Sep 13, 2008

"Adaptation"


The first two minutes of the movie are spent listening to Nicholas Cage say exactly what is coming to his mind. His random, completely digressive thoughts, that help us roll the credits onto the movie.

A movie which is about a digressing, ill-focussed screenwriter, aka Charlie Kaufman, given the job to write a script for the book written on Orchids. Kaufman says this film is going to be 'about flowers'.

What starts off as a languid-paced film ends up as a dramatic thriller. I didn't find it as great as the critics did but I did enjoy extremely convincing performances by the lead actors. The idea of the story within a story within a story got little attention amidst all the drugs and rare flowers. This movie isn't something you'd see to hear good dialogs (though some had a rancidly realistic punch to them) or believable stories; this movie is to be seen solely for its quality performances, especially by Nicholas Cage, who always does seem a little high to me throughout his movies, whether he's playing a law-abiding citizen or a car-theif. 

Something Streep fans will enjoy, Cage fans will appreciate and flower-lovers will watch expectantly. 

6 comments:

Mampi said...

Cage is my favorite.

yaseen ch said...

a nation who has his 1400 years of history,its rich language and culture ,then what the hell we want to show the world that we are people who hate ourselves but love your English movies and your culture.what do you think they will believe it?.never.

Majaz said...

"Your english movies and your culture" ... ?

What is that supposed to mean?

Is that supposed to mean I love the Western principles more than I love my own? Does that mean I am a xenocentric Muslim or a xenocentric Pakistani, because Pakistan didn't exist 1400 years ago and the culture that did exist 1400 years ago is deeply mutated now and has spread throughout the world in a variety of forms.

If you actually think any of that above, you've read my blog too perfunctorily or are just pissed off for no good reason.

Either way, you should calm down and read the archives.

rusta said...

I love read your post, and you have nice blog, I will back here again :)
http://www.gardeningplan.blogspot.com

Barooq said...

1400 years of history and rich culture and language?
Hehe....
did urdu exist 1400 years back?
Since when we shared culture with Arabs or even language.
I mean Yaseem bibi has accumulated so much stupidity in 5 lines, i dont even know where to start the rebuttal:D

And btw, Urdu never had one Shakespeare or James Joyce. We never had one great prose writer who was even comparable to say even D H lawrencce and yet some idiots keep on swearing Urdu literature is somehow better.

Majaz said...

I think it's one of those moments when there isn't even a need of a rebuttal, just an indignant sputter. Which is easy enough to utter once you realize that there can be some (maybe) answers to stupid questions.

I love the Urdu language and I love Pakistan. But that in no way can mean that Pakistan's richer than the United States. It can't change the fact that Pakistan has taken over 10 billion dollars in US aid and it doesn't change the fact that Pakistan is a poor, crises-struck country with a meager history and a terribly short past.

Urdu may have Meer or Ghalib or Momin but those are still few compared to the giants English, French or German have had. If we begin comparing languages, Urdu will be really somewhere down the spiral and that is not what makes me love it. What makes me love it is that it's mine. Not that it is greater than Sanskrit or Hebrew (which it objectively is not).

Sigh. I wonder why people have to insist that love is to remain blind all the freakin times.