 
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
|
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
What's the deal with the ending in this flick? I thought this movie was pretty clever and I was enjoying it up till the last 15 minutes or so. The ending seems really inconsistent with the rest pace/tone of the film.I had the same feelings with Matchstick Men. I enjoyed the movie up until the very end which seemed inconsistent with the majority of the film. Were the endings of these movies rewritten? It almost seems as if someone chopped off the director's original ending and slapped on a lame "summary" final scene. I would have much preferred if both movies just ended a little sooner, maybe a scene earlier. Instead of having some neat "wrap it all up nicely" ending that seemed totally forced, why not leave it up to the viewer with something to think about?
Paul
Follow Ups:
and the perfect denoument to the creative writer trapped in a hollywood movie. The ending has several ways you can look at it in fact. The writing guru Robert McKee is expalining that you NEED something to happen a formula - a point lost on the artistic so Charlie but not on his brother Donald. Charlie is struggling to create a screenplay about a plant.Does the film make fun of the bombastic money grabbing Hollywood process - or is it in fact making fun of arthouse film-makers who are trying to make a film so un-hollywood they end up being as boring as a movie about an Orchid? Ohh this is one of the beter films out there, because I'm not entirely sure that Jonze isn't making a commentary within a commentary about both sides of the film making fence - or about their audiences. Add a bit of pretension to the mix and this film is a hoot - even a rather touching hoot.
but I enjoyed it for the most part. The tidy 360 overlap made it worth sitting through. Although, the endless memory chases became tiresome. Too much creative cleverness.Nice budget saving move filming with the spot light.
Still like Malkovich better.
a
Matchstick Men actually has a story that goes someplace (screenplay by Nicholas Griffin; based upon Eric Garcia's novel), and the last 15 minutes, while marginally anti-climactic, do wrap-up the stories of these characters and the ironies that brought them to where they were some time after the scams had concluded. Adaptation was more like a Seinfeld episode in that the story isn't about anything but itself and most of the characters are either unlikeable or uninteresting; sometimes a movie can be too clever, especially when the film's screenwriter is trying to draw attention to himself.FTR, I loved Matchstick Men from start to finish. Unfortunately, I can't say the same for Adaptation in spite of it's, and Charlie Kaufman's, popular appeal.
AuPh
Gun play and charging alligators did not fit the flow. What got into CK? Has he ever been questioned on that by a brave interviewer?
Where he swears that the movie won't have any guns or drugs or car chases or characters that grow or change or learn imortant life lessons. And then towards the end when the screenwriter seminar guy says that you have to wow 'em in the end but don't you dare resort to "deus ex machina." to wrap things up.The whole point is that CK's making fun of himself for agreeing to adapt the Orchid Thief (he really did try a straight adaptation before it became what it was) and struggling to find a way to make something out of it.
He's also making big fun of hollywood and the typical studio exec's need to have certain elements be in a film no matter what. And, he's making fun of how often something miraculous happens (the alligator killing Larouche) to save the day/wrap up the story.
I can understand people not liking the movie but it always surprises me when people don't get it.
The movie turns into the very formulaic, shallow, improbable, gory, Hollywood action-thriller that Kaufman rails against all through the movie, as soon as he starts taking advice from his twin brother (his alter ego), and reaches for Success instead of Art. As Kaufman sells out, so does the story! It's brilliant!
Also the mentor absolutely forbids voice over narrative and that takes place during the entire film.
had been playing the leads I would have paid more attention. My mind shut down near the middle of the movie--I was along for the ride only.I'm not alone, though!
I'm also always amused when people don't "get" the end of this movie.It's a great satire of the Hollywood system.
Next to that, I prefer the wit and charm of Shakespeare in Love with it's ingenius modern playwrite allegory. As for Adaptation, it wasn't a matter of "getting it" for me, but rather caring enough about the characters to appreciate what I was getting out of the movie.AuPh
The best satire of the Hollywood system is probably "The Player". I have a soft spot for "The Big Picture" too."Adaptation" worked for me. It's overlapping reality / fantasy elements made for a difficult story to follow and thus connect with the characters. I like the movie more for it's plot machinations and clever continuity devices than it's character development. The story was just too cynical to really let you like any of the characters. I suppose it's the same thing as saying you love "Blade Runner" because the sets and art direction are so cool, even if the the other elements of it are flawed, see?
I could also not see this being a good movie to see in a group of friends at home because there is more likelihood of losing continuity with even a momentary lapse of concentration.
:o)
Coincidentally I watched "The Player" last night and was going to post something about it today. It is probably the best satire on Hollywood ever done, especially the prison film sequence at the end. And don't forget the over the top nine minute tracking sequence at the beginning. As always, I enjoyed every moment. Altman has had the most ups and downs of anyone in movies.
IMHO the last 15 minutes is the whole point of the film.
;^)
No, you need to see the whole thing, which leads to the last 15 minutes.
Sorry, I realize that many folks really like this film, but like our experience with Kaufman's most recent script (ESoTSM) it did very little for my wife and I and most other folks who saw Adaptation at a film party last year. Note: Friends were requested to bring over one or two films they really liked and if it hadn't been seen by the majority of folks present we'd vote and then project it on our 6' screen with our then-new DLP projector. One person brought Adaptation; since no one had yet seen it we selected it for our first screening. As it turned out, the fellow who brought it ended up being one of the few among 15 or so folks who enjoyed this film in spite of several fine performances by cast members.AuPh
I did get that the movie was a spoof on big budget, cookie cuter Hollywood films. I think my prob with the ending of Adaptation was that I was exhausted by that point. During the film, Kaufman got caught up in in being clever to the point where it became it became a distraction. By the time the ending came around, I already had more than enough of his "insights" on Hollywood. Adaptation seemed to be less about entertaining than about Kaufman exercizing his ego. I'm all for a little less "Hollywood entertainment" at the expense of content, but in this case I thought it was overkill..............Paul
"The Orchid Thief" is a static book (expanded from a New Yorker article), impossible to translate into a movie script. Kaufman knew this and decided that he had to take it over the top, but in such a gradual way that you are pulled along with it. There is some foreshadowing (the horrific car crash near the beginning) but after a while you start wondering just how far he can take this. For me the moment came (as I posted below) when Meryl Streep says, "We've got to kill him". Then you know he's going to make it in a Hollywood direction with "action".I find this a brilliant film and have seen it several times. But I for one did not care for "Being John Malcovich" and I am also aware that not everyone likes "Adaptation".
BTW, the DVD of "Adaptation" has a KILLER DTS logo and sound track.
Was not a huge fan of BJM. I think it might merrit a second view though. I hand it to the director - he certainly attempts to step outside of the norm - while ...ahem... not stepping out of the norm.
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2025, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
