|
I watched this for the first time last night and I'm left confused. The movie itself is built on a fascinating idea and something that I would say is fairly universal for the human experience. The idea that we can somehow forget memories that are utterly painful and soul-destroying? Wonderful. Who wouldn't want to leap at the opportunity to do that? The mention of the idea itself will bring about things that everybody wishes that they could forget. I think most human beings are going to relate to that idea somehow and that by itself means that the movie will be engaging to some degree and worth at least A watch. I also really like how it pointed out that even though you WANT to get rid of those bad memories, you NEED them in order to be the person who you are today. That's a fantastic idea and expressed pretty well in the film. ...But there's a lot about this movie that I couldn't get into and quite frankly hated. The more I think about it, I think it might be a mediocre to average film, built on a brilliant idea. One thing that needs to be acknowledged is that watching this movie is always going to be somewhat of a personal experience. It's likely to drag up demons you preferred left sleeping. I think if you watched this movie when you're going through a breakup? It'd probably be devastating. I would also bet that if you saw it while a personal trauma was raw and very real in your mind, the film would definitely gently caress with you on a pretty deep level. A movie that has that sort of impact is noteworthy, however I wonder if it was the film itself that did that or if it was the idea of the film. Personally, I'm single, comfortable with my breakups and haven't had something horrific happen to me for a while (touch wood). So MAYBE I'm just watching this movie at the wrong period of my life for me to really sink into it. However, if the film was truly amazing, wouldn't I be able to sink into it regardless? Enough with the wishy-washy, let's get specific and dig into this a little bit. I think the biggest problem with the movie is that I found the relationship between Joel and Clem to be...well...viciously unhealthy. I did not like the character of Clem in the slightest. I thought she was an insane, trainwreck of a human being and somebody that shouldn't actually be in a significant relationship. Her seemingly manic mood swings from happy and fun, to sudden: "What do you mean by <X>" followed by an argument is just tiring. I've been in relationships like that and they didn't last, nor should those sort of relationships last. Nobody should be in a relationship with somebody who is constantly making arguments about things. On top of that, we see on the night they break up, she was drunk driving and home at an ungodly hour. Joel was left at home going out of his mind in paranoia and fear about her. Clem later says: "But I'm just a hosed-up girl who's lookin' for my own peace of mind; don't assign me yours." which I think is meant to be endearing in some way. To me it just says "I'm invested in me, I'm not going to invest in you, so if you're willing to invest in me, fine we can have a relationship" Joel on the other hand was completely the wrong person for Clem. He's a quiet, introverted...self-confessed boring individual. There's really not much you can say about Joel because there's not much to him. I believe that what the director was trying to do was make Joel a blank slate, for which we can project our own personality onto. But the problem here is that I just saw Joel as somebody who was going to get eaten alive by somebody like Clem. Which she did. Absolutely, he is going to be at fault for the destruction of the relationship, but we don't see much of him being a dick. Sure, he gets angry when she picks another fight, but god. Who wouldn't? This movie tries to express its ideas with this relationship. I found that I couldn't sympathise with either character in this relationship. I think this movie could have been a lot more powerful if the relationship that Joel and Clem had was something that was healthy and worth supporting and getting behind. When Joel is desperately trying to hold onto his memories of her, I had SOME suspense, but it was more from the philosophical ideas of not deleting memories. The motivation to try to get back with the character and to hold onto her? I was watching the whole time just thinking: "Dude...sever" Going deep into Joel's subconscious over humiliating memories to me didn't really add anything either. The attempt to hold onto Clem by implanting her into his subconscious didn't work. So what the audience is treated to is a series of embarassing memories of Joel's character. I'm not sure what we were meant to learn from those scenes. They seem to have very little to do with the overall character of Joel and as I said before, the plan didn't work. So what was the point of these scenes? So then at the end of the movie, they've lost their memories of each other. Despite that, they found each other again and start a new relationship. They KNOW they've done it before and it didn't work. Despite that, they agree to go for it again and this is portrayed as a happy ending. I don't get how this is a positive thing? Where are the characters going to go from here? They've forgotten their past relationship so it's highly unlikely that these two, MOSTLY incompatible people are going to learn from their past mistakes. They're probably going to gently caress up their second relationship just as badly as the first one. I fail to see how it's a positive thing for these two people to have "found" each other again and got back together. On top of that, we have a few extra subplots going on. While these subplots add to the ideas of the movie, I can't help but feel that they could've been expressed better with the Joel\Clem relationship. To me, they felt like padding. Basically, the subplots are trying to say that memories\experiences are one thing, but we have some sort of natural connection with people that we love. Therefore, even if we forget each other, we're still going to be drawn to each other. This is why Kirsten Dunst's character still goes for Old Guy (I don't even remember their names) after having her memory wipe. Meanwhile, Clem gets an "awakening" of sorts when Elijah Wood starts doing all the stuff that Joel was doing in the movie. For the record, I thought the Elijah Wood subplot was pretty cool and kind of worth exploring. But both subplots end up with the idea of: "If you love somebody, you're going to be drawn to them no matter what" ...but this idea is already expressed really well by the way that Joel and Clem get back together at the end. In fact, I feel that the subplots kind of dilute the impact of that because it was telegraphed, AND we saw it happen with Dunst's character. I feel like the subplots were unnecessary additions used to pad out the movie, when the main plot expresses the same ideas of the subplots. Long story short, I love the idea of this movie. I don't know if I love the movie though. To be honest, this movie kind of felt like I was watching a fantasy of somebody who recently got dumped. A fantasy where all past mistakes are erased and both people in the relationship are able to get a "Fresh start" to try again because the dumped cannot deal with being dumped. The problem is that the movie presents a relationship that isn't worth saving. I wanted to like this movie a lot more than I do. I love the idea and I like the overall argument that the movie makes. I'm really keen to hear other people's thoughts. I know this movie is well loved and adored by so many people. What am I missing? It's awful frustrating to find a movie that strikes a chord with you, only then to play a poo poo song straight afterwards.
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2016 02:06
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 4, 2024 15:08 |
|
|
H13 posted:
This may be part of the reason you didn't quite connect with the movie. It's been a long time since I've seen it but I thought it was brilliant. I read it as saying that memories, no matter how painful, are important and necessary to change and grow, and there are no shortcuts. If Clementine and Joel did not hear the tapes and remember their experience, they would have no chance the second time around because they'd essentially be reliving the first time around. But now they've heard each other's true thoughts and feelings; maybe now they can put their insecurities aside and risk being open and honest. At the end, Joel says he wants to try again despite the likelihood of failure, and maybe that's the point: the cure for pain being love.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2016 08:05
|
|
|
socketwrencher posted:This may be part of the reason you didn't quite connect with the movie. It's been a long time since I've seen it but I thought it was brilliant. I read it as saying that memories, no matter how painful, are important and necessary to change and grow, and there are no shortcuts. If Clementine and Joel did not hear the tapes and remember their experience, they would have no chance the second time around because they'd essentially be reliving the first time around. But now they've heard each other's true thoughts and feelings; maybe now they can put their insecurities aside and risk being open and honest. At the end, Joel says he wants to try again despite the likelihood of failure, and maybe that's the point: the cure for pain being love. Like I'm almost certain that was the point of the plotline with the secretary and the doctor running Lacuna, it implied the two employees and other clients had been through the whole thing multiple times. I do think some of the movie resonates more based on your own experiences but it's a bit unfair to say it's just an okay film that we project brilliance onto. I should probably rewatch it again, but I remember having seen it the first time with my college sweetheart, curled up on the couch, not having really had a bitter break-up, and getting a bit misty-eyed. Then my second viewing was years later I think while house-sitting for parents during one of the first holiday seasons after a somewhat friendly break-up with that girl and I remember finding some of the early scenes with Joel and the awkwardness of associates having no idea you'd broken up and how much even that could hurt. But hell, maybe H13 is right and the film just sings to nebbish dorks who've had pretty girls with dyed hair break their hearts. H13 posted:Clem later says: "But I'm just a hosed-up girl who's lookin' for my own peace of mind; don't assign me yours." which I think is meant to be endearing in some way. To me it just says "I'm invested in me, I'm not going to invest in you, so if you're willing to invest in me, fine we can have a relationship" I also think Clementine is a great character though, for precisely the reasons you hate her. She's both the most human "manic pixie dream girl" I've ever seen, years before the archetype took off, and even in that speech critiques the drat archetype and the sort of shy introverts that covet the imaginary free spirit that'll complete them. The movie really would've been worse if it was clear Joel and Clementine were made for each other or he really could save his memories, or it in anyway glossed over how incredibly flawed they were.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2016 11:18
|
|
|
Coolness Averted posted:Ha funny enough I agree with you about it being brilliant, but I don't remember the ending being optimistic at all about Joel and Clementine's relationship going forward, like h13 I was under the impression that things probably are going to go bad again, since they're still the same people. They're still the same people, but they're not. Like the song goes, everybody's gotta learn sometime. I wouldn't say the ending is optimistic, but I think it's hopeful, and signifies a big change for Joel: whereas at the beach house he ran away out of fear, at the end he asks Clementine to stay. Whether things work out or not is beside the point; that Joel is willing to risk being vulnerable and expose his true self, and try to love Clementine for who she is and hope that he's loved back in the same way, seems closer to it. I think there's a bit of Groundhog Day in this, plus the terribly romantic notion of getting a second chance with the one who got away.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2016 18:10
|
|
|
All Charlie Kaufman films are nihilistic, soul-draining anecdotes. Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind: There are no true second chances; life is cyclical and we are doomed to fall into the same patterns of pain and misery. Being John Malkovich: People are manipulative; it is impossible for humans to truly understand each other. Synecdoche, New York: Women are evil; we have no control over the course of our lives; art is meaningless. Anomalisa: Human beings are bored by their similarities and repulsed by their differences.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2016 20:15
|
|
|
In the early drafts of the script you see Clementime as a old lady at Lacuna erasing the memory of Joel again, so it is supposed to go around and around and around but slightly different. Also I think a early script had the roles reversed where Joel "stooped down" to Clems level and then this one time it reversed and that's what set off the events of the movie. Cuz if you think about it, Clem has some serious mental issues. She's 40 and still dying her hair colors and works in a book store.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2016 22:43
|
|
|
I found it kind of disturbing that the movie suggested behavior such as getting drunk and then driving home and crashing into poo poo on the way (and having no regrets about that) was just a normal personality quirk to have, like the fact that Carey's character is "boring." Yeah, sorry movie, she is way hosed in the head and shouldn't be having a relationship with anyone.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2016 22:48
|
|
|
Nail Rat posted:I found it kind of disturbing that the movie suggested behavior such as getting drunk and then driving home and crashing into poo poo on the way (and having no regrets about that) was just a normal personality quirk to have, like the fact that Carey's character is "boring." Yeah, sorry movie, she is way hosed in the head and shouldn't be having a relationship with anyone. That was my main problem with the movie. I had no sympathy or good will towards the relationship. As a result, my mind was entertained by the ideas, but I wasn't emotionally involved in the movie at all. I'm not sure the movie has the legs to stand on it's own for a good 2 hours without that connection.
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2016 00:06
|
|
|
H13 posted:That was my main problem with the movie. I had no sympathy or good will towards the relationship. As a result, my mind was entertained by the ideas, but I wasn't emotionally involved in the movie at all. I'm not sure the movie has the legs to stand on it's own for a good 2 hours without that connection. But that's sorta the point, like there's a very good reason the two aren't together. It's a darker movie than 'love conquers all.' In general do you have trouble getting into fiction with unsympathetic or unlikable protagonists? Nothing wrong with that of course and would completely explain your disconnect. I remember mostly talking to folks when it first came out and were miffed about having one of the following expectations violated 1. Not an enjoyable Romance 2. Not a wacky Jim Carey movie edit: Like I view Joel as having kinda had moments of growth while going through his memories, but that growth is gone, he's back at square one even if he has some tapes the actual experience isn't there. I mean there's hope but the hope is more that these broken people will make the same mistakes but learn from them rather than erase them and go through another loop or do things right this time and be together forever. Although technically for Joel I think taking that chance is still a step up from where he's starting, we don't see the real Clementine having improved. Coolness Averted fucked around with this message at 00:42 on Jan 20, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2016 00:24
|
|
|
It's really strange that the film is marketed as a romantic comedy, all in all.
|
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2016 00:25
|
|
|
It's been a long while since I've seen it, but I still count it among my favorites. As far as Charlie Kaufman goes, this might be my favorite, although I think all his movies are worth watching. That said, they can also pretty bleak. I struggled with Clem the first time I saw this movie. Other movies would have treated her like the manic pixie dream girl, and show us that Joel is wrong to stifle her. That's not the interpretation I settled on, though. I generally don't feel sorry for Clem in this relationship. She's extremely destructive, and can't meet Joel halfway on anything. On the other hand, Joel is overly meek, insecure, and obsessed with himself (he's our Charlie Kaufman stand-in, after all). Joel internalizes his frustrations with Clem and lets them build up until he can't actually have a conversation with her. By the time he confronts her, they're both impossibly angry at each other. It's an ugly relationship that needed to end. I'll add also that they are both stubbornly not willing to change their personalities. Just imagine, if one of them had thought, "Maybe we need to change to make this relationship work," they might have been able to grow as people. Instead, they're both willing to give themselves intentional brain damage to remove the parts that tell them they might be flawed people. Now, if that were the whole of it, I think this movie would fail. Instead, the relationship I end up caring about, being invested in, and relating to, is Joel's relationship with his memories. You could interpret this as Joel's relationship with himself, which is a theme in other Kaufman movies as well. In Adaptation, "Charlie Kaufman" even bemoans the fact that he really only knows how to write about himself. It's sort of a bait-and-switch... it seems like I'm supposed to care about Joel and Clem, but suddenly I care about the nature of memory and self-identity. When Joel is clinging to his memories, I am struck by the weight of the process... it's pure destruction, and he's trapped. He's not losing Clem, he's losing himself. One memory that really gets to me is when he's a kid, and he kills the bird. That feeling of deep shame, embarrassment, disappointment in yourself... not only does it hit close to home (hopefully being a dumb, scared little kid is a mostly universal experience), but it likely explains some of Joel's personality traits as well. It really drives home the idea that it's just sort of sad to have memories, it's sad that they make us who we are, because they are inevitably lost (to time or otherwise). I find the end of the movie both sad and hopeful. I think this experience is especially traumatic for Joel and Clem because the tape is confirming personality flaws that they likely already know they have. The truth is they are likely doomed to repeat their failures. But I think they're willing to try, and maybe that's hopeful? This is a lot of  , sorry... the movie really stuck with me when I was younger, so a lot of what I'm saying is based off of what I remember feeling when I watched it. I'll reiterate that I think the music is great.
Seaniqua fucked around with this message at 00:32 on Jan 20, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2016 00:29
|
|
|
Nail Rat posted:I found it kind of disturbing that the movie suggested behavior such as getting drunk and then driving home and crashing into poo poo on the way (and having no regrets about that) was just a normal personality quirk to have, like the fact that Carey's character is "boring." Yeah, sorry movie, she is way hosed in the head and shouldn't be having a relationship with anyone. I thought Joel reacted pretty harshly to her drunk driving. That Clementine dismisses it as no big deal doesn't seem to suggest that it's normal or okay. Also, FWIW, I'd venture that 80% of the people I know, myself included, have driven home drunk or otherwise under the influence. That most of us managed not to crash into anything does not seem to be the litmus test of being responsible. Coolness Averted posted:
I don't think the entire actual experience was gone. In fact, I wonder if the memory erasure thing was saying that it's actually not possible to completely erase memories. We may suppress them, even try to eliminate them medically (hello pharmaceutical industry), but they're still with us and affect our lives in ways we may not even be conscious of. Coolness Averted posted:I mean there's hope but the hope is more that these broken people will make the same mistakes but learn from them rather than erase them and go through another loop or do things right this time and be together forever. I agree that Joel seems to have taken a step forward. The old Joel would have passively let Clementine go and gone back to his moping. Maybe she's open to change too; seems like the old Clementine would have left at the end and never looked back.
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2016 19:23
|
|
|
Seaniqua posted:When Joel is clinging to his memories, I am struck by the weight of the process... it's pure destruction, and he's trapped. He's not losing Clem, he's losing himself. Great point. It calls to mind the terror of Alzheimer's. I remember it being filmed so creatively too. Now I really want to see this again. Seaniqua posted:
Sad and hopeful sounds about right. Even if it doesn't work out with them, maybe it's still an intermediate step. People can change.
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2016 20:33
|
|
|
socketwrencher posted:I thought Joel reacted pretty harshly to her drunk driving. That Clementine dismisses it as no big deal doesn't seem to suggest that it's normal or okay. So you basically follow up saying that the movie is *not* implying that it's normal or okay by outright stating it's normal and okay. Alright then. Most people would fly off the handle more than he did if someone crashed into something sober, the fact that she did it under the influence did warrant a harsh response. Just because a lot of people have driven drunk does not make it okay, and despite it being the catalyst of the movie's main conflict, it's never brought up again. That, to me, is the movie saying it's not a big deal.
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2016 22:13
|
|
|
Nail Rat posted:So you basically follow up saying that the movie is *not* implying that it's normal or okay by outright stating it's normal and okay. Alright then. These are two separate points. I thought the movie implied that Clementine was irresponsible by having Joel get on her about it. On the second point, I wouldn't say that driving under the influence is normal, or okay, but I think it's not uncommon. Nail Rat posted:Most people would fly off the handle more than he did if someone crashed into something sober, the fact that she did it under the influence did warrant a harsh response. Just because a lot of people have driven drunk does not make it okay, and despite it being the catalyst of the movie's main conflict, it's never brought up again. That, to me, is the movie saying it's not a big deal. Some people may have gone ballistic, but given Joel's personality and character, his understanding of Clementine (he knows she'll get combative), the time of morning, and his overall weariness with their relationship, I don't think his response was inappropriate, and certainly don't think it implies that what she did was acceptable. Maybe we can agree to disagree on this one.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2016 04:46
|
|
|
Nail Rat posted:Most people would fly off the handle more than he did if someone crashed into something sober, the fact that she did it under the influence did warrant a harsh response. Just because a lot of people have driven drunk does not make it okay, and despite it being the catalyst of the movie's main conflict, it's never brought up again. That, to me, is the movie saying it's not a big deal. Or seen someone right about something but who argued it in the worst way possible to get their audience to respond? I think that's what's going on in the scene. They're both frustrated and angry at each other and this is it boiling over.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2016 05:52
|
|
|
The point is you need the bad memories to grow as a person. They are absolutely not supposed to be together but at that point in their lives they are attracted to one another for various reasons. If they erase the memories then they are doomed to repeat the experience and relearn that they are not supposed to be together. This is how people grow. Is how you spot red flags and it's how you learn about yourself. Bad experiences (hopefully) make for better choices. At the end they know it ended badly but again, they are still attracted to each other and that attraction won't go away until they go see for themselves how toxic it can be. Some people don't know fire is hot until they touch it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2016 09:05
|
|
|
I think you tried to watch this movie as a romantic comedy and didn't like it when it was something else. Their relationship is awful and poison but they are going to keep doing it again and again because people make bad decisions then over time forget and paper over why those decisions are bad and the do the same things again, sometimes for their whole life and this movie made that real thing real people do into a fanciful sci-fi machine to do it literally.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2016 19:11
|
|
|
Look at the ending of the movie again. The last shot of the movie, with Beck playing in the background. When they show them together, the film keeps "cutting" to them taking the same walk over and over again, almost like a mistake in the film in it repeating itself slightly. Why do you think that is? (I didn't notice that, either, the first time I saw it - that last shot basically tells you what the movie is saying)
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2016 20:56
|
|
|
As someone who absolutely loves the film, my main takeaway from the movie is that you like what you like about someone no matter what, and while the things that attract you to someone often can't sustain the relationship, they attract you nonetheless, and likely always will. In real life, I find myself missing ex girlfriends because I choose to remember the things I like about them and tend to put aside the things I didn't. Yet the reality is that the things I didn't like (or she didn't like) are the things that drove us apart. I explain my divorce to my daughter that way, basically that I didn't stop loving her mom so much as over time the things I disliked about her outweighed the things I liked, and the same was true for her. If she suddenly changed some key parts of her personality I'd be head over heels in love again. Or if I was made unaware of them, say through a business that could erase those memories.KidVanguard posted:The point is you need the bad memories to grow as a person. They are absolutely not supposed to be together but at that point in their lives they are attracted to one another for various reasons. If they erase the memories then they are doomed to repeat the experience and relearn that they are not supposed to be together. I think this is a great explanation of the movie. It also ties in with the sub plot between Kirsten Dunst and the Doctor.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2016 09:03
|
|
|
Abu Dave posted:Cuz if you think about it, Clem has some serious mental issues. She's 40 and still dying her hair colors and works in a book store. Surefire indicators of mental illness if I have ever seen them. Trump fucked around with this message at 16:00 on Feb 7, 2016 |
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2016 14:23
|
|
|
I wish people wouldn't write off films because they have a failure to empathise with a character. Sure, sometimes it's the fault of the film, but a little bit of research (Rotten Tomatoes etc.) would give you the consensus on if it's a flaw in the film. There is way, way more than goes into a film than that. Essentially when you discuss a film from the starting point "I did not connect" you are framing it through your experience only, which doesn't tell us much about the film; all we learn is you have a failure to empathise. 
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2016 10:35
|
|
|
H13 posted:This movie tries to express its ideas with this relationship. I found that I couldn't sympathise with either character in this relationship. I think this movie could have been a lot more powerful if the relationship that Joel and Clem had was something that was healthy and worth supporting and getting behind. It would have been a completely different movie if that were the case. As others have said, the relationship is bad, and both Joel and Clementine are flawed in many ways, and the relationship ends because of those flaws. The movie is more about coming to terms with relationships you've had and with your past in general, and whether you can learn from these experiences, even if they're bad. Whether the ending is 'positive' or 'negative' is up for interpretation, but even the most positive reading doesn't mean that the two will get back together and have a happy relationship that lasts their entire life. It could just mean that they have a relationship that ends less badly and they don't want to delete those memories in the end, and learn from it. You could also read it as more negative ('they're stuck in a cycle') and I think that was in the original script and maybe even filmed, but the final version of the film isn't very negative and I don't think it emotionally earns a 'hosed up neverending cycle' ending.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2016 11:19
|
|
|
Pedro De Heredia posted:It would have been a completely different movie if that were the case. As others have said, the relationship is bad, and both Joel and Clementine are flawed in many ways, and the relationship ends because of those flaws. The movie is more about coming to terms with relationships you've had and with your past in general, and whether you can learn from these experiences, even if they're bad. As I stated, it's in the actual film in the last shot of the film, you see them repeating the same journey over and over again.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2016 16:58
|
|
|
Darko posted:As I stated, it's in the actual film in the last shot of the film, you see them repeating the same journey over and over again. Yeah but that's a bit more subtle than the previous drafts of the script that were mentioned that flat out show Clem as an old lady erasing her memories again. Like you mentioned almost no one catches that stutter. Heck I don't even know if I will on a rewatch trying to see it.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2016 18:01
|
|
Darko posted:As I stated, it's in the actual film in the last shot of the film, you see them repeating the same journey over and over again. However, the final shot of the film is them being happy, playing in the snow on the beach. So, even if they end up repeating that same journey, where they swing between love and hate, they always wind up happy for a while. And, really, isn't that just what life is? It'll never be perfect bliss, but you can still enjoy things while you have them. Anyway, Eternal Sunshine is one of my favorite films. It had a huge effect on me when I first watched it, mainly because I'd just come out of my own strange relationship and I - someone who shared a lot in common with Joel - found that there were a lot of moments in the film that truly resonated with me. The beach house scene, in particular, still does - "I wish I'd stayed", indeed. God, even thinking about it now still gets me all choked up. I think the film is absolutely Jim Carrey's best work. I adore the direction, the nightmarish qualities (like the sand filling everything), the practical FX and perspective tricks...
|
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2016 01:08
|
|
|
I found the snow at the beach scenes the biggest mind gently caress in this movie. Snow happens up in the mountains only and on really rare occasions. #Australia
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2016 13:09
|
|
|
Milky Moor posted:However, the final shot of the film is them being happy, playing in the snow on the beach. So, even if they end up repeating that same journey, where they swing between love and hate, they always wind up happy for a while. And, really, isn't that just what life is? It'll never be perfect bliss, but you can still enjoy things while you have them. The issue is that they can't move on to someone they may be better matched to because they refuse to learn from the past and would instead rather just "forget" everything. Healthiness in a relationship is remembering the good times and the bad times, learning from them, and moving on. They wipe their memories, and, because of that, are stuck in a repetition of a failing relationship. It's basically a sci fi version of those couples that always break up and get back together over and over again because they're scared to move on and don't really grow as people in between.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2016 15:32
|
|
|
SciFiDownBeat posted:All Charlie Kaufman films are nihilistic, soul-draining anecdotes. IMO you're probably talking about yourself more than you're talking about the movies. I've seen all but Malkovich and I think you're very wrong but also very right.
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2016 01:44
|
|
|
^challenge anyone in this thread to make a more empty up it's own rear end statement than that
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2016 10:21
|
|
|
Abu Dave posted:Cuz if you think about it, Clem has some serious mental issues. She's 40 and still dying her hair colors and works in a book store. kate winslet is 40 today this film came out 12 years ago
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2016 11:42
|
|
|
Nail Rat posted:I found it kind of disturbing that the movie suggested behavior such as getting drunk and then driving home and crashing into poo poo on the way (and having no regrets about that) was just a normal personality quirk to have, like the fact that Carey's character is "boring." Yeah, sorry movie, she is way hosed in the head and shouldn't be having a relationship with anyone. The movie kind of leaves it up to the viewer to understand that that's a bad thing to do, and to acknowledge that it reflects poorly on him. We don't need a scene of him being chewed out or bitterly repenting, it's just a part of his character, and a part of our role as observers. People do that.
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2016 18:42
|
|
|
Mr. Unlucky posted:^challenge anyone in this thread to make a more empty up it's own rear end statement than that He got "women are evil and art is meaningless" out of synecdoche, that kind of speaks for itself.
|
|
#
?
Feb 29, 2016 14:27
|
|
|
H13 posted:Personally, I'm single, comfortable with my breakups and haven't had something horrific happen to me for a while (touch wood). (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2016 11:01
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 4, 2024 15:08 |
|
|
Perhaps the greatest thread revival I've ever seen.
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2016 18:08
|
|
