mobdick69

I wasn't going to bother commenting on this but the front page review on here is actually negative for this film! I was shocked. Adaptation has to be, easily, the most innovative and mind engulfing movie I've seen in a long time.

Just in case there are those who watching this and didn't realize what Charlie Kaufman was actually accomplishing with this, I'm going to attempt to break it down:

The movie is about the actual Screenwriter, trying to adapt a book thats unadaptable...but in the process, adapts the book by wrapping his attempts to comprehend its story, into the larger story.

Kaufman invents a twin brother who embodies slapdash, formulaic Hollywood. He's lazy, cliché'd and completely convenient inside the movie to represent what Charlie is fighting against doing himself. Donald makes Charlie's attempt to write a quality story more punctuated by showing how redundant mainstream Hollywood movies are.

I haven't read the Orchid Thief, but the arc involving Streep and Cooper is more than likely what the book is about, only in a documentary-ish kind of way. This allows kaufman in the screenplay to explore all the extraneous meanings of "adaptation" through Cooper's character's love of Orchids and plants in general.

And the last thing that I want to comment on is the ending. I remember reading reviews when it comes out that the ending completely falls apart and blah blah etc etc...when in fact the end of the movie is exactly in the same vein as the rest of the movie. Charlie struggles, and flounders in the whole movie to build and then finish the movie. Meanwhile, Donald creates, writes, and gets made his movie in that time. So when the movie finally starts to kinda hit the wall what happens? It turns into a panicked, Hollywood style ending replete with every cliché that Charlie refuses to cave in to earlier in the movie. Something that makes total sense after Charlie relents and see's the Script Writing Guru, and asks for advice from his brother. Wam Bam, the movie is done and the sour taste in a thoughtful movie goers mouth is deliberate and therefore genius. Donald Kaufman gets a screen writing credit on the movie hinting that he was the one who actually wrote the ending, and gets it dedicated to him to further blur the line between, "did this really happen??"

There are just so many great things in this movie that are slipped in, it has to be watched multiple times, it's amazing.

This is a quality motion picture which suprises me because despite the questionable ending to Minority Report, thats 2 movies in a row that Stevie Hollywood hasn't over stuffed with sentimentality or kid-crap and therefore are good. Who knows if he can keep it up, but I imagine that he'll go out and make that Memoirs of a Geisha movie to offset the quality entertainment he's been making. Remember when the guy made Jaws, Close Encounters, Indiana Jones all in a row there? i dont cuz I wasn't born yet, but it musta been nice, because I grew up in him being all serious or having some underlying message to all his flicks. anyway...

I really liked Catch Me if You Can and I have no complaints at all about it actually. For a 2 hr 20 minute movie it moved at a lightening brisk pace, had genuinely funny moments and had a very logical and well written script that never confused me for a second.

Dicaprio plays Frank Abangale Jr., son of F.A. Sr. (Christopher "man's man" Walken) who before his 21st birthday managed to impersonate an airline pilot, doctor and lawyer and swindle his way, via forged checks , to more than 4 million dollars in loot. DiCaprio really was the only mainstream choice to play Frank Abangale in my opinion. Other than Tobey McGuire he's the only leading man with a marketable name that can play from 15 to 30 convincingly which is what the script requires him to do. And does he do it well, the kid is an actor, not that I've ever denied it, he was good in What's Eating Gilberts Grape and Basketball Diaries, but unfortunantly Titanic had to come along and make his sleepwalk performance in that what everyone remembers. (the same problem is with James Cameron, the guy made some AWESOME movies and Titanic is all he's gonna be remembered for)

Chasing DiCaprio's Abangale is Tom Hanks Carl Hanratty, one of the few FBI agents back in the 60's to deal in check forgery and have a west virginia (i presume it is, they never actually say) accent as think as his horn rimmed

glasses. Hanks does a damn good job here as well, as though there is really any chance he'd be bad, portraying Hanratty as a competant but timid agent early in the movie to an honorable and much more mature sleuth 3 or 4 years after he started following Abergale's paper trail.

The movie runs deftly from the early years of Frank Jr.s life, showing how his father also had the smooth talking gene and took his son along as he attempted to finesse his way out of problems with the IRS. The whole conflict between the father and the government being passed to the son is very cool, I was pleased when I realized how it had shaped up, it wasn't spelled out in some long winded explanation by anybody like a stupid movie would. Spielberg, while not being my favorite director anymore, has the clout and the confidence to be able to tell a story without spelling it out just so the dumber members in the audience get it. Over the course of the movie we see the toll that the cat and mouse game takes while showing that both guys are good people and not villians in any sense of the word. Being based on a true story helped give it credibility and makes one wish that they were half as suave and clever as frank was at 15 years old.

This movie is a different beast from most other Spielberg movies, its not a fantasy, or actioner, or sci fi, its just a story told very well without huge pretentions. It's just meant to entertain and show that in America a set of brains and a pair of balls will reward you in one way or another.

***3/4* (I didnt give it a perfect 4 stars becase I really don't have an urge to watch it again, but maybe over time I will)

First off, I thought the movie itself was fabulous. Its something nowadays to sit and watch a movie and see every actor on the screen (including the kid) do a remarkable acting job. To top it off, the story was top notch and kept me entertained through the whole thing. I can't complain one bit about the movie itself, it was almost surely the best movie I've seen this year and odds are will stay there until December.

Now, what bugged me? The music for one. It wasn't bad, on the contrary, the main theme was actually great, I loved it. But the background music had too many chimes and reminded me of the music from American Beauty the entire time, it was distracting. This is what kinda bugged me about Gladiator/Hannibal/Black Hawk Down as well. After Gladiator, Ridley stuck with Hans Zimmer and the music had the same tone for all three movies and it reminded me of the previous film and I was taken out of that movie a little as a result. Thats the same thing with Mendes/Newman I think. the stuck with what worked and it did, but worked better with American Beauty because it was original then.

It can't complain with Mendes using heavy rain so wonderfully in this movie like he did in AB, rain is on the posters for this one, its raining outside when Hank's is raining bullets on people. But it did come into my head while watching it and draw me a little away. But it looks some damn wonderful that I can't fault it, the guy has a gift, I won't argue when he puts it to full use.

All in all though, I thought it was great. Hanks should be nominated for an Oscar, thats a given with almost any movie he does anymore, and I think Newman and Law will both get supporting actor nods. It's a bit disappointing that both guys are going for the same prize for such different performances. Newman is all alpha male in this movie, using his personality to make his character complete in a small amount of screen time. And Law makes a disturbing character without a lot of dialogue into a truly memorable character himself.

9 outa 10