before sunset and eternal sunshine are pretty much tied in my book. but before sunset had a better ending.

Eternal Sunshine I think might go on the oscars. I also think kill bill 2 should but wont.

im with ihgsoi....eternal sunshine and before sunset are tops....tho id say that eternal just nicks it baring in mind that before sunset is an 80 minute conversation...and i wasnt expecting that ending...i thought something would happen between the two of them...but then give credit to Linklater for that.

Unfortunately, I can't tell you what the best film of 2004 is yet, but based on the first two-thirds of "Eternal Sunshine", it ain't it. I'm going to watch the ending tomorrow, and then watch the whole thing over again to see if I'm more f**ked up than ever, or if I'm actually correct that a film written by somebody I admire could actually be SO lousy. The thing, up to this point, has "improved" from COMPLETE Sh** to just basic Poo (but certainly not worth the time of anyone with half a brain.) My 13-year-old daughter thinks I'm VERY wrong, but I'll check back later so you can yell at me some more. No way this thing gets nominations, but as far as I know, nothing yet this year will.

Don't make me angry...you wouldn't like me when I'm angry!

WHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHAAAAAAAAAAT THHHHHHHE HEEEEEEEEEEEEELLLLLLL ARRE YOU TALLLKING ABOUT???

Your daughter is VERY right! She knows what she's talking about and recognises quality filmmaking when she sees it...you, on the other hand...

I'd have to cast my vote towards Eternal Sunshine as well, with Garden State being a surprisingly good film.

quote:

---

Originally posted by mark f:
Unfortunately, I can't tell you what the best film of 2004 is yet, but based on the first two-thirds of "Eternal Sunshine", it ain't it. I'm going to watch the ending tomorrow, and then watch the whole thing over again to see if I'm more f**ked up than ever, or if I'm actually correct that a film written by somebody I admire could actually be SO lousy. The thing, up to this point, has "improved" from COMPLETE Sh** to just basic Poo (but certainly not worth the time of anyone with half a brain.) My 13-year-old daughter thinks I'm VERY wrong, but I'll check back later so you can yell at me some more. No way this thing gets nominations, but as far as I know, nothing yet this year will.

---

OK, this doesn't happen VERY often, but after watching it again, I'll have to take back my strongly-worded slam of "Eternal Sunshine". I still don't think it's half as good as Charlie Kaufman's "Being John Malkovich" or even "Confessions of a Dangerous Mind", but I think one could even have a whole brain and think it was well-done. Jim Carrey and Kate Winslet were both excellent, but I just wish that all the directorial- and plot-gimmicks could have mattered half as much as the (very) few quieter, introspective and (almost) romantic scenes.

So, Charlie, as of now, you can probably chalk up another script nomination, and Carrey deserves one thus far, but deserving has never had a reality check when it concerns the Oscars.

quote:

---

Originally posted by mark f:
OK, this doesn't happen VERY often, but after watching it again, I'll have to take back my strongly-worded slam of "Eternal Sunshine". I still don't think it's half as good as Charlie Kaufman's "Being John Malkovich" or even "Confessions of a Dangerous Mind", but I think one could even have a whole brain and think it was well-done. Jim Carrey and Kate Winslet were both excellent, but I just wish that all the directorial- and plot-gimmicks could have mattered half as much as the (very) few quieter, introspective and (almost) romantic scenes.

So, Charlie, as of now, you can probably chalk up another script nomination, and Carrey deserves one thus far, but deserving has never had a reality check when it concerns the Oscars.

---

I actually didn't like ANY of those 3 all that much. I was especially disappointed by Eternal Sunshine because, I suppose, I expected so much. This is part of a much longer conversation, but I think there's a real creativity gap in Hollywood which has something to do with the way films are greenlighted. I have a strong feeling that there are some amazing scripts out there, toiling in obscurity, but because the folks who hold the keys out there are not capable of recognizing their greatness (for any number of reasons), they never see the light of day. Take the "Best Picure" nominees for the last five years...starting with 2000's crop. Horrible. 1999 was the last SOLID crop of nominees, but the industry will be in serious trouble if they don't clean up their processes...

quote:

---

Originally posted by Metacritic Games Editor:

quote:

---

Originally posted by mark f:
OK, this doesn't happen VERY often, but after watching it again, I'll have to take back my strongly-worded slam of "Eternal Sunshine". I still don't think it's half as good as Charlie Kaufman's "Being John Malkovich" or even "Confessions of a Dangerous Mind", but I think one could even have a whole brain and think it was well-done. Jim Carrey and Kate Winslet were both excellent, but I just wish that all the directorial- and plot-gimmicks could have mattered half as much as the (very) few quieter, introspective and (almost) romantic scenes.

So, Charlie, as of now, you can probably chalk up another script nomination, and Carrey deserves one thus far, but deserving has never had a reality check when it concerns the Oscars.

---

I actually didn't like ANY of those 3 all that much. I was especially disappointed by Eternal Sunshine because, I suppose, I expected so much. This is part of a much longer conversation, but I think there's a real creativity gap in Hollywood which has something to do with the way films are greenlighted. I have a strong feeling that there are some amazing scripts out there, toiling in obscurity, but because the folks who hold the keys out there are not capable of recognizing their greatness (for any number of reasons), they never see the light of day. Take the "Best Picure" nominees for the last five years...starting with 2000's crop. Horrible. 1999 was the last SOLID crop of nominees, but the industry will be in serious trouble if they don't clean up their processes...

---

Well, Im glad to see someone not liking "Eternal Sunshine". I havent seen it yet and I want to, but seeing that I hate both "Being John Malkovich" and "Human Nature" with a passion Im not expecting much. I mean I like Charlie Kaufman and I think his "Adaptation" was the best film of that year (script-wise at least), but there comes a time when youre watching something that's been dubbed "creative" and "brilliant" where you, the viewer, can tell when the writer's straining WAAAAY too hard for "creative" and "Brilliant" ideas. When I write something that I find is wonderfully diabolic in its eccentricity Ill give it to someone and the majority of my responses deal with words beginning with a "w", a "t", and an "f". This is how I feel about the latter half of "Malkovich" and the entire plot of "Human Nature". I admire Charlie Kaufman as a writer with ideas but I cant say that I admire the ideas he that he, as a writer, writes.

I just think people (critics and audiences) jump on the bandwagon as soon as something "different" comes around. "Different" is always a good thing. Film makers need to break from the norm. But, audiences need to realize that its possible to be too "different" to the point of failure. And to quote David Ansen-- "this is the kind of failure that needs to appear more often."

quote:

---

Originally posted by Eccentro:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Metacritic Games Editor:

quote:

---

Originally posted by mark f:
OK, this doesn't happen VERY often, but after watching it again, I'll have to take back my strongly-worded slam of "Eternal Sunshine". I still don't think it's half as good as Charlie Kaufman's "Being John Malkovich" or even "Confessions of a Dangerous Mind", but I think one could even have a whole brain and think it was well-done. Jim Carrey and Kate Winslet were both excellent, but I just wish that all the directorial- and plot-gimmicks could have mattered half as much as the (very) few quieter, introspective and (almost) romantic scenes.

So, Charlie, as of now, you can probably chalk up another script nomination, and Carrey deserves one thus far, but deserving has never had a reality check when it concerns the Oscars.

---

I actually didn't like ANY of those 3 all that much. I was especially disappointed by Eternal Sunshine because, I suppose, I expected so much. This is part of a much longer conversation, but I think there's a real creativity gap in Hollywood which has something to do with the way films are greenlighted. I have a strong feeling that there are some amazing scripts out there, toiling in obscurity, but because the folks who hold the keys out there are not capable of recognizing their greatness (for any number of reasons), they never see the light of day. Take the "Best Picure" nominees for the last five years...starting with 2000's crop. Horrible. 1999 was the last SOLID crop of nominees, but the industry will be in serious trouble if they don't clean up their processes...

---

Well, Im glad to see someone not liking "Eternal Sunshine". I havent seen it yet and I want to, but seeing that I hate both "Being John Malkovich" and "Human Nature" with a passion Im not expecting much. I mean I like Charlie Kaufman and I think his "Adaptation" was the best film of that year (script-wise at least), but there comes a time when youre watching something that's been dubbed "creative" and "brilliant" where you, the viewer, can tell when the writer's straining WAAAAY too hard for "creative" and "Brilliant" ideas. When I write something that I find is wonderfully diabolic in its eccentricity Ill give it to someone and the majority of my responses deal with words beginning with a "w", a "t", and an "f". This is how I feel about the latter half of "Malkovich" and the entire plot of "Human Nature". I admire Charlie Kaufman as a writer with ideas but I cant say that I admire the ideas he that he, as a writer, writes.

I just think people (critics and audiences) jump on the bandwagon as soon as something "different" comes around. "Different" is always a good thing. Film makers need to break from the norm. But, audiences need to realize that its possible to be too "different" to the point of failure. And to quote David Ansen-- "this is the kind of failure that needs to appear more often."

---

I'm sorry Eccentro, but I just don't understand how someone could HATE WITH A PASSION "Being John Malkovich"
If you didnt appreciate the amazingly creative originality aspect of the movie, which in my opinion was the best thing, one could still love this movie because of how funny it was! Even the one scene where John Malkovich goes inside himself and everybody looks like him and is saying "MaLkOvIcH, MALKOVICH, malkovich! That one scene is one of the funniest scenes in movie history. I agree, that the plot got a little strange in the second half, but i still loved this movie. Plus, if you didnt know, it is one of the highest scoring movies on metacritic at a 93!
And unless Martin Scorcese's "The Aviator" is gonna turn out really really good, i am quite confident that Eternal Sunshine will take the best picture oscar.

quote:

---

Originally posted by kraftdeluxe:

I'm sorry Eccentro, but I just don't understand how someone could HATE WITH A PASSION "Being John Malkovich"
If you didnt appreciate the amazingly creative originality aspect of the movie, which in my opinion was the best thing, one could still love this movie because of how funny it was! Even the one scene where John Malkovich goes inside himself and everybody looks like him and is saying "MaLkOvIcH, MALKOVICH, malkovich! That one scene is one of the funniest scenes in movie history. I agree, that the plot got a little strange in the second half, but i still loved this movie. Plus, if you didnt know, it _is_ one of the highest scoring movies on metacritic at a 93!
And unless Martin Scorcese's "The Aviator" is gonna turn out really really good, i am quite confident that Eternal Sunshine will take the best picture oscar.

---

All of my opinions are based on a viewing of Malkovich when it first came out on video back in 2001. I have not seen it since but I might when it comes on TV. Why didnt I like the movie? Well, I think I explained myself in the above post, but more specifically it seemed that certain elements of the plot seemed tacked on to be "eccentric" (the half floor, the monkey, the old woman and the penis, etc.) Also, though the movie was clever (in a forced kind of way) I wouldnt go so far as to call it one of the funniest movies ever (thats not what you said but you said it had one of the funniest scenes ever). I dont know maybe, three years ago I wasnt able to wrap my head around the whole thing, but I just dont remember laughing that much.

Whatever it's cool. Don't take it personally. I still agree with many of your posts. I recently saw Being John Malkovich on Comedy Central. I think it comes on like once a month or so. Then again, its edited a bit for tv but in my opinion its the kind of movie that CAN be edited i guess. Unlike Pulp Fiction which is the worst movie to see edited ever!! Every few seconds they censor something and they skip over the most of the part after John Travolta accidentally shoots Marvin in the car. God, that made me angry.

I found Eternal Sunshine to be the best Kaufman script yet; it's his first movie to actually say something of substance. The others were just... fun. A lot of fun - but that was it. Eternal Sunshine offers depth...

And on that note, I still think Dogville is tops for the year. I'm surprised how little acclaim its been getting in the forums.........

This is what I don't get...WHAT DID IT SAY OF SUBSTANCE? "The Clash was the only band that mattered"? Kirsten Dunst looks good go-go dancing over an asleep brain-erased guy? High-maintenance women are the best...if you can only keep them? I don't recall anything of substance. I admit the last ten minutes were "quietly reflective", compared to the rest, but did it really SAY anything?

As far as "Dogville", which I had plenty to say about, the forums discussion is here.

Mark,
Being a middle aged married man, Im sure that you know quite a bit more than me about relationships and love, and I am surprised that you didn't see the substance in Eternal Sunshine in the way that it captured what its like to be in a relationship and the hardships of loving another that lead to causing you to want them removed from your memory. At 15 years old, Ive never had a serious relationship and cannot "understand" the movie in exactly the same way someone else might, but ETOTSM still "struck" me on a level no movie has ever "struck" me before. Its hard for me to explain, but the movie definately had depth.

I don't have to always be right or have the last word. Sure, it had some depth and it did describe some truths about how people may deal with love and its loss. Compared to Carrey's slapstick films, it comes off as comparable to "Hamlet". I just think that it was too satisfied with its intriguingly-original premise to explore its own ramifications. Trust your feelings and believe me when I say that I don't mean to belittle anyone's honest emotional reaction. That's why I'm trying to share mine, but I think I should shut up now.

Hey, new here.

Unfortunately, I too have to jump on the "didn't like 'Eternal Sunshine'" bandwagon.

The movie said nothing new. It was a calculated, by the numbers, candy-coated bloat fest. The worst part is that I really like all the people involved. The acting is superb. The direction and production are top notch. It just doesn't go anywhere new.

Think about it. How can you erase someone's memories, yet have a casual friend (Like guy in entrance way by mail boxes) mention that person to you. Poor choices on what to focus on in this film. It SHOULD have gotten deeper into the idea of a place like "Lacuna" actually existing. The doctor/secretary relationship was fascinating, yet, instead, Mr. Kaufman decides to phone it in with a love story that's been told a million times before.

As far as there being Better love stories out there?
Plenty:"Amelie", "Chungking Express", "In the Mood For Love", "When Harry Met Sally", "Manhatten", "Taming of the Shrew", “Edward Scissorhands”, "Romeo and Juliet", Both "Before surise/sunset" movies, "The Wedding Singer", "Ghost", along with "A Princess Bride" "An Affair to Remember", "Donnie Darko" (yes, a love story about the sacrifices we make for it), hell, even "Pillow Talk"!

Sorry Charlie, "Adaptation" is still your masterpiece

OK, first of all: The Wedding Singer? A better love story than Eternal sunshine? HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA, that was a good one man...

Second of all, It's a good thing that the film didn't insist on the Lacuna place, that's not important, the science fiction side of it is just a way to present the love story. A pretext, if you will.

This film creates a love story that HASN'T been told a million times before. The way Joel's loneliness is portrayed in the first scenes, for example, is very poignant.

And, even though I loved Adaptation, I don't think it can even be compared with this film.

I see your point Ed, but I think you can compare this movie to Kaufman's others, just like every Spike Lee movie is compared, or all of Woody Allen's are.

That's the good thing about it. Kaufman's movies have become their own genre. I still love his stuff to death. I just think this was the weakest one so far. Although, if ya wanna compare, I'd take E.S.O.T.S.M. over The Royal Tennenbaums any day! Wes Anderson has lost it.

As far as movie of the year, I'd have to say "Tarnation"

quote:

---

Originally posted by zapjones:
Although, if ya wanna compare, I'd take E.S.O.T.S.M. over The Royal Tennenbaums any day! Wes Anderson has lost it.

---

-spits water all over computer monitor-

Pffft....Surely you jest! I'm not trying to begin a war of opinions, but Wes Anderson--lost it? "The Royal Tenenbaums" was---was brilliant.

ACH I gotta go get some more water....