40 Years Ago Today, a Hilarious Movie Surprised Audiences With a Gimmick Never Done Before (And No One Has Tried It Since)

by

Today, when you go to see a movie like Avengers: Endgame, you can be sure you’re watching the same version as everyone else globally. While there are occasionally small changes for international releases – perhaps to address content concerns or graphic scenes – the film remains largely consistent, whether you’re in Paris or New York. But forty years ago, that wasn’t the case.

Paramount Pictures released the movie Clue on December 13, 1985, almost forty years ago. Today, it’s common to see movies based on books, comics, or other existing stories, but back then, adaptations weren’t the foundation of Hollywood, particularly not those based on board games. Making a Clue movie was already unexpected, but the most unusual part of its creation happened even before filming began. The filmmakers had a groundbreaking idea for the time: they planned to create multiple different endings for the movie, and each theater would randomly show one of them.

Clue Surprised Audiences With Three Different Endings

Movie gimmicks weren’t new when Clue came out in 1985. 3D movies had already gone through a boom and bust cycle, and director John Waters had previously used a scratch-and-sniff card in his 1981 film Polyester. Even earlier, William Castle was famous for gimmicks in movies like House on Haunted Hill, The Tingler, and 13 Ghosts. What made Clue stand out was its truly unique gimmick: three different possible endings. Advertising for the film even played on this, asking audiences, “Who done it? Depends on where you see it.”

Okay, so here’s the deal with Clue: when it first came out, you actually got one of three different endings depending on which theater you went to! Each one pointed to a different killer, with different reasons, and even different jokes throughout. Roger Ebert thought this whole multiple-ending thing was pretty clever, but he also admitted the movie itself wasn’t quite strong enough to really pull it off. Sadly, all that confusion – people didn’t know which ending was the ending – meant the film bombed at the box office. It was a certified flop, despite that interesting gimmick.

Jonathan Lynn, the writer and director of Clue, explained to Buzzfeed that John Landis believed the film’s multiple endings would be a big draw for audiences. The idea was that people would enjoy the movie so much they’d pay to see it again to watch the alternate endings. However, Lynn said that audiences actually got confused about which ending to choose and ended up not returning to the theater at all.

Hollywood Are Cowards For Not Trying This Gimmick Again

It’s smart to move away from relying on alternate endings. When a movie with this feature fails, it discourages studios from taking risks on original ideas, leading to a focus on predictable, safe options. This isn’t to say every film needs an alternate ending, but it should be considered when it could genuinely enhance the experience.

Think about films like Alien vs. Predator, Freddy vs. Jason, and Godzilla vs. Kong. They all capitalized on the excitement of seeing iconic characters battle it out – finally answering debates that fans had been having for years in places like schools, video stores, and comic book shops. While these movies all have a predictable ending, imagine if the outcome wasn’t certain. What if there were different versions where a different character won, or maybe no one did?

This decision would likely upset fans. Imagine being a Godzilla enthusiast who paid to see a movie expecting him to win, only to have King Kong defeat him – that would be frustrating. It also raises questions about the overall story of the franchise: which ending is the ‘real’ one? This creates confusion for both the studio and viewers about the established story and timeline.

Despite costing $15 million to make and initially earning only $13.3 million in theaters, the movie Clue has become a beloved cult classic. While originally shown with multiple possible endings, home video and cable versions combined them all, presenting two as potential outcomes—a concept film critic Roger Ebert even suggested during the movie’s theatrical run. The film’s enduring appeal lies in its humor and the talented cast, as well as the intrigue of those different endings. With streaming now so popular, it’s time for a reboot—and any “wrong ending” could easily be skipped with a quick button press.

https://comicbook.com/movies/news/sinners-smoke-stack-twins-visual-effects-perfect-oscar-michael-b-jordan/embed/#

Read More

2025-12-13 20:24