| 
A Key West Bed and Breakfast....
Boasting an incomparable location at the midpoint of Duval Street, The Tropical Inn is a quiet and private island compound. You might walk down Key West's most famous promenade a hundred times and not notice this romantic hideaway, tucked unassumingly away just steps from all the bustle and excitement |
|
|
| Adaptation (Superbit Collection) | 
 enlarge | Actors: Jim Beaver, Nicolas Cage, Chris Cooper, Brian Cox, Gary Farmer
Studio: Sony Pictures
Category: DVD
List Price: $14.94
Buy Used: $1.80
You Save: $13.14 (88%)
Avg. Customer Rating:  315 reviews
Sales Rank: 4586
Format: Anamorphic, Closed-captioned, Color, Dolby, Dubbed, Dvd-video, Subtitled, Widescreen, Ntsc
Languages: English (Original Language), French (Original Language), English (Subtitled), French (Subtitled), French (Dubbed)
Rating: R (Restricted)
Running Time: 114 minutes
Number Of Items: 1
Aspect Ratio: 1.85:1
Shipping Weight (lbs): 1
Dimensions (in): 7.5 x 5.4 x 0.5
MPN: COLD07601D
ISBN: 0767879805
UPC: 043396076013
EAN: 9780767879804
ASIN: B00005JLRE
Theatrical Release Date: January 10, 2003
Release Date: May 20, 2003
Availability: Usually ships in 1-2 business days
|
| Customer Reviews:
 Mediocre September 25, 2008
1 out of 2 found this review helpful
Adaptation was a highly lauded film, critically, but nowhere near a great film. Yes, Chris Cooper won an Oscar for his turn as botanist John LaRoche, & it is a good performance until the film tanks, as well as his acting. Again, it's no defense to claim the screenplay or director wanted deliberately bad, hammy, over-the-top acting. Anyone who's seen CC in earlier roles in John Sayles films such as Matewan or Lone Star knows he is 1 of the best actors of our times. Adaptation is not in a league with either of those 2 performances. Anyway, here's the basic precis of the film: The L.A. screenwriter of the film Being John Malkovich- Charlie Kaufman (played by Nicolas Cage)- is having trouble adapting the next film assignment he's been given. The book is a non-fiction best-seller called The Orchid Thief, written by a Susan Orlean (Meryl Streep)- a writer for The New Yorker- about an oddball character, who is obsessed with orchids, she was sent to profile for a magazine piece. This is CC's LaRoche character. The book (a real book, by the way) proves difficult to adapt- for both its substance & its style. So the fictional CK character is stuck. Now, here's the 1st twist: the real CK, who wrote the actual film, decided to create a fictional twin brother for the fictional version of himself. This character is Donald Kaufman (also played by Nicolas Cage). Here's where the 1st problems with the film arises- & it's not about Post-Modernism, but then the film exploits every known cliche about writers & twins. CK has writer's block, & suffers, & is an outcast, filled with angst, & a putz around pretty women. His brother is his near exact opposite- smooth, witty, uncreative, not-too bright, yet he tries to mimic his brother by becoming a screenwriter & working on the text for a dull slasher film. CK, of course, disdains & looks down upon DK.
Of course, the rest of the film follows a pretty predictable track, even as it intercuts between the artistic dilemmas of the 2 brothers, CK's going to a screenwriting guru (at DK's behest), & the presumed `real' tale of John LaRoche & SO's profiling of him. Predictability sets in when CK's artistic paralysis increases, DK's screenplay is lauded as brilliant by CK's agent & he gets a huge advance, then CK turns to his brother for advice on how to finish his adaptation of The Orchid Thief. DK ends up going to interview SO about the book, posing as CK- who requested it. DK suspects that SO is a liar & hiding her true feelings for JL. This is where the film really tanks- what happens next is so predictable I feel almost foolish extrapolating- but here goes: this is where DK's `influence' on the real `outer' screenplay is felt. De facto- this is where the real Charlie Kaufman (not the NC version) felt he could slack off, & indulge all his worst instincts & fob off the film's failings on the Post-Modernist crutch. Let me chart the precipitous plunge. Basically, SO & JL turn out to be drug-addled lovers who capture the spying CK (who's followed SO to Florida with his brother to see what she's up to). They plan to murder him & dump him in the swamps where JL went hunting orchids. DK, of course, kiboshes the plan & both twins become the hunted. DK ends up dead, along with JL, & CK heads back to L.A. for the film's denouement, to explain lessons learned. The fictive DK is credited as co-writer & the film even ends with a memorial dedication to the dead fictive writer.
Here is where the film's advocates declaim its brilliance- that the film is actually mocking predictability by being predictable because, of course, this was the fictional DK's influence. That the real film does not tell us more about the interesting characters from the actual book is glossed over in favor of the real CK's presumption of his own (or his fictive self's) interestingness is treated as some artistic breakthrough, when it's really an infantile throwback to the `art' films of the 1960s & 1970s. The best performance in the film actually comes from perpetually underrated standout actor Brian Cox, as the screenwriting guru Robert McKee who inspires DK, then CK. There are the obligatory star cameos by actors from Being John Malkovich playing themselves- including director Spike Jonze, John Malkovich, Catherine Keener, John Cusack, & the real Susan Orlean playing a woman in a grocery store.
You don't have to be dumb to hate this one. September 24, 2008
0 out of 2 found this review helpful
I guess if you think you're smart and an extreme film buff, then you could go with the flow of critics and give this one 5 stars, but if you're looking for anything even remotely entertaining as "Being John Malchovich", then you will be sorely sorry you decided on this piece of fluff.
The story moves at a snails pace, the acting is sub-par(Don't even know why Chris Cooper got an Oscar) and the only chemistry going for it, is Nicolas Cage playing off of...Nicolas Cage.
It's not as smart or intellectually stimulating as "Malchovich", and I know it's not the same movie, but when you have the same director and writer, you do expect something close to being as original and funny as "Being John".
Skip it, you won't miss anything in this over-hyped and uninteresting film.
 Comedy Not at it's best May 26, 2008
0 out of 3 found this review helpful
this is one of the worst comedies i've seen, it's an okay movie, the only reason it's okay its because of nick cage. other than that it's dumb
 Way Above Average May 18, 2008
2 out of 2 found this review helpful
Ok, so this is inside baseball, Hollywood-style, with the script merging with the mind of the script-writer. It's still very entertaining stuff, especially the voice-overs by the nervous Cage character. Cage's double-lead is exceptionally well done. Literate stuff, and only one or two gunshots and a couple of violent car accidents. Not bad for Hollywood.
Great unknown.... May 18, 2008
2 out of 2 found this review helpful
Everyone has heard of this movie, very few people seem to have seen it. I was skeptical at first too, but I loved it.
Nicolas Cage plays two roles and nails them both. The story is confusing at first, but it all makes since in the end. Good movie, great characters, youll enjoy this film.
|
|
|
Powered by Our Keywest | |
