Eternal Sunshine...worst movie ever...

[TomServo69]

vanhagar3000 said:

tomservo69 said:

That's it, it's definitely time for Forrest and me to send the death squad after you.

Servo

Okay fine. Just don't make me watch 2001 again. ;D

Nah, I'll make you watch WCW pay per views from 2000 and 2001.

I know how to make you hurt!

Servo

[vanhagar3000]

tomservo69 said:

vanhagar3000 said:

Okay fine. Just don't make me watch 2001 again. ;D

Nah, I'll make you watch WCW pay per views from 2000 and 2001.

I know how to make you hurt!

Servo

DEAR GOD NO! 2001 IS THE BEST MOVIE EVER MADE! KUBRICK IS GOD! I BOW DOWN TO KUBRICK!!!!

[TomServo69]

vanhagar3000 said:

tomservo69 said:

Nah, I'll make you watch WCW pay per views from 2000 and 2001.

I know how to make you hurt!

Servo

DEAR GOD NO! 2001 IS THE BEST MOVIE EVER MADE! KUBRICK IS GOD! I BOW DOWN TO KUBRICK!!!!

OK, "puts away tape of Greed 2001", don't make me bust those out again.

Servo

[vanhagar3000]

Funny how every thread now a days seems to degenerate into a debate about 2001.

[NerdGroupie]

And I've still never seen it.

[mummifiedstalin]

Okay weird. Synchronicity reigns. First sampo rents a movie I just watched, and now last night my wife brings home Eternal Sunshine since she'd never seen it.

So I thought I'd give my opinions.

First, to address Forrest's main complaint: I didn't find the "MTV cam" all that distracting, to be honest. The jump shots seemed to fit with the way they were presenting memory as somewhat disjunctive, associative, and random. But then I don't usually react all that strongly at all to "camera work" like a lot of people, so it's no surprise it didn't distract me.

As for the story, I think the comparison to Overdrawn is a stretch. Both are dealing with a good ole sci-fi trope of memory machines that have gotten worked over in a lot of ways, Total Recall probably being the most famous, but there are tons of versions in novels and short stories. Besides, Overdrawn seemed to want to use it as the basis of the plot...like the "technology" itself was the point. Here, the procedure is really just a way to tell an allegory about relationships. And for that, it worked well.

But it dramatized the difficulty of relationships very well, I thought: his isolation in his own mind (getting cut off from the person you love), the awkwardness, the way relationships go through extreme highs and lows (which was why I thought Kate Winslet did a great job of not seeming to have a thoroughly consistent character sometimes...which was exactly how Carrey was feeling about her). And I thought the end was particularly moving when they agreed to give it another shot even though they knew how it was going to turn out. It was the best part of the theme for me since it was total anti-hollywood relationships: they can work even when they aren't wonderful, and even when you're fully aware of the things that are going to destroy them.

Anyway, I liked it. Not a classic, I guess, but not an utter failure, either.

[yousonuva]

I loved this movie. It had something a lot of movies don't give off anymore. Emotional impact and a love for the characters. And it's beautifully shot, whatever the hell kind of cam they used. It really felt like being in someone's dream (which is pretty much what it is). There, I have spoken and that means it's become fact that this is a good movie....all depart.

[BoB3K]

I just watched this movie last week. Here's my opinion:

The plot device was nothing new, but used here in a good way to examine human relationships.

The camera-work didn't bother me at all. In fact I would say there were less jump-cuts than the average blockbuster action movie of recent times.

SPOILER: Click to show

I thought the end at the beginning thing really had no point here except to confuse the audience, although I guess you could make the argument that it was adding to the point of the movie, which is...

I thought they did a good job of making a point in this movie. They show a relationship (And I agree with the others who've said it was a very good portrayal of a real relationship). And then after the relationship falls apart and is erased, the two people end up together again. Point: we are more than just our memories. We would make the same choices even without them. Then, they go one step further (and I thought this was pretty interesting), after the two people have made the same choices again, they are given back their memories and shown their supposed bad mistake...and they STILL make the choice again. So, we would make the same choices WITH or WITHOUT past experience, WITH or WITHOUT knowing the possible consequences.

I didn't really like the whole sub-plot of the workers and their screwing around. I didn't think it fit with the other part of the movie. But once the movie was over, I realized its importance. For one, it's the plot device used to let Carry's character find out what's going on. And two, the affair between the assistant and the doctor is an exact parrallel to the main story, hammering the point home.

I didn't really love the movie; I though it was okay. I do think it was a relatively well made movie, with an interesting plot and characters. So, I guess that means I disagree with Forrest. I also didn't think once, for even a moment that it was at all like ODATMB. One is about memories being erased as a device to examine human relationships and the human condition, the other is about transfer of human conciousness as a device to examine, uh, a crappy future society with little imagination and, uh, big fat ComHugCo CEOs.