Ambiguous films

Two of my favourite films ever made are 12 Monkeys and Pan's Labyrinth. After thinking about the nature of storytelling for awhile, I've come to the conclusion that part of the reason I derive so much enjoyment from these films is because in each case, there are at least two valid ways of interpreting the film - all the sci-fi/fantasy plot elements were just hallucinations occurring in the main character's head, or everything depicted in the film really happened. Similarly, V for Vendetta (both the comic and, to a lesser extent, the film, though the comic was better) leaves open for discussion the question whether the title character is mad or rational, benevolent or a menace. I'm looking forward to viewing David Lynch's Mulholland Dr. because I'm told it has the same open-ended structure as the above-listed works; I'm growing convinced that great art shouldn't supply audiences with all the answers, and that it's more important for it to ask provocative questions. Are there any other films (or, for that matter, works in any other medium) that you consider to be similarly open-ended? I'm curious to read about what people have enjoyed.

Pan's Labyrinth is an amazing film. My sister bought me the special edition DVD two years ago for Christmas. I'll admit, I hadn't heard of it. I watched it the first time, not so much out of interest, but to use my Christmas present so that I could comment on it. I was incredibly impressed. It was the perfect fairy tale movie, told with a general cynicism towards life that I could identify with. The ending was one of the best ever - completely unexpected and not Hollywood. We need more films like this, directed by people who aren't afraid to credit the intellectual capacity of the audience. Steven Spielburg makes great movies that always bring in the cash, but he doesn't trust the audience to understand what he's saying, and often diminishes the power of his films (like Schindler's List) by over explaining the stuff he thinks is important. When directors just make the film, with the art in mind, and when they don't condescend the audience, the movie is a winner. Pan's Labyrinth is a winner. It makes you think. It actually allows you to think. I like to think. I like Pan's Laybrinth.

I hated Mulholland Dr.

Found it to be a pretentious pile of drivel. I like films that are slightly ambiguous, both in the conclusions and the shades of gray that are throw throughout a film. Pan's Labyrinth is a good example of a film where the ending isn't 100% clear and if it had been 100% clear, it wouldn't have been as good. I think part of this has to do with what Garland is talking about in that a LOT of times, directors and writers underestimate the intelligence of their viewers. It's kinda insulting.

If you liked Pan's Labyrinth, the same director made an earlier movie "The Devil's Backbone" which has all the same strengths. When he's allowed to be creative (go away Hellboy and Blade II), Del Toro is one of the best story tellers in the business.

Mm, I love The Devil's Backbone. I thought it was just as good as Pan's Labyrinth, which is pretty damn awesome.

The Orphanage had some ambiguous attributes to it, I guess. I really love that movie as well.

Many of David Lynch's other films are very ambiguous and open ended like Mulholland Dr. My favourite of his is Eraserhead, and I whole-heartedly recommend it.

Donnie Darko?

Eternal Sunshine is a pretty artistic watch. I dunno about open-ended interpretation. But with a weird set-up akin to Momento, it definitely doesn't give you everything

Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind certainly has an ambiguous ending, which you can interpret as being optimistic or somewhat bleak. Mulholland Drive is another good example, the film lends itself to many differing explanations and in contrast to Miriel I think it's a work of genius and maybe the best film of this decade so far. Perhaps Rashomon is the ultimate in ambiguity, a film which helped pioneer the idea of differing viewpoints on a situation, so you're left wondering where the truth lies.

I thought Mulholland Dr. was excellent. I'd describe it as suspenseful, differant, & an ultimately surreal film. Some bits at times seem out of place and irrational, but this was purposely put there because, It's like the whole movie is a dream. If you are looking for a film to see as you stated above, then this is really one you should watch. Whether you love or hate it, you will leave the film with a strange feeling. I can't really describe it. However, I think its one of the only times I've come away and saying that the director really put himself in the movie. Just like you got an insight to his imagination.

I saw The Wrestler recently and it had quite the ambiguous ending, but I thought it was a cop out as I do with most ambiguous endings. Almost as if the screenwriter and/or the director are too afraid of giving a solid ending for fear of the audience disliking the outcome. *cough* The Sopranos. *cough* Pan's Lab made it work though. Brilliant film. Big Fish sort of had an ambiguous ending. I say sort of (SPOILER)because it's possible that it was all in the old man's head. Possible, but not likely.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Garland

Pan's Labyrinth is an amazing film. My sister bought me the special edition DVD two years ago for Christmas. I'll admit, I hadn't heard of it. I watched it the first time, not so much out of interest, but to use my Christmas present so that I could comment on it. I was incredibly impressed. It was the perfect fairy tale movie, told with a general cynicism towards life that I could identify with. The ending was one of the best ever - completely unexpected and not Hollywood. We need more films like this, directed by people who aren't afraid to credit the intellectual capacity of the audience. Steven Spielburg makes great movies that always bring in the cash, but he doesn't trust the audience to understand what he's saying, and often diminishes the power of his films (like Schindler's List) by over explaining the stuff he thinks is important. When directors just make the film, with the art in mind, and when they don't condescend the audience, the movie is a winner. Pan's Labyrinth is a winner. It makes you think. It actually allows you to think. I like to think. I like Pan's Laybrinth.

---

Yeah, I agree completely, to the point where it actually may be my favourite film ever made. I was actually up for about five hours the night I first watched the film just thinking about aspects of the plot. A lot of the meaning doesn't really come together in your head until you've thought about it for awhile, because del Toro doesn't spell everything out.

I have The Devil's Backbone on DVD, but haven't watched it yet; I'm very much looking forward to it. I'll probably check out The Orphanage at some point as well; I've heard good things. Told it has some similarities to The Turn of the Screw, which come to think of it is another good example of an open-ended story (although I found the writing to be completely impenetrable).

Also yeah, Big Fish was pretty awesome. I find Burton to be generally somewhat a style-over-substance director, but that was a solid film all around, and the style is very well executed in any case.

As for the other recommendations, I'll definitely take those into consideration; thanks.

I completely agree about writing stories that ask the audience to come to their own conclusions of things. Pan's Labyrinth and Big Fish were two great films, as well as K-Pax. I could never really get into Mulholland Drive. It bored me more than intrigued me.

Its because Hollywood insists on explaining everything and generally write stories that treat the audience like simpletons that I stopped watching movies.

The director's cut of Blade Runner:

(SPOILER)Not only is there the remaining question after the film of whether Deckard is a replicant, but the director's cut gets rid of the cop-out ending of the original film to leave Rachel's future unresolved.

Total Recall had a very ambiguous ending but no matter which way you spun it I don't think it really mattered if it was all a dream or real. I personally like that approach rather than leaving us anxious for answers.

For instance the Usual Suspects and its infamous twist ending was poorly handled as we are asking more questions at the end of the film than at the start. I had invested an hour and a half into this film and there is absolutely no conclusion to what actually had happend. God dammit I hate that movie. So overrated.

Great endings are ones that leave us wanting to know more but still leaving us satsified with what we already know. I'm sure everyone who watched the Breakfast Club would die to know what happened the next day but our imaginations can fill in those answers. Same thing with Dawn of the Dead, I would love to know what happened next but in all seriousness it wouldn't matter as everything before it had concluded.

I didn't really have any additional questions at the end of The Usual Suspects; I felt everything was pretty much summed up with the revelation that (SPOILER)Soze was Kint, and a master manipulator.

I should watch the director's cut of Blade Runner one of these days.

2001: A Space Oddyssee is one of the most ambiguous movies I've ever seen, though I really thought it was detrimental. The movie itself doesn't really give a whole lot to go on for you to fill in the pieces, and the ending just kind of happens. I guess it's supposed to make more sense when cross-referenced with the novel (written at the same time as the movie production) though.

The Usual Suspects has one of the best endings ever! I thought it was a perfect example of pulling the rug out from under the feet of the audience. Though in contrast to what The Man says: (SPOILER)Verbal is not necessarily Keyser Soze, though he could well be. Keyser Soze may not even exist as they say. But what is true is that he has been telling a load of lies and Verbal isn't just some petty crook. I do like the story that Gabriel Byrne thought that his character was Keyser Soze and was very cross when he found out that he wasn't :D

The Usual Suspects is simply a waste of time to watch. I invested myself in the characters and story and they think they can get away from concluding the story simply because of the twist they threw in there? I honestly thought the movie was going to continue for at least another half an hour but it just ended. Maybe some people like the way they handled it but I wanted answers.

What questions did you honestly have left? (SPOILER)Kint planned everything perfectly, and everyone who could have contradicted his story was dead. It doesn't really matter what the truth was; the important point is what a fantastic con artist he is.

I'm surprised no one has mentioned Jacob's Ladder. Haven't watched, but want to.

I didn't think Jacob's Ladder was really that ambiguous. It doesn't really hold your hand a lot, but it's pretty easy to draw a conclusion from everything that happens, especially the ending.

I'll add a very old one : Stalker(1979)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hsu

I didn't think Jacob's Ladder was really that ambiguous. It doesn't really hold your hand a lot, but it's pretty easy to draw a conclusion from everything that happens, especially the ending.

---

I figured he meant from the "everything in your head" thing.

Yet another suggestion: Hidden/Cache

(SPOILER)The film never resolves the issue of who is sending the tapes and drawings to the lead characters' house. A few suggestions are made, especially in the final scene, but ultimately the main question remains unanswered.