For my love of the movie theatre, it is no surprise that I could think of many psychological thrillers (much more than those I’ve picked to analyse), which is a genre that I completely and absolutely adore. Why? Because I get no pleasure of just sitting in the theatre and watching something that needs no further interpretation, that suggests no “brain function” necessity. The constant urge to understand and see the idea and the ending and the inability to do so is what attracts me in those kinds of movies.
Twelve Monkeys (1995) starring Bruce Willis and Brad Pitt
Fight Club (1999) starring Edward Norton and Brad Pitt
The Sixth Sense (1999) starring Bruce Willis and Haley Joel Osment
Memento (2000) starring Guy Pearce and Carrie-Ann Moss
Identity (2003) starring John Cusack and Amanda Peet
Mindhunters (2004) starring Christian Slater and Val Kilmer
The Butterfly Effect (2004) starring Ashton Kutcher and Amy Smart
1. What elements of each of the objects seem to be the same?
The first and most obvious common element in these films is the unexpectedness of events. I have become quite accustomed to the Hollywood way of making movies and most of the times I know the ending halfway through the film. With these 7, however, it was either the ending or even the next minute that eluded me and left me completely confused.
Moreover, most of these films share a certain way of structuring – they are not entirely consequent and that is another factor for their unpredictability. There is no set linear chain of events – introduction of the characters and their history, development of the story, plot twist and ending. Most of the psychological thrillers don’t follow that structure at all, they either start from the end, introducing the story backwards (as Memento) or they start from the middle and uncover the beginning and ending at the same time (as Twelve Monkeys).
2. What elements mark each object out as being different from the rest that you have chosen?
There are certain differences in the plots of the films, even though they are close in structure. For instance, Twelve Monkeys and the Butterfly Effect are rather sci-fi psychological thrillers, because they are based on time-travelling, although their key concepts differ. Fight Club and Identity tell the story of people with split personalities, though one is more of a drama piece and the other is considered horror. Mindhunters is much more action piece than the others; the Sixth Sense is a fantasy/mystery one, telling the story of a man who doesn’t realize he’s dead and Memento is the most structurally-complicated of all the 7 films, telling the story of a man with short-term memory, looking for the killer of his wife.
Even though the movies have been categorized as being in the same genre (thriller) and the same sub-genre (psychological thriller), they cover a wide range of topics and plot structures and have different additions of other genres, whether drama, action or sci-fi.
3. How might ‘the audience’ understand the object?
Psychological thrillers are definitely hard to understand. Some of them require a second viewing, especially if the story is told backwards. Some of them are open to interpretation – Memento leaves the decision to the audience; it gives a few clues as to whether or not the main character is the killer of his own wife, but the truth is never revealed. Twelve Monkeys ends with a young boy witnessing the murder of his future self, but it is not completely and entirely clearly stated. The Sixth Sense’s ending is the realization of the main character of his own death, but it is a difficult idea to grasp and some people actually miss it.
Some of these thrillers don’t really trust the audience enough to understand the message, so they put a few flashbacks from the story after the ending, so that we could be reminded of the clues they had given us throughout. Other films leave that to those of us willing to see the movie a second time and find those clues ourselves. Overall, they are certainly difficult to understand and the audience might interpret them in different ways and come out with different conclusions after seeing them.
4. What kinds of pleasure might ‘the audience’ get from each object?
The pleasure of seeing those movies is the pleasure of using our brains to follow and understand the whole story. Some are more challenging than the others – Memento tells a colour story in reverse and a black-and-white story in chronological order, so it’s very “occupying” just to follow, let alone to understand the idea. Others have a simpler story and structure, but a rather complicated ending that leaves us wondering. But that’s the beauty of it – a piece of work that leaves you with your mouth open, wondering what the hell happened just now. I remember seeing the Butterfly Effect for the first time and somewhere halfway through the movie I had my hands on my head, totally and utterly confused and lost, asking myself “what just happened?”.
Of course, those pieces don’t appeal to everyone. There are people who believe that movies, as the core of the entertainment industry, should, in fact, entertain rather than confuse. That is because some people say that if they want to think and analyse, they would not go to the movies, but read a crime story, for instance. People who enjoy rom-coms or spoof movies with no deeper meaning and intention, but to make us laugh, would probably not sit throughout a whole inverted plot line and have any satisfaction at the end. But, of course, I am generalising – perhaps some of them might.
In general, the pleasure the audience can get from each of those movies I’ve picked is the unexpectedness of events and endings. There is nothing more exciting than seeing the most complicated story reveal itself, sighing in surprise and suddenly understanding how the whole movie actually makes sense.Labels: tasks |
