Eternal Sunshine

In my opinion, the greatest movies are the ones that are open ended and open for interperetation. Usually, a romantic comedies are the most repeditive, straight forward, and predictable movies out there. the plot of the usual romantic comedy goes something like this: There's some guy who meets a girl and they fall in love and do all sorts of things together until the guy does something stupid and loses her and realizes what he has done and works to get her back, and of course they usually get back together. Of course there are also a bunch of really dumb, corny jokes thrown in there (the level of "funnyness" of course differs from movie to movie. for example, Knocked Up is a very funny movie while Good Luck Chuck is painfully unfunny, not to mention it stars one of the least funny and most annoying comics in the business, Dane Cook...) Now, the great thing about Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind (Michel Gondry, 2004) is that it really breaks that stereotypical romantic comedy genre. the thing that sets Eternal Sunshine aside from most romantic comedies is the complexity of the plot and the characters. also, the fact that the ending is open ended and very open to interperatations

In the end of Eternal Sunshine Joel and Clementine both realize that they have had eachother erased from their minds due to problems they had with eachother in their previous relationship, but they deside to just go for it, for the sake of rebuilding the good memories. now the part that's very open-ended: How long will their relationship last? Will they go through the same experiences as they did in their previous relationship? Did they end up going through a continuous cycle of memory erasing? There are all sorts of questions left unanswered in the end, and there are many ways of interperating it. Personally, i think, due to the fact that in his memories as they were being erased, he decided to changed what he really did, and stay with clemintine. Now I think that their memories weren't completely erased, i mean where would they go? I think that their memories were just put into an extremely repressed state and Joel and Clementine are led by their subconcious to eachother. I think this because clearly Joel subconciously goes to montogue to meet Clemintine again when in his memories, she tells him to meet him in montogue. So basically i think that they have a good chance of lasting, because they are led by their subconcious to be together, even after being erased from eachothers memories they are clearly ( I dont want to say it in fear of being completely corny and cliche... but ill go ahead), they are clearly... destined to be together...

Unforgiven (1939) vs. Stagecoach (1992)

The films Unforgiven (Clint Eastwood, 1992) and Stagecoach (John Ford, 1939) would theoretically be better suited for American culture and society if for example Unforgiven was written in 1939 and Stagecoach was written in 1992. I suggest this mainly due to the lack of violence and the anti-violence theme of Unforgiven and the pro-violence and sense of adventure in Stagecoach.

If Stagecoach were written in modern times with modern acting, cinematography and a pumped up storyline, it would be a perfect film for today's society. In today's society, people love a movie that's fast paced, violent, and action packed. Of course not all modern movie-goers love movies like this, but it's safe to say that a large majority does. The love for movie's like Die Hard, 300, and James Bond in today's society is very common. People love a movie with a lot of action, violence, and a complete badass hero. Stagecoach shows all of those elements, but of course it is different because of the time in which it was written. Now if it were written in today's society, and basically modernized it would be a hit. If it were written to accomidate modern culture, scenes like the chase scene would be pumped up with a lot more heroism, death , and it most certainly would be more fast paced. Also, the use of modern film equipment and CGI could improve scenes, provide new angles, and just basically make the action look so much cooler. If Stagecoach were written in modern times it would be pumped up with more action, violence and heroism. It would be phenominally popular in todays society

Contrary to Stagecoach, the more modern film, Unforgiven, would be better suited for late 30's culture. In the late 30's world war 2 had just began, and the great depression was still going on strong. People back in those days probably did not enjoy seeing violence a whole lot, especially because a lot of people who survived world war 1 had probably had experienced enough violence in their lifetimes. People seeing films in those days would want a film with an anti-violence message, and Unforgiven would be a perfect film for that. Of course if Unforgiven were to be shown and written back then, it would have to be set to their standards and would most certainly be filmed in a more classic style. Although people back then would want an anti-violence message, they would still want some action and heroism in order to fully enjoy the film and so they can relate. Unforgiven seems to be a perfect movie for Late 30s society, and preaches an anti-violence message that people would want, and the characters are fairly easily relatable.

North By Northwest

North By Northwest (Alfred Hitchcock 1959) Is a great example of good set making. From the elegant and modern house of the villain, to the brutal fight scene on the authentically built faces on Mount Rushmore, the authentic and elaborate sets make this movie believable.
The "Vandamm house" is an example of professional set designers building sets that not only fit with the plotline, but also fit with the times. at the time, Frank Loydd Wright was a very popular architect, and Hitchcock wanted the Vandamm house to reflect that sort of style, Vandamm being a rich "art" collecter, it seems that his character would have a house just like this. North By Northwest is a film in which almost all of the characters live very wealthy and luxurious lives, so the Vandamm house fits right in with the elegant lifestyle that he, and almost all the other characters live. In order to capture this luxurious mood, Hitchcock really wanted to have a Frank Loydd Wright house as his set, although a huge challenge was presented with this goal, the emmense cost of such a house. So Hitchcock got his set designers (Robert Boyle, William A. Horning, Merril Pye, and Frank McKelvey) to create a Frank-Loydd-Wright-ish style house. This took a long time and they faced many challenges presented by this modern, even abstract architecture. Although only a select few parts of the house were actually built, mainly consisting of indoor rooms like the living room and the bedroom and a few upclose outdoors shots like the garage and the porch. The house you see from the distance was entirely face, no, they didnt actually build a huge house just for the movie. The architectual problems that they faced were mainly in the outdoor shots. The big problem that they had to deal with was the support, if the steel beams were strong enough to carry its load and if the angle they are at is undesireable. The crew even took a few shortcuts to lessen the expense; most of the supposed limestone was actually made out of plaster, and a lot of the windows were actually bare, there was no glass involved. Most of the far away shots you see are mostly just paintings, like the shot when Thornhill first approaches the elaborate house, there is just a painting digitally added to the scene of the house.
another very elaborate setting is on Mount Ruchmore. You can tell that the set designers had trouble with this one. They had to make an exact, upclose replica of certain parts of faces on Mount Rushmore, but they did a brillient job, they even put indents into the plaster to make it look like the places where the dinomite was actually placed in order to make the real thing, and the details on the faces are phenominal and very authentic looking. It actually is very interessting to see what Mount Rushmore looks like up close like that, and you can assume that what you see in the movie is as close as you are going to get to seeing the real thing.
The set designers in North By Northwest had some troublesome tasks in creating certain scenes. Not only did they have to paint and design the Vandamm house, they also had to make certain parts of the house themselves and incorperate rooms that fit to the design. They also had to create a lifesize, authentic replica of certain portions of the Mount Rushmore faces. They did a fantastic job though, after viewing this film, you could sware that there was a huge modern house on top of Mount Rushmore, and that people actually climbed on the faces and fought to the death on Washington's face.