Um roteirista apaixonado se desespera ao tentar, sem sucesso, adaptar "The Orchid Thief", de Susan Orlean, para o cinema.Um roteirista apaixonado se desespera ao tentar, sem sucesso, adaptar "The Orchid Thief", de Susan Orlean, para o cinema.Um roteirista apaixonado se desespera ao tentar, sem sucesso, adaptar "The Orchid Thief", de Susan Orlean, para o cinema.
- Direção
- Roteiristas
- Artistas
- Ganhou 1 Oscar
- 67 vitórias e 100 indicações no total
- Ranger Steve Neely
- (cenas deletadas)
- Orlean Dinner Guest
- (as Agnes Badoo)
- Direção
- Roteiristas
- Elenco e equipe completos
- Produção, bilheteria e muito mais no IMDbPro
Avaliações em destaque
Anyway, Cage is fantastic in this - really if the Oscars were about acting, he should have got it for articulating two characters brilliantly. After the mess of Captain Corelli's Mandolin, it's some achievement.
A must see - but you need to engage your brain for this!
Returning to 'Being John Malkovich' is meta-insanity and a great stroke of genius. Donald and his screenplay is hilarious. This is real head-spinning and I love it. Some say people could be turned off by the self-references and the loopy writing. It's a bit of a challenge but it's never difficult to follow. The movie does take a twist at the end which I wish they hinted at earlier. Cage is at his best doing duo duty. This is one of the most original script ever devised.
I adapted. I evolved. My second take on this movie was a turnaround from the first, when I thought it was needlessly complicated and self-absorbed. After all, the lead character is the screenwriter, and he's so full of himself and his self-pitying diary entries he has an identical twin to double the narcissism. I remembered enjoying it, but thinking it wheedling and grad school ultra-clever, too.
But that's not it at all. This is a movie that is all about plot construction but not about being inside the plot in the normal viewer-filmmaker way. For me, I couldn't just watch to see what was going to happen next. Things happen, there is a true climax of an ending, but it's how they happen that matters. The layering of time frames is paralleled by the layering of realities--until you realize that it's all real, and that the supposed movie being written is and isn't the movie we are watching. Or if it is, totally, and we see it's genesis on screen, it is still a screenplay about something real. Or not, once you see that the book, "The Orchid Thief," which is a real book by Susan Orlean, is not "Adaptation" at all, but just a thread for Kaufman to weave these different personalities and plots together.
Fiction or fact, who cares? Well, that's part of the film's cunning--there's even a cameo of John Malkovich at the start, and a shot of that famous Being John Malkovich set of the half sized floor 7 ½ in an office building. And for the record, there is a Ghost Orchid that grows in the Everglades, Polyrrhiza lindenii, and yes, you can now buy it legally from growers with greenhouses. But Charles Kaufman the very real screenwriter (Being John Malkovich, of course, and Synecdoche, New York) is played by an actor, Nicholas Cage, with Cage's usual nervous ticks and uneasiness. Perfect for this role.
But does it all work? On the brain, yes. It's fascinating and engrossing, the work of a screenwriter showing off his chops. Is there suspense? Not really, even though it involves thieves and guns and romance. More telling, do we care about the characters? Nope again. Not for me. I'm curious about these people--Meryl Streep as the writer of the book, and Chris Cooper as the orchid thief are both right on--but not worried about their survival, in love or in life. Still, I had to see every minute because I wanted to see how these very disparate characters were used to construct the construction, to force a point.
To say the movie isn't original or well done is foolish. The director? The redoubtable Spike Jonze, who seems to have let Kaufman lead the way, so the filming, per se, is excellent without being notable. You can't quite tell he's a television commercial director, but once you find that out it makes sense, and the movie is broken into short pieces not unlike your average t.v. experience.
To say Adaptation isn't to your taste is, of course, very reasonable. But if you can watch it the way I did the second time, open to its inner meanderings and the jumping from layer to layer, open that is to the working of the narrative plot stripped bare, you'll be glued.
Charlie Kaufman might just be the most genius screenwriter (I daren't say ever) at the moment. I mean, trying to adapt a book for a screenplay, not succeeding, yet in the process writing a screenplay about how you can't seem to adapt this book for a screenplay. Oh yeah, and also being helped by your not existing twin brother, and crediting him as co-writer, and being nominatad for an Oscar together with him.
Is anyone following this?
Kaufman seems to be the master of destroying the line between reality and fiction.
I kind of have a hard time saying anything about this movie, because I don't know what to say. You should just go and say it. There's nothing like it.
If you liked Being John Malkovic you wil definitely love this. If you hated BJM you might still like it. It doesn't have the absurdity and surreality of BJM. The story is just incredibly intelligently written.
Even though the movie is about how Kaufman is unable to adapt this book, he actually succeeds in doing just that in the process.
Jesus, I'm still totally stunned.
Jonze does do a very good job once again. But the direction is just outshined by the story...
I wanted to see this film because I had enjoyed BJM and was interested to see what Jonze did next. I came to it with a vague knowledge of the plot but nowhere near enough o have expectations. For the majority of the film, the different style and presentation kept me deeply interested. The way the different stories occurred in different times and places worked a lot better than I would have expected it to. The plot gets increasingly difficult to follow and you'll get as much as you want from it. For those just looking for a simple story then you'll have a nice neat resolution, if you want more then more is there for you as you try to work out what part of the film is real and what part isn't.
I came away with mixed feelings. I felt that the ending was not as clever as it thought it was and didn't give a good ending for those who weren't happy to accept things at face value. I didn't feel let down I just felt that the last section of the film stepped down a gear rather than up. I know that this is the point that Jonze was making perhaps, by allowing Donald's derided ending come to live and be the replacement for Charlie's original aim. But it didn't totally do it for me. Up till this section I was hooked and felt that the various stories all worked to form a mix of drama and comedy. However the end does a disservice to it's characters.
Cage shows that the recent cr*p he has been in doesn't mean he can't act (just that he doesn't). He really brings his two characters to life and plays them so well that it is easy to forget that it is the same person in both roles. Cooper is wonderful and deserved his Oscar for support. Streep, as much as I dislike her, was very good and brought that difficult character out although I did feel she was the one most betrayed by the film's end.
Overall this was an interesting film that worked in most areas. It's difference and it's inventiveness were such that I wanted to keep watching. However I, and I know others will disagree, felt that this uniqueness was not well served by the end of the film. I understand that it was not meant to exist in the same way as the majority of the film but I still felt that the ending didn't meet the standard set by the rest of the film.
Você sabia?
- CuriosidadesNicolas Cage has said that during the filming of this movie, he ignored all of his acting instincts and played the part of Charlie Kaufman exactly as director Spike Jonze asked him to. He then received an Academy Award nomination for it.
- Erros de gravaçãoAt the end when Charlie pulls out of the parking garage, crew member Jennifer Porst sits next to him in the car for a single shot, though he is riding alone.
- Citações
Charlie Kaufman: There was this time in high school. I was watching you out the library window. You were talking to Sarah Marsh.
Donald Kaufman: Oh, God. I was so in love with her.
Charlie Kaufman: I know. And you were flirting with her. And she was being really sweet to you.
Donald Kaufman: I remember that.
Charlie Kaufman: Then, when you walked away, she started making fun of you with Kim Canetti. And it was like they were laughing at *me*. You didn't know at all. You seemed so happy.
Donald Kaufman: I knew. I heard them.
Charlie Kaufman: How come you looked so happy?
Donald Kaufman: I loved Sarah, Charles. It was mine, that love. I owned it. Even Sarah didn't have the right to take it away. I can love whoever I want.
Charlie Kaufman: But she thought you were pathetic.
Donald Kaufman: That was her business, not mine. You are what you love, not what loves you. That's what I decided a long time ago. What's up?
Charlie Kaufman: [stunned] Thank you.
- Cenas durante ou pós-créditos"We're all one thing, Lieutenant. That's what I've come to realize. Like cells in a body. 'Cept we can't see the body. The way fish can't see the ocean. And so we envy each other. Hurt each other. Hate each other. How silly is that? A heart cell hating a lung cell." - Cassie from THE THREE
- ConexõesFeatured in Siskel & Ebert & the Movies: The Best Films of 2002 (2003)
- Trilhas sonorasOne Part Lullaby
Written by John Davis, Lou Barlow and Wally Gagel
Published by Careers-BMG Music Publishing, Inc. o/b/o itself, Endless Soft Hits, Loobiecore and Blisswg Productions
Performed by The Folk Implosion
Courtesy of Interscope Records
Under license from Universal Music Enterprises
Principais escolhas
Detalhes
- Data de lançamento
- País de origem
- Central de atendimento oficial
- Idiomas
- Também conhecido como
- El ladrón de orquídeas
- Locações de filme
- Empresas de produção
- Consulte mais créditos da empresa na IMDbPro
Bilheteria
- Orçamento
- US$ 19.000.000 (estimativa)
- Faturamento bruto nos EUA e Canadá
- US$ 22.498.520
- Fim de semana de estreia nos EUA e Canadá
- US$ 384.478
- 8 de dez. de 2002
- Faturamento bruto mundial
- US$ 32.802.440
- Tempo de duração1 hora 55 minutos
- Cor
- Mixagem de som
- Proporção
- 1.85 : 1