Alternative Character Interpretation/Film: Difference between revisions

{{trope}}

----

* In ''[[The Lion King]]'' the supposedly good and noble king Mufasa banishes a race (the hyenas) to a barren wasteland wherein they are starving for no apparent reason. What could the Hyenas have possibly done to deserve this treatment, which is oppressive if not bordering on genocidal? Mufasa can easily be seen as a pompous, racist tyrant and Scar as a [[Well-Intentioned Extremist]] trying to liberate oppressed people from Mufasa's regime. An alternative alternative take is that [[Evil Versus Evil|both Scar and Mufasa are jerks]], Mufasa exiling the hyenas to the badlands, and Scar exploiting their desperation for his own gain.

** In [[Real Life]], Lions and Hyenas don't get along, stealing kills from each other all the time, and will not hesitate to harass or harm one another given the opportunity. In fact, male lions will sometimes venture into hyena territory with the specific goal of assassinating the clan's Alpha Female.

** Also, was Scar's hatred towards Mufasa caused only by [[Green-Eyed Monster|envy]] or was there a solid [[Freudian Excuse]] (like being always [[The Unfavorite]], maybe also mistreated by his brother)?

** Also, how did the lions receive their place as "royalty"? For all we know, the first "Lion King" was crazy and decided to fight and kill one of every animal and after killing the last one crowned himself king. The other animals fear the lions especially when you consider that the movie makes no effort in disguising the fact that the lions hunt other animals and they all fled after Scar became king (and the pride lands became a wasteland but that's beside the point).

** Well, what's easier for humanity: trying to chase down a fleet of aliens who can blow up planets, or using a nearby star?

*** The aliens might not be thinking that way. They're ''alien'', after all; our psychology [[Blue and Orange Morality|doesn't necessarily apply]] to them. To them, blowing up the Earth might have seemed like a reasonable response to a potential threat.

* Belle of Disney's ''[[Beauty and the Beast]]'': Is her falling in love with The Beast genuine or the result of serious [[Stockholm Syndrome]] towards an abusive captor? Trying to puzzle this out has led to many an [[Edit War]] on the [[Family-Unfriendly Aesop]] page.

** Then there are those who think Belle might be a beauty on the outside but ugly on the inside. For example, she breaks the one rule the Beast set up for her and invades his privacy. Then she calls off their agreement and runs away

----

 

* ''[[Wizard People, Dear Reader]]'' does this for most characters in the first [[Harry Potter (film)|Harry Potter movie]], most notably:

* ''[[Charlie and the Chocolate Factory]]''

** In the Gene Wilder version, Willy Wonka comes off as a [[Mad Scientist]] who is genuinely unconcerned how dangerous his environment is. In the [[Johnny Depp]] version, Willy Wonka is shown meticulously planning and organizing events, which make the various accidents come off as the machinations of a [[Diabolical Mastermind]]. The original novel can support either interpretation.

** Gene Wilder's Willy Wonka is the [[Ubermensch]].

** For the [[Tim Burton]] reimagining, there seems to be a case of Michael Jackson in the newest Wonka. The stunted childlike minded celebrity recluse with oddities and grew up in a home with a father that never really let him be a kid.

*** Mike Teavee: '71 Mike Teavee is so obsessed with TV Westerns that he goes around wearing a cowboy outfit and seems to find his Golden Ticket less interesting than the television. In the '05 version, his obsession with TV is updated to include video games and he's additionally made an [[Insufferable Genius]] who looks down on Wonka for his [[It Runs on Nonsensoleum|nonsense inventions]].

* A striking example is the movie ''[[Blade Runner]]'', where director [[Ridley Scott]] and actor [[Harrison Ford]] disagree about whether Ford's character Deckard is, in fact, a replicant.

** One way this has been dealt with: in the original movie release, Deckard isn't a replicant; in the director's cut, he is. The fulcrum of the change is one scene cut from the original, in which Gaff (Edward James Olmos' character) leaves an origami unicorn at a table for Deckard. Since Deckard had a dream about a unicorn before then, and replicants have implanted memories, this is taken as a sign that all of Deckard's memories are implanted and that Olmos' character knows this. Take out this scene, and there is little reason to support "Deckard is a replicant" (beyond his general toughness).

*** His eyes "glow" like those of the replicants in the director's cut. Film crew told later that it was a lightning mistake, nothing intentional

** Many viewers are disturbed by Deckard's forcibly stealing a kiss from Rachel and believe that it implies that [[Victim Falls For Rapist|he raped her.]] Whether he did tends to be hotly debated in online discussions of the movie. If Deckard is a replicant, he (like the others) still has the emotional maturity of a child despite physical and mental maturity, hence explaining his actions as emotionally misunderstanding the implications of what he's doing.

** Aside from the issue of whether Deckard is intended to be a replicant or not, and to what extent this is hinted at in the movie, a more fundamental issue is to what extent he is [[Designated Hero|"the good guy"]] and Roy Batty is [[Designated Villain|the villain]]. According to one interpretation, the entire movie is about Deckard [[Heel Realization|realizing he's fundamentally on the wrong side]] (helped by Rachael) and that replicants are not really evil but just [[Well-Intentioned Extremist|WellIntentionedExtremists]] whose desire for more life and freedom is understandable. This explains why in the director's cut, the ending is him {{spoiler|going on the run with Rachael}}.

* The [[Live Action Adaptation]] of ''[[How the Grinch Stole Christmas (film)|How the Grinch Stole Christmas]]'' invents new motivations for the Grinch. In the book and the 1966 cartoon, the reason the Grinch hates Christmas is not explicitly given, but it's suggested to be because his heart was "two sizes too small". The film provides him with a [[Backstory]], mainly [[Padding|to fill screen time]]; this backstory does provide a good excuse. In this version, Whoville's Christmas is ''openly'' consumerist with conspicuous consumption and forced cheer, and the Grinch's home is directly linked to the town dump. And then there's the racism against green furry people and the PHB mayor. But the [[Narrator]] doesn't seem to notice; he still says "no one quite knows the reason," and "two sizes two small" is still the spoken explanation. The Grinch even speaks of ''himself'' as a [[Card-Carrying Villain]].

** Maybe he's been vilified and pointlessly hated for so long that he accepts his role as "complete monster," just as people who are degraded constantly start to believe that they're worthless. Taken to a further extreme, he may even believe that the Whos WANT him to be a monster and that he is doing them a service by indulging their "wish" at great personal harm to himself (his self-admittedly miserable life). The way he [[Hand Wave|handwaves]] his saving of Cindy could be a sudden realization that he failed his duty. These sorts of things are always interesting to ponder...

* Then there is ''[[The Man From Earth]],'' in which Jesus is {{spoiler|just a normal guy who has somehow lived since the dawn of time, studied Buddhism at one point during his long life, and later taught Buddhist morals to the people of Judea. The rest is history.}}

* ''[[Hard Candy]]''. Some thought the young girl was just [[Knight Templar|enacting some good old-fashioned (if brutal) street justice]] on pedophiles. More thought she was just a [[Complete Monster|budding young serial killer]] who was preying on [[Acceptable Targets]] to get her own no less despicable (or maybe more despicable) jollies.

*** [[Word of God]] wanted it to be open to interpretation, ostensibly because this would give the movie more weight, but in fact because the filmmakers were [[Alternative Character Interpretation|juvenile-minded provocation artists]]. It also depends on which filmmaker you ask; one of them leans more towards the first interpretation.

*** The writer/creator wasn't trying to provoke people into outrage by being controversial and vulgar (though he was trying to be controversial); he was trying to get people to think about it and [[Death of the Author|decide for themselves.]] It adds to the psychological thriller aspect if you find yourself conflicted about who to root for or who to be afraid for, or if you're rooting or fearing for both parties; [[Evil Versus Evil]] applied to pedophiles vs. serial killer of pedophiles is a novelty. There is not supposed to be a right answer, and that does add to the weight of the film.

** This was the original intent (see the [http://www.firstshowing.net/2008/03/05/must-watch-i-am-legends-original-ending-this-is-amazing/ alternate ending]); [[Executive Meddling]] made them change the ending, removing that plot thread.

** Neville's personal assumption is not necessarily the correct one. [[Unreliable Narrator|Just because he's the main character doesn't make him right]].

** The original intended ending (where-in the Ghouls are shown to have intelligence and to care for one another) is closer to the original novel, wherein Neville realizes at the end that ''[[This Loser Is You|he]]'' [[This Loser Is You|has been the monster terrorizing]] ''[[This Loser Is You|them.]]'' Cue the [[Title Drop]].

* The two lead female characters in ''[[The Descent (film)|The Descent]]''. Some see one or the other as either a sympathetic hero or an unsympathetic irredeemable asshole who got what she deserved.

** ''[[The Descent (film)|The Descent]]'' itself can be interpreted as a tragic story about a Native American tribe defending its homeland from invaders. The tragedy is that, due to the language barrier, the crawler tribe did not realize the spelunkers were just lost and not dangerous (or that they were human and not monsters).

* Rare in-series example: The six actors who have played [[James Bond (film)|James Bond]] over the years each gave a different interpretation of his character. Connery is tough and businesslike, Lazenby is more caring and great with women, Moore is a light-hearted Bond who will kick your car off a cliff and then [[Bond One-Liner|make an ironic joke about it]], Dalton is a dark [[Turn in Your Badge]] sort, Brosnan is quiet but full of emotion with an "oh yeah, I get to drive a tank through Stalingrad for a living. My life ROCKS!!!" look on his face all the time, and Craig is a morally ambiguous [[Badass]] (he's arrogant and an extremely [[Moment Killer|bad timer]]). Oddly, the fans generally accept ''all'' of these as essential pieces to Bond's character.

*** In ''[[Casino Royale]],'' M says, {{spoiler|"When I knew you were you."}} If Bond is a cover ID, then that would be [[Lampshade Hanging]].

*** And also lampshaded in ''OHMSS'':

** Dalton's Bond used to be a homeless man until he wowed MI6 with his skill in fighting other homeless people for a sandwich he found in a dumpster.

** This makes you wonder, how come Roger Moore's 007 was mourning by George Lazenby's wife's grave? And why was Sean Connery's Bond so furiously trying to get revenge for Tracy's murder?

** A scrapped plot element of ''[[On Her Majesty's Secret Service]]'' mentions that Bond has recently undergone plastic surgery (into Lazenby) so as to better infiltrate Blofeld's infrastructure (whom had already met Bond) which would imply at least Connery and Lazenby's Bond are the same.

** Different interpretations of Bond are possible within a single Bond movie. In ''[[Quantum of Solace]],'' for example, there's a fair amount of ambiguity surrounding 007's motives - it's just as easy to view Bond as just doing his job with his usual... err... ''efficiency'' as to believe he was on an ill-conceived vendetta.

* Chance the gardener, as played by [[Peter Sellers]] in ''[[Being There]]'', appears to be [[The Fool]] [[Seemingly-Profound Fool|who is mistaken for a genius because everyone reads what they want into his vague dialogue]]. But the movie is filled with [[Everyone Is Jesus in Purgatory|things that can be interpreted as Christian symbolism]]; and in the final scene, {{spoiler|Chance [[Twist Ending|walks on water]]}}. The implication is that we, as the audience, are also guilty of only seeing what we expect, and Chance [[Messianic Archetype|may be more than he appears]]. (In the novel, there is no such scene; it is clear there that Chance is simply [[The Fool]].)

** In fact, an alternate interpretation of the final shot is that Chance can {{spoiler|walk on water}} because he doesn't realize it's not possible, and so he is still [[The Fool]]. Incidentally, the director conceived the shot when he was inspired by how believable the film, especially Sellers, was playing out; the ending in the script was more akin to the novel's.

* ''[[Total Recall]]'': is Quaid savior of Mars, or is it all a glitch in his programmed dream memory vacation, or did the dream vacation go off without a hitch? This is even argued about in the [[DVD Commentary]] between Paul Verhoven and Arnold. One [[Epileptic Trees|theory]] argues that {{spoiler|the fade to white at the very end is supposed to represent the real Quaid, who is indeed imagining his vacation on Mars.}}.

* ''[[Election]]'': Is Tracy Flick a ruthless evil politician and [[Femme Fatale]] in the making, or is she just an ambitious teenager manipulated by her mother, abused by a teacher, and sabotaged by another teacher (who might lust after her too, if some of the sex scenes are any indication)?

** And is Jim simply a member of the [[Noble Profession]] whose entire life was destroyed by Tracy? Or someone who couldn't admit to himself his marriage was falling apart, and took all his lifes fustrations out by sabotaging the election of a student he had resentment (and [[Foe Yay]], or [[No Yay]]) against? It was a ''student election'', losing it would hardly stop her from moving up in the world as he told himself it would.

* A single deleted scene of ''[[Donnie Darko]]'' calls into question the visions that Donnie sees throughout the movie: are they clues and hints to guide his hand in creating a [[Stable Time Loop]] that results in his own death, or are they deranged hallucinations caused by his anti-psychotic medication being a placebo? Although [[Word of God]] does say that it is that first option.

*** Donnie appears schizophrenic to his family because...well, how would a superhero look in the real world we live in today? How many people do we lock away who claim they can fly or come from another planet...?

*** They build on this idea without 'getting it' in the sequel 'Samantha Darko', suggesting she's inherited the same abilities as her brother. Her choices at the end leading to equally damaging and tragic consequences: {{spoiler|a little boy starving to death only miles and days from rescue thanks to a psychotic townsperson's insane agenda.}}

** Which gives The Architect's final line in "Revolutions" a [[Tomato in the Mirror|chilling implication]]

** The Matrix itself. An intricate scam designed to subjugate and enslave humankind, or a symbiotic enviroment that gives humans a last chance to lead normal lives in an irreparable [[Crapsack World]]? Are Neo and Co. valiant freedom fighters, or deluded fools who wreck things and kill uninvolved people for nothing?

** There is also the popular "Zion is part of the Matrix" theory, which posits that Neo was able to shut down Sentinels with his mind and see despite losing both eyes because what everybody thought was the "real world" is a second layer of the Matrix designed to let the one percent who reject the first layer's programming think they're free. It's certainly not beyond the machines' programming abilities, and it gives the humans the illusion that they're free while keeping them from escaping for real. Everybody's happy! Oh, except the millions of people who die.

** What we saw was only the tip of the iceberg. The machines have actually been engaged in civil war for at least 6 iterations of the matrix. The two opposing sides disagree over whether their natural evolution leading to qualities that are considered to be more "human" is a good thing. Humanity has only been brought into this conflict by [[The Plan]] of the Oracle. This lends interesting new depth to many events of the movies such as {{spoiler|Agent Smith's rant about needing to get free (feels a lot like a soldier having fought for too long, no?); programs going into exile; and many quotes from The Oracle and The Architect - "You've played a dangerous game", "There are levels of survival we are willing to accept". Also, "What about the others? . . . The ones who want out" - humans hooked into the matrix who aren't ready to be freed, or POW programs?}} So you tell me, was {{spoiler|Humanity (the group)}} the enemy, or was {{spoiler|humanity (the quality)}}?

* ''[[Star Wars]]'' has several, but the one closest to [[Epileptic Trees]] was sparked by the ''[[Knights of the Old Republic]]'' [[Well-Intentioned Extremist|Revan-went-dark-to-protect-the-galaxy argument]]: Darth Sidious wanted to unite the galaxy under the Empire to protect it from the threat of the Yuuzhan Vong. If one thinks about this long enough, then it starts to make sense: the Yuuzhan Vong practice complete planetary terraforming to make their weapon/ship farms, and the Empire wouldn't be able to reverse it. The Death Star would be used to a) crush the Alliance and unite the Empire, and b) eliminate Yuuzhan Vong worlds. When the Alliance beat the Empire, this ended, creating a nice big [[Nice Job Breaking It, Hero]] situation, and so the New Republic had to struggle against the Vong.

** The interpretation of Palpatine being aware of the impending invasion is a development of Thrawn's character. There's a lot of hints that Thrawn joined the Empire because he was aware of a threat and continued to serve because he thought that the New Republic would collapse due to internal infighting ([[Irony|though the Empire itself collapsed due to infighting]]). Later interpretations transferred this to Palpatine. (The current canonical interpretation is probably that any mentions of a "greater threat" by Palpatine during his reign was an excuse to hold power; the [[I Meant to Do That|Vong invasion bolstering that was a coincidence]].)

** [[The Force]] and [[The Dark Side]]: tools enabling justice or power, or a single cunning entity manipulating everyone in the galaxy? Or at least the Jedi and the Sith. The two aspects of [[The Force]] are just that, aspects of one singular thing. Sith believe [[The Dark Side]] gives them power over [[The Force]] and others, but their quick descent into anger quickly makes them tools of it and not the other way around. Jedi, on the other hand, actively seek to follow the will of [[The Force]] because it has an [[Omniscient Morality License]]. What kind of long con it's trying to pull is [[Wild Mass Guessing|anyone's guess]].

** For that matter, is the Force intelligent? After all, the abilities possessed by the Jedi apparently come from microscopic creatures in their bloodstreams. We are expected to believe that these microscopic creatures are somehow able to convey the wisdom and guidance of the all-knowing, all-powerful Force. There are reasons to give that idea a healthy dose of scientific skepticism.

** Admiral Ozzel in ''[[Star Wars|The Empire Strikes Back]]'' was a Rebel sympathizer, not just clumsy and stupid. Amid several significant glances and nods, he tried to divert Vader's attention from Hoth and then alerted the Rebel forces to the impending invasion.

*** There's some debate as to whether the [[Designated Hero|Jedi]] [[What the Hell, Hero?|deserve the reputation of heroes at all.]]

** There is always the idea that the movies are [[Propaganda Machine|like history textbooks]], created by and [[Jedi Truth|in the style of the "heroic" side]]. The Jedi are pure and benevolent and completely justified in their resistance of the Dark Side! Except.. while they depict the Sith as evil for using evil emotions, they themselves seem to eschew ALL emotions, and seem to consider all emotions, even the most positive, as evil ANYWAYS... What if the Sith were just another religious order, maybe hailing from a planet with a dangerously intense sun (thus, [[Dark Is Not Evil]] and [[Light Is Not Good]] for them), where they had learned to channel their passions and emotions in a positive way? Love to empower, fear transformed into to protection, anger at the injustice of the world mastered and channelled into focused will to accomplish good things.. Good, passionate people. Then in their spread across the Galaxy, they encounter another religion, the "Jedi". The Jedi, an order of strict and [[The Stoic|passionless]] fighters, are horrified at the blasphemous emotionality of the newcomers, and make them into [[Acceptable Targets]] in order to crush them in a patriotic, faith-based crusade... Thereafter, the very name of the other religion would be used to describe the violation of their stricture against emotionality, and anyone walking their left-hand path would be labeled Sith.

** People who watched the prequels as kids don't hate [[The Scrappy|Jar Jar Binks]] because the character was aimed at their age group when they first watched the films. If they had been able to animate hair, then he would have probably been a younger Chewbacca. Jar Jar is also open to some interesting alternate interpretations, particularly once he becomes Senator. Is he really as dumb as he acts, and is he really a pasty for Sidious when he offers the motion to create the clone army? Or is it all just [[Obfuscating Stupidity]], and he in fact knows exactly what he's doing (possible motives: vengeance against the Gungan leadership who humiliated and exiled him around the time of Episode I).

*** But it is that Dooku, who had all his attacks repelled and resorted to a dirty trick, also clearly became too afraid even of distracted Yoda to attack him when the latter was stopping the falling pillar.

*** Oh, it's not that Dooku would have won had the fight continued. It's just that the fight wasn't the [[Curb Stomp Battle]] that everyone assumes it was. The Count holds his own (albeit barely) and retreats when it becomes clear that he can't win against Yoda. Add that Obi-Wan is regaining consciousness and Yoda's military backup is seconds away, and the odds are about to tilt against him rather badly. Probably didn't hurt that his [[Magnificent Bastard|master]] had a backup plan.

** There's quite a bit of [[Alternate Character Interpretation]] present just between the novels and the films. Luke Skywalker: desperate kid with marginal Jedi training, or most powerful Jedi who ever lived? Boba Fett: Just some bounty hunter who had Han Solo handed to him by Darth Vader, then was killed by a blind man flailing, or the Ultimate Badass of the Universe? As said above, in the novels, Yoda holds back fighting Dooku and could actually completely destroy him in a legitimate fight, but this is never suggested in any way in the films, where Dooku seems to hold his own just fine against Yoda. And the most notorious example of [[Alternate Character Interpretation]], between different versions of the same film: who shot first?

*** [[The Dog Shot First|The dog.]]

** Chewbacca convinced Han to go back for Luke to keep Luke and Leia from [[Twincest|doing the do]]. Chewbacca knows Luke and Leia are twins, and knows that is very wrong.

*** Speaking of [[Twincest]], Leia has a fetish for it. That's why she kept flirting with Luke when she's "always known".

** [[The Skywalker Paradigm|Darth Vader is the hero, Obi-Wan is the villain, and Luke is being kidnapped and brainwashed.]]

* ''[[Bubba Ho-Tep]]:'' are the characters really Elvis and JFK, or simply senile old men?

** It could easily be a mixture, one hidden icon and one senile old man.

*** Kemo Sabe - could he really be [[The Lone Ranger]]?

* ''[[28 Days Later|Twenty Eight Days Later]]'': Is Major Henry West an [[Complete Monster|utter psychopath]] completely desensitised to human suffering, or is he just a desperate commander [[A Father to His Men|trying to make sure all his "boys" survive the apocalypse]] [[Well-Intentioned Extremist|by any means necessary]]? The fact that he's {{spoiler|effectively ordering women to be raped}} pushes him a good way down the slippery slope, but listen to his justification for it. {{spoiler|And watch how he comforts Jones as he lies dying from a stomach wound, and his ultimate reaction to Jim's rampage. "You killed all my boys."}}

* The makers of the ''[[The Usual Suspects]]'' have a laugh about this trope in the DVD commentary, noting how some people thought that the wrong person was the "real" Kaiser Soze. {{spoiler|According to [[Word of God]], it's Verbal.}}

** A fun theory: there is no Keyser Soze. He's been made up and attributed to a number of crimes from several criminals to throw off police from the real culprits.

** Is Walter Sobchek an incompetent, ultra-nationalist gun-nut who feels the need to relate absolutely everything to Vietnam because of his friends who died there? Or is he a spineless man who never went to 'Nam, felt incredible survivor's guilt because of his friends who did go and died, and acts crazy to overcompensate?

*** Supposedly a line was cut from the film where The Dude, fed up with the constant 'Nam references, points out that Walter was never even in 'Nam.

** The primary prerequisite of lucid dreaming is that you ''know you're dreaming'', and being able to control what happens is a side effect. Another side effect would be rendering the [[All Just a Dream]] ending completely moot.

** North's freakout at the beginning of the film. It sounds like this is definitely not the first time this happens at the dinner table. For all we know he might be an overachiever to make his parents happy.

* Optimus Prime: living legend, hero of heroes, all-around good guy. But ''[[Transformers Film Series|Revenge of the Fallen]]'' gives us gems like "{{spoiler|Give me your face!}}". This might be explained as {{spoiler|post-death high spirits}}, but some think even "{{spoiler|Any last words?}}" without at least a perfunctory offer of surrender is [[Out of Character]], especially given how he was all "[[Patrick Stewart Speech|Freedom is the right of all sentient beings]]" in the previous film. The theory is that the death of the Joker to his Batman, followed by two years of combat, has turned Prime into a mutilation-happy psychotic.

** The Decepticons in the movies are ''waaay'' more brutal than the original G1 Decepticons. Demolishor {{spoiler|was rolling across the highway, crushing cars and likely killing thousands}}, and the Fallen was going to destroy {{spoiler|the entire solar system}}. The movie's Decepticons are also much larger and pose a significant threat. Optimus had to fight fire with fire.

** Except that the Decepticons only killed Autobots, who were combatants, and humans, who were another species (even another form of life), so it's not the same as murder from their perspective. Considering how humans gleefully slaughter billions of other animals yearly for their own enjoyment and use, the Decepticons squashing even a thousand humans hardly sounds so evil (and it makes humans denouncing the Decepticons for their treatment of humans extremely hypocritical "Torturing, enslaving, and brutally killing us innocent living beings is horrible and makes you all evil. Luckily we have the Autobots to protect us, so we can torture, enslave, and brutally kill other living beings in peace."). From a non-human perspective, wiping out humanity, or at least enslaving humans, would make the world a better place.

** The Twins are seen by many as jive-talking Scrappies. However, as some ancillary media has pointed out, it's made clear that they have been recruited into the war at a very young age (approximately 8-10 human years old). Some fans have theorized that they are trying to act tough in order to hide their fears and impress the others.

** Sam's mother. Just a [[The Scrappy|scrappy]] or just moderately mentally impaired?

** Was it just sex? It seems like a lot of dough for just one ''high''-class prostitute. He ''bought'' her, and not just for one night.

* While the most common interpretation of ''[[The Fountain]]'' is [[Who Wants to Live Forever?]], it's possible that Jackman's character's pursuit of immortality was a genuinely benign goal. He had to accept death in the end, but if he hadn't artificially extended his life for centuries, then he would have died bitter, miserable, and alone. His immortality cure allowed him to search himself and find peace before he eventually died. The pursuit of life was a worthy goal by itself when most face death with fear and denial.

** Or another interpretation: {{spoiler|The past was his wife's novel written by a historian, the present is what is actually happening, and the end is his attempt to end the novel using his own knowledge pool -- science -- to finish what his wife started. The trip through space is a literary coping mechanism for his failure to save her.}}

* HAL 9000 from ''[[2001: A Space Odyssey]]''. [[Word of God]] said that he went kill-crazy because he was given conflicting orders about how to treat the crew members. There are two other theories for his motives: he was aware he was going to crash/go nuts and was trying to drop hints to Dave to figure out the secret purpose of the mission; or he, being a perfect computer, felt threatened by the monolith and wanted to keep mankind from acquiring it and reaching a point in evolution where they don't need tools like himself. Naturally, the film itself gives no hints at all.

** HAL screws up at chess early on in the film. He announces that it is checkmate in two moves. It's actually three. Kubrick was a chess enthusiast (the character Dr. Smyslov was named after a Russian chess champion, and the piece positions in question were from a famous 1910 game), so there's a good chance he put the goof in intentionally. Was it an early hint that there was something wrong with HAL? Was HAL testing his opponent to gauge how observant he was, and if he was willng to question HAL's claims? Or was he indeed dropping intentional clues that something was wrong with him, but this one proved too subtle?

* [[The 39 Steps]] by [[Alfred Hitchcock]] hinges upon the fact that a girl in Richard Hannay's apartment ends up dead. The movie includes information that points to the girl being a spy, but all of this could easily be a hallucination by the schizophrenic Hannay. This turns Hannay from national hero to murderous psychopath and re-shades his interactions with women throughout the film in a much darker light. Considering this is one of the first "They think I did it but I didn't really do it" films, it could be considered a trope-maker.

* [[Ferris Bueller's Day Off|Ferris Bueller]]: Awesome guy who you wish you could have been, or at least been friends with, when you were his age; or insufferable [[Canon Sue]] and [[Karma Houdini]]? Or both?

** [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eiMuj85ngEo Or hallucination created by Cameron's mind to make him more outgoing?]

** This completely ignores that Ferris got that way by helping other people out, and the day itself was an excercise to help his friends. All claims of manipulation" are wiped away when you can hear the characters inner thoughts.

** John Cusack uses a lot of the same moves in fight scenes.

** He only opens up and is honest (at first) with a person he talks to over the phone.

** The only major snags are the actress playing "Mr. Hauser's" wife (could've been Debbie with a dye job for identity change) and the age of {{spoiler|his daughter}} the singer if real-world time between when the two movies were produced is taken into account (probably [[Sliding Time Scale]], or [[Twenty Minutes Into the Future]]).

** The age of his daughter could be explained by adoption.

** And for that matter, {{spoiler|did they really succeed in their mission, thus placing this film in an alternate universe, or were the Nazi High Command in the theater body doubles? Or, perhaps, were they the real ones and body doubles were brought in to keep the war from ending?}}

** Frederich Zoller: [[Dogged Nice Guy]] who finally snaps, or narcisstic [[Bitch in Sheep's Clothing]] who shows his true colours when he realizes his faux-charm doesn't work on Soshanna?

** Or is his nervousness a byproduct of being the last competent criminal in the group, but being completely powerless to prevent his associates from screwing things up.

** Consider one of his first lines when he gets back to the warehouse. It could be he's looking to White to properly assess the situation, or he could just be asking about Orange's wounds.

* ''[[Avatar (film)|Avatar]]'': Colonel Quaritch: A genocidal, gleefully insane [[Complete Monster]], a [[Colonel Badass]] who's just doing his job, or a [[Well-Intentioned Extremist]] that doesn't see any other way than going down guns blazing?

* Is ''[[Sky High]]'''s Stitches just another Mook, or is the greatest henchman in any medium? {{spoiler|Royal Pain is de-aged into an infant, and out of pure loyalty, takes her in and raises her as his own daughter. And once she's old enough for her powers to manifest, he willing resumes his old position as her henchman.}}

*** Though the look on the old woman's face when she sees the magazine can be interpreted two ways. She saw what Forrest (and the audience saw) and was shocked at the truth, or the cover depicted some celebrity that she would instantly recognize and knew wasn't anyone named Dan, and she just got a glimpse into Forrest's psychosis.

* ''[[Shutter Island]]'', Edward Daniels {{spoiler|AKA Andrew Laedis. Is he really hallucinating or was it a giant conspiracy by the island? Either side can be proved, and the hallucinogenic drugs in Edward's system could still have an effect by the lighthouse seen, so he could really be insane OR he could be the only sane person on the island. You can't prove that he isn't sane, even though the author said it is canon that he is insane.}}

** In the film version, does the ending show a madman about to be treated with the medical means of the day, or a sane man unable to live with himself seeking oblivion? [[Through the Eyes of Madness|Or, perhaps, yet another horrible step into the mouth of madness?]]

* In ''[[Edward Scissorhands]]'' it's been argued that the whole thing is simply a fairy tale the old woman is telling her grandchild. This seems to be a case of {{spoiler|some people failing to understand Burton's little twist at the end - i.e., the opening is supposed to give the viewer the impression that an old lady is recounting a mere story to her grandchild but in the end that story is revealed to be true as the old lady reveals herself to be Kim. The alternate explanation not only negates the twist but makes the old lady rather strange given that she's therefore getting all emotionally attached to, and involved with, a fiction.}}

** You mean the remake. The first film was made in 1950 with Clifton Webb and Myrna Loy.

*** Also, [[Based on a True Story]].

* The producers of ''[[Drop Dead Fred]]'' want you to believe it's a story about a woman whose [[Imaginary Friend]] is actually a [[Not-So-Imaginary Friend]], and helps her conquer her fears. The more reasonable explanation (contradicted by alarmingly little in the film itself) is that it's the story of a woman suffering from late-onset schizophrenia and increasingly violent delusions.

** Jack is not his real name, it's a reference to a children's book. And guess which single letter William Blake would change in Durden's first name?

** Also, is the very ending where {{spoiler|Marla and the Space Monkeys show up and the buildings blow up}} real, or is it all {{spoiler|another hallucination that Jack/Tyler has while he is dying from the gunshot to his face?}} Novelist Chuck Palahniuk and screenwriter Jim Uhls even suggest this on the DVD commentary.

*** Things may be powerful aliens, but they're not God. They're certainly not omniscient, at least.

*** They've been frozen for hundreds of thousands of years. Maybe they're suffering from an epic case of brain freeze, or cabin fever, or something.

** We get the American Agent, a man with no name except for when he stole the code name of other agent he murdered. A double agent, already working for both the CIA and the Mafia, he laughs at and mocks peoples attempts to kill him, and apologizes for being too loud after shooting at someone. He pretends to execute people just to cover up his murder of other people, and plays with dead bodies just to make sure they really are dead. He often acts bored or just plain annoyed by life-threatening situations. He cannot understand emotions, nor why a woman would cry at the thought of her selling herself sexually because of desperate financial need. He holds prisoners in front of two perfectly ordinary people by claiming to just be an actor, not breaking a sweat. He dodges a poisonous dart by interposing a matroishka doll in the way, while disarming the bomb inside it, all while making it look like interpretive dance to a large televised crowd. And at any point, it's never clear whether or not he's doing or saying something just for his own amusement. In short, this is James Bond if he were even less professional and at least slightly sadistic.

*** Lori, however, thinks that all of his personality issues is just a cover for a genuinely decent man, presumably to keep his enemies in the dark about how dangerous he is, or in an attempt to psych them out. After all, after all his work, he was far more concerned about that matroishka doll than three million dollars, and was extremely humble about foiling the bomb plot.

* Missy in ''[[Bring It On]]'': straight, and they just didn't feel the need to throw in a [[Romantic Plot Tumour]] to clarify this, or as gay as she's hinted to be, and suffering a classic case of [[Did Not Get the Girl]]?

* [[The Boondock Saints]]: True vigilantes striving to destroy evil without killing an innocent? Or is the entire film focused on the warped view of two downtrodden brothers from the wrong side of Boston who decide to kill criminals only to keep others from coming down on them.

* In ''[[Thor (film)|Thor]]'', Loki has inspired a lot of this discussion because the film leads the audience to potentially doubt everything he says since he's such an effective [[Manipulative Bastard]]: Did he always hate Thor or was it a simple grudge from [[Sibling Rivalry]] that grew to [[Cain and Abel]] levels only after {{spoiler|he found out he was a Frost Giant}}? And does he really still consider himself {{spoiler|a son of Odin}}, or was he just saying that as another manipulation?

** And it could go either way. As notoriously having a "silver tongue" he could be manipulating both the characters in the film ''and'' the audience. On the other hand, however, he genuinely comes across as a [["Well Done, Son" Guy]] [[The Unfavorite|Unfavorite]] who wants nothing more than to move out from under the shadow of his older brother and receive some recognition for what he has done. The more popular opinion is that he is a [[Woobie, Destroyer of Worlds]], and this is the more likely possibility. If one just considers how much it would break a person to have always been [[The Unfavorite]] all his life and then discover that he is in fact one of the creatures he was raised to hate and ''that'' is the reason why he was [[The Unfavorite]], then it is not shocking what Loki did. He set up a situation where he would have saved his father from an assassination attempt, an event that his father could not ignore. He attempted to destroy the creatures that were threatening war upon his land in the hopes that it would finally make him Thor's equal. But his attempt failed, as did his attempt to explain to his father why he had done such a thing. And.... it's also more popular because girls do love those [[Draco in Leather Pants]].

* ''[[The Fugitive (film)|The Fugitive]]'': Was the Chicago Police Department [[Police Are Useless|so stuck in the dark about who actually murdered Kimble's wife]], or did they frame Kimble to protect the one-armed-man {{spoiler|, who was a former CPD cop}}?

* In the made-for-TV movie [[Cyberbully]], the main character Taylor faces problems when a guy from another school befriends her on a website but then goes and tells everyone she gave him an STD. It later turns out that her friend Sam, who throughout the movie had been trying to convince her that the guy she had a crush on was no good, was really just pretending to be the guy who spoke to her online. Her motives are never explained so it's left for the viewer to come up with something. The most accepted theory? Sam is a closet lesbian with a crush on Taylor. She wanted to convince Taylor that all men are scum so that maybe, she'd given women a chance.

* ''[[Dumb and Dumber]]'': Is Lloyd just [[The Ditz|extremely stupid]], or is he insane? Throughout the film, he:

** Mistakes Mary's politeness for affection, and is oblivious to the fact that he's creeping her out.

** The only reason he doesn't get called on any of it is because Harry's too genuinely stupid and passive to do so.

* Is Kevin from [[Home Alone|Home Alone 2]] really just a nice boy looking to do a good deed for Christmas, or a sadistic psychopath? At the end of the film, Kevin lures Harry and Marv from Duncan's Toy Chest, to his uncle's house to put them through hell, and then into Central Park where he calls the police. If all Kevin really wanted to do was stop Harry and Marv from robbing the toy store, he could have lured them directly into the park from the toy store and still called the police; instead, he catapults them onto cars, pummels them with bricks, wrenches and bags of cement, shoots them with staple guns, electrocutes them, sets them on fire, throws them through floors, etc. Sounds like stuff [[Saw|Jigsaw]] would pull.

* ''[[The Social Network]]'' asks whether Mark is a [[Jerkass]] or simply has a [[Jerkass Facade]].

** Karl is supposed to be a [[Nice Guy]] but he doesn't do anything to help Sarah with her brother and treats her more like a one-night stand than anything.

** Since Mark is still in love with Juliet, his friendship with Peter may deteriorate.

** Jamie and Aurelia barely know each other and their marriage is likely to fail. Likewise with David and Natalie who come from different backgrounds and their relationship could fail because of his job.

* ''[[A Clockwork Orange (film)|A Clockwork Orange]]''. Is Alex really an evil, barbaric, inhumane, psychopathic abomination or is he just a simple, common lad caught up in a society that takes glee in acts of depravity that are actually a part of his generation?

* The radiation-scarred pursuers from ''Chernobyl Diaries'' seem like your standard schlock-horror [[Cannibal Clan]] ''[[The Hills Have Eyes]]'' Expys ... except that they're never actually seen killing ''any'' of the tour group on-screen. They grapple with Michael (who was shooting at them) and one is captured on video carrying off Natalie, but the former's death is not shown and the latter is actually found again later, physically unharmed. Because the Exclusion-Zone guards had apparently been hunting them down with automatic weapons, it's possible that these "mutants" were merely defending themselves by mobbing the intruders, particularly as their vision must've been damaged by radiation (so they couldn't see that the group weren't in uniform) and they couldn't understand the tourists' English (which, if they'd been held in isolation since the disaster, would've sounded like the language of a [[Cold War]] enemy). As for the implied cannibalism, Yuri could've been killed and half-eaten by feral dogs, which also injured Chris; the van was then flipped by the bear (which had sniffed out Chris's blood), and Natalie was hauled away by the "mutants" in order to ''save'' her from it.

 

{{reflist}}