Adaptation.
Originally Written: January 2003, expanded in February 2023.
Spike Jonze’s “Adaptation.” is low on F/X, but high on invention. Then again, by the time it came out, we shouldn’t have expected anything less from he and screenwriter Charlie Kaufman after “Being John Malkovich.” The film begins with Kaufman (played by Nicolas Cage) being asked by a Hollywood bigwig to adapt a novel called The Orchid Thief by Susan Orlean. Orlean’s book tells the story of Southern Boy John Laroche, who hunts rare flowers in the Florida swamps, sometimes in ways that skirt legality. The problem for Kaufman 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 (also played by Cage) 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.
Few films have been as playfully entertaining, and profoundly honest, about the creative process as “Adaptation.”. That’s not terribly surprising given how Kaufman has explored the human mind and heart over the years, whether it’s an original film like “Malkovich” or “Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind,” or a dense adaptation like “I’m Thinking of Ending Things.” Rewatching it for the first time in a while, I continue to marvel at how Kaufman as a screenwriter is able to tie some of the most ridiculous cliches in writing, and filmmaking, into a film that captures the themes of obsession, longing, connection, and surviving with weight, but also with a sense of fun, as well. Part of that is the alchemy he and Jonze had in these films, where Kaufman could trust Jonze to stay true to his gonzo ideas, and Jonze could trust Kaufman to give resonance to the images he put onscreen. Here, the two are playing with real-life and fiction in a way that many would laugh off the screen, but because everyone involved is on the same page, we’re in awe of how much we don’t care about the absurdities the film transgresses to at the end.
If you’re concerned about Charlie Kaufman and how he writes the death of his brother Donald at the end, rest assured- Donald isn’t real. Donald is a reflection of everything Charlie isn’t, which is to say, he’s confident, outgoing and adventurous to Charlie’s self-loathing, insular and reflective. The way that Cage and Jonze manage to make the two distinguishable while not changing the outward appearance of either is one of the great acting miracles, but every step of the way, we can tell the difference. This feels like as defining a role for Cage as any, and it’s hard to think of an actor who has more of those. Think about some of the performances he’s given since in films like “The Weather Man,” “Bad Lieutenant: Port of Call, New Orleans” and “Pig,” and you can see the blueprint in this film. Only an actor as unafraid of the big moment as Cage could make Kaufman’s reflection of himself work, and yet, I think the most impactful moments of his work in “Adaptation.” are of Charlie (and Donald) at their most revealing- Charlie in his meeting with McKee (played wonderfully by Bryan Cox), and his final moment with Amelia (Cara Seymour), and Donald when he tells his brother, “You are what you love, not what loves you,” when they are hiding from the drugged-up Laroche (Chris Cooper) and Orlean (Meryl Streep) in the Florida swamp. Did I mention how loopy this film gets?
Donald is useful for Kaufman the screenwriter because he’s someone for Kaufman the character to vent his frustrations to about trying to break through this dense story. The climax in the swamp never happened, of course, but for Kaufman the writer, it’s the only way to end his attempts to tell the story of Orlean and Laroche; as McKee says after Charlie tells him the story, he had to go back and fill in the drama. Understandably, Orlean was scared about the prospect of being portrayed as the film does, but I’m glad she took the chance to sign off on the film, because not only is this portrayal a wonderful send-up of the way journalists sometimes romanticize their unusual subjects, but it gives Streep a chance to give one of the best performances of her career. Everyone points to the scene on the phone, and in the hotel room, when she is high, but seeing the way she portrays Orlean as a cynical writer who doesn’t take Laroche seriously at first, and seeing the “reality” of when she sees the Ghost Orchid, we get a full picture of a woman who writes about wanting to be as passionate about something as Laroche seemingly is about every passion he lists off in an early meeting between the two. Laroche represents a freedom Orlean doesn’t have, and that’s ultimately why she’s drawn to him. Cooper winning the Oscar for this role was always one of the great choices; he makes Laroche a grotesque curiosity as well as an individual whose entire life has been spent trying things out, taking the easy way to find success, and just being happy with life.
One of the movies that “Adaptation.” reminded me most of in 2002 was Fellini’s “8 1/2,” and it’s an easy comparison to make, with its surreal structure, self-reflective voice and that it is about the struggle of creating when you overthink what you’re working on. Watching it months after “The Fabelmans,” I wonder if Steven Spielberg and Tony Kushner had it on the brain when they were working on that film. Spielberg’s film is certainly more authentically honest about his life than “Adaptation.” is to Kaufman’s, but in the moments where Sammy Fabelman is wrestling with what his filmmaking has done to his perception of his family, you can see that shared struggle about what life means, what art represents, and how to stay true to both. For Spielberg, it was to sometimes question his own decisions at that time in his life; for Kaufman, it was to creative a narrative that feels antithetical to how he explores storytelling, which is to say, one that indulges in cliches and easy plot devices. The reason both films will endure, like Fellini’s has, is because in the end, they reveal the storyteller at their purest, and most hopeful, about the future of their storytelling. The reason I think “Adaptation.” is my favorite of the three is because Kaufman- aided by Jonze and a wonderful cast- embraces the silliness of cinema the most, and gets to the heart of what it means to have that great breakthrough when you’re in a creative rut. You feel triumphant, and unafraid to go outside your comfort zone. That’s quite a feeling to have.
