Some explanations give us more than we wanted and kill our enjoyment of movies we otherwise love. For more awesome content, check out: whatculture.com/ Follow us on Facebook at: / whatculture Catch us on Twitter: / whatculture
I was going to say that - his First mate says it while in Tortuga (if memory serves me right about this scene), and there is a scene were Jack and Turner were chasing the Black Pearl through a storm, and Jack was using the compass.
I don't agree with the ring. The 7 days thing was good. And when you find out its because she died in 7 days. To me its saying she suffered for 7 days so she will make you suffer for 7 days in physiological ways.
It’s way more than that. It’s “show someone this video within 7 days so they know my Mother killed me”. If you make a copy and show someone, you don’t die, right? Seems they missed that whole point in this video.
The point of the 7 days was to nearly drive her victims mad given how long Samar’s suffered before she expired on that 7th day. Believe even the original film had the same explanation, but slightly different
Umm it was a little more then solders killing Hannibals sister and revenge.. they killed her and fed her to him. I feel that's a little more then just they killed her..
i thought the same. it was more the canibalism... and if memory serves the book was also pretty bad. the author himself didn't want to make a Hannibal book to keep him a mystery... and then gave in years later. I think even he knew it was a bad call. Such a bad novel in such a great series.
@@lvmonkey77 The book is super graphic. I have a copy. there is a guy who is fed to pigs, a myster surrounding an orphanage (If I recall correctly) and hannibal just being hannibal during all of this. Plus Clarice being in the center of it all,
I actually really loved the idea of Jacks compass. It may seemingly diminish some of Jacks quirkiness but I was really enjoying the epic fantasy route they were going with.
Honestly the compass suddenly becoming a magical artifact doesn't change much for me at least. It just if anything adds depth and shows that magick is everywhere even in places you wouldn't have thought.
@@lucario2able The compass always showed the person holding it, the direction of the thing the possessor wants most in life. It was never in any of the movies just a compass that did not point north.
I respectfully disagree. I felt that it over-explained everything because they spent the better part of the movie trying to undo the previous two movies.
@@davesefoster just the previous movie really. i actually thought of the last jedi as a 7 or 8/10 until rise of skywalker came out. you could literally almost skip 8 and not be lost they had to do so much reexplaining. after seeing rise of skywalker i knocked episode 8 down to a 5 or 6 because it just doesn't fit with the other two movies. disney's real mistake was not having 1 director do all 3 movies.
I take umbrage with Jack’s compass. In the first movie there’s a whole bit where Gibbs responds to Will saying that the compass doesn’t point north. “Aye, but we’re not trying to find north, are we?” We then see that Jack is using it to navigate and when Gibbs asks why he’s in a good mood he responds “we’re gaining on them”. The compass was always magical, it just wasn’t the focus of the first movie. It was probably always intended to be an explanation for how the pirates found Isla de Muerta in the first place since it’s an island that can’t be found except by those who already know where it is.
Definitely disagree with your assessment of The Ritual. The reveal of the creature was one of the better monster movie reveals in recent memory. Plus if you look more into some of the clues from the cult, it pays off even further with Norse mythology, so not over explaining that is what kept the mystery and tension strong in the film.
Agreed. The Ritual was much better than I was expecting. All of the mythology mixed with the underlying grief and anger in the characters made for some serious quality.
I disagree with the ritual, I like the concept that the monster was revealed. So in case you get lost in the forest, you know what to look for, or not to.
That was awesome. If it wasn't shown then it would have sucked imo. Revealing it has a huge effect that makes you realize everything was real nobody was crazy (well still crazy people but not the way you think) because the evil being they follow is physical and real.
jay p I completely agree with you. I like that the monster is revealed. Scared the hell out of me. It actually added more greatness to an already great film in my opinion.
You do realize that the exact same arguement you made against Rise of Skywalker could be made against Last of the Jedi in how it handled storylines from The Force Awakens?
I'd argue that Alien: Covenant does a worse job of over-explaining than Prometheus did, whereby we learn that the xenomorphs were created by the android David for... reasons. At least the idea that the Engineers created them as a bio-weapon makes *some* sense.
This is exactly what I love about French sci-fi, like Barbarella (yes, I know there's a lot of Italian content there too), The Perils of Gwendoline, The Fifth Element, Delicatessen, Valerian, etc. They don't explain *anything*. They just create this complex world to set their stories in and pitch you right in without so much as a floatie.
Yeah, you want over explaining, go look into the lore behind the Japanese version. Sadako (the japanese version of Samara) is revealed to be a powerful psychic hermaphrodite who was raped by a pedophile who killed her after discovering she had a penis, but also had small pox and had infected her. When the cabin was built over the well she was in, her ghost telekenitically rearranged the DNA of the small pox virus and infected the tape, and it is a literal virus killing the people who watched the tape, unless the spread the virus to others via the tape. Ultimately it is revealed the entire thing takes place in a VR simulation, and Sadako is really a computer virus trying to manifest in the real word. No, I am not being funny.
Really disagree with Sinister - after so many horror movies of having spirits/ghosts/etc. with the goal of tormenting subjects to get revenge or for no real reason at all, it was really refreshing and to me much more terrifying that the ghost had a seemingly neverending and extremely ~sinister~ goal in mind
I totally agree. The entire point of the movie was the explanation of where the Alien came from and why it is so different from seemingly all other life. You don't even get to realize it fully until you start reaching the end.
If anything Prometheus should have explained more, its the sequel what explains too much with the whole thing that David created the Xeno's what ruins the idea of them and the idea Prometheus hinted at with them.
Prometheus (and its sequel, which would be renamed "Aliem Covenant") suffered from an audience tbat "wanted answers right away" and a studio that caved and made Scott rush the overall story. What were described as plotholes were breadcrumbs to be followed and explained in the next movie. Movie goers expected an Aliens prequel, but gasp, there were no xenos! Outrage! Scott was in the middle of finishing up the story for Prometheus: Paradise Lost, when the studio put pressure on him to change the story to speed up the appeance of xenomorphs and rename it Alien: Covenant to distance itself from Prometheus and establish a directconnect/line to the Alien franchise to placate the audience. Love Prometheus. Its not without its flaws, but it laid some pretty good ideas, and wish it wouldve kept its original existential lovecraftian horror vibe.
@@wallywest4727 David didn't create them. He simply re-created them (as a weird recreational activity - pun intended). Btw that thing is called a neo-morph. It's built is different from the xenos in Alien and Aliens. The most appearant difference is it's movement and posture. David's desdain of humans is also given reason as we're shown how and whom he had first made contact with and saw their dealings. It's no wonder he turned out like that.... The first scene also makes more sense if you watch the long version. Tooo much was left out of that movie and by that I mean important plot points that clarify things, answer questions we wouldn't even have if this content wasn't cut, and change how we look at the characters. It's a shame it was shortened. Really. You should watch the director's cut if you get the chance. The left out scenes are all on youtube but seeing them where they belong sure does top the experience.
Narrator, you're way off the rails the minute you say "Prometheus was not a bad film." Oops. Let me help you: it was expensive garbage. Raise your standards.
As was already pointed out a few times, the compass was already revealed to be special in Black Pearl; Norrington points out the apparent absurdity of a compass which doesn't point north, and a gun with only one bullet--then it's later revealed that Jack did not have these items because of "quirkiness."
I very much enjoyed "The Last Exorcism" (which your video misspells, btw), and I loved the unexpected Lovecraftian ending. I didn't feel that particular film was over explained.
I mean did Kirsten even see the original where Edward Woodward is sacrificed by Sir Christopher Lee’s cult of men and women? Hello that’s the point of the narrative in each: victim is arrived and toyed with for a few days and then is sacrificed to appease angry God by the islanders
this is one of those videos that was definitely created because someone told her she needed to make a video about something to get out in time. It doesn't need to make sense, it just needs to exists
I prefer more explanation than less because I'm more interested in understanding what the filmmaker envision for their story than me guessing about it unless that is their intention.
"The secret of how to become boring, is the desire to tell everything." - Voltaire. (Unlike that "I disapprove of what you say, etc." quote, this is something that Voltaire really DID say.)
I just have to point out Voltaire never actually said anything. It's a pen name, meaning one he wrote under. If it was said, that is spoken, then François-Marie Arouet said it, not Voltaire.
You'd also complain if the compass in pirates of the Caribbean was "explained" in the first film because it would be clearly obvious that it would come into play in the next film.........
In the Pirates movies. Its explained right away that the compass points to what you want most. Meaning It can point to more than one thing. Depending on what your heart desires. So your comments are wrong.
The compass is a great prop for the series. The first movie hints there’s more to the compass. And the second one finally explains why the compass works that way. Because it only points where your hearts desire. And it never works for Jack because he doesn’t know what he wants which adds depth to his character. The only time the compass works for Jack is when it pointed to a bottle of Rum. The compass works and this list sucks
I do like the compass ALWAYS points to what you want most, not what you NEED most, or how you can GET what you want most, or what could be the most useful to you. When one of the villains who hates Jack more than anything... keeps pointing on Jack, because he wants to see Jack DEAD!
If I recall correctly, the "seven days" response to the "how long can you survive at the bottom of a well" question was just some offhand remark made by Rachael. It's never indicated in the film that she was correct about this, or that the amount of time Samara's victims have to save themselves has anything at all to do with how much time she spent in the well.
The Last Exorcism is awesome, it does a great job adding depth to a tired trope and then tosses the whole formula a sharp turn at the end. Sure there was some atmospheric dissonance, but it was exciting.
I think you're partially wrong with "The Wickerman". It's Magic 101. The point of sacrifices is usually to reach a certain goal (in this case "reviving the stagnating honey production"). And blood magic is usually stronger than "verbal magic". In this case it's basically "double blood magic": Not only is the death blood magic, but the daughter is starting the fire and was instrumental in the whole process of getting and keeping him there and preparing him for the ritual. That is also blood magic, as it is performed by a member of the bloodline (aka the daughter). And if you factor in the elements (in this case death by fire) and/or powerful beings (like gods, demons etc), then the result will be even stronger. And magic always comes with a price (it could be a physical toll, or a mental one or a sacrifice)... and it rarely lasts forever. The way I see it: The ritual needs to be repeated on a more or less regular basis. Be that once a year or once every few years (I think it this) or once the effects of the previous one are almost ended), because: The "6 Months later" just ushers in a new cycle. The seductions of the two men is supposed to result in a new pregnancy, which will result in another daughter. Either they have "means" (aka magic, like a different ritual) to ensure a daughter or they just seduce as many man as they need, probably within a certain timeframe, so that at least one child will be a girl. Then they raise the girl(s). And once the honey production is stagnating again, or the time is up, they call upon the father... for another sacrifice. And even if it's not magic. Let's say the island is a cult. That still opens up a number of possibilities... I could make up a whole backstory/explaination for that too. And "the women are just crazy" is not one of them". Well... "crazy" is in the eye of the beholder... I know that my "explaination" is also an overexplaination, but that's how my mind works anyways. I always think about the how and why. I can find an explaination for most supposed plotholes or even supposed errors in movies and tv shows. And the longer it runs (in case of tv shows or movie franchises), the easier it usually gets. That's why I also liked the origin of the 'Alien' provided by Prometheus.
Well from an explanation I remember a high school friend gave who was obsessed with magic and the dark arts, and all that jazz. Blood magic is far more powerful if you willing sacrifice your blood and your victim is purposely and knowing partaking in the sacrifice. Aka willing! So they were kind of doing it wrong anyway if they wanted the magic to last any decent amount of time. Atleast that was the explanation she gave me. She sighted a bunch of historical tales and such to justify the books she was listing this all off from.
I disagree with Hannibal, Prometheus, and Sinister. I dont think learning where the monster comes from or the "rules" behind them makes them any less scary. Even knowing how Aliens originated, I wouldnt like to find myself anywhere near one. Knowing Hannibals backstory doesnt ease my discomfort with his serial killer/cannibal ways (love Anthony and Gaspard's portrayals) And the Sinister "plot twist" with the haunting rules of the family only dying if they move from the house into a new one and that further progressing the haunting onto the next family is actually one of my favorite plot stories in most scary/ghost/demon movies.
I'm passionately mixed on this list. I HEAVILY agree with Hannibal Rising (I think, haven't seen it) and The Rise of Skywalker but HEAVILY DISAGREE with The Ring (2002) and Premetheus.
8:30 "We see characters who survived the original trilogy and whose survival was important to the... Day-nu-men(?) of those films" Do you mean Denoument? If you don't know what a word is can you take 5 seconds to look it up instead of being lazy?
@@bheast86 That might be true if you viewed out of context to when it was made. When it debuted, it was stylized after Miami Vice which was hugely popular at the time.
I have to disagree with you on the monster from The Ritual, that thing still haunts my dreams, the design was so unique and otherworldly that I give it a pass for having one too many glory shots.
"The Ritual" monster isn't so much scary by how it looks, but how it acts. It has a personality, it seems to make decisions rather than blindly attack. It's a monster, but it is not a dumb animal.
I really like the ending of Last Exorcist. There are a ton of exorcism movies out there, and they are particularly bad for using that tired old device of leaving the real cause of the events ambiguous. "Let the audience decide for themselves." It's a bit cowardly, really, because it's a way to navigate a potential minefield of controversy. If they say the character was possessed, they risk alienating rationalists and atheists. If they say it was psychological, they risk alienating religious people. With the "choose your own adventure" approach, they're trying to have their $100 million cake & eat it too. Last Exorcist doesn't ride that middle line, it dives over the side. It's good storytelling. More plot development happens in those final moments than in the whole rest of the film. What is their goal? To raise a demon. Why? Because crazy cult people. The answers kind of write themselves. I really admire Eli Roth for going for it, for taking the risk and actually giving a conclusion to the story.
The Ritual showed the entirety of the creature just enough (2-3 times?) that it made me curious about the creature, doing some research. It’s not just a creature of fiction, but one taken from Norwegian(?) legend. I appreciate the effort to keep enough mystery versus honoring a culture’s story.
"Psycho" rather famously tells too much at the end with the psychiatrist explaining to everyone, in great detail of his mental condition, precisely why Norman did what he did. I think that "Frailty" suffers from a similar issue as The Last Exorcism. The ambiguity of "is this real? Or is this guy just a nut?" was eliminated by the revelation in the end.
That ending in “Psycho” is kind of a victim of its time because people didn’t understand criminal psychology like they do now. In the original book, Bloch has Sam Loomis tell Lila about Norman’s split personality; similar to what De Palma did at the end of “Dressed to Kill”
More like "Kirsten from WhatCulture doesn't like seeing monsters". Sinister and The Ritual had great monster reveals, and were still pretty damn scary after the fact.
I liked that they said 7 days, to me that was the length of time in anxiety and suffering knowing she was stuck there for her doom and she's doing the same to the people that watched the video
Nope, if there ever was a monster that needed to be seen on screen, its definitely the monster from The Ritual. I also disagree with your exposition on the Ring and Sinister.
You guys need to make a video about the 10 movies that didn't explain a damn thing that should have and it comes at night needs to be on that f****** list
The Rise of Skywalker is a weird one, because it explains a lot things which it shouldn't, like undoing a lot from TLJ, whether you like that film or not. But then it doesn't explain a lot things, like The Empreor coming back and being able to make clones of Snoke.
I disagree totally about The Ring - awesome movie , and I loved the detective story about it and finding the answer. I think it's refreshing. Lazy to make random things happen , people investigate, but it's never really explained.
I've never seen *The Ring*, and maybe that reveal does damage the movie, but isn't it at least understandable? The girl suffered for 7 days knowing she was going to die. She then turns around and inflicts that same dread on others. *The Ritual* !? You put that movie on this list!? Part of what makes the movie so good is that unlike a lot of monster horror movies, you get to see the monster in detail. I know there are moves where not seeing the detail makes it better, but the design here is so creepy that it unnerves you even more.
As horrid as the 2006 “Wicker Man” is, it did get the ending kind of right if you ignore the post credit ending. However it can’t hold a candle to the ‘73 film considering the ambiguity that we don’t know if Howie’s death will make the harvest work, but that matters little to the islanders during the ritual
I don’t really see how most of these movies “explained too much” but I will say I prefer that than a movie that is so vague I have no clue what’s going on! In general.
The most overexplained movie I can recall is Silent Hill--in the last act there is like a 10 minute exposition scene that explains the entire backstory of the original game, and it completely sucks you out of the movie. But for that scene, I'd consider it a great horror movie.
I think the fact that these are almost all horror movies is telling. What would you want them to do? If you have a horror movie where the monster/threat is hidden or obscured the whole time then the audience is left unsatisfied anyway, because they never know what's really going on. Part of the satisfaction of a horror movie is learning the rules, not having anything explained or explored in these story make films boring and they story feels meaningless.
i agree with hannibal rising and deadman’s chest, but gurl... biiig disagreement with the ring, sinister, the ritual, and ESPECIALLY last exorcism... i will now be taking future lists by kirsten with a grain of salt... and a shot of tequila
Hannibal rising wasn't spoilt by over explaining, it was a great film. In pirates of the Caribbean his compass wasn't magical, it just seemed that it didn't work properly.
Is it weird that I love monster mythology? I adore the ring for the way it investigates and reveals the pieces as it goes. I enjoyed Sinister as well despite the fact that Ethan Hawk really should've figured out the house jumping part before he moved and that was kinda dumb.
Last Jedi was the problem. It was a middle film that failed to expand upon the first and/or set up the third, let alone if you looked at it all that film left you with was an equally generic Emperor Kylo as its alternative. It subverted expectations by destroying plot threads and not building anything to replace them which doesn't work if your a middle film. The Rise of Skywalkers problems were as much made by the Last Jedi forcing too much upon a single film. . Also lol at Pirates of the Caribbean. A franchise starts with ghost pirates and magic cursed gold and a compass that points to the heart's desire is too much.
Seems like some find them overly long and complicated and not as fun and gripping as The Curse Of The Black Pearl. Honestly though, Dead Man's Chest and At World's End are my favorites of the franchise, and Dead Men Tell No Tales was the only one I found somewhat stale.
I never actually saw hannibal rising but I love the character but never once did I ever wonder why he does what he does. I always thought he was supposed to just be an almost human monster.
It isn't perfect, but deadmans chest is probably one of the most underrated movies in terms of rotten tomato score. Deserved a bit more than a 53 percent.
Hannibal himself said, "Nothing happened to me...I happened." The revenge was due to the tragic event, but it's how he naturally processes human emotions makes him who he is.
I happened to know about the Hannibal seeing his sister get eaten backstory long before "Hannibal Rising" but not because I read the books. I think it was in the DVD extras to one of the earlier films...
Those are... 10. The Ring (1:00) 9. Hannibal Rising (2:22) 8. The Rise of Skywalker (3:58) 7. Prometheus (5:18) 6. Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man's Chest (6:39) 5. Jason Bourne (7:50) 4. Sinister (8:50) 3. The Ritual (9:44) 2. The Wicker Man (10:54) 1. The Last Exorcism (13:17)
movie idea: it starts as a horror movie about unexplained thing, then after it gets explained, it turns into a science fantasy magical realism story that is more of a slice of life drama with its own internal mythology and scary part is kind of ignored to focus on action with other scary things that build upon until it jumps all the sharks and becomes a parody surreal comedy with non sequitur cringe being played strait
Ambigwitty? . I know English is weird and inconsistent, but wrong pronunciation really undermines these otherwise (mostly) well researched lists. Especially in an era where the correct pronunciation is easily google-able.
"Prometheus is not a bad film" I keep watching WhatCulture videos that say things like this or like "Shaw was an interesting character" aand I wonder if we've watched the same movie.
