If you want to talk about the ending of The Silence of the Lambs, consider that Clarice saves her own life by instinctively and blindly firing at the sound of Buffalo Bill cocking his Colt Python pistol.
But as author Stephen Hunter has pointed out, there was absolutely no good reason for Bill to cock his gun rather than just pulling the trigger.
Less force required to squeeze the trigger on the first shot. More likely to kill her with a single well-placed round to the head.
Prometheus was gorgeous to look at but I hated it from almost the beginning. The scene where the specialist scientists take off their helmets without any evidence that it’s safe beyond sniffing the air after removing the helmet. That took me right out of the movie and I stopped caring about anything or anyone in it.
Repeated at great length in the follow-up, Alien: Covenant. But the latter film might actually be an inversion of the thread’s premise, as there the series of idiotic decisions by the characters throughout really made it difficult for me to get behind the film, but the ending was actually pretty good. The Entry of the God’s into Valhalla….
I was so turned off by Prometheus I haven’t been tempted to watch Alien: Covenant.
I would rather watch another Alien vs. Predator where the camp is to be expected.
Seems it falls to me again to have the last word on a controversial choice of movie 
The reveal of Tyler being his alter-ego was mind-blowing for those of us that didn’t have it spoiled. A perfect twist that changes how you see everything, and largely made sense in retrospect.
Nonetheless, the actual ending did suck, and it’s because it became almost entirely exposition. Once Tyler is absent, there can be no more back-and-forths, so much of the third act is just narration of a long sequence of events. That level of exposition is tolerable in the first act, not so much in the third.
I think the details wer more clearly stated in the book as well. My point is that a movie doesn’t need to provide that detail, it’s a trope and the audience expects the lone protagonist to proceed on their own.
Maybe just wanted to mess with her by letting her know she was about to get shot. Guy seems to enjoy terrifying women, after all.
He thought she couldn’t hit him because she couldn’t see him in the dark. Cocking the gun to savor the moment or terrify the victim is typical bad guy behavior. And he’s nuts, not a super genius like Lecter.
No, Popeye hits the octopus really hard, then Bluto runs away.
Nope, I’m wrong. He does hit Bluto once after eating the spinach. That’s still not a fight-to-the-finish, though.
Also, just to defend Clarice’s actions. On the Criterion Collection of The Silence of the Lambs, there are deleted scenes showing Starling getting hauled into the FBI director’s office, kicked out of the academy, and her boss, Crawford, getting suspended. Outside on the sidewalk, Crawford gives Starling money from his own pocket and tells her to pursue her lead of the first victim. On the commentary track, director Jonathan Demme says it was William Goldman who called him after a screening and told him to get rid of these scenes because they brought the story to a screeching halt. Just get right into the third act, Goldman advised. (There are similar scenes in the novel, too.)
But anyway, it’s clear from the original story that Clarice’s trip where she unwittingly walks into Buffalo Bill’s house is pretty much unofficial FBI business. She enters the basement as a rescuer of women/lambs, not a law enforcement officer.
Maybe he just didn’t know that much about guns.
Another possibility. I don’t think it ruins the ending. Him killing her wouldn’t have been as good of an ending.
It’s funny, I forget how much I hated the end of that. Part of it, I admit, is a comparison to the end of the book, where she figures everything out and tracks down Buffalo Bill having guessed who he is. I realize the movie ending is more dramatic – you get the interleaving cuts between the task force and Clarice Starling, perhaps not realizing it’s two different locations – but it felt like robbing Clarice Starling of her intelligence.
Trapped in a basement with a serial killer, she also had the option of firing a shot for brief illumination and warning… not sure how effective the illumination is, I’ve never shot guns in the dark, but in a lot of movies you can see people that way.
You think she should blindly fire her weapon, when she doesn’t know where the hostile or the hostage are?
Beyond that, muzzle flash in a pitch black environment isn’t useful for illumination. It lasts a split second, you’ll be blinded by the glare, and then your vision will be worse.
MIST. Although I guess a lot of people will just say it was a terrific twist ending.
Wasn’t there a movie where the main character was famous for rescuing a hostage – by shooting him?
Speed