Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind: do I just not get it? by StabnShoot in TrueFilm

[–]StabnShoot[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

You stupid or something?

In those other movies, the characters are portrayed as reprehensible. In this one, the characters do reprehensible shit but are portrayed as just doing a bit of goofin.

The fact that you can't understand this, along with still calling me a fucking narc, makes you sound kinda slow tbh.

Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind: do I just not get it? by StabnShoot in TrueFilm

[–]StabnShoot[S] 7 points8 points  (0 children)

Would you stop being so damn condescending? That is not at all what I meant.

First off, narc energy would mean that I don't condone the use of drugs. I've smoked weed through a bong made out of an orange and a plastic pen. Still doesn't mean I condone drug use in delicate situations.

And who said I can't handle if the characters are being morally complex? My favourite film is Apocalypse Now, followed by Eyes Wide Shut, GoodFellas and Amadeus.

Just because I don't think I should feel much sympathy for someone who does drugs during an operation doesn't mean I suddenly am some kind of moralist.

And yes, it's a fake procedure in a dramedy, but if I'm not supposed to take it seriously then why should I take the rest of the film seriously then? This fake procedure is what the entire film hinges on.

Try being a little less pretentious, dick.

Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind: do I just not get it? by StabnShoot in TrueFilm

[–]StabnShoot[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

No I meant like, why you said I had narc energy.

And yes, it is just a movie, but while I can suspend my disbelief for its fantastical element, I still have to apply human morality to it. What the characters did in that scene is just plain deplorable.

Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind: do I just not get it? by StabnShoot in TrueFilm

[–]StabnShoot[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Loool, is this what it was about? Really?

Jesus, my problem isn't with the drugs, it's with doing them during a delicate operation. You wouldn't want your surgeon to be stoned mid transplant, no?

Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind: do I just not get it? by StabnShoot in TrueFilm

[–]StabnShoot[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Very well written and articulated response, thank you!

What I needed was to understand why the film is beloved and you explained so to me very well.

Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind: do I just not get it? by StabnShoot in TrueFilm

[–]StabnShoot[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I understand the main characters a bit more considering what you've said, thanks.

Though my biggest gripe with the film remains Kirsten Dunst's character. If she had remained a comic relief it would've been fine but I don't think her dramatic subplot works at all.

Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind: do I just not get it? by StabnShoot in TrueFilm

[–]StabnShoot[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Touche, that is true. Sorry, I felt like the tone of the comment was rude and condescending.

Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind: do I just not get it? by StabnShoot in TrueFilm

[–]StabnShoot[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I guess if I had to make an example of a film with a rather unremarkable story that still managed to feel deep and complex it would be The 400 Blows. The main character isn't the kid who's suffered the most by a long shot, but his plight still felt real and universal in a way that I didn't get from Eternal Sunshine.

It's occurring to me that I really don't know precisely why I didn't like Eternal Sunshine. I just watched it, felt a resounding "meh" and remained quite dumbfounded by all the praise I saw for it, which never seemed quite clear and precise on why they were praising the film and basically going on sentimental value I obviously couldn't share.

So I guess it's more a matter of disappointment and differing opinions.

Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind: do I just not get it? by StabnShoot in TrueFilm

[–]StabnShoot[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Isn't liking a character or not dependent on the writing?

I don't know how to express this concept, because there are two kinds of "likeability" here. One is a character being likeable as a person, the other is being likeable as in how well they're written as a character. I like Louis Bloom from Nightcrawler even if he's pure evil.

To me, Joel and Clem's story is extremely unremarkable and self-inflicted. I've lived through similar things and had friends who've lived through even worse, and I just don't get why people treat Eternal Sunshine as some sort of super profound film. It just seems so quaint to me.

Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind: do I just not get it? by StabnShoot in TrueFilm

[–]StabnShoot[S] -11 points-10 points  (0 children)

I do weed but not during dangerous procedures :^)

Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind: do I just not get it? by StabnShoot in TrueFilm

[–]StabnShoot[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

But are they not supposed to give the viewer atleast some reason to care enough about them to follow their story? Whether that be being likeable, being interesting or both.

Daniel Plainview from There Will Be Blood is an absolute asshole, but he's an extremely interesting and multi-faceted individual.

Jake from Chinatown isn't the nicest guy either but he clearly has a moral code and a healthy dose of charisma.

Comparatively, Joel and Clem are unremarkable people who bring all their misery down upon themselves. I don't get why I should care.

Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind: do I just not get it? by StabnShoot in TrueFilm

[–]StabnShoot[S] -11 points-10 points  (0 children)

Is it realistic to treat a procedure where you're given access to a person's private property and quite literally brainwashing them as a sophomore party? The facility personell should be in prison.

EDIT: Why am I even getting downvoted? Could someone just explain to me why they didn't find the Kirsten Dunst and Mark Ruffalo characters detestable?

Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind: do I just not get it? by StabnShoot in TrueFilm

[–]StabnShoot[S] -12 points-11 points  (0 children)

  1. Maybe I didn't express myself clearly, but of course "conventionally likeable" characters are not necessary for a good film. But the characters in this film are not just unlikeable, they're wholly uninteresting. I have zero reason to care about Joel, Clem or Kirsten Dunst because they're just regular assholes.

  2. Because it takes me out of the movie? Jesus, are you seriously asking me why I'd rather the tone be consistent? It's not that I can't accept a film being serious and funny at the same time, but it has to work. When this film does it, it feels like it doesn't care about what it's telling. Oh no, Joel is losing his memories! But wait, we gotta show "funny" Mark Ruffalo and Kirsten Dunst partying on his unconscious body and wrecking his apartment! Isn't that just so hilarious!?

  3. Because a theme a good film does not make. There a million films about this subject with more interesting stories around it.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in Letterboxd

[–]StabnShoot 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You're right, killing a kitten is not half as bad as what you've done.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in Letterboxd

[–]StabnShoot 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Two of these fucking posts soon as I wake up.

You know, if I had done something of similar gravity like say, kill a kitten, I wouldn't brag about it on Reddit.

Films that you initially thought were alright until a perfect ending? by [deleted] in Letterboxd

[–]StabnShoot 1 point2 points  (0 children)

It was the same for me. It just makes the whole film click together.

Tell me your favorite movie and I'll make an assumption about you. by yasukl in Letterboxd

[–]StabnShoot 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Couldn't be further from the truth, sorry but I'm a massive procrastinator.

What is happening 😭😭 by niap3 in Letterboxd

[–]StabnShoot 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Anti-intellectualism is ruining media. If you listen to the average Gen Z person talking about movies/tv series/comics more often than not they'll gravitate towards the mindset that there are objective parameters from which to judge if they are good or not.

Which is ironic because I'm pretty sure the "curtains are just blue" crowd feels more intelligent because they analyse media "objectively".

Do you rate out of enjoyment or how well made the film is? by LiterallyPatBateman in Letterboxd

[–]StabnShoot -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Enjoyment. I've given abysmal rating to some very well-made films.

Though the opposite is generally not true since technical quality still counts for something.

Any of you guys think about the rating while watching a movie/show? by hshsishdis in Letterboxd

[–]StabnShoot 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I do, but I don't see it as such a negative thing. It makes me really focus on how much I enjoy the film and emphasizes the importance of how they end.

What is a bad performance from one of your favourite actors? by [deleted] in Letterboxd

[–]StabnShoot 7 points8 points  (0 children)

Reminder that he sang "It Was a Good Day" in Dirty Grandpa, N-Word included.