2002 / 114 Minutes / R
Reviewed by Dale Nauertz

The fact that “Adaptation” is a very strange film should come as no surprise. It is, after all, the brainchild of Spike Jonze and especially Charlie Kaufman, who were responsible for the insane and brilliant “Being John Malkovich” a couple years back. The fact that it is uninvolving and largely a frustrating mess, however, does come as a bit of a shock.

“Adaptation” is the story of Charlie Kaufman’s attempt to adapt an inadaptable novel about orchids (”The Orchid Thief”) into a motion picture. It’s a lot harder than anyone might expect and it seems to exact a toll on poor Charlie’s sad mind. At the same time, the writer of the novel, Susan Orlean (Meryl Streep) is conducting interviews and getting involved in all sorts of shenanigans with crazy orchid thief Chris Cooper. Oh, and his twin brother (both of them are played by Nicolas Cage, in true sad sack mode) seems to be achieving success with his formulaic serial killer script.

There are many strange things afoot in the course of “Adaptation”. But too few of them are very funny. The idea sounds like a great one, an exercise in giddy insanity that the guys behind “Being John Malkovich” should be all too adept at stirring up. So why did it feel so hollow to me? I could recognize why the film was supposed to be funny, but I was not drawn to laughter. The film never exactly bored me, but I was annoyed by a great deal of it. It is a case study of one man’s frustration, but that makes for a fairly frustrating film. The characters are irritating and whiny, for the most part. The plot is nothing but a string of random, ludicrous events (none of them ludicrous enough to be amusing) and the main character is wallowing in self-loathing and despair (now there is comedic gold). Which is not to say that there aren’t a couple humorous moments and a few clever bits. But, by and large, the film seems to be almost too clever for its own good. It’s so busy being original and apparently witty that it never seems to have much of a point. I could see the symbolism and metaphors that the film was getting at, as well as the tired points the film may have been trying to make. And passages of the dialogue really are quite well-written. But it’s still a mess: a big, embarrassing mess that never really amounts to anything. None of the actors really do anything to distinguish themselves either. Cage sleepwalks through the film once again, never really giving us a hook on which to hang his character. Meryl Streep acts loopy at one point but otherwise has very little to do. Chris Cooper has some nice moments, but not nearly enough of them. And fine, comedic actors like Brian Cox and Ron Livingston are pretty much wasted.

I wanted to like “Adaptation”, really I did. But it was too disturbing to be funny, and not disturbing enough to be effective. It’s an original mess, but a mess nonetheless.

This entry was posted on Friday, January 10th, 2003 at 2:51 pm and is filed under Dale's Reviews. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.