I have watched quite a few films in my life, and the more I watch them, the more I wonder, what is the point? I mean, sure, there are plenty of movies that have obvious answers to your questions, but sometimes, a picture comes around that makes you ask more questions than the answers you receive. It’s these films that make or break a career. Some may be considered the greatest thing ever, and some may be considered the worst thing ever, but they’ll all end up making you scratch your head in. Warning: this list contains spoilers.
I had to put this on the list, not because it’s the most confusing movie ever, but because I fear the backlash did I not. My opinion? No. The reason is because I already knew the big twist of the movie when I came into it. That ruined the experience for me, but Edward Norton made up for that. Still, it is a confusing movie, and far superior to the same director, David Fincher’s Se7en. Anyone who has seen Fight Club appreciates its inclusion here. If you haven’t seen it – the last few moments will make you realize why it is here.
Walking talking rabbits, time travel, schizophrenia, bizarre therapy sessions – this film has it all. But the one thing it is missing is clarity. If you have seen this film you probably love it. Gyllenhaal gives a superb performance in what is definitely one of the most unusual films for its time. This is a must-see film – regardless of how difficult it is to understand.
Is it a nightmare or an actual view of a post-apocalyptic world? Set in an industrial town in which giant machines are constantly working, spewing smoke, and making noise that is inescapable, Henry Spencer lives in a building that, like all the others, appears to be abandoned. The lights flicker on and off, he has bowls of water in his dresser drawers, and for his only diversion he watches and listens to the Lady in the Radiator sing about finding happiness in heaven. Henry has a girlfriend, Mary X, who has frequent spastic fits. Mary gives birth to Henry’s child, a frightening looking mutant, which leads to the injection of all sorts of sexual imagery into the depressive and chaotic mix.
This film is quite interesting. The set up is great because it’s a concept that seems to have never really been done before. The confusion of it all is in the fact that it’s told out of chronological order, due to the character’s short term memory loss. This is not the first film with disordered time (think Pulp Fiction) but unlike Tarantino’s masterpiece, Memento is firmly grounded in a mental problem. The confusion is not through artistic direction but through an aberration of the character’s mental state. If you haven’t seen this film please do. You won’t regret it.
A man known as Masaru Daisato has inherited the duty of protecting Japan against various monsters. He is able to grow several stories high, through the power of electricity. However, he is regarded as an outcast by his fellow citizens, and suffers under burden of a heroic heritage which overshadows his own less-than-shining accomplishments as a monster fighter. To make matters worse, in his personal life he is failing as well as both a father and a grandson. In the end, his failures and doubts reach a hallucinogenic apotheosis. Now you know why this film deserves a place on this list.
Two film makers stand out as the masters of the unusual – Kubrick and David Lynch. This is a definite cult classic and while Stephen King may not have been impressed, Kubrick managed to take a fairly typical horror story and turn it into a bizarre film – and while you may not think about it upon first watching, it definitely is bizarre. There is very little dialogue, and what you see leads itself to many different interpretations. Frankly, how normal is a film that includes a lift spewing blood?
David Lynch has made some straight forward films, but then there are films like this – the work for which he will be always remembered. This movie gets a lot of credit for being really confusing and it is no wonder – even Lynch doesn’t know what it means! Characters are played by multiple Actresses, an insane amount of identity issues occur, and theories suggest that the first 3/4′s of the film are all just a dream sequence. Twin Peaks was Lynch’s great TV show, and even though this was going to be Twin Peak’s successor, instead it came out in movie format, and so any questions that might have been answered are left in the dust.
This is the most underrated Science Fiction film I’ve ever seen. Filmed for 7,000 dollars, and using a cast that you could count on one hand, Primer was Shane Carruth’s attempt at a re-envisioning of the tried and true plot of time travel. Primer is an anomaly for confusing movies, because there is not one person in the universe who will fully comprehend it. Carruth didn’t know what he was doing while he was writing it (which brings to mind Lynch’s Inland Empire). It just sort of came – so to speak. It’s confusing to the writers, the actors, the characters, and the audience – intentionally.
Thomas A. Anderson is a man living two lives. By day he is an average computer programmer and by night a malevolent hacker known as Neo. Neo has always questioned his reality but the truth is far beyond his imagination. Neo finds himself targeted by the police when he is contacted by Morpheus, a legendary computer hacker branded a terrorist by the government. Morpheus awakens Neo to the real world, a ravaged wasteland where most of humanity have been captured by a race of machines which live off of their body heat and imprison their minds within an artificial reality known as the Matrix. As a rebel against the machines, Neo must return to the Matrix and confront the agents, super powerful computer programs devoted to snuffing out Neo and the entire human rebellion. The real question in this film is: what is real?
In the middle of this wonderful film occurs a 15 minute interlude of psychedelic colors and strange music (not unlike a Windows screen saver). What the hell Kubrick was thinking no one will ever know – but despite the bizarre aspects to this film, he will be forever remembered for giving us some of the best (and most true to life) pictures of what life in space might really be like.
I <3 Ed Norton!
Any film with him is always awesome!
The Incredible Hulk
Exactly what I was gonna' say. That film sucked greasy ramrod.
gosh. really. that was confusing. haha
fight club was an AWESOME movie.. But confusing i agree
LOVE IT! …like a little scratch on the roof of your mouth that would heal if only you could stop tonguing it,
I've seen a couple of these, and most of them I gave up on 15 minutes in. I think I'll try it again sometime…
I kinda like the shining
Great list, some of my favroute movies on here – I must admit though that I am a Kubrick fanboi lol
inception, anyone?
its definitely not as confusing as memento, Nolan's earlier movie. Inception is complex, but not very confusing because all actions happen linearly. thats what i think.
my friend robin meade is on cnn right now talking about that movie — but didnt it just come out like…this weekend? if youre right, and its all linear, then unelss it was like lost highway, i dont see how it could be *that* confusing.
momento, on the other hand– that movie took me over 3 hours to watch because i backed up the dvd about 37 times.
and, lala — (or anyone) do you happen to have the limited edition dvd, with all the sundance documentaries, and dissecting the scene clips, and the portfolio and the original short story?
i dont typically get those special editions, but a friend gave this to me for a birthday — very interesting
well, its not like the story moves in a straight line… But unlike (as I mentioned) Memento, this movie doesn't shuttle between the past and present as frequently and in such a jumbled-up manner. The movie is definitely not overly simple, but the dialog that lead to the actions justify and are in accordance with each other. The storyline is complex because it is a completely new concept that is going on in the movie and people take some time to get accustomed to the whole feel of it. I'll still say its not very complex though. Maybe it's because I like seeing obscure and confusing movies…
maybe I went to the movie expecting too much complexity from what I'd heard and from the reputation of a certain Mr. Nolan that I found it 'not too twisted'. Whatever it is, do watch the movie on the big screen. The cinematography is amazing!
As for the DVD, its pretty difficult to find the limited editions here as well. Bad luck.
i like jumbled up…..
i have to goto work—but check back here in like 9 hours — i have a question about 3 of his others and how they tie in to each other………
Sure sure. I'll be waiting. You day is getting started and mine about to finish.
have a good day.
inception was complex, put the plot was very straightforward and concise
—-lala — now were switched — 8:15pm here, where you're probably going to be starting yours soon. —
i realized something a time back about all his movies — i thought i erased the 3 in my post, it was a typo
basically i was wondering if i was missing something — its not that difficult of a catch, but obscure enough that i immediately began to try to force a reason for it.
—nolan has 11 films under his belt (counting inception)
——-7 films released, 1 in pre-roduction, and 3 short films.
——-concentrate on the placement of batman begins.
—in chronological order, tarantella (sh.story), larceny (ss), doodlebug (ss), following, memento, insomnia, batman begins, the prestige, the dark night, inception, and (in production) the untitled batman sequel.
–its likely i just gave it away — but heres what ive noticed.
——-of his 15 primary (and repeat) actors ((note heath ledger, katie holmes, aaron
wow. now thats quite a fix you've got me here in. i haven't seen insomnia and the only short movie by Nolan I've seen in doodlebug, but boy, did this make me think.
i personally feel that this is just coincidence. Batman Begins was the switch that made Nolan from a great director to one of the best today. and most of the actors in section b were in his movies doing minor roles… whereas most of those in section a have had a major role in the movies. I'm really lost on this. Maybe I need to reflect on this a little more. But as far as I can see, there is no pattern here. Hopefully I'll figure something here and reply again soon. By the way, do let me know what patterns you were looking for.
it was confusing because there were sooooooo many plot holes
awful movie, two thumbs down
What about Shutter Island?
I could not get into Mulholland Drive enough to try to understand it.
Such a shame because it is a fantastic film! If you liked twin peaks give Mulholland Drive a decent go.
seriously no pulp fiction? thats confusing…but then again its only because tarantino messed about with the sequencing
Eraserhead gets my vote. I first saw it when I was about 21 and it confused the ***** out of me. I've seen it a couple of times since and still can't work it out. Having said that, the whole atmosphere and the music of Eraserhead is so unsettling that I get uncomfortable viewing it. If that's what Lynch was aiming for, he succeeded (with me anyway).
with me too. i saw it when i was 22. i'm 24 now. so i guess i'll wait a while before i watch the movie again. Lynch succeeded with me too. I found the movie deeply intriguing. and the acting, ah the acting. it does justice to the direction. The story? Someday I hope to understand it.
After just view this list I went downstairs and scrolled around in my Free Movies! section of On Demand (’cause why not? free movies) and I found Eraserhead. I only got to watch about–I don’t know–around ten minutes in because my friends were over and they kept asking stupid questions and making inane comments. I am SO seeing it tomorrow. It’s my birthday tomorrow so I will always remember the first time I ever saw Eraserhead. xD Pretty stupid I know.
Ya, ironically, I hadn't seen it when I wrote the list, but watched it the same day afterward. Ya, it's really confusing, especially the ending. But 2001 still takes the cake by a long shot for me. What does any of it mean? I'm a huge Kubrick fan, so it's cool to see my list get published for a first! But still, even if I'm a fan of Kubrick more than the rest (although I like Lynch a lot too, as well as David Fincher and Shane Carruth,) I just can't wrap my mind around Kubrick. Even technical aspects confuse me, like "How on earth did Kubrick do that?"
I suppose that's why they're called visionaries.
Eraserhead was about Lynch's fear of having a baby that was deformed, disabled, etc…
Hell of a way to get that message across!
Southland tales is quite confusing, doesn't help its from the director of donnie darko.
If u say confusing one more time i think i’ll puke.
confusing
I would add Avatar.
James Cameron spent 15 years making this movie and that story was the best he could do????
Wasn't Avatar just another version of Pocahontas?
didn't Pocahontas come out after Avatar was written?
If you really want to get picky, yes, but James Cameron still hadn't released ANY details on the story, and it was a VERY early draft. Even two years before the film was released, the only information released to the public was that it was about the discovery of a planet called Pandora.
wasn't pocahontas a version of Dances with Wolves?
no…. it was clearly a remake of fern gully
How the hell is Avatar confusing? Were you confused by Snow White, too?
It's not the movie that's confusing but the fact that its crap plot was the sum of 15 years of writing.
and referring to all the smurfs as "na'vis" didnt help much either
Oh. I see what you mean. It seemed like a very simple plot.
With all the money being used to make the movie, he didn’t want to gamble with the script. I’d say the movie turned out pretty nicely, it’s goal was to entertain and many people found it entertaining
i understand not wanting to put one director on this list 3 times — and, mulholland drive and eraserhead were both super-weird, but one of the most confusing movies ive ever seen (on 1st viewing) was lost highway
right at the beginning, bill pullman hears "dick laurent is dead" on intercom, and clicks button.
at the end, pullman says "dick laurent is dead" and hears the intercom click on the other end.
all the while the same sirens sound off in the background of both scenes.
i was prepared to leave having it not make much sense.
then, due to the above, i started quickly piecing together the ties to vertigo, and
realizing the cyclical circularity of the whole thing
this was the only time ive ever stayed at the theatre, bought another movie ticket, and watched the damn thing again…..(even 25 min late for work … **sorry, grand casino!**)
ollie, ollie, ollie…haven't you learned how to stay for the next show without buying another ticket?
tsk! tsk! tsk!
haha funny
truth is, this was a slightly-delayed-reaction-meets-nicotine-addiction problem.
i meant i didnt leave the complex, not the theatre.
i watched the thing, went outside, and was talking to a friend, when i started to phase out into the deer-in-headlights zone. my friend said "whats wrong with you man?", and my only response was …. 'dick laurant is dead"….my friend asked me what in hell i was talking about, and i just said — 'yanno, i'm not really sure, but i need to go watch that again'.
if i had only had my epiphany 7 minutes earlier. oh well.
lost highway is one i still fail to get, and i'm speaking as a lynch fan (even have his collected shorts). i've been told there is a specific temporal game going on, as in "start the movie at this particular place over half-way through, watch to the end, then re-watch directly from the beginning", etc. but it didn't make it much clearer for me. i've decided it is best viewed as a nonlinear piece a bit like abstract art…..
and p.s. what's up with the author listing films they've never even seen once (revealed in a comment on eraserhead above) in a list of films that take most people several viewings to "get"? makes me doubt their commitment to the "mind*****" genre!
to your first paragraph:
"like abstract art" is precisely how to describe that movie.
and hell, i enjoy abstract art as well, even though i don't always understand it.
to your other paragraph;
i cannot imagine one single reason why someone would put an unfamiliar film on a list of films. now, in his defence, (albeit, quite weakly), he did say he was tired and wrote it fast, and didnt edit it.
which begs our next question — why write a list for *this* many people to view, quickly, and not concisly? — and i thought the list was ok — when @mom said something about not including plot synopses, i thought to myself — at least people can go look up stuff on their own. we've had a few lists here in which the author force-feeds every bit of relevant informaiton, and readers look up ***** anyway to discuss what was missed or disagreed with. on the other hand, when mom said he should have included the reason why they were confusing, well, *that* i agree with.
the list im working on currently, i have been playing with for about 5 days.
and your last sentence, there?
yes, absolutely agree.
Oh my, Number one confused me when I watched it.
Problem with 2001 is that it has some amazing scenes that don't hold up to everything else. The whole HAL scenes were terrific, but the overly long introduction and acid trip ending were a bit too much for me. People may call it artistic and beautiful, but it was a bit boring in my opinion.
i never made it past the intro.
The 'acid trip' is the attempt at visualising the jourmey through the stars and across the glaxies, and how difficult it was for the astronaut to comprehend. Read the book for a better comprehension of what its about. I'm sure if Kubrik had today's CGI it would be a lot easier to understand.
Aladdin….your spelling and sentence structure are outstanding for a 7-year old. Stick to legos and crayons for a while, though.
alpenstocks…you mean "your spelling and sentence structure IS outstanding for a 7-year old". Douchebag hypocrite.
I agree. Totally borrrrring…..
Inception isn't 100% straightforward.
Ya, but it's too recent to be put on the list. Otherwise, it might have been on the list.
was it too recent because you wrote the list before it was in post-production, or because you hadnt decided if it was confusing or not?
i havnt seen it yet, i was just wondering
sometimes its not about whether you understand a movie or not, but if you enjoy it even if you don't. for me this is true for 2001, Donnie Darko and Mulholland Drive (Top 10 movies)
I agree – 2001, Donnie Darko, and Mulholland drive are three films I didn't really get – but are three films that I love! Quality in film doesn't always equal comprehension
The first time I watched Donnie Darko, I was confused. But it was so amazing I watched it again and again and again. Now, ten viewings later, I get it. But I think it’s poetry, open to interpretration. We could argue for hours about the finer points of the film but you’ll never take away what it means to me.
I think Donnie Darko is pretty straightforward to be honest. It’s about the loss off innocence/youth. The beginning of the film see’s Donnie die, he “wakes up & weird things start happening” but really it’s a sort of pergutory that leaves clues for him to realize he’s in fact already dead. He doesn’t really cop onto these clues, either because of his mental state or because the whole fact of no young person believes there’s a chance they can go to bed and not wake up the next morning. It takes him being shot in his dream sequence/purgutory. Then the film reverts back to where it started, the fussilodge hitting the house!
That’s just my interputation though!
Great film, prob my fave!!
Some of these movies are rather straight forward: Fight Club, Matrix, especially Memento, which is just clever and intriguing but not so much confusing really. I don't know, none of these movies really stand out to me as super confusing.
I will watch Big Man Japan as I haven't seen it and it sounds like it's worth a shot.
For Primer I think there's a timeline somewhere that explains what's going on exactly, you can google it I'm sure.
1.Fight Club is confusing just because of things such as "If he's only one guy, then how could he do the things that required two people to happen?" and so forth.
2.Matrix I put because I'm still confused as to why they even made the third one. Either Wachowskis are underrated geniuses or they are overrated piles of crap. Either way, a lot of every one of the films make no sense.
3.Big Man Japan is a "curveball" movie, so if it feels straightforward, watch it all the way through before you judge.
4.Primer does not have a definite timeline because the director himself even said that he had no clue what he was doing, and that he would like to know why some of the things happen in the movie, because he doesn't know why. The movie was an experiment in moviemaking, just as the machine in the movie was an experiment.
Fight club – not confusing – dual personality
Matrix – not confusing – Inside, digital reality, out side reality
The shining – not confusing – Man goes mad due to isolation and some weird ghost/spirit activity
2001 – not confusing – Computer gains consiousness and doesn't want to die.
Mullholland Drive and Donnie Darko are confusing and I haven't seen the rest. I think you need to change about half the list/
yes ! dO Agree with yOU..
I hate to be a *****, but does anyone else think a bit of proof reading would have made a big difference to this list? The most 'confusing' thing about this was the unnecessary wordiness and the rather infuriating repetitive use of words and phrases. Just in terms of writing quality this was way under par and sounded like a high school assignment.
I was thinking the same thing!
I though it was just me and the early hour that I am reading this!
Agreed. I also feel like this list is a beginners guide to films that have a little depth to them. If that’s what you mean by confusing, maybe the addition of Fellini,Tarkovsky or even Hitch*****would be a little more practical. But in terms of confusing, I would much rather see Alejandro Joderowsky or Dusan Makavajev’s films written about. When I saw the post about confusing films, I was excited and thoroughly let down.
Hmmm, didn't notice.
Ya, I don't really have much time to write, so it was written while I was tired, and kind of rushed. I would have liked to proofread it, but I didn't even think it would be posted, so I'm sorry for any errors with repetition, but do I really need to use every word in the dictionary for "confusing"? Because that can get tiresome. Don't worry, it's not that I always get repetitive, it's just that you start to repeat yourself when you're talking about the same concept over and over. Again, I apologize for any mistakes.
@bassbait: ""but do I really need to use every word in the dictionary for "confusing"? Because that can get tiresome.""
man —- its a happy medium thing.
(and i thought the idea was great (other than the word confusing))
this is nothing but a 'for future reference' type thing, but whereas
looking for replacement words for "confusing" gets tiresome for you
reading the word "confusing" 35 times (or whatever arsnl said) gets equally tiresome for everyone else.
just keep in mind that im not criticising — hell, the fact that i even mentioned it in the first place is unlike me — but if you submit another one, it i think it would be tits if we didnt have 47 messages all saying the same thing, and not concentrating on one *****ant word. to me –if we had read 2 or 3 criticisms, that would have been cool — but after reading 7 an hour for 15 hours, it took a little away from a typically fun to read comments section.
good list anyway
even if you did leave 'lost highway' off ; )
didn't jamie have an update that announced he'd employed a copy editor?
if s/he is still working for him/the site they don't deserve their pay! nothing appears improved over the way lists were before, a simple proofread would catch this stuff…… heck, i'd do it! just because i don't capitalize in my own posts doesn't mean i can't spot grammar errors and typos.
@lo: "didn't jamie have an update that announced he'd employed a copy editor?"
yeah—joanne
at first i thought she might be on vacay, but it has happened several more times.
now, jamie didnt say she was a full time editor — maybe that explains it?
On the positive it is a fascinating subject with a lot of decent films chosen. The content is good but it was genuinely quite hard to read at times :S Sorry, my first comment came out far to cranky….
I would put The Holy Mountain for being completely confusing up to the last scene when everything makes sense.
if by everything, you mean nothing. The woman's breasts become panthers and they squirt milk at people, it makes no sense.
In the end the message was "none of this is real, you were watching a movie, go back to real life."
ya man. the last line made sense. what about the rest of the movie? And alchemy from *****? Really?
I agree the rest of the movie made no sense, but I think that was the point. The ending would have been meaningless otherwise.
i've seen 7 of the movies on the list and thoroughly enjoyed almost all of them. the only movie i didnt really enjoy was 2001. I couldn't get the concept I think. Other movies were twisted. Some less, some more… But more than that, I think it's human tendency to praise something thats beyond our comprehending level. Is it awe? Is it the fear of 'not being intellectual enough to get it'? I dont know. I say all this because I was having a discussion today morning with a friend about all this. I was talking about Finnegans Wake.
P.S. – nice list. what i like most is how you've justified your choices. I hope we dont see another brawl here.
I'd have added the Seventh seal to the list… and maybe even Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless mind. Not taking anything away from the list, but thats what I feel.
eternal sunshine wasn't confusing-it was just completely pointless.
the only thing that movie succeeded in doing was showing that Jim Carrey was capable of another decently-played dramatic role, and that Kate Winslet could effectively play a schizo *****.
The acting was great, but the story was terrible.
A freind of mine loved the book – didn't care for the movie.
Tex, that’s probably because there was no book and your friend didn’t get the movie. Check out IMDb, Charlie Kaufman wrote the screenplay and he came up with the story with Michel Gondry. There was no novel.
Way to completely miss the point of the movie.
Sunshine is a work of art. Any movie that can so cleverly strip away the complicated layers of a relationship as Eternal did is worthy of better *****ysis than just "Completely pointless".
The Seventh Seal (Det Sjunde Inseglet) is not confusing at all; if anything, it is thought provoking. A medieval knight plays chess with Death about his life, what's confusing about that? Very straightforward.
Im with u on dat one Dessums. The repetitions suck!!
Rocket Science left me wanting to strangle the guy who made it
2001 should definitely be the number confusing movie. i have a lot of respect for Kubrick but i think 2001 is one of the most OVERrated films. Sure it had some fantastic imagery and music but really WTF.. trying TOO hard Kubrick.
This is my opinion only and respect anyone else's views.
what about Lost Hightway?!?!? a great movie… but WEIRD as ****
right when this list came out, i wrote a post on lost highway — i think my comment got stuck in moderation, and hasnt appeared yet
the more i think about it, the more i'm convinced virtually any incident of psychogenic fugue in modern cinema is going to be inherently confusing (on 1st view)
its when you begin to put things together that it, not only makes sense, but begs the question 'why the hell didnt i catch that the first time'.
– i suppose the answer to that is hidden (not so carefully) in the more concrete aspects of the story (*each* story for that matter — what, with the different family, altered fingerprints, etc etc) as its played out on screen. its not really explainable, but does allow for interpretation (which always seems to be different, albeit semi-refutable).
–years ago i read a synopsis of pullman's character as a cinematic bridge between lewis carroll and kafka, which i thought was brilliant — random as *****, but brilliant..
–of course, this whole thing is highly subjective, with all the characters symbolic of the main character's emotions — and the way it's all tied together is pure david lynch peculiarity
id love to see jamie's take on this — if i recall correctly, he loves this movie
anyway — like i said in my earlier post, i understand not wanting 3 films from the same director on this list, but it's hard to rule out lost highway from inclusion (if i had written this, i *probably* would have switched out l.h. with mulholland drive — which was weird as *****, but did get nominated for a best director oscar ('01), and won the cannes best picture award — so it's a little more familiar to the masses).
— nice, bassbait— …look up some synonyms for "confusing", but good content.
What about 21 grams, took me about 20 – 30 mins to stat inderstanding how it was put together!
What's about Inland Empire?
Martyrs ?
That wasn't confusing at all… but it definitely WAS weird and repellent…
Martyrs twisted my head for days
I`ve never got The Matrix. I remember when I first heard, that there was a film called The Matrix, I thought isn`t that out of Transformers? And The Matrix story, it`s like a story out of the old Transformers comic when I got as a kid. And why the hell was George W Bush in The Matrix?
He was Agent Smith.
First Matrix was awesome. Second one was stupid and boring-would have fallen asleep in the theater had I not gone out for a cigarette(couldn't just leave because my friend was driving, and he wanted to stay), and then I never bothered with the third one because I just didn't give a *****.
I wouldn't call Matrix "confusing" in the least. Pretty straight-forward movie I always thought.
Maybe the second and third ones qualify, but not the first.
I don't think any of the Matrix's were confusing. I loved all three. The third was the best, overall imo. But I watched all three, along with the animatrix, one right after the other, so that may have taken away some of the confusion.
I read a theory somewhere that Zion is part of the Matrix and that the machines were never really defeated but the people were made to believe it to keep them happy, that you can never truly escape The Matrix. If this were true it would have made The Matrix a far better movie and it would have a reason to be on this list. Otherwise it's a pretty straight forward movie.
The only thing confusing about this list is the way it was written. This list is not an easy read and I conclude that the author is either:
a) brilliantly mimicking the disjointed, stop-start, doubling back style of of the movies he is writing about; or
b) a terrible writer.
I like to think a).
I would like to think so too. If I was confusing you with the list, it was because, as I've said before, I was tired. So maybe the directors of these movies were just too tired to make any coherent sense when they wrote the movies? Who knows, I'm no genius by my standards, so if you think it's confusing, it's quite ironic that it is. I didn't proofread it too much only because I was tired, and I thought "hey, as long as there's no spelling errors (which I think there might be), then I'll turn it in".
And to counter both of these arguments, I'd like to say that I've written short stories with bad writing for the sole purpose of giving a certain "feel" to the story. I seek a lot of inspiration from directors and so I've disguised bad writing with good metaphors and so forth. I am very wordy, but chose to use the word "confusing" so that you never forget what you are reading about. If you did, I apologize, but maybe I'm just too smart for you to comprehend (hyperbolic sarcasm).
Also, he totally ripped off the description of The Matrix straight from IMDB.com
I've been straying away from listverse for awhile now. Can't take anything here seriously.
Your my #1 most confusing writer ever, and how is the shining "the most underrated horror movie" wth are you talking about man lol
"Your my #1 most confusing writer ever"
'Your'?
How ironic.
That's not confusing because you know what he meant.
I'm saying this because every other great horror film gets too much respect. The Shining has it all, in the sense that every good horror element is there, as well as many that were never before seen in horror movies. At the time, it was considered awful, but as of recent, it's a classic. I would also say, if I were to pick a "REAL" underrated horror film, it would be "The Thing" by John Carpenter, or "Alien" by Ridley Scott. Otherwise, The Shining has more unsettling moments than most horror movies, without having anything scary really happen. The confusion of the movie helps the unsettling atmosphere, and there are moments that make you forget you are watching a horror movie, then bring you right back to the creepy atmosphere.
I would have expected to see Being John Malcovich on here.
While I find this movie both brilliant and hilarious, the wider consesus seems to be that people don’t get it.
Charlie Kaufman should have had a Honorable Mention or bonus entry. I heard Synecdoche
I thought that as well, or at least, Adaptation.
uhm american psycho? nobody can even agree if everything in american psycho even happened..the end of that movie is super confusing….. half of these movies arent even confusing…memento? seriously? yeah you dont know whats going on while its happening but by the end everything is revealed…its not confusing at all
ummm, anybody for A Clockwork Orange???
wait………what?
why?
what confused you about it?
Ah. If the movie confused you, I don't know what the book will do to you. Why man? What didn't you understand in the movie?
Although not a good movie by any mean, in my opinion, but I would have included Vanilla Sky def more confusing than some go the movies on the list..
agreed. way more confusing than memento, fight club(my two favorite movies, btw), or the first Matrix(wrapped up nicely throughout the movie itself).
I also don't find The Shining to be confusing either. I guess if you try to make sense of little bits and pieces it could be, but considering the movie is about a man's descent into madness, isn't it completely expected and acceptable(therefore, NOT confusing) that things aren't going to make sense.
absolutely vanilla sky more confusing then all the rest of these movies put together AND it sucked
im beginning to think everyone is getting "confusing", "peculiar", "weird", and "obtuse" all mixed up
i didnt find vanilla sky confusing at all.
weird, yes.
obtuse? perhaps more so than any other adjective.
not confusing
i'm with you on that.
also, anyone who loves or hates vanilla sky (i like it) should watch the original http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_Your_Eyes_(1997… which happens to also feature penelope cruz.
i don't get the US obsession with remaking every good film. reading subtitles isn't really very hard, and although i hate dubbed films with a deep in the gut passion, basically every other non-majority English language country that watches US films dubs them….. "US remakes" of brit films like death at a funeral are particularly pointless….. does anyone really struggle with the accents that much? is it the "cultural differences"? that's like saying films set in the US deep south need to be remade for people in minnesota to understand the spoken words and character motivations……..
Dang i estimated 33 uses of the word “to confuse” and its other forms and they were 35. A 6.06% error. Thats way to much.
Funny fact: in the intro this word doesnt appear at all.
Ps:i know im beating a dead horse.
really? no true lies?
oops, i meant 'total recall'. the movies WERE kinda similar i guess…
Great call on Primer, confused the hell out of me but I really enjoyed having watched it. I prefer films to leave a level of interpretation up to the viewer because you don't feel patronised like you do where everything is wrapped up in a neat little package.
Naturally everyone's list would be different and these were some good choices, though I haven't seen Big Man Japan so I can't vouch for that, but I would have included Begotten (which I actually found out about through another listverse list, thank you listverse!) and L'intrus. Both stunning films, but near impossible to comprehend. L'intrus reveals nothing about who any of the characters are, what's really going or in what order it's happening. You have to sort of just sit back and accept it. Begotten, well, just watch the opening 5 minutes and you'll get the idea – http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-79732253…
I watched the first 10 min. What was that? Was it a woman cutting out her baby or a man cutting off his package, or what? I couldnt make it out. It was too dark and grainy.
I couldn't even read the whole list as it is so poorly written. The movies listed cannot compete in the confusion stakes with the twists and turns of this "author's" tortured writing. I have year 7 students who can easily write an essay that is clear, grammatically correct and far more readable than this utter drivel.
The apes’ process of achieving consciousness is exactly the same as HAL’s.
Lost Highway?
confusing films- Pi
that is one mindf*ck
yes. it was really confusing… but amazing too.
fight club is badass imagine a man beating himself!
I don’t know about any of you but The Shining almost made me ***** in my pants. It’s the scariest movie I’ve ever watched.
The sound effects you can hear in Ringu was most definitely inspired by The Shining.
Of all David Lynch's personal films, I think Mulholland Dr. is the least confusing. The whole thing up until they dropped the box was all a dream. Watt's character (the failed actress in the end) was trying to comfort herself in a dream where everything works out for her – from love life to her acting career. It's that simple. Now if you can only make sense of Eraserhead or INLAND EMPIRE.
Oh my God! Inland Empire is Lynch at hios most Lyncian (well, Eraserhead too). I have no idea what the hell is going on in Inland Empire. Lynch is mad.
how about hot tub time machine i mean if you think about it its not comedy
i dont want to ruin the movie for you
The painful thing for me about the Matrix movies was Morpheus's long winded lines! I couldn't get into the Saw movies either, too distracted by the killing contraptions, too many sequels. Being John Malkovich should be on this list.
The first ***** and the City movie raised questions for me too, like what the hell am I doing here? Why is this crapola so popular?
No Vanilla Sky?
yes vanilla sky
at least 7 times over vanilla sky
read all the comments again — carefully
they are straightforward
just like vanilla sky
"and George Lucas (who attempted to hire Lynch for The Return of the Jedi, imagine THAT)" fapfapfapfapfapfapfap…. That would have been even more awesome. It would have made every film past 1983 completely unnecessary because they wouldn't have compared to the awesomeness of that movie anyways.
I really enjoyed the Matrix, if you accept the theory that what they eventually perceive as "real" (Zion etc.) is just another Matrix it adds a lot of depth to the movie. (Also, why else would Neo be able to do his Matrix moves "outside" of the matrix?) If you don't accept the this theory, than it's just incoherent bull*****
Hahaa. Agree 100%.
>>fapfapfapfapfapfapfap…. That would have been even more awesome. It would have made every film past 1983 completely unnecessary because they wouldn't have compared to the awesomeness of that movie anyways.<<
The first Matrix was inspired by the first lines of the introduction chapter in your high school philosophy book, but it was okay at the time, although the lines are awful. The other two movies are just one stretched out movie, mainly due to the popularity of Keanu Reeves (they wanted to make a prequel and a sequel but studio was worried nobody would want to watch a Matrix without Neo). For those two movies I personally think they just decided not to worry about the story but use a *****load of special effects, realizing that that was what attracted people to the first one, not the story (write it down on a piece of paper, not mentioning anything related to the visuals and see what you're left with).
I found The Machinist to be insanely confusing. I’ve seen it several times and everytime I watch it I find something else that I never noticed any previous times.
Watch Rob Ager's *****ysis of The Shinning on YouTube for a mind-blowing experience. (Highly Recommended)
You can use a lot of words to describe Stanley Kubricks masterpiece "2001 A Space Odyssey" but confusing is not one I would pick. It's actually a very simple movie set in three acts:
Act 1 – The Dawn of Man – early man encounters aliens in the form of a black slab who teach man how to use weapons and the rest, as they say, is history.Act 2 – The Moon – Man advances enough to make his way to the moon where he encounters his long lost friend the black slab a second time. The slab sends a powerful signal towards Jupiter. Act 3 – Infinity and Beyond – The spacecraft on its way to Jupiter to investigate runs into a lot of problems because their computer, HAL, goes haywire. But they do find the black slab once again, orbiting Jupiter. This time, the aliens take one of the spacemen, David Bowman, along for the ultimate ride – a trip across the universe.
What does it mean? Who knows. Kubrick went to his grave never explaining what the end meant, because he wanted to force us, the audience, to contemplate what the ending means, on our own, without his take on it clouding our thoughts and possibilities.
2001 ran on TCM today so I watched for a few minutes for what night be the 15th time since 1968. It changes for me as I get older and a technology grabs hold of our lives more firmly than when it appeared. Originally we feared the idea that the dawn of man showed us in early evolution, now that seems a gentle peek at man's potential. Open the pod bay doors, HAL.
Right. What they imagined way back hasn't exactly come true (we still drive cars, not rocketships, we still haven't gone to Mars), but did anyone even imagine the internet back then? I'm at this very moment writing a message that can be read by people all over the world, a mere second after I push *enter* on my laptop. 2001 is still a great film that has stood the test of time, maybe BECAUSE it's so ambiguous.
Agree with all of these. To this day, I still have to explain the Matrix to my mother every time it comes on.
What about the M. Night Shyamalan movies? Although I do like how he wraps them up at the end.
Shyamalan is not confusing, just a normal story backwards, reveal in the end what would otherwise be the first plot point. It's a gimmick that really only worked once for him.
Maybe not to you or me, but there are many who do find his films confusing or don't get the plot twist at the end. That is why I put him out there.
this is funny oouch—–
what exactly do you tell her?
I was saying its like a big computer game (to try and keep it simple) but that never worked.
After repeating it a few times, I just tell her its a dream and the movie doesn't really exist.
I give up now.
Lots of words but nothing's being said. No try at plot synopsis, no reason why these movies are confusing – just that they are. Interesting premise – ***** poor execution. Too bad.
Wow. Thats kinda harsh. Esp coming from you. Generally speaking, I thought you cut most people some slack.
in the comments I do cut folks some slack – not so much in a published list. then you're fair game. It appears that the list writer (and Jamie – although he's fixed up his end since my comment) didn't do enough (any) proof reading. Nor did he/she justify their choices. Had the errors been grammatical etc but meaty and meaningful, I would have defended them. They weren't.
Actually see– Rob Ager's on YouTube– for *****ing awesome reviews/*****ysis of 2001 as well and some of Lynch's stuff too. I ***** you not when I say it is mind-blowing. Changed my experience of those movies for ever. He got well known esp. for his work on Kubrick.
Ager is a genius.
Basically, almost any Kubrick film could make this list. I could barely sit through Eyes Wide Shut. I tried so hard to understand it, even trying to watch it on TV when it comes along, and still don't make it all the way through. Did anyone else find it as confusing as I did?
Even if you find Eyes Wide Shut confusing, which I don't agree with, a lot of his movies are not confusing at all. Dr Strangelove, Clockwork Orange, Full Metal Jacket, Barry Lyndon. All perfectly straight forward films.
I do not understand what you find so confusing about Kubrick films.
What do you find confusing, specifically?
Eyes Wide Shut wasn't confusing – just horrible.
I just wanted to see Nicole Kidman In her birth day suit.
Maybe it was because i found the movie so mind-numbingly boring, that I lost track of what was happening, thus causing confusion. Either way, crappy movie…
I was hoping for a bit more of a synopsis of the stories. I know they're supposed to be confusing, but I have no idea what some of these movies are about, except that they've confounded plenty of people. There was a spoiler alert at the beginning!
This is a good list of some really great films, but it is their greatness that makes them, for me anyway, not confusing, but perplexing. Or maybe the right word is thought-provoking? I enjoy films where the director (like Chris Nolan or Kubrick) refuses to spoon feed the audience a straight forward, predictable, easy to understand and cliche narrative.
Take the ending of 2001. Bowman is in an elaborate 18th or 19th Century room and ages before our eyes. What does it mean? Who knows? Is he a prisoner, or zoo animal for the aliens? Is he going through time and dimensions? Is it just a dream of his poor, overloaded mind after his ultimate space ride and mind trip across the universe? And what about the Star Child returning to Earth? What's up with THAT?
Kubrick went to his grave never explaining what the ending meant, for a reason. He refused to allow his take on what the ending means to impact, in any way, what we the audience thinks it to mean.The film isn't meant to be confusing, it simply is not meant to be easy to understand.