SUNDANCE FILM FESTIVAL — On Feb. 1, the second-to-last in-person screening of James Sweeney’s film “Twinless” took place at the Rose Wagner Performing Arts Center in Salt Lake City. Our team of three critics signed up for the waitlist for this screening and made our way over to Salt Lake. This is the standard process for certain press pass holders; you’ll get in if ticket buyers don’t fill the theater. Days before, two of us had tried to get into a late-night screening of “Twinless,” and every single person on the waitlist was turned away.
We knew “Twinless” was one of this year’s most popular films: Dylan O’Brien was awarded the U.S. Dramatic Special Jury Award for Acting, and the film itself — directed by co-star James Sweeney — won the U.S. Dramatic Audience Award. We had high hopes of getting into the event, given our luck with other waitlist lines the day before, and the facts that the Rose Wagner Center seats more than 500 people, it was snowing all morning, and the screening was occurring a ways from the main festival hub in Park City. Also, the second half of Sundance, known for lighter crowds, was drawing to a close. Yet when the time came for the film to start, and as we and dozens of other people in the waitlist line anxiously waited to learn if we’d make it into the screening, word came that once again, not a single person from the waitlist would be admitted. The theater was at capacity.
There was one more way to see the film: the ticketed online version of “Twinless” was available to stream starting Jan. 30 on Sundance’s virtual platform. But by Feb. 1 it had been removed.
Despite the inherent popularity of a critical darling such as “Twinless,” which has received rave reviews and has a high-profile actor attached, there’s more to this story than just regular festival-induced hysteria.
On Jan. 31 at around 12:30 a.m. MT, images, videos and plot details of “Twinless” were leaked online — based on our research, the leak originated on a website called Large Penis Support Group (LPSG). At 8 a.m. the day before, the film was available to stream online to ticket-buyers. But come afternoon of the 31st, details about the film had made it to X (formerly known as Twitter) in the form of graphic imagery that spoiled large details regarding the plot.
A similar situation involving “Selena y Los Dinos” occurred at this year’s festival as well, in which short sections of the feature documentary were leaked on TikTok. This film was also removed from Sundance’s online platform “after a series of copyright infringements,” The Sundance Institute said in a statement.
These incidents are not isolated to this year’s Sundance Festival — rather, they’re the natural climax to an unfortunate phenomenon that’s been happening more frequently as of late. The day after “Wicked” released in the United States, a fan account on X posted to their followers, asking people to “show ur “wicked part 1” photosss.” Fans of the musical responded with photos and videos they’d taken in movie theaters, sparking debate online regarding the ethics of phone use at the movies. Even before the “Wicked” incident, “Deadpool & Wolverine” director Shawn Levy reposted numerous spoiler-ridden photos fans had taken in movie theaters, the same week of the film’s release. Photos of title cards for newly-released films have become the fodder of Instagram pages.
While theater chain Alamo Drafthouse directly condemned the “Wicked” post, it’s concerning that someone of Shawn Levy’s stature would validate fans violating the social (and legal) contract of movie-going.
These films all involve actors or subject matter with significant online followings, often composed of extremely devoted fans (referred to as “stans”). Usually the scenes that get recorded in popular films such as these come from a place of recognition, making them relevant to the fandom involved. “Deadpool & Wolverine” faced leaked footage of popular Marvel characters and actors who were not advertised to be in the film. Leaked scenes from “Wicked” featured beloved musical set pieces such as “Defying Gravity” and “Dancing Through Life.”
The stan culture surrounding “Twinless” specifically revolves around Dylan O’Brien. O’Brien has been at the center of online obsession for years, following his appearances in young adult media such as the “Maze Runner” films and the “Teen Wolf” TV series. It’s worth noting that the leaked clip from “Twinless” is sexually explicit in nature, featuring O’Brien’s character having sex with another man. This detail is only relevant because various characters of O’Brien’s over the years have been the subject of gay speculation — dating back to his role as Stiles Stilinski in “Teen Wolf,” which premiered in 2011. There’s a specific preoccupation with seeing O’Brien in a role such as his in “Twinless,” which undoubtedly contributed to the current situation.
“Twinless” premiered at Sundance, meaning the number of people who will see it at this point is, by design, limited. As of this writing, the film has no distributor publicly attached; on the contrary, films such as “Twinless” come to Sundance with the intent of generating word-of-mouth and courting buyers who can give them a proper release. An eventual wide release will allow for more people to see the film than are currently permitted.
A shaky recording of a laptop screen, showing a single scene from the film out of context, was not the way “Twinless” was meant to be seen during Sundance.
This situation is a result of the FOMO factor that is inherent in the generation raised on social media. Films are treated by many not as art to engage with, but rather events to take pictures of. This extends beyond movies; life becomes more about documentation than experience. It’s not enough to log on Letterboxd that you watched a movie — you have to take a picture in the theater to make sure people know you were there. Piracy laws are incidental to the desire to be part of the in-group.
It’s unclear if the lack of digital access to “Twinless” led to a renewed interest in seeing the film in person during the final days of Sundance. What is clear, however, is that from the moment “Twinless” was taken down, the only people who could see it at this festival were those who could fit into the final two screenings — this excludes crowds of people on the waitlist, festival volunteers, critics using the online portal and anyone who paid to digitally screen the film from afar. Only those attending Sundance in person could watch the award-winning film, and even that was far from a guarantee.
It’s been clear from conversations we’ve had with other festival-goers that “Twinless” was the hot-ticket item of this year’s Sundance. As a patron said to us earlier in the week, there is always one film that proves impossible for those in the waitlist to get into — this year’s was “Twinless.”
The evening before we tried (and failed) to see “Twinless” for the second time, the leaked clip was already garnering thousands of likes on X. But as critics ourselves, who originally planned on reviewing the film, it was nearly impossible to avoid spoilers. We didn’t want to see any part of this film until we had the chance to see it in its entirety — as is surely the case for many others.
Critics have speculated that this will be the end of virtual screenings for Sundance. But above all else, those who are most affected are the artists, such as O’Brien and writer/director Sweeney, whose work deserves to be treated with more respect. “Twinless,” for most people, is something to look forward to in the future — but for now, we’ll just have to patiently wait.