The film Adaptation is about a guy named Charlie Kaufman, who is hired to write a movie about a book. However, he gets writers block and is unable to come up with something creative enough that would satisfy his audience. His plan was to make a movie about flowers, because he said that it hadn’t been done yet. He tries to go to his twin brother, Donald, who is a better version of him (Social wise) in his eyes because things seem to come easier to him. In his eyes his brother would be able to find want he needs to fix in his writing. Unfortunately, his brother is unable to help him find that missing piece, but likes what he read. He attends a screenwriting lecture, directed by a well-known screenwriting figure, Robert McKee, to try and spark
…show more content…
There is adaptation being shown. The critics knew adaptation was involved, but couldn’t really agree with this as well. They more questioned the idea of there being adaptation in the movie. They still had the idea of irony in their head so I can blame them. To me Charlie is “ADAPTING” to his current life situations and writing about it in a creative way. Let’s look deeper. If you noticed in the movie, some parts said, “Three Years Earlier”. It’s Ironic that Susan seems to have changed her values in life, but each time they get back to reality Susan has a different path in life. When she is with Charlie she seems as if she has nothing to do with drugs but, each time they say, “Three Years Earlier”, it gets deeper and deeper into that drug addict lifestyle Susan has. This further proves my theory that the movie was about the script and what was going on in his life at the time. If you were to put my theory that the movie is actually his script and what’s actually going on in reality, you would see that Spike Jonze is basically showing how Susan also is “adapting” along with Charlie. This is what causes confusion in the eyes of me and the other critics. All of these different elements not clearly adding up how they normally do in other movies can twist someone’s mind if they’re not
There is adaptation being shown. The critics knew adaptation was involved, but couldn’t really agree with this as well. They more questioned the idea of there being adaptation in the movie. They still had the idea of irony in their head so I can blame them. To me Charlie is “ADAPTING” to his current life situations and writing about it in a creative way. Let’s look deeper. If you noticed in the movie, some parts said, “Three Years Earlier”. It’s Ironic that Susan seems to have changed her values in life, but each time they get back to reality Susan has a different path in life. When she is with Charlie she seems as if she has nothing to do with drugs but, each time they say, “Three Years Earlier”, it gets deeper and deeper into that drug addict lifestyle Susan has. This further proves my theory that the movie was about the script and what was going on in his life at the time. If you were to put my theory that the movie is actually his script and what’s actually going on in reality, you would see that Spike Jonze is basically showing how Susan also is “adapting” along with Charlie. This is what causes confusion in the eyes of me and the other critics. All of these different elements not clearly adding up how they normally do in other movies can twist someone’s mind if they’re not