The mockumentary film is born out of a transgression of boundaries between the documentary and the fiction film (Roscoe and Hight 2001). By offering a contract of recognition between the producer and audience, this playful nature of the mockumentary is acknowledged (Lipkin, Paget and Roscoe 2006, 17). The last decade have seen an increase in what can be understood as a mockumentary "mode of adress" (Nichols 2001), hence the an encounter with a mockumentary is increasingly produced as a habitual space for recognition and categorization. Yet the boundaries of this contractual practice are pushed farther through the so-called hoax (Roscoe and Hight 2001, 72). Film such as I'm Still Here (Affleck 2010) and Exit Through the Giftshop (Banksy 2010) deny such contracts of recognition, instead prompting questions of the verasity of their truth claims. More importantly they bring to light a question of some centrality in researching audience response, namely how the spectator negotiate agency, not only through an identification of what kind of film is on display, but more saliently how to understand oneself as a thinking subject through the event of spectating (von Schantz 2015). In this paper I argue that instead of writing off the hoax as a 'flawed' mockumentary, or a 'lie' these films can be seen as offering a particular contract, what I call a missing contract. That is, a contract that brings into existence a thought that is not yet (Deleuze 2005, 28). Instead of offering recognitionof the play with form and content as does the mockumentary contract, the missing contract offer conditions for the spectatorm as well as the researcher, to transgress the taxonomic tendency of spectatorship/academia and engage with reality (as encountered both on and off screen) as a performative and productive practice of bringing into existence multiple webbed realities (see Law 2004, Coleman and Ringrose 2013).