I say I disagree with his interpretation. I'm not saying my interpretation is objectively correct. I'm engaging in a fricking dialogue with the dude, and perhaps, by discussing it, we'll both experience new ideas and come away from this thread with slightly more with slightly more than with which we entered.
Yes, it's often expressed in reddit and I associate it with an autistic/fanboyish self-image issue.
These types are invested into a given movie for instance, but they mistakenly cling to a self-image that is very insecure: they cannot deal with the fact that their take is wrong or not the only possible one, and as you said instead of profiting from seeing it from another pov they try to turn it into a pathetic contest.
So for instance when a certain movie is discussed they try to come up with remarks such as "only a moron wouldn't see that the lady in the radiator actually means a fairy trope", which is perfectly valid (I honestly just came up with it), but by no means definitive.
Very often, what stands in the way of intelligence, insight and culture isn't objectively dumb/ignorant people, it's midwits because they mistake their shrill, narrow views for unassailable facts.
i'm
, i appreciate your attitude of coming here to attempt dialogue and i replied earnestly.
if you are
my issue with that reply is that you started the dialogue by needless insults and hyperbole (which is par for the course on Cinemaphile).
Marge moments lole
It's what movies confused the most people, not the objectively most difficult to understand.
It's real easy to underestimate how dumb people can be.
You think the people on twitter talking about marvel are moronic, or some of the people here are dumb.
The thing is, Cinemaphile and twitter are mostly text based and there are a bunch of people that are very very very close to illiterate. Not from lack of education, or from an intellectual disability. They just find reading and writing to be hard, the way many people find maths to be hard. Because their IQ is low. But they know enough to get by or play vidya or use the computer.
At the same time, you underestimate how smart even a moronic human is. A downie is going to mog most animals. Every single human has a vast and beautiful universe inside their head.
So they can enjoy all the same kinos we do, but when they watch something like the matrix it's going to feel like when neo gets kung-fu uploaded into his head. Brain maxing out it's power as all this profound information and artistic expression surges through their neurons. For us, watching something like the matrix and drawing out deeper themes, allusions, references, etc than the dumbass perceives is easy, it's walking and chewing bubble gum.
The dumbass is going to get confused, but he's enjoying himself and trying to figure out what's happening. So good for him.
And the smartest among us here are going to be unfathomably dumb for some people. There are people who read every translation of Homer and think
>hmmm, none of these are quite right, let me take a crack at it
and then translate it their way and get published.
Tldr frick you idiot
lol this is so fricking stupid. copypasta material even
there is a film about israeli sorcery called π that is very difficult to understand
It's not confusing the guy is a complete shizo and is making shit up. It actually has a ton of negative stereotypes.
>Fifht club literally explains everything at the end with cut scenes, flash backs and all of that
>"Confusing"
tf
How did Jack get out of the cooler?
Ghosts
danny
stop acting like you understand the shining when you dont.
are these two frames from the actual movie?
yes
I don't know why that's two versions of that picture but i would guess Kubrick shot the sequence in two different occasions for reshoot purposes and didn't realize it wasn't the very same pic. i'd never noticed anyways
It’s just a reflection off the glass on the frame idiots
>most confusing movies ever
>all Nolan shit
People who have been stultified by capeshit and assorted dreck will initially react against these movies as being "confusing" when they're usually just subtler or open-ended or whatever.
The fact it's a letterboxd article says a lot since the mental and literal 12 yos who use the site are still learning about not just movies, but narrative and life in general.
>learning
They’re not learning anything. They’re just watching movies while checking their phones so they can post a meme or something to get a thousand likes from the other morons
Some of them are.
The issue is that the audience became too widespread. Ppl used to Bollywood and/or capeshit aren't necessarily prepared to watch, say, Take Shelter or The Exorcism of Emily Rose, just to mention 2 movies that some find ambiguous).
There's a question of either inexperience (12 yos whose movie and life knowledge is still very limited) and insight, which is linked to education and cognition in general.
Instead of bottlenecks to make people either grow intellectually or stay in their lane, now there is a dysgenic "no dumbass left behind" mindset. That is terrible in that it doesn't encourage the audience to think harder, so there are articles such as this one.
>The Exorcism of Emily Rose
that's like one of the biggest normie hits. I was a teenager when this movie was released and LITERALLY everyone saw it and liked it
It was a box office hit, and its ambiguity is often either an insurmountable aspect that frustrates some normies or even an aspect that flies past their understanding-- some don't notice it at all and see the movie as a conventional Blumhouse product a la The Conjuring instead of being open to interpretation.
>instead of being open to interpretation.
it's been over 15 years since i saw it, Can you elaborate?
There are clues to assume that she either was possessed or actually pretending to , starting with the very first scene (blood on the barbed wire).
i might have to rewatch that. Torrenting it rn. Becaue i remembered the movie as implying clearly that she really was possesed. In opposition to real life case where she clearly wasn't (but not because demons aren't real)
It will be like rewatching the Sixth Sense when we change our focus and start seeing clues
> i remembered the movie as implying clearly that she really was possesed.
That's the beauty of it. It works on a different level all the time while we focus on the surface narrative. Same thing with Welles' noir Touch of Evil, which I won't spoil in case you haven't seen it.
i saw touch of evil, awesome movie. Might rewatch that too.
Yes, besides being inherently kino from the technical pov, its curveball ending completely upends the moral direction it had taken so far. It's a brilliant, counterintuitive cautionary lesson that many viewers don't seem to fully grasp.
QRD? Never watched it
>slightly abstract imagery
>no exposition dumps
>“it was a mindfrick dude”
I fricking hate normies so much
>Shutter island
>inception
>tenet
>no exposition dumps
Lol wut
>no eraserhead
what a peasant
>nolan on there 4 times
brainlet bros...
ive tried to watch inception lime 6 times the first few i just kept falling aeep then i was just too high to understand and then i tried forcing myself thru it and still got side tracked. not sure if its that deep or just that shitty of a movie
I saw it in the cinema 12 years ago and it's shit. It's about people entering each other's dreams and dreams within dreams or something. It's not exactly difficult to understand, but it's just stupid and poorly directed. It's like two and a half hours of the plane scene starring le shiggy leonardo.
It’s overrated and the enormous amount of exposition in the first half of the movie is mind-numbing, but it has some good action scenes
you are MAD coping if you claim to have fully understood all his movies on the first watch. they are indeed rather confusing and they will confuse you at least once
>seeing cloud atlas
>boomer couple sitting in front of me
>every time it switches time periods, old dude throws up his hands and says, "what movie is this now?"
>"why do they keep switching movies?"
>eventually they leave halfway through
>eventually they leave halfway through
Based. This is like some kind of ancestral innate wisdom. They dont know why but they instinct made them leave the shit movie. Same as low iq Black folk being homophobic and tribalistic. They really cant grasp why, but something tells them is the right thing to do. Based boomers.
>lack intelligence to understand a movie
>get annoyed because you're confused
>protect the ego by leaving, while stating ostentatiously: WHAT A DUMB FRICKING MOVIE
>dissonance reduced
>you can maintain the image you have of yourself as 180IQ individual with a wicked sense of humour
Of course, thats why I put the examples of Black folk being tribalistic. Its a midwit bell curve. The boomers left because they were too stupid to like Cloud Atlas. Smart people leave because they are too smart to like that turd movie.
And btw, the smart people left and went home to watch Speed Racer, the only good movie those trannies ever made.
Based Boomers that movie was a waste of time.
Every Time I watched Drive people left in the first 20 mins always had an empty theatre. I must have watched that movie 20 times that year. Always empty.
Who did it?
The homosexual twin brothers
There's huge youtube channels with billions of views that are like "[------ ]ENDING EXPLAINED." Like who needs the end of Jurassic World explained to them
time travel in avengers makes no sense
either incomprehensible or bad writing
occams razor has it as bad writing
Stop posting clickbait bullshit sites, moron.
The only confusing movie here is Mulholland Drive and that’s because it’s supposed to be an incomprehensible dream realm that only David Lynch understands
if not these than what is the actual most confusing movie (that has a reasonable explenation)
upstream color
Movies can only be objectively confusing if they are bad. TENET belongs on this list because it's a really awful movie. But for the other 14, viewers are just too smoothbrained to understand the themes and meanings. A "confusing" movie can be one where the characters do things that make ZERO fricking sense (nuWars, Poltergeist, Gladiator) or where the story itself makes zero fricking sense (nuJurassic Park with the fricking military raptors, Alien Covenant etc)
There's quite a high number of people who don't "care" about movies. They don't watch them carefully remembering everything and following along at every point. They just vaguely pay attention and forgetting elements 10 seconds later. For this type of viewer some movies are confusing because the plot point is only explained once and, after missing that moment, it's hard to guess what is going on.
That's always been my assumption - that most people go to the movies for popcorn flix. But even if you look at it as a "brain turned off" situation, I don't get what'd be confusing about the matrix.
It seems akin to being confused by Independance Day. Actually, that one's probably more of a thinker with the inexplicable 90s-style hackermind at work.
It's confusing to zoomers' adhd ridden brains.
Think about how dumb the average person is. Roughly half the population is even more stupid than that. Normalgays got filtered by the Star Wars prequels.
Shutter island is only confusing for a while, it clears it all up pretty definitively at the end.
you don't even know what the word "confusing" means. That's how moronic you are. The whole thread is just fricking embarrasing. You don't even realize how much you're exposing yourself as insecure morons.
most of those movies are by design confusing. That's their inherent quality (in some of them intentional, in some thanks to director's moronness). If you say stuff like
>LOOOOL what was confusing about Mulholland Drive or Shining? They are like the least confusing movies ever lol.
that says a lot about you
>Tenet
How? The movie stops every half hour to explain to you what's going on, what you just saw, and what you're about to see. It explains itself tediously from beginning to end. Wtf
Lol, nolan loves explaining things. Almost half of inception was one long exposition dump. When everyone at my school kept saying they didn’t get it, I felt like I was surrounded by morons
inception at least has a pretty clear concept behind the movie. Tenet is just moronic therefore a priori confusing.
I agree that tenet was more confusing than inception, but I wouldn’t even say confusing, I’d say it was confused, lol. Lynch shouldn’t be on the list, either. His movies don’t have anything to “get” really. There isn’t a literal meaning behind every signifier. Its just a vibe.
it does, and yet the stakes in each scene is stillconfusing. i don't care to be called a brainlet over this. the premise of the movie is completely flawed
don't bother. You're talking to insecure morons. Even when the movie is comically poorly made (like tenet) and confusing just because of that they would never admit that. They can't even admit that mulholland drive is confusing. Meanwhile
Contained within the original DVD release is a card titled "David Lynch's 10 Clues to Unlocking This Thriller". The clues are:
Pay particular attention in the beginning of the film: At least two clues are revealed before the credits.
Notice appearances of the red lampshade.
Can you hear the title of the film that Adam Kesher is auditioning actresses for? Is it mentioned again?
An accident is a terrible event—notice the location of the accident.
Who gives a key, and why?
Notice the robe, the ashtray, the coffee cup.
What is felt, realized and gathered at the Club Silencio?
Did talent alone help Camilla?
Note the occurrences surrounding the man behind Winkie's.
Where is Aunt Ruth?
>matrix
>confusing
maybe if you're a schizoid with troony'ism
you don't know what the word "confusing" means.
maybe a case for the matrix sequels being confusing could be made. personally it's more that i didn't care what was going on than i was confused. the only good thing about the matrix is the first 30 minutes.
The only movie on that list that I would even remotely consider “confusing” is Mullholland Drive. Some of those movies outright explain anything that would be considered confusing like fricking Shutter Island just dropping all pretense in the last 10 minutes
Calling a movie "confusing" is often linked to
-individual stupidity
-expecting a linear narrative
-expecting a conclusive, neatly packaged payoff/ending-- some movies are deliberately ambiguous
-lack of contextual knowledge (scientific or historical, for instance)
-lack of attention
There's nothing wrong with rewatching and/or reading interpretations of a movie. In the case of movies that make reference to specific information, it also makes sense getting better informed--- for instance, learning more about the housing bubble after watching The Big Short.
Essentially, the worst kind of ignorance is being dismissive, that is, trying to place the blame on the movie instead of making an effort and seeing it from a more informed/empathetic angle.
>There's nothing wrong with rewatching and/or reading interpretations of a movie.
why would you that if the movie is not confusing? LMAO. I'm going on Cinemaphile. Too much stupidity on Cinemaphile today.
Your question makes no sense either way, you've posted 2 or 3 other comments above that sound weirdly triggered for some reason.
>that sound weirdly triggered for some reason.
i'm triggered because i'm losing the last place on the internet where you can, from time to time, discuss things. It's getting dumber every year after 2016 elections. Borderline unlurkable right now.
>Your question makes no sense
why?
unironically turn off the computer, go outside and take a walk
i've spent over two hours in the woods today foraging for mushrooms. That's still not an argument.
You just come across as insecure.
Your question made no sense because there are several reasons to rewatch a movie regardless of how confusing or not it seems. Knowledge rewards focus and attention, not spastic overreactions.
you also read interpretations and educate yourself about the housing market bubble. WHY? Something was unclear for you in the big short? Lol. Fricking normie midwit moron. You probably got quadruple vaxxed and think global warming is real lmao.
Weak and a bit desperate tbh, hope you get better soon
>primer isnt on the list
>shutter island
>fight club
>arrival
If you had any confusion from these, you are confirmed a 80 iq brainlet.
This, I haven't seem arrival but what are you supposed to be confused about in shutter Island and fight club? They both have scenes literally explaining to the viewer what happened.
arrival is confusing from the storytelling point of view. It sets up a sci fi movie but doesn't deliver on that premise.
>get the letterboxed account they said, that's where the real "cinephiles" hangout
Predestination was not confusing it was just fricking stupid
shutter island is the least subtle film i've ever seen
Nothing. People are idiots.
Shutter Island, Arrival and Interstellar are all straight forward.
I'll be honest. The last scene of The Shining that shows Jack Nicholson's character in the old photo confuses the frick out of me.
See
there's a few shots of that hallway throughout the movie and that picture of jack in 1921 can only be seen in the end.
the original treatment of the shining (https://docs.google.com/viewerng/viewer?url=https://cinephiliabeyond.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/shining-treatment1.pdf&hl) has the whole scrapbook subplot that was cut from the final film.
That's perfectly fine. The endings of movies such as The Shining, Triangle or Tim Burton's Planet of the Apes are meant to be paradoxical.
This
type of self-consciously shrill remark is just one person expressing his opinion, which is no more valid than others since the movie does not conclusively explain it and neither has Kubrick.
In fact, it's a weak attempt because it would imply Jack looked like the owner from the start, which makes no sense as we see him before he sets foot inside the Overlook.
The explanation he tried to rabidly criticize
is much better.
Kubrick explained the ending, dumb c**t. Jack is the hotel caretaker reincarnated.
ah, there is that fantastic attitude of dialogue and new ideas and mutual gain again! truly a shame you are persecuted on Cinemaphile
2001 isn’t confusing if you were saw the beginning. The monkeys touch the monolith, gain sentience and therefore become humans. At the end, David interacts with another monolith and ascends to a higher level of consciousness. He literally sees his old form dying and is reborn as the new godlike child. It really isn’t difficult to understand.
You’re telling me the website that spends more time shitting on “filmbro movies” than they do actually watching movies, are confused by movies that don’t explain everything to you like you’re a baby? No fricking way, I’m so shocked!
Mulholland Drive is the only one that's really confusing.
i watched the movie with my roommate, once he pointed out that the first part was a fantasy and there's a switch to reality at some point, the movie fell into place for me. i don't have a solid grasp on all the david Lynch clues (
)
however
For me, I believe the first half of the film is Naomi Watts post-death heaven. The second half is reality and how she came to die.
>Director explained the ending
>Not true
why are people like this?
This is the perfect top 15 overrated movies of all time list.
It is but 2001 should be number 1.
I'm Thinking of Ending Things was confusing? Literally how? They spell it out for you in the last 10 minutes.
When people call most of these movies "confusing", what they seem to actually mean is that they're elliptical, that is, the explanation isn't clearly presented.
Sometimes these movies are also open-ended, which can be mistaken for "confusing" inasmuch as there was an expectation of an ending that eliminated all other possibilities.
I saw Inception with one of my bros who is about 70 IQ and this list checks out.
What's confusing about Shutter Island? It's all clearly explained at the end.
>Is called Jack
>Shouts here's Johnny
>Elaborates no further
>Freezes
????
been a while since ive seen nocturnal animals but i remember it being pretty straight forward
Yeah. Another meaning of "confusing" in this thread's context is movies whose endings are clear but left in a state of narrative suspension, so their supposed meaning leaves some viewers expecting something more obvious to them. A similar example: the ending of The Lobster.
WTF is going on bros.
The Matrix Ending Explained (44:56)
What is confusing about Shutter Island? It's about as straight-forward a twist as you can get. Arrival is also stupidly simple.
This list was made by fricking morons. They'd have an aneurysm if they watched Inland Empire or anything Jodorowsky
what's confusing about the shining? how did he get out of the fridge?
>how did he get out of the fridge?
Most likely explanation: the hotel's paranormal entities open it for him
I'm a room temperature IQ brainlet and none of these movies confused me.
Only Tenet is confusing, since its supposed to be. If you didnt understand any of the other films, youre literally an ape.
The only confusing thing about The Shining is the amount of undeserved praise it gets.