Film #088 – Adaptation (2002)
Viewed March 29, 2006
F’n genius.
I can’t think of a better way to describe Adaptation, undoubtedly the best film I’ve seen this year.
It begins with the premise. Adaptation ostensibly tells the story of screenwriter Charlie Kaufman’s attempt to write a screenplay adapting Susan Orlean’s book The Orchid Thief. As the film unfolds, we see Kaufman (Nicholas Cage) come to terms with the difficulty in adapting the material, eventually writing the screenplay for the movie we are watching. Along the way, we get actual material from The Orchid Thief featuring Orlean (Meryl Streep) and her subject, John Laroche (Chris Cooper). Kaufman’s difficulties are exacerbated by his twin brother, Donald (Cage again), whose attempts to write a screenplay for a thriller (”The Three”) using techiniques learned from a “scriptwriting guru” (Brian Cox) alternatively get in the way and help him along his path.
After seeing the trailer, I was sure that this film would be interesting, but I didn’t really know what I was in for. I knew that the title was a reference to Kaufman’s attempts to adapt the book, but it goes deeper. It also refers to people’s ability to adapt their view of the world to fit what they want or need it to be, instead of what it is. And it goes still deeper. It also refers to man’s ability to adapt to his surroundings and to his circumstances in a very real way. It is these intertwining threads of reality and fiction that make Adaptation a true rarity: an absolutely unique film.
And it all begins, naturally enough, with the script. Kaufman’s ability to float betweeen reality and his fictionalized version of reality is at the center of it all. As these kinds of high concept films go, Adaptation would be fairly straightforward (we see the story evolve as Kaufman shapes the script), except it begins with a fabrication already in place: Kaufman’s non-existant twin brother. The script’s acceptance of Donald as one of the film’s “real” bits underscores the basic, “un-real” nature of film. This carries over to Orlean and Laroche, whose story in the film veers wildly off from reality, yet is somehow grounded in the concepts espoused in Orlean’s book. (Bringing us back to the concept of Adaptation as an adaptation.)
The actors are another vital ingredient in a film like this. It takes talented people to make these situations seem real. Nicholas Cage as Charlie and Donald is, of course, the most significant. Each of his two completely different performances could qualify as one of his best. Put them together and his achievement is staggering. He shows (and I know this sounds odd) a strong chemistry with himself. The two Kaufmans play off each other with an ease not usually seen in this kind of double role. It is essential that the audience accepts Donald as a character unto himself and not an extention of the real Charlie. Cage makes that happen.
I’ve never been much of a fan of Meryl Streep, but she usually impresses me most in her quirkier roles (like Defending Your Life) and she surpasses my expectations here. The way she portrays Susan Orlean as a sad, somewhat lost individual truly resonates. Even more impressive is the way she carries that portrayal through the more fantastical elements of the film without missing a beat.
Chris Cooper, who won an Academy Award for his portrayal of ‘Orchid Thief’ John Laroche, does best in the more reality-based sections. His character is already so outlandish that when the big changes occur, he doesn’t change much. Still, his immersion in Laroche is complete and serves as something of an achor for the film, keeping the emotions very real, even as his portrayal can seem somewhat cartoonish.
The direction from Spike Jonze is also strong. He composes the frame with extreme precision and everything fits. As the story veers further into fantasy, the camera becomes more erratic, only settling down when we return to some semblance of the real world again. It is clear that he and Kaufman (the real one) are truly collaborative, because I can’t see anyone making this script work as well without a close relationship to its author.
Adaptation is not one of those films that requires multiple viewings in order to get it. It’s so well done that one viewing puts it’s value in plain view. But multiple viewings will be rewarded by a deeper understanding of the film’s complexities and can bring out the subtlety of the script and the nuances of the performances. If any film deserves a lengthy and careful study, it is this one.