Review: Adaptation. (2002)
Karina Montgomery
Full Price Feature
Charlie Kaufman is a different sort of man than one usually meets.
Besides having an obsessively self-deprecating internal monologue
rattling constantly through his sweaty, balding head, he also happens
to be an extraordinary new voice in Hollywood screenwriting. Being
John Malkovich or Human Nature ring any bells? That's him. For
those who might be scared off by these credits, Adaptation is vastly
more accessible, without being at all pandering. He is also the lead
character of this film, as well as the screenwriter.
Or should I say co-screenwriter? In a fascinating absurdity, Charlie
shares his writing credit with Donald Kaufman, portrayed as his twin
brother in the film, and dedicates the film to his late brother. Is
Charlie real or is he a Dark Half sort of doppelganger of Charlie's
id? Charlie, wisely, will not say. By the end of the movie, we can
guess easily enough which sections were written by Charlie and which
by Donald. Delicious questions persist: how much of the story is
true, how much of the story is fiction, how much of the story is
construct, or fictionalized truth. For all his avowed self-doubt,
Charlie has some serious cojones when he's writing.
Nicholas Cage (channeling the spirit of Gene Wilder) plays the twins,
and, real or not, they are completely unique persons, totally
different but physically identical characters. What a feat! I am
sure they even used the same hair piece for both Charlie and Donald,
so alike are the brothers - but at no point do you ever wonder which
is which. Nicholas is back, baby! Cage has fantastic timing with
himself. As Charlie he's shlumpy, nervous, even irritating in his
inability to connect. Donald is naively happy go lucky, unserious,
and definitely shaped by different mutations than Charlie. Chris
Cooper, one of Hollywood's great unappreciated, is marvelous as the
subject of the book; off-putting and compelling all at once.
Patricia Waugh describes metafiction as "fictional writing which
self-consciously and systematically draws attention to its status as
an artifact in order to pose questions about the relationship between
fiction and reality." (London: Methuen, 1984) That pretty much sums
up Adaptation; and yet it is about so much more. The plot is
basically about Kaufman having to write the screenplay adaptation of
Susan Orlean's (Meryl Streep) book The Orchid Thief, which becomes
the film we are watching. His theme of adaptation extends beyond
adapting novels to species and individuals, orchids and screenplays,
modes and methods.
It's about Kaufman, by Kaufman, yet it's the opposite of
narcissistic. He was a nobody who became something doing anything to
turn a book about nothing into a beautiful film about everything. It
is easy in the first 2 acts to forget, to just watch it as a movie,
but as Donald creeps more and more into the story, it becomes
impossible not to be aware that this is a movie about itself. It
doesn't feel forced, it is never confusing (a miracle in and of
itself) and it is always engaging. I loved it - I got on the phone
to tell everyone to see it right when I left the theatre. You will
get your money's worth.
--
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
These reviews (c) 2002 Karina Montgomery. Please feel free to forward
but just credit the reviewer in the text. Thanks.
rev...@cinerina.com
Check out previous reviews at:
http://www.cinerina.com
http://ofcs.rottentomatoes.com - the Online Film Critics Society
http://www.hsbr.net/reviews/karina/listing.hsbr - Hollywood Stock
Exchange Brokerage Resource
http://www.mediamotions.com for 1999 releases
==========
X-RAMR-ID: 33642
X-Language: en
X-RT-ReviewID: 825435
X-RT-TitleID: 1118700
X-RT-SourceID: 755
X-RT-AuthorID: 3661
Steve Rhodes
A film review by Steve Rhodes
Copyright 2002 Steve Rhodes
RATING (0 TO ****): *** 1/2
The creative team that brought us the wild and wonderful BEING JOHN MALKOVICH,
director Spike Jonze and writer Charlie Kaufman, are back again to mess with our
minds and tickle our funny bones in ADAPTATION. This time Charlie shares
writing credits with his twin brother Donald, who makes what might be called
ethereal contributions to the script. The Kaufmans write themselves into their
movie with a terrific Nicolas Cage playing both characters.
In ADAPTATION, Charlie is a painfully shy guy with a huge writing block. He
sweats bricks, as he tries to adapt the unadaptable, the non-fiction book "The
Orchid Thief" by Susan Orlean (Meryl Streep) about an orchid hunter named John
Laroche (Chris Cooper). It's all poetic images with no creative tension and few
character changes -- not the type of material that screenwriters like to work
with.
ADAPTATION is a deft and hilarious blend of fiction, reality -- there really is
a book by Susan Orlean titled "The Orchid Thief" -- and movies -- we go on the
set of BEING JOHN MALKOVICH. The labyrinth of a plot has a lyrical gem at its
center as we go into the world that Susan captures in her book. This part in
turn spills over into Charlie and Donald's lives. Like an Escher print, these
two storylines twist into and out of each other in such a fascinating way that
we're never sorry where the plot has taken us at the moment.
Charlie, whose dreams are passionate and erotic, has trouble when it comes to
real life dating and writing. In contrast, his goofball brother Donald is the
king of the sleazy scripts, full of serial killers and multiple personalities.
He even incorporates the trashy suggestions that Charlie feeds him as a joke.
Money, women and words are naturally attracted to Donald.
Meanwhile, Susan and John are forming a strange bond. They couldn't be more
different. She's a well-off and sophisticated writer at the New Yorker, and
he's a poor, good ol' boy whose signature feature is his three missing front
teeth. Although Susan is interviewing him about his time as a orchid hunter, he
is actually a serial passionist. Before orchids his passion was fish, and now
he's trying to make a killing selling Internet porn.
When the two stories finally collide full force in the cataclysmic conclusion,
the result isn't pretty. The over-the-top ending that the Kaufmans come up with
is the story's only dud. But as you leave the theater, it's hard to resist the
thought that the awful ending was intentional. It was a wacky bit of
self-deprecating humor, poking fun at their own screenwriting abilities.
ADAPTATION runs 1:54. It is rated R for "language, sexuality, some drug use and
violent images" and would be acceptable for teenagers.
The film opens nationwide in the United States on Friday, December 20, 2002. In
the Silicon Valley, it will be showing at the AMC and the Century theaters.
Web: http://www.InternetReviews.com
Email: Steve....@InternetReviews.com
***********************************************************************
Want free reviews and weekly movie and video recommendations via Email?
Just send me a letter with the word "subscribe" in the subject line.
==========
X-RAMR-ID: 33653
X-Language: en
X-RT-ReviewID: 825396
X-RT-TitleID: 1118700
X-RT-SourceID: 703
X-RT-AuthorID: 1271
X-RT-RatingText: 3.5/4
Jon Popick
"We Put the SIN in Cinema"
© Copyright 2002 Planet Sick-Boy. All Rights Reserved.
It's usually quite exciting when characters break the fourth wall in
unconventional ways, like when Jeff Daniels stepped off the screen and into
Mia Farrow's life in The Purple Rose of Cairo. In Adaptation, Being John
Malkovich director Spike Jonze and screenwriter Charlie Kaufman don't just
break down said wall so much as completely obliterate it. The result is
certainly the most original film of the year, if not since their very own
Malkovich.
I'm anxious to write this review, just to see if I'm able to adequately
explain what happens in Adaptation. It's a trippy, confusing ride, so let's
start with the basics:
REALITY: Several years ago, while his first film (Malkovich) was in
production, Kaufman was offered the chance to adapt Susan Orlean's
best-selling novel The Orchid Thief into a major motion picture. Kaufman
accepted, but quickly found it impossible to turn the book, which was about
a very unthrilling hunt for a rare type of flower, into something anyone
would actually pay money to see. Faced with both a devastating case of
writer's block and a looming deadline, Kaufman incorporated himself and his
inability to complete the screenplay into the script for Thief.
THE FILM: Adaptation is about a screenwriter named Charlie Kaufman who,
while seeing his first film (Malkovich) in production, is offered the chance
to adapt Susan Orlean's best-selling novel The Orchid Thief into a major
motion picture. He accepts, but quickly finds it impossible to turn the
book, which is about a very unthrilling hunt for a rare type of flower, into
something anyone would actually pay money to see. Faced with both a
devastating case of writer's block and a looming deadline, Kaufman
incorporates himself and his inability to complete the screenplay into the
script for Thief.
But the wackiness isn't limited to just that. Kaufman (the real one) gives
Kaufman (the fake one) a twin brother (they're both played by Windtalkers'
Nicolas Cage), who doesn't actually walk the Earth but does have an official
screenwriting credit on Adaptation. Are you still with me? Donald Kaufman
might exist only in the movie, but I'm still not entirely sure his character
isn't a figment of Charlie's (the fake one) imagination. But he's totally a
figment of Charlie's (the real one) imagination.
As if that wasn't enough turmoil for the typical moviegoer used to crap like
My Big Fat Greek Wedding, Jonze and Kaufman (the real one) bounce us around
in time from present day, to 4 billion years ago, to Darwin's time, to three
years ago, where Orlean (Meryl Streep, Music of the Heart) researched a
possibly crazy Floridian (Chris Cooper, The Bourne Identity) accused of
stealing orchids out of a protected state wildlife refuge. Her exploration
of John Laroche became the basis for a magazine article, which ultimately
became the novel, which sort of became this film I'm trying to review.
Hey, speaking of writing movie scripts, that's just what Donald wants to do
after attending a screenwriting seminar taught by a crusty veteran (Brian
Cox, The Ring). While Charlie (the fake one) tries to turn Thief into a
fresh, edgy, cliché-free story, Donald is working on a ham-fisted tale
featuring a serial killer with multiple personalities, car chases, gunplay
and a voiceover...all things Charlie (the fake one, and possibly the real
one, too) can't stand. I can't say what happens in Adaptation's last reel,
but if it doesn't convince you that the film is the most innovative of the
year, you've either missed the joke or are the butt of it.
As shocking as it may seem, this is Cage's first indie film credit since he
won the Oscar for Leaving Las Vegas. Not so coincidentally, it's also his
best work since then, if not ever. Between his acting and Jonze's
direction, you will completely believe there are two different actors on the
screen when you watch Charlie (the fake one) and Donald interact. Streep
is, as always, very good - it's a whole lot of fun to watch her do comedy, a
medium in which I think she's is completely underrated (see Defending Your
Life for more proof). As good as Cage and Streep are, though, this is
Cooper's show to steal. His Laroche looks like a cross between the late Jim
Varney and the character the late Jim Varney played on The Simpsons. Except
he's missing his front teeth, too. I bought it all, hook, line and sinker.
Meanwhile, Jonze is starting to one-up the Farrelly brothers when it comes
to making big stars look really fugly in their movies. After giving John
Cusack (you can spot him here, along with Catherine Keener, who plays Boggle
with Donald) and Cameron Diaz unattractive makeovers in Malkovich, Jonze and
crew turn the usually trim Cage into a dumpy, balding mess. And I already
warned you about what they did to Cooper. Aside from the destruction of the
fourth wall, Jonze and Kaufman's venture reminded me a lot of another
brother-made film about a movie scribe with writer's block - the Coen
brothers' Barton Fink. Ironically, that film's star, John Turturro, was
originally tapped to play Laroche.
1:51 - R for language, sexuality, some drug use and violent images
==========
X-RAMR-ID: 33687
X-Language: en
X-RT-ReviewID: 822967
X-RT-TitleID: 1118700
X-RT-SourceID: 595
X-RT-AuthorID: 1146
X-RT-RatingText: 9/10