“Puzzle films” and other cult classics invite contemplation

*Editor’s Note: This piece is a continuation of last week’s article, “Cult classic films hold a timeless and unconventional allure.”*

Welcome back, cult classic fans. This week, we’re tackling the confusing films, the films that encourage dorm-room conversation in a fit to prove who is intellectually superior, the otherwise known by their delightfully-expletive name: “mind f*** movies.” Plus: Rocky Horror!

**GENRE: MIND F*****

**Donnie Darko (2001)**

In “Wallowing in Dissonance: The Attractiveness of Impossible Puzzle Films,” authors Miklós Kiss and Steven Willemsen attempt to pinpoint what it is about confusing films that make them so appealing to the viewer. Their article—which specifically mentions “Donnie Darko”—cites the “attractiveness of complexity”; that is, while most mainstream films attempt to engage the viewer through various scopes of relatability, empathy, arousal and closure, so-called “puzzle films” leave their audiences scratching their heads. Ambiguity isn’t for everybody, but it is for people who like making their own theories.

A large hallucinated bunny, the manipulation of the tangent universe and time travel—“Donnie Darko” is not easily consumed. “Donnie Darko” is about a disturbed high school boy (Jake Gyllenhaal) who’s been warned that the end of the world is coming.

I won’t go into too much detail for this one, simply because it’s hard to, and I don’t want to infringe my own ideas onto yours. Rest assured, nobody truly knows what the director’s intention behind “Donnie Darko” is, but the movie is certainly one that inspires time/space conversations long after its viewing–and the scene in which “Head Over Heels” by Tears for Fears plays is one of my favorite soundtrack x scene moments ever. It’s worth watching for that alone.

**Fight Club (1999)**

There’s a reason that I’ve watched both “Fight Club” and “Blade Runner” in film studies class; they’re so intelligent, so otherworldly and so comprehensive that they’ve accrued pages upon pages of critical theory.

“Fight Club” is another movie that can’t be easily simplified, but the general synopsis goes something like this: an unnamed narrator (Edward Norton) suffers from insomnia, capitalist burnout and obsessive materialism–all of which his eventual role model, Tyler Durden (Brad Pitt), defies. As a solution, the narrator finds solace in attending support groups for diseases he doesn’t have, where he meets fellow imposter Marla Singer (Helena Bonham Carter).

When these story threads overlap, the result is cataclysmic. Director David Fincher uses film techniques such as splicing and breaking the fourth wall to distance the audience from normality, enabling us to find the disturbances in our own lives. “Fight Club” is a mediation on capitalism, consumerism, alienation and ideology–more impressively, it seeks to promote the value of questioning in everyday citizens. I almost feel as though a pointer finger extends from the credits, implying that my self-awareness is not the same as liberation.

Note for amelia – Self-awareness isn’t enough, it’s must be followed by change

And frankly, “Fight Club” could not have picked better actors. I’d probably be interested in my phone book if it was Edward Norton who read it, just as I would be if Helena Bonham Carter blew her cigarette smoke over the pages.

**Blade Runner (1982)**

What makes a human, “human”? That’s the central question behind Ridley Scott’s “Blade Runner,” in which Deckard (Harrison Ford) is tasked with eliminating four Replicants, fictionally bioengineered humanoids physically indistinguishable from “real” humans.

“Blade Runner” is essentially a haven for anyone interested in philosophy, science fiction and humanism. If a “Replicant” (or robot) looks like us, has exceptional intelligence, is capable of emotion and can recall memories, how can we ever be different? That is what makes Deckard’s job as a Replicant hunter extremely difficult, and what makes “Blade Runner” a remarkable analysis on perception. It, as Kiss and Willemsen remark, “is designed to keep viewers in a loop of sense-making.”

“Blade Runner” has since been followed by “Blade Runner 2049,” which I have yet to see. If it has any song like its predecessor’s “Memories of Green,” I’m already guaranteeing that I’ll become emotional.

**Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas (1998)**

A tribute to Hunter S. Thompson’s 1971 novel of the same name, “Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas” follows a semi-autobiographical version of Thompson (Johnny Depp) and his attorney Dr. Gonzo (Benicio del Toro) as they stumble through a drug-addled daze in Las Vegas.

I’m not sure if “Fear and Loathing” really belongs in the Mind F*** category because it’s really an outlier of any genre. However, due to its psychedelic nature, I would say it often bends reality, which is a marker of the former movies in this category.

For those unaware, Hunter S. Thompson is the inventor of gonzo journalism, a style in which the reporter inserts themselves into the story, creating a subjective and personable experience. “Fear and Loathing” celebrates Thompson’s accomplishment in this way, with Depp’s stream-of-consciousness narration using exact quotes from the book.

There’s a lot going on in this movie, even beyond the drugs. It begins as a crazy, fun adventure that eventually turns into a harder and harder watch, which is exactly the point. The excess and consumption of the 60s caught up to all of them just the same.

Say it with me: “too weird to live, too rare to die!”

**GENRE: MUSICAL**

**The Rocky Horror Picture Show (1975)**

Toted as the ‘original cult classic,’ “The Rocky Horror Show” tanked when it first came out in theaters but has since made its legacy as a campy, scandalous phenomenon made by misfits, for misfits.

When young lovers Brad (Barry Bostwick) and Janet (Susan Sarandon) find themselves with a flat tire, they look for help in the nearby mansion of transvestite scientist Dr. Frank-N-Furter (Tim Curry) and his posse of equally eccentric lackeys. Written by Richard O’Brien, “Rocky Horror” was inspired by low-budget science fiction and horror movies between the 1930s-1960s. This is visible through the burlesque-like style of the characters and the inclusion of many popular science-fiction elements, such as Dr. Frank-n-Furter’s master plan to create another being, a nod to the evil genius of Dr. Frankenstein.

One of the reasons “Rocky Horror” remains a cult classic is due to its extreme encouragement of audience participation. Through the 1980s and 90s, audience members took to “Rocky Horror”’s midnight showings, dressing up like the characters, singing all the songs, and even “shadow casting,” an act where fans gather below or in front of the screen and act out the entire play. Richard O’Brien could not have foreseen what a beloved piece of art his screenplay would become, even now, 48 years later.

In a time where such things were an object of shock, “The Rocky Horror Picture Show” dared to explore queer themes and radical self acceptance–no matter the self.