Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind (Michel Gondry, 2004)

[Michael]

Now reflecting on all the films I've seen through the soon-to-end year, there is a handful that I really love - Bad Education, Before Sunset, Shaun of the Dead (this one failing to appear on critics' top tens..why?!? ).

So now what is the #1 of 2004 for me? Easy answer. The Gondry film released very earlier this year - Eternal Sunshine Of The Spotless Mind. Rewatching the film on DVD numerous times confirmed this.

When it first came out, I was worried about it being another same old Charlie Kaufman vehicle (Being John Malkovich and Adaptation were impressive but quickly faded away) .. however Eternal Sunshine made me forget Kaufman. And it is so much better! I remember after watching Malkovich and Adaptation, the first word came out of my mouth - Cool!. But with Eternal Sunshine, no word came out. Fortunately the freezing rain was pouring outside, masking the tears already soaking my face. For years, I had lost faith in cinema's representation of love, romance. It had become too dishonest, ridiculous, glossy. However, this year with two so-beyond-great romances - Eternal Sunshine and Before Sunset - my faith is now restored.

Eternal Sunshine is a very deeply felt film. A perfect love story. The two lovers - Joel and Clementine - are so beautifully real.. as soon as I laid my eyes on Joel.. I thought - "that's me". The magic is how the film makes the characters become you, not in the physical sense but from within (inside out that is)... no matter what your background is. This film changed my mind about Jim Carrey forever. What a brilliant performance.

The film is overloaded with universes of images, sounds, ideas and first time watching it can be irritating or intimidating as you get busied up trying to figure out what's going on in the film.. but I find that rewatching the film is so much rewarding because then you will get to feel the love, intimacy between Joel and Clementine more. And it is very very impossibly honest and poignant.

How many of you love the cinematography? At first, it is not that special enough to write about because the atmosphere is plain but after the film is over, the way the camera sweeps around throughout the film magically stays with me.. it actually feels like dreaming.

I'm very happy to see this title finds it way to countless Top Ten lists on this forum. I would love to see more thoughts about this film from you folks.

Happy New Year.

[exte]

While there was another thread about this fine film, I think, I do agree it's the best of the year, and it's a shame not many lists have it at the top. Because it was an early release, it will probably be forgotten at the Oscars....

[Michael]

While there was another thread about this fine film, I think, I do agree it's the best of the year, and it's a shame not many lists have it at the top.

I remember there was a thread devoted to Eternal Sunshine but it's now gone unfortunately.

Because it was an early release, it will probably be forgotten at the Oscars....

Or maybe not. This could be this years Lost In Translation.

[dvdane]

I was very dissapointed by it, for several reasons.

The first was how stupid its premise was. Here was a guy, completely insecure, an emotional virgin, who meets a girl with whom he has nothing in common. Its infatuation, not love. Their split is inevitable.

Spoiler

Now she gets her memory erased, because he is such a loser. Fine. So does he, or at least intends too. Fine. But as an emotional virgin, he still loves her, so now we have a whimp playing mental cat and mouse with the erasers, while, she is reversing the proces on the other side.

This means, that the entire credibility of the story, and its ability to make the audience buy into it, depends on how the viewer can identify with an emotional whimp. If he thinks its so romantic, then great idea, if not, then the film dies. For me, I hate the two main characters with a passion. Carrey needs a wakeup call from his naive state of mind, and Winslet should grow up. The only character I feel anything for is Wood; I honestly believe his emotions are genuine.

As a story, this is the weakest story yet from Kaufman, even weaker than Human Nature, and surprisingly ordinary. So despite great acting, especially by Carrey and Wood, so despite amazing mise-en-scene and some devilish editing, the story depends on one very weak premise.

One thing is that the film has been hyped to the extreme, but another thing is why so many buy into the love story. Is this a film for emotional wrecks?

[Poncho Punch]

Is this a film for emotional wrecks?

Yup.

[Michael]

I decided to give Eternal another viewing. I will take my "perfect love story" statement back. It's certainly an overstatment. Looking closer to the relationship between Joel and Clementine this time around, I now realized that this is NOT the relationship I would like to have. Geez. What happened? Did the film fool me the first time into thinking that the love between Joel and Clementine is "all that"? Joel is one very insecure man..wonder if it is the first time for him to enter a romantic relationship. Some folks' insecurities tend to come out in full bloom when they fall in love.

Does Joel grow up in the end? I don't know because his memories have already been erased. We grow up by learning from our mistakes but the problem is their memories have been erased.. so how would they ever learn? Is listening to their recordings on the Lacuna tapes enough? The film apparently takes the Kieslowskian path in the end - second chance, destiny and all that. BUT there is something there that bothers me and I still couldn't put my finger on what it is. Or maybe it's because something is missing from the film.

I could never imagine doing this to my partner of seven years -accusing him of fucking around when I have no proof like Joel does to Clementine. Utterly disrespectful!

However what I LOVE about the film is the style. The look of it. The film captures the dreary, icy atmosphere of New York (my home) so perfectly. I clicked with Joel right there.. with his looks (coat, outfits, hair, etc) riding the lonely trains so many times. Only that and no more.

dvdane, what is your idea of a perfect love story? What do you think of Linklater's Before Sunset - another 2004 favorite of mine?

[dvdane]

dvdane, what is your idea of a perfect love story?

Casablanca

Then again, I don't believe there is such a thing as a perfect love story. Just think of these great love stories: A Month in the Country, Dead Ringers, Brief Encounters, In the Mood for Love, Lost in Translation, When Harry met Sally, White Palace, Martha and Les Amant du Pont Neuf, and how different they are.

I very much liked Before Sunset, and I have for a long time been a closet Linklater fan, but he is still to inconsistent in method and style to impress the hell out of me.

[Steven H]

I was very dissapointed by it, for several reasons.

The first was how stupid its premise was. Here was a guy, completely insecure, an emotional virgin, who meets a girl with whom he has nothing in common. Its infatuation, not love. Their split is inevitable.

I know many people who tend to get infatuation and love confused. It seems entirely plausible that this kind of person would end up being written about and then made into a character on film.

One thing is that the film has been hyped to the extreme, but another thing is why so many buy into the love story. Is this a film for emotional wrecks?

You obviously have a very intelligent and analytical mind, you should not let what other's think influence you so easily. Maybe a year or so from now revisit the film, forget the hype, and try to ignore the immaturity of the characters (I apologise if this assumption of weakness on your part offends you, I'm not trying to challenge you, merely talk about my feelings about the film in relation to your own). I find the film to be a very honest treatment of how confusing and human "love/infatuation" can be. Not remembering what you felt about someone to begin with, falling into habits, confusing your wants and needs... these things rung true. I liked it, and I would hardly describe myself as an "emotional wreck".

[Michael]

harri wrote:

I find the film to be a very honest treatment of how confusing and human "love/infatuation" can be. Not remembering what you felt about someone to begin with, falling into habits, confusing your wants and needs... these things rung true.

I agree with this statement.. very strongly.

I still feel that I'm missing or misunderstanding something in the finale of this wonderful film. After hearing their recordings on the Lacuna tapes, do the erased memories of Joel and Clementine get refreshed? Or do they go by their recorded words (just that) in order to realize their mistakes they made in the past? I'm sorta having a hard time with their reconcilation in the hallway even though I love Joel's subtle answer - "uh okay" to Clementine's warning that she's one fucked up girl and so on. Would you call this ending "ambiguous"? Or is it very clear that they heading to a hopeful future - running side by side in the snow?

[Kirkinson]

I think it's much simpler than that. Joel feels that the good he'll get out of the relationship is worth the risk of the pain he'll recieve in consequence. Joel is, at heart, a romantic, and even if he is deluded by infatuation, it is clear he has grown in the end because now he is willing to take the plunge. The Joel who existed before this romance would never have followed Clementine into the hallway and tried to convince her to stay. He would have been far too frightened; he would have let her go and it would all end up in his journal again. Even if his memory has been erased, something about their relationship remained with him.

Whether or not this means their second relationship will be any better is open to debate. Joel has become a little stronger, but that doesn't suddenly make them right for each other. Indeed, the original ending Charlie Kaufman wrote suggests otherwise. The script originally ended by showing us Joel and Clementine years later when we learn that they have erased each other and gotten back together fifteen times. This completely changes the entire message of the film.

Also on the cutting room floor (or in the waste basket; I don't know if it was ever filmed) is the revelation that not only did Mary have an affair with Dr. Mierzwiak, but she became pregnant and had an abortion. This also changes the film's intent considerably, and provides a lot more food for thought.

Here's the script, if you're interested:
http://www.beingcharliekaufman.com/spotless.txt

[Andre Jurieu]

I still feel that I'm missing or misunderstanding something in the finale of this wonderful film. After hearing their recordings on the Lacuna tapes, do the erased memories of Joel and Clementine get refreshed? Or do they go by their recorded words (just that) in order to realize their mistakes they made in the past? I'm sorta having a hard time with their reconcilation in the hallway even though I love Joel's subtle answer - "uh okay" to Clementine's warning that she's one fucked up girl and so on. Would you call this ending "ambiguous"? Or is it very clear that they heading to a hopeful future - running side by side in the snow?

I don't believe their erased memories are refreshed after listening to the tapes. I think the only thing that's clear is that they are heading to some sort of future, and more than likely they are doomed to repeat their past mistakes (I'll try to get back to this). However, whether they live "happily-ever-after" or simply descend into relationship destruction once more isn't really the point. The outcome of their actions doesn't matter, only the fact that they have made the decision to give their relationship another chance actually matters. The film is not asking the viewer to conclude that everything turns out fantastic now that they can start over with a somewhat clean-state. If anything, it's saying these people will continue to struggle with their relationship, but this time they will understand that the pain and heartache that they create for one another isn't some awful thing that must be despised and therefore erased, but rather something to understand as vital to what makes them more complete. Henrik is right in my opinion - their split is inevitable since they have no business being together, since they are both emotional wrecks. However, that's also the beauty in their final decision to try again, despite the odds stacked against them that their relationship is doomed.

I can understand Henrik's complaints regarding the film. When I first watched it in the theatre and had to deal with the grand canvas, I identified with Joel's plight somewhat. When I watched the film on DVD months later on a smaller screen, I was increasingly more frustrated by Joel's character (I was annoyed by Clem on both screens anyway - though I think Winslet does a great job with the character). I think it's also obvious that everything is an infatuation in the film, rather than our lofty ideas of "love". It's clear that Joel and Clem are infatuated with one another, that Mary is infatuated with Howard, that Stan is infatuated with Mary, that Patrick is infatuated with Mary, or at least he's infatuated with the idea of infatuation. However, I don't think my judgment of these characters increases or decreases my enjoyment of the film at all. The film works for me almost entirely because of how the concept of destroying our own memory is illustrated and the ability of Kaufman and Gondry to convey the value of every memory and our need to hold onto every memory, no matter what our response is to that memory. I also love how the film's execution plays around with the notions of images somewhat, considering the way our memory and visual images are related.

I have to say, from my POV, the relationship between Joel and Clem doesn't really matter to me. The really interesting characters are the supporting players, and more specifically, the tragedy of Mary's choices. I think, by having her recreate her own doomed fate once more, is where the film really speaks volumes about memory, situation, environment, and personality. That's why I believe Joel and Clem are doomed anyway, even though they now have knowledge about their past association. By essentially reconstructing the same situation that created their original trauma, these people will not escape the events they once sought to erase, as displayed by Mary's infatuation with Howard and her retread onto the same path. However, Mary isn't really tragic only because of her inability to stop herself from taking the same actions, but rather also because she lacks the ability to learn from her past actions, and she realizes what a violation this is a little too late.

I could never imagine doing this to my partner of seven years -accusing him of fucking around when I have no proof like Joel does to Clementine. Utterly disrespectful!

How the hell do we know that Joel doesn't have proof? We are only privy to Joel memories and of those memories we are only exposed to certain moments of his life. The method in which these memories are displayed only shows us a few moments from a forced perspective of one character. There could have been countless other memories that we were not able to witness that were erased during the process, which may have included Joel becoming aware of Clem having an affair. Maybe not. That's the thing though - it's all a mystery since memory is just a few fragments of visual images and audio occurring in our brain. Gondry and Kaufman choose to highlight but a few meaningful moments and display the influence of these fragments while destroying them.

[jorencain]

I think the only thing that's clear is that they are heading to some sort of future, and more than likely they are doomed to repeat their past mistakes.

I really think this movie has many similarities to "Annie Hall"; at least Joel and Clementine's story. First of all, there's the method of telling the story of their relationship: the chronology is out of order in both films, highlighting the high and low points of the relationships (although in this film, the timeline just moves backwards rather than the more jumbled order of "Annie Hall"). Both also jump back to some childhood memories.

Mostly, though, I think that the end of "Eternal Sunshine" and the fate of their relationship could have been summed up with Woody Allen's voiceover from the end of Annie Hall; that relationships are crazy and don't make any sense, but we put ourseleves through them because "we need the eggs." Both movies leave me with the same feeling; neither relationship is ideal (since both are doomed), but they enriched the lives of everyone involved, taught them things about themselves, and created indelible memories that each person carries with them, whether or not the relationship survives.

[Michael]

whew...jorencain, thanks!

This is exactly what I thought but I didn't have Annie Hall in mind...I think the initial problem I had with the film was trying hard to turn the ending into a hopeful romance.. in reality, the relationship was already doomed and being a hopelessly romantic, I denied to see the truth of it and made myself more confused!

[hearthesilence]

MoMA is wrapping its Focus Features retrospective today (commemorating the company's tenth anniversary). Yesterday, they were showing The Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind, and it was projected in what seemed to be a good 35mm print. I think the DVD/Blu-Ray supplements mentioned that they were going for a 'rough' look, and they seemed to have extended that to the lighting, which can have an unvarnished look outside of the dream sequences. In the last scene of the prologue, when Joel and Clementine are in the car and she goes to get her toothbrush and stuff, they're not shy about the harsh glow of a morning light - Winslet looks nice in the shade but the light really blows out on Carrey. It's harsh, but it blows out more gracefully than what you see on the DVD or Blu-Ray. Regardless, it was helpful to confirm that this was part of the original cinematography, not something introduced in the video transfer, but I do feel that the color timing on the Blu-Ray could be a little better. Who knows if the print's off, but even when you judge it using natural skin tones as a neutral tonality, the U.S. Blu-Ray does seem a bit on the reddish/pinkish side.

[Trees]

I enjoyed the film, and I will always praise thoughtful, well-made and well-acted films that try something different. I liked the creativity of how the film was structured and how its science-fiction elements unfold and are revealed to the viewer. This is creative and expert filmmaking with a fairly strong emotional punch, but there are some problems.

In terms of the story, obviously its premise is beyond outlandish. The viewer just has to turn off the logic switch early in the film, and enjoy the ride, otherwise one would go crazy trying to follow or pick apart its lack of logic. I found Carrey's character fairly dull. I've seen him in much better roles, where he's really able to shine. This character could have really been played by anyone.... maybe a John Cusack type, for example. I feel like Carrey was using 15% of his acting abilities here, because the character just didn't demand or allow him to use more. In terms of Clementine, for me, her character has a fatal flaw. For me, she commits basically an unforgivable act: to erase Joel. No one who actually cares for another person could do that. Does she care about his feelings? Does she think about anyone other than herself? Her act of having Joel erased seems to tell us the answer: No. This is brushed aside in the script as Clementine being "spontaneous" or whatever, but it's a massive betrayal of the underlying, so-called "love story".

It's still an excellent film with many techniques and set pieces worthy of praise, but this crucial, fundamental flaw, for me, prevents me from really, deeply caring about Clementine, and by extension, the film overall.

[Brian C]

Are you making an argument that you don't think Clementine would do that? In other words, that you think it's out of character for her to erase Joel, which would imply perhaps that the filmmakers are cheating a bit to make the story work? Because that would be a criticism of the actual film, at least.

It sounds, though, as if you just didn't LIKE that she did that. Which would have nothing to do with the film itself, it's just a matter of your personal preferences, as if the filmmakers somehow owe it to you to cater to your whims.

But I'll let you clarify, since you're not very clear about the exact nature of your complaint.

[FrauBlucher]

On one hand you say, "obviously its premise is beyond outlandish. The viewer just has to turn off the logic switch early in the film, and enjoy the ride, otherwise one would go crazy trying to follow or pick apart its lack of logic." and then you end up picking apart Clementine's motives.

[mfunk9786]

I can't imagine watching this entire film and coming away with even the remote idea that having someone erased is an unforgivable act. If anything, it gives multiple nuanced reasons why someone might make this decision, however hastily and irrationally. And no one owes anyone anything once they're no longer in a relationship with them (or, frankly, while they're in a bad and mutually destructive relationship with them).

Re: Carrey - this is easily the best performance of his career, and there's is plenty for him to do, so the statement about him only using 15% of some sort of massive untapped mine of acting talent has me scratching my head too. Really?

[Trees]

For me, the fact that she "erased" him with no warning makes the whole "love story" angle fall apart, because obviously she does not have a real love for him. Her's is not an unconditional love, for example. It's still a good movie about screwed up people, but I don't think much of Clementine as a person so it's more difficult for me to sympathize fully with her character.

[StevenJ0001]

For me, the fact that she "erased" him with no warning makes the whole "love story" angle fall apart, because obviously she does not have a real love for him. Her's is not an unconditional love, for example. It's still a good movie about screwed up people, but I don't think much of Clementine as a person so it's more difficult for me to sympathize fully with her character.

I'm not sure what this "love story" is that you're expecting the film to conform to. Why does it have to be a traditional love story anyway? It's certainly about a messy relationship, but what relationship isn't messy? And I don't see the film as being about "screwed up people" at all. I don't even think the film lacks logic--it seems consistently credible within the absurdist framework that Kaufman sets up.

With regard to Clementine "obviously" not loving Joel because her love isn't unconditional, does unconditional love even exist in the real world? Even if it does, it's usually pretty dull in narrative form.

[swo17]

It's not a love story. It's one man deciding whether he can live with the pain of a broken relationship. From what we see he could be kind of a jerk at times, so it's not the least bit surprising that someone as impulsive as Clem would just want to be done with it and have the kneejerk reaction she did. Have you never really had a broken heart, one that leaves you in constant agony with seemingly no respite in sight? I wouldn't blame anyone for wanting to be free of that pain.

[Professor Wagstaff]

"You know me, I'm impulsive" Clementine says to explain why she had Joel erased. That's what Joel did too, and both actions make sense to me for those characters at that time. Neither like the choices they made after the fact, but both saw it as a relief from their pain. I've talked with people who did similar things, threw out anything that reminded them of an ex only to regret those choices once the wave of heartache began to subside.

[knives]

It's also important to remember we primarily see and understand her as a function of his memory. What the real Clem is like could very well be dramatically different then the version that he sees her as.

[Trees]

Many of these are valid points, for sure. I was just sharing my own subjective, visceral, emotional reaction to the film. We all carry our own personal baggage and personal history and outlook into a story like this.

Like I said, I really like and admire the film a lot. I give it 8/10. If the film had even more of an emotional bite and resonance for me, I'd probably have given it 9/10.

[Trees]

Have you never really had a broken heart, one that leaves you in constant agony with seemingly no respite in sight? I wouldn't blame anyone for wanting to be free of that pain.

Oh, I have. Maybe that's why I didn't care for Clementine's "impulsive" action. She is brushing off her own pain and dumping it squarely on Joel, with no warning.