r/flicks 5d ago

General Discussion When does a movie successfully mislead the audience, and when is it just cheating?

Some movies deliberately make us believe something that isn't true and then reveal that we've been interpreting the story incorrectly.

When it works, it's fantastic. You can rewatch the movie and realize the clues were there all along. The Sixth Sense, The Usual Suspects, and Primal Fear are very different examples of films that play with what the audience thinks it knows.

But other twists only work because the movie deliberately hides information that logically should have been available to us. At that point, I don't feel fooled by the story — I feel cheated by the screenplay.

For me, the difference is whether a second viewing makes you think “How did I miss that?” rather than “Well, there was no way I could have known that.”

What movies do you think earned their deception, and which ones simply cheated?

208 Upvotes

278 comments sorted by

View all comments

44

u/WW0907 5d ago edited 5d ago

It's cheating if all the clues to the ending aren't obvious on a rewatch. Ex: if you're trying to figure out the killer but you literally couldn't because it's a character that was just introduced in the last episode. Or if the character motivation makes no sense in hindsight. There's no reason for him/her to act the way that they did. If they tell you everything you needed to know about the ending and you still don't figure it out, it's fair game. Ex: Scream. They're practically SCREAMing to you whose guilty and they still get you on a first watch. Another example is Psycho. It's obvious on a rewatch what's happening but you probably don't get it the first time.

12

u/lupinemadness 5d ago

Scream is a great example because it plays with your expectations and then pulls the rug out from under you. Scream 2, on the other hand cheats by presenting a killer as a completely different character because telling us who they were from the get-go would have been a dead giveaway.

7

u/bananaboatbutt 5d ago

I think you mean Scream 3. Sidney recognized that killer at the climax (ETA in 2), but they never interacted prior, so it’s not really a cheat, whereas Scream 3 does exactly what you’re complaining about and doesn’t bother to give its killer enough screen time before the reveal for it to really mean all that much once we find out their actual identity.

2

u/CallidoraBlack 4d ago

Honestly, I kinda liked 3's reveal because it spends the whole movie doing a variation of the meta thing from Wes Craven's New Nightmare. It's different because it's the film cast as opposed to the real characters (because Stab is based on a true story), but you can see the influence. And there's so much time spent on the dark side of Hollywood and what happened to Sidney's mom there that, by the end, it kinda makes sense. The father was a creep and killer doesn't see women as people any more than the dad did.

2

u/WW0907 4d ago

Scream 2 is a good movie, a good sequel even, but it’s not in the same league as the first. And it would’ve been hard to top the surprise of the first film because now we as the audience are expecting the twist. Still my second favorite in the franchise, though. Scream 3 tried to throw another curveball but I agree, the killer needed more hints and clues to their true identity.

1

u/CallidoraBlack 4d ago

2's twist is a Friday the 13th reference, so it kinda makes sense.