Adaptation - Thoughts and Reviews

[dh1989]

http://us.ent4.yimg.com/movies.yahoo.com/images/hv/photo/movie_pix/columbia_pictures/adaptation/nicolas_cage/adaptation.jpg

Plot: Set in South Florida (and probably the first movie to deal with a phenomenon known as orchidodelirium), this is the true story of a plant dealer and three Seminole Indians who conspired to clone rare orchids and sell them at exorbitant rates to plant collectors. However... that's just what The Orchid Thief is about. There's another half to this movie, and that's where the title Adaptation comes in. This movie is the tale of screenwriter Charlie Kaufman's (Cage) attempt to adapt The Orchid Thief to the big screen. That's right... this is a movie about its writer adapting a book, but it's also the adaptation itself. Whoa. In his attempt to overcome his writer's block, Kaufman seeks the help of his (fictional) brother, Donald. Meanwhile, we see the action of the Orchid Thief, as writer Susan Orlean (Streep) meets John Laroche (Cooper)...

I REALLY want to see this film. Spike Jonze is a wonderful director. His film, Being John Malkovich, is really clever, original, and witty. The writer, Charlie Kaufman, is great too. I thought his film release earlier this year, Human Nature, was funny as hell. There is also a superb cast. Nicholas Cage, while making some career bad choices along the way, is really talented and, with the correct script, can give a great performance. And Meryl Streep, of course, is an acting legend. She is one of the best, no doubt. The plot sounds amazing. I love twisty films like this. I am sure this one will be a treat for moviegoers and it might be an Oscar nominee, you never know. What do you schmoes think?

http://us.ent4.yimg.com/movies.yahoo.com/images/hv/photo/movie_pix/columbia_pictures/adaptation/_group_photos/meryl_streep1.jpg

[Nate6]

This film looks amazing. It's nice to see Charlie Kaufman continually going to work (he has such potential). It's also nice to see Nic Cage do real movies and Meryl Streep do different movies (too much generic melodrama lately). The idea rocks, so do the cast and crew.

[dh1989]

Moriarty, a writer from Ain't It Cool News, wrote an extremely positive review of this film. Some spoilers ahead...

Hey, everyone. "Moriarty" here with some Rumblings From The Lab.
This movie shook me.
I read the script last year. I read a few early reviews. I walked into the theater pretty sure I knew what I was going to see.
And I was wrong. Almost entirely wrong. See, I underestimated Spike Jonze and Charlie Kaufman. I expected something surreal and genre-bending and provocative, and it’s all of that, but it’s more. What I saw hit me in a deep, personal place and left me reeling as I staggered to my car afterwards. I took a few minutes before I even started the engine, trying to explain what I was feeling to my girlfriend, who could see that I was having a complicated reaction. The DGA is less than five minutes from my house, but in those five minutes, driving home, I began to shake. It felt like a shock wave was hitting me. By the time we reached my driveway, there were tears in my eyes, and I almost had to be helped inside. She talked me down over the next couple of hours, both of us digging into the film and what it makes you think about, simply letting it take us wherever it was going to, enjoying it as one of those rare film experiences, a total immersion.
ADAPTATION is like nothing else I’ve seen in recent memory. It is a complete original. It burrowed under my skin and worked its way into my entire system as I watched it, and no matter what I’ve watched since, ADAPTATION is what I continue to think about. I feel like I do on the far side of my first experiment in altered consciousness all those years ago, like I’ve just opened some new doorway in my brain, and I don’t know where it might lead, but I know it will be someplace I’ve never been before. I think the reason it made me so emotional after seeing it is because ADAPTATION is also one of the bravest pieces of film art I’ve ever seen. And it was made and released by a studio.
I think the word I’m looking for starts with an “m,” but it’s not “masterpiece”.
I think the word I’m looking for is “miracle”.
For one thing, I had given up on Nicolas Cage. It came to a head not long after he won the Oscar for LEAVING LAS VEGAS, but it had been brewing for a while. I still remember the charge of seeing VALLEY GIRL in the theater when it opened and wondering who this remarkable bag of freak was. RACING WITH THE MOON and BIRDY were both films I really liked when they came out, but it was the back to back punch of PEGGY SUE GOT MARRIED and RAISING ARIZONA that convinced me that Cage was one of the best, someone worth paying close attention to. MOONSTRUCK, VAMPIRE’S KISS, and WILD AT HEART were gifts for the faithful, films that we could point at to prove that Cage was the one defining whatever envelope there was to push in acting. He was Crispin Glover crazy, but he managed to get the leads in these films. The things he tried were either inspired or retarded, and that fine line is what made him so fascinating.
And then he hit a dry spell. And for Cage, a dry spell can be a majestic, horrifying thing, full of films so terrible they defy description. Films like ZANDALEE and FIREBIRDS and GUARDING TESS and IT COULD HAPPEN TO YOU and TRAPPED IN PARADISE. I started to wince when I would hear his name, and it was only the occasional RED ROCK WEST that gave me hope. His collaboration with Mike Figgis yielded one of his very best performances, and he deserved that Oscar. He made self-destruction a spectator sport, and he managed to give real, angry voice to a character that almost no one else could have made sympathetic. I hoped that Oscar sent him a message about his gifts as an actor, that it rewarded him for doing that same sort of brave, on the edge work that defined him at the start of his career. I hoped it was the start of a second, better stage in his filmography.
And instead, I got THE ROCK and FAMILY MAN and CON AIR and CITY OF ANGELS and GONE IN 60 SECONDS, and somewhere in there, I just gave up. I just got tired of watching him piss away these prime years of his life, when he’s still young enough to do almost anything. He was no longer an actor, as far as I was concerned. He was a movie star. To me, the difference is that movie stars play themselves, or some slight variation on themselves, while actors vanish into their roles, becoming someone else.
In ADAPTATION, Nicolas Cage The Actor comes roaring back to life, creating not one but two of the year’s most interesting characters, giving the best performance as twins since Jeremy Irons in Cronenberg’s seminal DEAD RINGERS. First, there’s Charlie Kaufman, the film’s lead. We see the world through his eyes, and it’s positively deranged of him to make himself a character in this film. I am surrounded by evidence of his reality. Right now, I’ve got an invitation on my desk for a set of screenings of CONFESSIONS OF A DANGEROUS MIND, written by Charlie Kaufman. I’ve got an advance DVD for review of HUMAN NATURE, written by Charlie Kaufman. And sitting on my stack of scripts to be read is ETERNAL SUNSHINE OF THE SPOTLESS MIND, the latest and hottest script by... yes... Charlie Kaufman. He’s a real person, but after seeing this film, I don’t know if there’s room for a different face than the one Cage gives him. He’s got a remarkable coiff, a strange sort of thinning orangey afro, his skull showing clearly through it from most angles. He is hunched, pushed over, like someone’s got their thumb on him. When we first get a glimpse of Charlie, he’s hanging back, on the edge of things behind the scenes on BEING JOHN MALKOVICH, which is being directed by Spike Jonze. We see a startling recreation of the production of that film, with Malkovich himself making a heartfelt plea on behalf of the extras in the scene. Charlie walks outside, feeling like he’s in the way, and we see him plunge headlong into life as a “hot” screenwriter. I typically hate movies about filmmaking because the details are always exaggerated, cartoonish, inaccurate. People prefer to play the stereotypes instead of the way things really are, even though they know better. In this film, Jonze and Kaufman achieve an effortless, perfect portrayal of life in modern Los Angeles working in films. This is the way it feels.
And based on the portrayal, you’d guess that it doesn’t always feel good. Kaufman is insecure, even in his success, and he feels a constant pressure to produce according to expectations. As I type right now, I glance down at my fingers on the keys, and I see that the nails on several of the fingers are chewed down to the quick and even past, ragged and awful. I’m stressed right now, working about sixteen hours a day, and I’m terrible to myself at times on some subconscious level. There’s something about the horror of facing a blank page that does this to people.
Cage’s other performance, as Charlie’s twin brother Donald, is remarkable because of how easy it is to simply accept him as a separate person from Charlie. The FX work by Gray Matter FX is exceptional, nuanced and sophisticated, and they’ve laid these two people into the same frame in a way that Bob Zemeckis could only dream of as recently as BACK TO THE FUTURE 2 (1989). They interact. They play off of each other in unexpected ways. They couldn’t be more different in the way they attack life. Charlie is the strong one in some ways. After all, he’s the one who has the movie in production, the one who has the house in the Hollywood Hills. Donald doesn’t even have a home of his own. He has to crash with his brother. He seems to embody everything that Charlie hates about the business he works in. Donald talks about “The Industry” and he quotes Robert McKee, a guy who gives seminars on screenwriting, and he seems to believe there is some magic formula that you can just copy that will give you a great script, guaranteed.
But there’s one way that Donald is completely superior to Charlie. He has the ability to connect with people. He meets the makeup girl (Maggie Gyllenhaal) on the set of BEING JOHN MALKOVICH, and they fall into the exact sort of light, casual relationship that Charlie dreams of, but seems incapable of initiating. There’s a heartbreaking subplot involving Judy Greer as a waitress at a local diner, and a major part of the film deals with the friendship Charlie has with Amelia (Cara Seymour), a lovely British girl who obviously cares about him. He can feel the tension between them. He even seems like he wants to make the right move and connect with her, but he’s frozen, paralyzed by himself and his own self-image and his fear of failure, and he never quite works up the nerve. He never quite says the right thing. And when he sees the way Donald is able to make those connections, it tears him up inside. It manifests as a sort of thinly veiled contempt for his brother.
Charlie gets hired to adapt a book called THE ORCHID THIEF into a script by Valerie (Tilda Swinton), who does a spot-on-perfect job as a development executive. Her first meeting with Kaufman is eerily accurate, right down to the almost inappropriate level of zeal that Charlie shows when he talks about how he’d approach adapting the book.
Of course, as soon as he gets the job, he freezes. I’ve had my fair share of sleepless nights recently as the enormity of the job I’m doing for Revolution really started to hit me. There have been all sorts of things going on that have really turned the pressure up for my writing partner and me. It’s a great thing, but it’s also terrifying in that jump-out-of-an-airplane sort of way. You just have to have faith that the chute’s going to open. You have to trust that you’ll find your voice and the script will come to life. Charlie begins the process of converting THE ORCHID THIEF into screenplay form, and as he does, we’re drawn into the world of the book, just as he is.
It’s a nonfiction story, expanded from an article that originally ran in THE NEW YORKER, by Susan Orleans (Meryl Streep). It concerns John Laroche (Chris Cooper), a charismatic figure who was arrested for removing rare plants from a Florida preserve. It was part of a larger plan by Laroche to breed these plants, including the elusive ghost orchid, using local Seminole Indians to handle the plants in an effort to circumvent local wildlife laws thanks to a loophole. At first, Laroche is an anecdote that she tells to great comic effect at a dinner party, but she is drawn to him. She becomes completely absorbed in her efforts to understand him.
And as he writes this, as he starts to piece the story together, Charlie Kaufman finds himself drawn to Orleans. He becomes completely absorbed in his efforts to understand her. The parallel between how he approaches his work and how Orleans approaches her work can’t be missed, but it’s the differences between them that distinguish them. Susan’s part of the world. She’s got a life. She’s got a husband. She works with other people at this magazine, a social creature. Charlie is fascinated by her because of the world she seems to symbolize to him. Her book is beautifully written, moving, and it impacts Charlie deeply. Still, he can’t quite hand himself over, heart and soul, to what he’s writing, and that’s the step that really brings something to life. So much of my work week is dedicated not to the act of writing, but the creation of the right space in which to write. It’s a process of shutting out the world. It’s a process of slipping completely into this thing you’ve created. It’s crucial. Charlie’s problem is that he writes in circles, so obssessed with the work that he begins to double back on himself.
When Charlie comes up with the notion of writing himself into the script, and he begins to write the film that we’ve been watching the entire time, it’s a moment so strange, so completely odd that it wouldn’t seem possible for an audience to maintain any real sense of sympathy for the characters onscreen. I mean, it’s such a self-referential, inside-joke type idea, clever to a fault. It is a testament to the considerable gifts of Kaufman and Jonze and Cage that the considerable tonal shifts in the film all seem to work. The concept takes a particularly daring turn in the last third of the film, and it’s this section that is causing considerable controversy with some viewers. People either buy what happens, and they allow themselves to feel the experience intuitively, or they resist, they fight it, and they let themselves get derailed. I think it’s wonderful. I think it’s horrible. I think it makes you feel very, very deeply for a character who should be a two-dimensional cartoon, but somehow isn’t. I think the use of Robert McKee as a character is the single most inside joke I’ve ever seen in a studio film, but I think it makes perfect thematic sense, and it’s not a stunt in any way. I think it’s brave. I think it subverts expectation by fulfilling certain expectations to a fault. I think it’s both obvious and broad and somehow subtle at the same time. It’s a triumph, and it will piss many, many people off.
Make sure you stay till the very end. The last few moments of the film are the punchline to the entire thing, and they’re worth sitting for those few extra moments and letting this movie wash over you. Lance Acord (BUFFALO 66, BEING JOHN MALKOVICH) is the director of photography, and he’s working in a very particular palette that manages to create as distinct a world as the best work by The Coen Brothers or David Lynch. This is style as substance. Everything counts. Every level of the image and the performances. Chris Cooper is spectacular as Laroche, ferocious and filled with child-like wonder and burned out distraction and sudden, mercurial anger, all in equal measure. It’s the most vivid performance he’s ever given. There’s a disturbingly real prosthetic he wears as Laroche, his front teeth all smashed out and never replaced. There’s a moment that explains those teeth that is as horrifying a moment as I’ve seen in recent memory, shocking and sudden and real, and it almost sent me scurrying for cover when I saw it.

I will finish it in the next post.....

[dh1989]

Here is the rest of Moriarty's review......

Credit for this film must ultimately rest on the shoulders of Spike Jonze, who continues to prove himself one of the most singular voices of his generation, able to work in three-minute music videos and features with equal impact. He’s capable of directing the year’s most cerebral exercise in high comedy, yet he also produced and appeared in the year’s most deliriously lowbrow big studio film, JACKASS. It’s that range that makes him dangerous, and there’s the sense that he’s enjoying his career more than anyone else will ever enjoy it. He’s got his own private joke, so dense and brilliant that he can’t possibly share the whole thing. We get crumbs. We get the bits he can spare. As great as ADAPTATION is, I still get the sense he’s warming up. It’s just too effortless. He understands the comic rhythms of Charlie Kaufman on an almost chemical level, the same way Charlie finally finds the true heart of Susan Orleans, the same way Kaufman somehow maps his own heart. By the end of the film, Charlie has made a major step forward. He’s been transformed by his own work. He’s beaten back self-doubt and fear and he’s created something that fills him with pride. It’s given him a better sense of his own voice. And, for the first time, he finds the courage to use that voice. And it’s still scary, and what happens isn’t exactly what he hopes for, but at least it happens. At least it’s real. At least Charlie’s finally committed to life. He has adapted. He is changed, and in that change... in all change... there is the potential for something great. That greatness, however transitory, however elusive, is all we can hope for, and it seems that for everyone in this film, it is in that trying, in the struggle itself, that grace is found.
Trust me... ADAPTATION is one of this season’s finest gifts, and I sincerely hope you find that it’s just your size when you try it on.

[The Other]

Yea, this movie does look good. I'll definitely check it out. There's even Oscar talk as well.

[dh1989]

Here is an banner running on our own board, but I wanted to post it here, so everyone can look at the genius ad whenever they wish......

http://m2.doubleclick.net/viewad/771075/adapt_468x60.jpg

[blankpage]

This movie looks amazing. The style everything. I will defentaily be checking this one out. It looks like a great mad comedy.

[sleekproductions]

This looks very good and original... I can't wait!

[Mike]

Well, I guess I'll be breaking the trend here. I saw the trailer a couple of weeks ago before my second viewing of THE RING and I wasn't very impressed. I'm not opposed to seeing it someday, I'm just not that interested in it.

[Scarface98.9]

I normally wouldn't be very interested in this type of movie, but considering the reviews calling it a masterpiece, I figure I'll check it out. This could go either way with me since I never saw Being John Malkovich

[idealdiscountdude]

I know I haven't even seen it yet but I must say that Adaptation

[idealdiscountdude]

I know I haven't even seen it yet but I must say that Adaptation looks BRILLIANT! Absolutely BRILLIANT!!!

(However if it sucks or is mediocre....I guess I'll be eating my shorts! ;))

[notchreturns]

It looks great, no doubt about it. Spize Jonze is a great young director and Charlie Kaufman is an awesome writer. Nick Cage, when in the right role, can kick some serious ass, this looks like that role. Meryl Streep is Meryl Streep, 'nuff said. Chris Cooper is as underrated as they come... and did I mention the kickass premise? Yeah, it should be quite good....

[dh1989]

Here is a link to see the BRILLIANT trailer in Quicktime....

http://www.apple.com/trailers/columbia/adaptation/

[FeverDog420]

Received free passes in the mail today for a December 5 screening. Can't wait - I've got high hopes for it.

[BakeTheMooCow]

WOW, this movie is getting absolutely terrific reviews (http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/Adaptation-1118700).. 15 fresh - 0 rotten right now

And I know James Berardinelli gave it *** stars as well. So, I'm really looking forward to it. Looks like this years BJM.

[Fergus]

This is my most anticipated film for the rest of the year. I'm DYING to see this one...and I just read Lisa Schwarzbaum's review and I'm hyperventilating. It's driving me nuts. Hurry up and see it FeverDog, I need to know what you think <----impatience at its worst.

[DieHardBruceFan]

Thank God for Charlie Kaufman and Spike Jonze!!!
After reading several reviews, including Mr. Blo's, looks like Nic Cage is finally making a comeback-meaning that he is making good films again, and not just Hollywood blockbusters. Don't get me wrong! I am a Cage fanatic. I just haven't enjoyed his films like I used to since he won that Oscar (exceptions being BRINGING OUT THE DEAD and THE FAMILY MAN).

Let's hope this performance ends up as a Oscar nom. or at least that it gives him back the respect he deserves as an actor that loves to take risks.

[dh1989]

This probably could go in the ADAPTATION Thoughts and Reviews at: http://www.joblo.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=39804.

[idealdiscountdude]

Originally posted by dh1989
This probably could go in the ADAPTATION Thoughts and Reviews at: http://www.joblo.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=39804.

I agree completely. I'm merging them right now.....

[idealdiscountdude]

Bump

[freakandgeek]

maggie gyllenhaal's in it,,,,so, well, i want to see it. looks interesting though...wa ha ha :D

[freakandgeek]

Originally posted by DieHardBruceFan
Thank God for Charlie Kaufman and Spike Jonze!!!
After reading several reviews, including Mr. Blo's, looks like Nic Cage is finally making a comeback-meaning that he is making good films again, and not just Hollywood blockbusters. Don't get me wrong! I am a Cage fanatic. I just haven't enjoyed his films like I used to since he won that Oscar (exceptions being BRINGING OUT THE DEAD and THE FAMILY MAN).

Let's hope this performance ends up as a Oscar nom. or at least that it gives him back the respect he deserves as an actor that loves to take risks.

i wish he'd do more like raising arizona, the best nic cage film ever IMHO

[Jerk Shapiro]

Originally posted by blankpage
This movie looks amazing. The style everything. I will defentaily be checking this one out. It looks like a great mad comedy.


Same here. I love Spike Jonze. He's an amazing and original director. And I won't miss it. Although I'll probably have to wait til' video.

Damn limited release.

[TheMovieMinor]

Wow, ol' Nic Cage is releases a couple flicks a bit too close to each other. Adaption and Sonny. But y'know Nic he makes mistakes, especially the Pricella Presley marriage, but whatever, I still Love the Family Man, even when he is in Con Air, and it doesnt matter if he has to Face/Off with bigger movies. We know He wont take out his 8mm, and go Raising Arizona or anything. He will be probably in the theaters Bringing Out the Dead to his films, making a big profit rather than being Gone in Sixty Seconds.
Hey, but you know It Could Happen to You, whenever your Leaving Las Vegas, y'know the City of Angels, on The Rock, the place where you may just end up being Trapped in Paradise. But not to worry if your Moonstruck and you were actually on a Honeymoon in Vegas, because if you do get lost, you will be stuck watching Captain Correllis Mandolin or Windtalkers. You dont want to be in war, or watching war, so whats the use. Its like the Kiss of Death or a Vampire's Kiss, you know. Plus if your in a desert you may just see those Snake Eyes, and go crazy, but dont worry bout that, worry about those Fast times at Ridgemont High. Okay, So Adaption and Sonny or set to be a good film, with enough space, right? Right.

[flowrchild]

Tonight I had the joy of seeing Adaptation, and it is now one of my favorite films of the year. It was very witty, quirky, and eccentric, in the same vein as Being John Malkovich. This movie is impossible to sum up and do justice to, so my only advice is to SEE IT whenever you get a chance. One of the most original movies I've seen in ages. 8.5/10

[movielover-9]

I want to see this movie. All buzz aside, I just want to see it because of director Spike Jonze and writer Charlie Kaufman, who came out with one of the most PHucked up movies of the 90's[with a capital PH] Being John Malkovich . I'm sure this will be as original and eccentric as that film.

[Puck Bond]

Adaptation is a superbly inventive, funny and poignant film about life, love an screenwriting, from the creative team of Spike Jonze and Charlie Kaufman who brought the amazingly, original 1999 film Being John Malkovich. This follow up really shows how genuinely original and great these two are. Instead of a story about a portal into the mind of actor John Malkovich...this time we get a portal into the mind of screenwriter Charlie Kaufman in a matter of speaking. Nicolas Cage plays Charlie...he's fat, balding, ugly and sweats a lot. He is obsessive, shy and kind, and coming off the success of Being John Malkovich ,which has some nice behind the scenes sort of stuff, he has been asked to adapt a book called The Orchid Thief by Susan Orleans played by the wonderful Meryl Streep. The trouble with this is that he can't find an original way to adapt the book. "You can't make a movie about flowers!" Unfortunately for Charlie he lives with his twin brother Donald Kaufman also played by Cage. Donald is the complete opposite of Charlie, cocky, self-confident and without originality. He also is writing a script...a by the book serial killer thriller that naturally follows all conventions and formulas and of course is a hit with Hollywood executives. I will say that Nicolas Cage's perfomance in this film is absolutely astonishing in creating two completely different characters who are both look a like and are equally likeable. It's an amazing feat that you can always tell them apart eventhough they look the same. Charlie's dilemna leads him to find out more about author Susan Orleans and the a man the book is written about. That man is John LaRoche played by Chris Cooper in a fine performance, who on the outsde seems nothing more than a redneck hick living in the swamps of Florida, but there is a lot more to him than meets the eye. Susan also sees this and they develop a strangely hipnotic attraction to each other, while she was writing about him three years earlier in search of a very rare and barely seen Orchid called the Ghost Orchid. As with Spike Jonze's Being John Makovich there are quite a few surreal and amazing things about this film and the way it draws comparisons to people, life, flowers, Hollywood, love, writing etc. are endless and just stunning. Overall Adaptation is one of the best acted films of the year with all 3 people giving great performances especially Nicolas Cage and Meryl Streep and features a totally inventive and amazing story. The only reason I'm not rating this higher is the rather arbitrary and derivative action-oriented ending. It just didn't feel like the proper resolution to this film. Still a very good film.

[flowrchild]

Originally posted by Puck Bond
The only reason I'm not rating this higher is the rather arbitrary and derivative action-oriented ending. It just didn't feel like the proper resolution to this film. Still a very good film.

****Spoilers****



I am glad you liked the movie. Oddly enough, I think the last third of the movie is the best part. It is when everything falls together and Charlie has allowed his brother and Mckee to ruin his screenplay, by taking the cliche route he was so keen on avoiding. I think it was brilliant.

[Scarface98.9]

Saw it this afternoon. My pseudo-review:

What I liked:
-Nicolas Cage. To be able to play 2 roles who look exactly alike and be able to make a distinction between them by performance alone speaks volumes about his talent.
-Meryl Streep and Chris Cooper. This is near career best work, with Cooper hopefully finally being able to be nom'd for an Oscar.
-Spike Jonze. Considering the brilliant script, the fact Jonze can actually keep up with its energy is a testament to his talent.
-Charlie Kaufman. Much has already been said of Kaufman's script, but it's all true. It's a brilliant script by a very self-loathing writer.

What I disliked:
-The length of certain scenes. Many scenes just seemed to drag on, or could've been cut altogether.

But that's all about what I could find wrong.

Final grade: 8/10

[areyoubeingserved]

I'm a complete fucking failure as a cinema goer, or at least this is how I feel today, I read the second draft of Charlie and Donald Kaufman's Adaptation befor watching the film today -- although being a good cinema goer probably only requires paying the admission, which I did. In many ways I ruined the film for myself, and as I left the cinema it was like a bullet in the foot.

The second draft in comparison with the film was a little more cartoonish but far more beneficial to the third act (maybe) and the female interests of both Donald and Kaufman were not present and, perhaps, as a reflection of this there was a lot more masturbation. There was an excellent scene of a young Laroche cut and my main complaint of the mutation of the drafts is the ommision of the fucking SWAMP MONSTER! I want my fucking SWAMP MONSTER. That was easily the most destructive effect on my viewing.

The film is, of course, quite very good. The acting is key pitch perfect, Chris Cooper's current awards swoop justified entirely, Streep and Cage scarily impressive.

Stylistically it loses the flavoursome bleakness that BJM held so perfectly, and the score isn't as effective. Is it wrong of me to compare? Oh, its not as good but it stands on its own.

The script was the best I had ever read, and this effected the films decisive vision, the emphasis was better in the script on the third act, but I feel as though without the changes the film would have come off as obvious and possibly shot down by critics rather than the routine apprasal it is receiving now.

8.

[alloy2]

After watching the trailer for this movie, i was confused and knew it would be a must see. After watching the movie with a group of friends I decided it would be best to go alone...in order to enjoy the entire film. I just love Nic Cage and think that his preformance was phenomenal. Its one of the best movies i've seen in a very long time. :D

[Duke Nukem]

I wanted to like this movie a lot. And I did...up until the last 20 minutes. If it weren't for the last "conventional" final segment of the movie, I would have put in my top 10 list, but the last 20 minutes of the movie nearly trashes what the the first 100 unconventional and completely original minutes got me so intrigued into. The last segment is obviously for some final sentiment between the Kaufman twins (both brilliantly played by Nicolas Cage), the orchid thief (Chris Cooper), and the writer of the 'Orchid Thief' book (Meryl Streep), but it goes through unnecessary and far-fetched measures to do that (you'll see what I mean). Otherwise, this is a pretty good drama that really digs into the above characters, writer's block, the orchid flowers, and (in a way) figuring out what makes you happy and who you really are. If anything, this is this year's "A.I": One of the best and most creative films of the year...if you forget that last 10 or 20 minutes. Is there anyone else who thinks so?

[dammit_janet]

Sort of. After I first saw the film I was really upset by the last 20 minutes. I thought it was a total sham. Then I thought about it a little more and realized that it fits in perfectly with what the script was doing all along.

I even wonder if this is representative of what happened when Charlie asked Donald to help him out with the script. Since that's really the style that Donald had anyway. I think this might be a movie I see again, just to suss it all out.

[bob]

I really want to see this movie. Forgive me if this sounds pretentious, but I think the subject matter really takes on a new perspective if you are a screenwriter. I am, so this film looks very interesting. I especially like how Charlie Kaufman just made the character himself, instead of Hollywood-ing it into "Jim Steel" or something.

[alloy2]

Originally posted by bob
I really want to see this movie. Forgive me if this sounds pretentious, but I think the subject matter really takes on a new perspective if you are a screenwriter. I am, so this film looks very interesting. I especially like how Charlie Kaufman just made the character himself, instead of Hollywood-ing it into "Jim Steel" or something.

Im sure you're not alone. The face that Kaufman wrote himself into the screenplay was an added bonus for me.:)

[Gretchen_Ross]

to say this movie was original is a severe understatement. charlie kaufman has done something really special. he's taken real life, ficiton, and the lands inbetween and crafted a film that is funny, poignant, realistic, and fantastical. nicolas cage (almost) makes up for all his lame recent flicks by adding subtle nuance to charlie and donald kaufman. instead of making them "wacky" opposites, cage underplays them and wins out in making them two sides of the same coin. chris cooper is outstanding (no surpise), and meryl streep is amazingly fearless as a woman trying desperately to survive an existential crisis. the jokes work because they're grounded in reality and pain, and the reality and pain work because of the acting. wonderful stuff.

[FoxForce5]

When I saw teh trailer I wasn't quite sure what I was in for, but I knew I wanted to see it. At first, I thought maybe the twoo Nick Cages were all in his head or something and I had no idea what the movie was about. But I saw it and loved it. I'm glad the trailer didn't try to give a synopsis, because how could it? It was so good and I always have a special place in my heart for films that have no respect for chronological order. Cage's acting was good. I loved to see him play the almost complete opposites. And the conversation the two brothers had in the swamp towards the end; the dialogue was excellent, especially the line about how his love is only his and no one else's.

[alloy2]

your soo right the trailer couldn't have given a synopsys of what was to come, simply because it wouldn't have done the movie justice in any way. I think the trailer was just enough to catch movie goers attention and leave them shocked, among a number of other emotions. I also loved Nic Cage's performance, but I was highly and pleasently suprised by Merly Streep's preformance, considering that she hasn't been a favorite of mine in her previous roles.

[The Other]

I just saw this movie. I loved it. I think the performances were great. It was often very funny (Streep getting high and then her and Cage cursing each other out in the end!) Funny stuff.

Reading a plot synopses like the one above could make this movie sound confusing, but it's not once you've seen it. I could definitely see where Kaufman was coming from in the film...not that I write or anything, but how do you turn a book about flowers with no plot into a film and still be faithful to the book? What were the execs thinking when they really asked Kaufman to do that? Oh well.

I could definitely see Oscar noms for Cage, Streep, Cooper, Kaufman, Jonze, and few tech noms. I could, however, see the picture as a whole being snubbed for Best Picture though. While everything in the film has a shot at Oscar, the picture has a whole isn't the type of film that Oscar votes for (Being John Malkovich was also nominated in the three major fields of Directing, Writing and Acting and snubbed for Best Picture). Sad, but true.

Rating: 9/10

[flowrchild]

The Other-

I am glad you enjoyed the movie as much as I did. It is definitely one of my favorites for the year. I hope it gets recognition at the Oscars but I am certainly not going to hold my breath. :(

[The Other]

flowrchild, it will definitely be nominated for Best Adapted Screenplay(Charlie and Donald Kaufman), Best Supporting Actor (Chris Cooper) and Best Supporting Actress (Meryl Streep). Then it has a good shot at being nominated for Best Actor (Nicolas Cage) and Best Director (Spike Jonze).

Personally, I hope Cage gets the nomination more than anyone. I've never been a fan of his (I thought his performance in Leaving Las Vegas was kinda overrated), but I loved his performance in Adaptation. Streep was great as well (those two scenes I mentioned in my first post were hilarious). And Cooper was really good as well. He's won a few major critics awards already, I think he'll be nominated. He's so under-rated too (Should've been nominated for American Beauty three years ago). And yea, the screenplay is a definite. Jonze is a possibility. But again, the film is likely to be snubbed :( .

[flowrchild]

Yea, it will definitely be nominated for best screenplay, no question. I would bet good money on that. I would be thrilled if it got a best picture nomination but it just seems too quirky of a movie to get that kind of recognition. And I agree, I was never much of a Nicolas Cage fan either but he really shined in this movie, for sure. Chris Cooper is one of the most under-appreciated working actors in hollywood.
As for Meryl Streep, I am curious if she will get a best actress/best supporting actress nomination for "the hours" (not sure how they are going to do that yet, regarding which of the 3 actresses in that movie will qualify for actress or supporting actress), and "adaptation" both. The academy loves her so I wouldn't be surprised if she landed two nominations.

[dammit_janet]

Originally posted by flowrchild
As for Meryl Streep, I am curious if she will get a best actress/best supporting actress nomination for "the hours" (not sure how they are going to do that yet, regarding which of the 3 actresses in that movie will qualify for actress or supporting actress), and "adaptation" both. The academy loves her so I wouldn't be surprised if she landed two nominations.

I would love to see that. She did a fantastic job and, in recent memory, I can't recall her doing a part like this.

Of course this begs the question, can Nic Cage be nominated twice -- once for Charlie and once for Donald?

[flowrchild]

Originally posted by dammit_janet
Of course this begs the question, can Nic Cage be nominated twice -- once for Charlie and once for Donald?

Hehe that would definitely be interesting, but it will never happen. Anyone in the past who played someone with multiple personalities or something similar, never got more than one nomination in the same movie. I like how they said the screenplay was written by "Charlie and Donald Kaufman" even though Donald is a fictional character. That was great.

[The Other]

Originally posted by flowrchild
As for Meryl Streep, I am curious if she will get a best actress/best supporting actress nomination for "the hours" (not sure how they are going to do that yet, regarding which of the 3 actresses in that movie will qualify for actress or supporting actress), and "adaptation" both. The academy loves her so I wouldn't be surprised if she landed two nominations.

For THE HOURS, Nicole Kidman and Meryl Streep will go lead and Julianne Moore will go supporting (according to the "For Your Consideration" ads.) It makes sense because Julianne Moore already has a lead performance that she's likely to get nominated for (FAR FROM HEAVEN) and Streep has a supporting performance she's likely to get nominated for (ADAPTATION) so they are each going for their respective categories for THE HOURS so they don't split votes and get snubbed because you can only be nominated once in each acting category. And Kidman goes lead because she has no other performance this year up for Oscar consideration.

[alloy2]

Originally posted by dammit_janet
I would love to see that. She did a fantastic job and, in recent memory, I can't recall her doing a part like this.

Of course this begs the question, can Nic Cage be nominated twice -- once for Charlie and once for Donald?

I most certaintly agree...and its a new year lets have it full of surprises...lets just go ahead and give Nic those awardS

[flowrchild]

Originally posted by The Other
For THE HOURS, Nicole Kidman and Meryl Streep will go lead and Julianne Moore will go supporting (according to the "For Your Consideration" ads.) It makes sense because Julianne Moore already has a lead performance that she's likely to get nominated for (FAR FROM HEAVEN) and Streep has a supporting performance she's likely to get nominated for (ADAPTATION) so they are each going for their respective categories for THE HOURS so they don't split votes and get snubbed because you can only be nominated once in each acting category. And Kidman goes lead because she has no other performance this year up for Oscar consideration.

Yea, that makes sense. I would hate for a "thelma and louise" repeat where they all cancel eachother out and nobody gets a deserved award.

"You are what you love, not what loves you" -Donald

I think that's a great quote. Completely irrelevant to the topic at hand but had to just throw that in anyway.

[dh1989]

I'll be seeing this one tommorow or Saturday. I am very happing its going wide! :)

[Tommy Doyle]

Adaptation rating 6/10

I wish I could give it a higher mark, I really really wanted to LOVE this film, but I walked out only thinking that it was a good film.

Nicholas Cage's performance as the brothers is amazing, and the effects to get them to appear together on the screen are flawless. There's not a bad thing I can say about Cage. Meryl Streep was great in her role as well. It was a little different than her usual larger than life dramatic roles I'm used to seeing her in, she payed off. Chris Cooper was very good as well. In fact, the cast of characters and the actors portraying them is what makes me rate this film 6/10 instead of 5/10. They were all very good, and I wouldn't be surprised to hear all their names Oscar nomination morning.

The reason I didn't give the film a higher rating is because it just didn't pull me in. Until the last twenty minutes, I was watching the film and thinking "there must be something more..." Now before people start saying that I was missing something, I don't think I was. I realize how incredibly original the script was. How unique the story telling was. How unconventional the way the movie unfolded was, I caught all that. The intense amount of activity in the film didn't escape my notice either... It's just that none of these things roped me into the movie like I had hoped they would. It's still a good movie, and I did like it, but I wasn't blown away. And for how original this film is, I felt that I should have been blown away.

I wasn't able to connect with Kaufman's trouble. I couldn't see the connection between Streep's character and Cooper's character. I didn't feel Kaufman's pain over his brother excelling and him stumbling, none of it hit me. And actually, only after second thought did I really like the ending. At first I was like... "what? Why would it end like that?" Then I thought about it, and came to realize the entire movie actually really did build up to that ending, as unexpected as it was. At first I felt it was a rip-off, but have come to appreciate it much more after thinking it over. It tied the movie together for me and pushed my rating up to a 6.

For the originality of the movie, and the strong performances of the actors (although truthfully, I don't think any of them actually deserve the golden guy, just a nomination for their work) I give the movie a 6/10.

(And just so everyone knows, because it's my first real film rating on the boards here... six out of ten is a decent movie. I'd be hardpressed to give very many movies a 10/10. An 8/10 is an incredible movie, 9/10 brilliant with very few flaws, and 10/10 is reserved for probably very few movies which nail me. 6/10 is decent. Probably lower than most in this thread would rate it, but a decent movie for me.)

[Kamikaze3]

I loved this movie. I'm not sure what to think about the ending though. On one hand I think it ruins the whole point of the movie, and it's a drag to sit through. But on the other hand, I find myself liking it because it fully shows how everything he talked about not wanting to do, he ends up doing. And the film gets across the points in the book that were supposedly so hard to adapt. I'm still mixed on my decision, but I think over time the ending will grow on me.

[Scarface98.9]

Originally posted by dammit_janet

Of course this begs the question, can Nic Cage be nominated twice -- once for Charlie and once for Donald?
Not to my knowledge. If he gets nom'd, it'll be for one category. Peter Sellers was nominated once for Dr Strangelove, where he played 3 different roles

[Mike]

Originally posted by Mike
Well, I guess I'll be breaking the trend here. I saw the trailer a couple of weeks ago before my second viewing of THE RING and I wasn't very impressed. I'm not opposed to seeing it someday, I'm just not that interested in it.

You know, I didn't want to see this movie based on the trailer, but the countless TV spots I've seen for it have actually peeked my interest. I think I actually might see this one on video. It looks kind of quirky and fun.

[bskutle]

**#5 on Brian's "Must-See" List for Fall 2002**
The year's wildest ride happens to be low on F/X, but high on invention. Here's the deal- Charlie Kaufman (writer of "Being John Malkovich" and 2002's underrated "Human Nature") is asked by a Hollywood bigwig to adapt a novel called "The Orchid Thief"- about Southern Boy John Laroche, who hunts rare flowers in the Florida swamps- by New Yorker writer Susan Orlean into a screenplay. The problem is, the book's nonlinear, contemplative tone and style- and the subject matter of flowers- is a tough nut for a screenwriter to crack, and the self-loathing Kaufman- who hopes to stay true to the book without Hollywood gloss- gets a nasty taste of writer's block. It doesn't help matters that Charlie's confident brother Donald is taking up screenwriting after taking a seminar with screenwriting guru Robert McKee, and his first attempt- a serial killer thriller hack job- is bought for a million dollars.

Donald isn't real; he's an alter ego upon which Charlie- who is most certainly real (and deserves his second Oscar nomination after "Malkovich" for this dizzying effort)- can vent his frustrations upon while trying to break through the dense story. But the genius of creating Donald wouldn't be nearly as brilliant were it not for Nicolas Cage, who's never been riskier or more riveting to watch as both the self-effacing Charlie and hot rod Donald. He won an Oscar- undeservingly I felt- for the terminally dull "Leaving Las Vegas," and was passed over for the brilliant duality of John Woo's wicked-cool "Face/Off"; I would hope those facts don't stop Academy members from honoring him again here. Cage drives the slyly inventive events of "Adaptation" as Kaufman's dazzling script moves effortlessly from Charlie's conflicts and Orlean's interactions with Laroche as director Spike Jonze proves his own Oscar nomination for "Malkovich" was no fluke. It'll be hard for the Academy to deny him another one. The same can be said about Meryl Streep- cutting loose beautifully as Orlean- and Chris Cooper- making a surprisingly three-dimensional character of Laroche- for the Supporting categories. But like Kaufman's "Malkovich" and "Human Nature," don't dismiss "Adaptation"- also fueled by a brilliant score by Carter Burwell (another "Malkovich" collaborator) that is worthy of the composer's first Oscar nomination- simply as arty, pretentious goofiness; more than that, it's a beautifully neurotic meditation on adapting in life, the conflicts of the "serious" artist and "commercial" mind, and the passions that drive us. So see, it's arty and fun- a rare combination to find. Granted, it's not as fun or outrageous as "Being John Malkovich," but the twists and turns- and wildly clever third act- will leave you breathlessly entertained.

[dh1989]

http://i.imdb.com/Photos/Ss/0268126/203_0_AF.jpg

SPOILERS

Rating: 8.5/10

This film is a burst of originality. In a time where most movies drone on with lines we've heard in a million different films, and see scenes where we know the outcome before it ends because we saw pratically the same exact scene in a film in theatres last week. None of this can be said about this film. Is it weird? Yes. I can honestly say I've never seen a film depict Hollywood, CA in the past(you know forty billion years ago!). That sequence alone is worth the price of admission. It has amazing time lapse photography(this is used through the film to perfection). It also has some disturbing images like a dead fox turning to liquid in a few seconds. Nicholas Cage is superb. He captures both Donald and Charile Kaufman perfectly. As for me, I like Donald more. Sure Charlie is fascinating, but Don is so damn endearing. Meryl Streep was also excellent. She really suprised me in the exciting final act, and her speech about being born again was poignant. Chris Cooper played such an incredible role. John Laroche is such a fun character! :) Also props to Mr. Cooper for learning all of the scientific names of the plants. One scene in this film really stuck with me. It is the first car crash scene where John's family dies. It is a brilliantly displayed side impact scene. Shocking. I am going to stop now. Just go see this movie ready to be suprised. It offer laughs to suspense to flowers(The Ghost Orchid sub-plot was beautiful) to Alligators. It has it all. An amazing film.

P.S. Some of the funniest parts come from Donald writing his thriller The 3. LOL! :) The best parts had to be Charlie talking about THE DECONSTRUCTER(he cuts off bits of his victim's body to kill them), and the bit where he talks about the three characters are all one man, but they work and live in different places, which is where Charlie comments on "plot holes", if you will.

[dammit_janet]

Originally posted by Kamikaze3
I loved this movie. I'm not sure what to think about the ending though. On one hand I think it ruins the whole point of the movie, and it's a drag to sit through......... I'm still mixed on my decision, but I think over time the ending will grow on me.

I agree. When I first saw the movie I was loving it until the last part and then I was just furious/disappointed. When I finally realized what the point was, I enjoyed it more. But I think I'll definitely be going back to see it again, with the ending in mind.

Someone suggested that the ending is when Donald begins writing. I wonder if a second viewing will show any other Donald changes or discrepancies?

[DieHardBruceFan]

I think that Charlie's life begins to reflect everything he DIDN'T want to write about- "characters overcoming great obsticles, guns and car crashes and chase scenes." That's exactly what his life turns into, a cliqued movie script, which is exactly what he didn't want to write for his film.

[Benny]

I went to see this today for my birthday and was amazed. This film was EXCELLENT. It was very funny, yet also had much deeper meanings and was totally absurd at the same time. The three leads (Cage, Streep, and Cooper) are all great in their roles, and hopefully are up for Oscars. Charlie Kaufman wrote yet another great screenplay for this movie, which includes himself and his fake twin brother Donald (both played by Cage), who represents everything Charlie does not want to be. A lot of people did not like the ending, I thought it was perfectly fitting though and made much sense. Once again, this is an incredible film, and the Best Movie of 2002.

10/10

[blankpage]

http://i.imdb.com/Photos/Ss/0268126/169093.jpg

Adaptation.

Starring- Nicolas Cage, Meryl Streep, Chris Cooper,Tilda Swinton

Directed by- Spike Jonze

Rated R( language, sexuality, some drug use and violent images)


Story: Charlie Kaufman tries to adapt the book "The Orchird Theif" but has a big struggle. His brother Donald Kaufman is writing one of the biggest cliched scripts ever, but has success. Charlie writes himself into his screenplay. Charlie seeks adivce. The story of one Screenwriter's struggle....

Adaptation, in my opinion, is the cleverest, funniest, best written film of this year. Charlie Kaufman(and Donald)'s screenplay is so quirky, fun, funny, original that it is hard to put into words. This film makes fun of show biz, makes fun of writers, and in the end, makes fun of itself. The charatcers are so well developed and acted that it makes this film all the worth. If you don't know already Charlie Kaufman is a screenwriter, and very good one at that. And this film is basically about him, he writes about himself trying to Adapt the screenplay and such. A movie inside a movie, if you will. But it is so well brought out and filmed, that well, it's a mad brilliance. The movie is so quirky and funny, almost every scene had me laughing my arse off(including the final "Third" act).

The Charlie Kaufman character is what as he decribes himself as: "Sad, Fat, Uguly, Pathetic." His whole little "thing" in this movie is so pathetic, and sad. But is friggin' halarious. His brother Donald is very funny, as the Hollywood cliched writer. The chemistry the two have is brilliant. This might be due to the fact that both Donald, and Charlie and both played by one Nicolas Cage. The voice overs Charlie does is one of the key parts of the film. How he talks to himself, and then something ironicly happens. Likes one scene that I couldn't hel but laugh.

Possibly Spoilers Below


The scene where Charlie does go to this Screenwritng course in New York. Charlie is talking to himself, thus being a voice over in the movie. After he does this the Screenwriting Guru says," Do not use Voice overs in your movie! It is a lazy way of writing, etc...." Very funny.

End Possible Spoilers

The Final act is probably one of the funniest things I have seen in a movie in a while. Spoilers in this Paragraph. It was funny how Charlie was so, I am not for the cliches, don't use cliches. Then while he is in New York, he is taken over by the Guru, and his brother and uses the cliche. Of the whole People over coming obstacles, The Drug thing, etc... . This might have been I turn off for some people, but for me, it just made me love the movie even more. It plays out so well, and is soo Charlie Kaufman like. End Spoilers in this Paragraph.

The acting in my opinion was great. Nicolas Cage scores twice as Charlie and Donald. He gives a very wonderful and funny performance. Worthy of an Oscar even. Meryl Streep was good, but I don't think she was brilliant. For me, she didn't stand out completly, but was still great. Oscar Worthy? Very possibly.

What stands out in this film I think is the writing. Charlie Kaufman(and Donald)'s screenplay deserves the Oscar. It's what makes this movie work. Along wit the brilliant directing of one Spike Jonze. Those two key factors, along with many other things make this film stand out. Adaptation is a quirky, fun, original, brilliant film. A stand out film of 2002.

*****(out of 5) possibly lower

[Jedi]

Despite the contreversial ending (which was a little bit disappointing for me) I loved ADAPTATION. For one important thing: it's a movie to watch and THINK about while, and after, seeing it. It doesn't feed you thoughts and ideas but it makes one just think it over and over.. and man! it has some really interesting things to tell!

Now I've just seen this today (along with CHICAGO) and I can't think well about it. I'll give it another viewing soon coz it's really worth it. Nicolas Cage presented his BEST performance since Face\Off and Chris Cooper was the great surprise of my day. I loved how individual every charecter is. How well written and HUMAN they all were. Loved the whole flowers thing with all its symbols and allusions. Too bad the ending was a little bit too loose! Those who saw the movie would know what I'm talking about.. A little bit too corny for a movie with this intellect. It just didn't fit!

Still, it's a unique and ORIGINAL film.
8/10

[darkface]

7/10

Good movie. The acting was great, and the writing was just excellent. I love the unique-ness by it. Definatly from the creators of Being John Malkovich (which is also a very cool movie) I liked the movie and i would give it an 8/10, but it could have done more for me. And i don't give out .5's cause those don't count. so 7 it is.

[Sad man]

Adaptation is an awesome and very original movie.It´s my number one of my top 10 of 2002.But I still need to see Gangs of NY, Far From Heaven and Chicago.
The acting is superb and the movie is very funny and sad at the same time.Nick Cage is fantastic as well as Meryl Streep and the very hilarious Chris Cooper.I can´t wait to see Spike Jonze´s next film.And can´t wait to read Charlie Kauffman´s next script too!.

8/10 or A-

[darkface]

Originally posted by Jedi
Too bad the ending was a little bit too loose! Those who saw the movie would know what I'm talking about.. A little bit too corny for a movie with this intellect. It just didn't fit!


I thought the ending was loose, cause that's what the Speaker dude said in the movie. "If you're going to have a movie with just boring characters, that don't succeed or anything, then you have to have a good ending" something like that. So what they tried to do was make it more of a hollywood ending. A bit hard to explain, but it was a hard movie to comprehend.