Best Adapted Screenplay: 2005

When it came—thirty cents—he pinned it up in his trailer, brass-headed tack in each corner. Below it he drove a nail and on the nail he hung a wire hanger and the two old shirts suspended from it. He stepped back and looked at the ensemble through a few stinging tears. “Jack, I swear—” he said, though Jack had never asked him to swear anything and was himself not the swearing kind.

My Top 10

1. Brokeback Mountain
2. Munich
3. Pride & Prejudice
4. The Constant Gardener
5. The History of Violence
6. Batman Begins
7. Downfall
8. Capote
9. Proof
10. King Kong

note:  An excellent Top 5 and Top 10.

Consensus Nominees:

1. Brokeback Mountain  (336 pts)
2. Capote  (304 pts)
3. The Constant Gardener  (120 pts)
4. A History of Violence  (120 pts)
5. Munich  (72 pts)

note:  Only six films earns Consensus points (due to circumstances listed below) and all six make my Top 10, two circumstances that both last happened in 1997.

Oscar Nominees  (Best Screenplay – Based on Material from Another Medium):

• Brokeback Mountain
• Capote
• The Constant Gardener
• A History of Violence
• Munich

WGA:

• Brokeback Mountain
• Capote
• The Constant Gardener
• A History of Violence

note:  Why only four?  Because the WGA considered Syriana to be Adapted but I go by Academy rulings and place it in Original.

Golden Globes:

• Brokeback Mountain
• Munich

Nominees that are Original:  Crash, Good Night and Good Luck, Match Point

BAFTA:

• Brokeback Mountain
• Capote
• The Constant Gardener
• A History of Violence
• Pride & Prejudice

BFCA:

• Brokeback Mountain
• Capote

Nominees that are Original:   Crash, Good Night and Good Luck, The Squid and the Whale

LAFC:

• Capote

BSFC:

• Capote

My Top 10

Brokeback Mountain

The Film:

Except for the brief period from when I saw it in the theaters and when I saw Munich on DVD, I have never had Brokeback Mountain as my #1 film of 2005.  That puts me at odds with the majority, but I want to make clear how great a film this is, how, even though I rank it below Good Night and Good Luck and Munich, I think it is a truly fantastic film, brilliantly acted (as is clearly evident since it wins three of my acting awards), directed and written (winning here, of course) and that the Academy under-appreciated its technical achievements.  I still look at that shot in the Fourth of July scene and think it’s one of the best still shots in all film history.  It’s not my #1 or even my #2 choice among the Best Picture nominees but I wouldn’t have hesitated to enjoy had it won like it was widely expected to.  Fully reviewed here.

The Source:

“Brokeback Mountain” by Annie Proulx  (1997)

For a short story (33 pages in the published version in Close Range: Wyoming Stories in 1999 but short enough that it originally appeared in The New Yorker in 1997) this has a completed realized story and characters.  It’s a heart-wrenching story about two men who fall in love one summer and are unable to break their attachment in spite of where the years takes them after that, until one of them has died and the other finally realizes how much he meant to him.

The Adaptation:

What’s incredible is how much of the film really does come from the original story.  Yes, there are added scenes (like the Fourth of July scene for instance) but the whole premise of the film really comes from the original story.  Most of what is added is actually about Jack’s life once he heads down to Texas.  Even a considerable amount of the dialogue comes from the original story including the key line of “I wish I knew how to quit you.”  And, of course, if you saw the caption above you know the ending is straight from the story.

The Credits:

Directed by Ang Lee.  Screenplay by Larry McMurtry & Diana Ossana.  Based on the short story by Annie Proulx.
note:  The title is the only thing in the opening credits.  This is the last time this note will be appearing.  Too many films at this point (including the majority of the Top 10) don’t list anything in the opening credits except the title.

Munich

The Film:

Is Munich the best film of 2005?  I certainly thought so when I first saw it and for years afterwards until I bumped Good Night and Good Luck into that top spot.  But there is very little space in my Top 3.  All three are within five spots of each other on my all-time list which is pretty damn close.  It’s rare to have the top two films that close and it’s unique to have the top three that close.  Munich is a great film not just because it tells a riveting story in an entertaining fashion, full of excitement and intrigue and drama but also because it does it without really choosing sides, preferring to present the story rather than try to sway us with an argument.  Fully reviewed here.

The Source:

Vengeance: The True Story of an Israeli Counter-Terrorist Team by George Jones  (1984)

Whether I read a book when a film comes out depends on a lot of things, including my reaction to the film (or anticipation of the film – if it’s fiction I’m more likely to read the book first but if it’s based on a non-fiction source, I’m more likely to read it afterwards) and my interest in the subject.  I have a distinct memory of reading this book almost immediately after I saw the film and finding it fascinating.  There is no way to prove that the events are true, though Jonas was convinced by the real Avner and documented them thoroughly.  They make for interesting reading as well as food for thought on how the world responds to terrorism and at what point you lose sight of what you are doing and why.

The Adaptation:

The film follows many of the events as described in the book rather closely, including most of the more prominent scenes.  The one thing that wasn’t in the book and came from the filmmakers (sort of) is the best scene in the book – the night they end up sharing a safe house with the PLO.  That is actually (I assume) inspired by a footnote in the book on page 380 where it mentions that Avner spent two nights in a safe house with Carlos the Jackal without knowing who he was or would become.  But it’s Kushner who really brings that scene to life.  But many of the deaths (including the revenge assassination on the female) are straight from the book in every detail.

The Credits:

Directed by Steven Spielberg.  Screenplay by Tony Kushner and Eric Roth.  Based on the book Vengeance by George Jones.

Pride & Prejudice

The Film:

I suppose we shouldn’t have been so surprised at the amazing one-shot at Dunkirk in Atonement.  After all, in one of the first shots of this film, we move away from Lizzie as she walks up to her house, go in through the hall, see all of her sisters and get an idea of their lives, move back out, see Lizzie coming across the front and close enough that she can hear her parents discussing the new arrival that will set in motion the story in the film before moving back inside yet again, this time with Lizzie before it finally does a cut to where the sisters will gather together to listen in on the news.  It’s a masterful shot, a quiet kind of camera flourish and one not normally to be found in an adaptation of Jane Austen, but that’s the kind of interesting director Joe Wright would turn out to be, no matter how successful (Atonement, Anna Karenina, Darkest Hour) or unsuccessful (Pan) his films would turn out to be.

This is the story of Lizzie Bennett and the way she falls in love.  Or maybe it’s so much more than that.  This is the story of the Bennett girls, five young women who are in a position where they must look for husbands as a way to support their lives (they are not so poor that they would be forced to actually go out and work but once their father dies they will lose their home) and the way some of those romances come to roost.  It’s a very talented group of young actresses, one of whom was already a Bond girl, one of whom would (deservedly) earn an Oscar nomination for this film, one of whom had been giving strong supporting performances for years and two of whom were new to films but would be good enough that within two years, both would be guest-stars on two of the very best episodes in the whole history of Doctor Who.  And that’s just the five girls.

But, more so than her sisters, this is the story of Lizzie and the man she loathes from first sight but also finds intriguing.  It’s not because he’s handsome (though he is) or because he’s rich (he is very much that) but because of his proud bearing.  He is smart but also rather dour.  He is capable of great kindness but is quick to point out what he views as improprieties.  He is also forthright, willing to declare his love in the middle of a rainstorm when she is running away from him but knows when something has been done wrong and he must make amends.

As will only be briefly mentioned below, I am not a fan of the book.  But this film, as much as any Austen adaptation except perhaps Sense and Sensibility, really brings the characters to life.  It helps, of course, to have a cast with the likes of Donald Sutherland and Judi Dench.  But it’s the way the story is told.  There are some films that need a happy ending, that demand a happy ending, and watching Lizzie learn the things that she does, watching Darcy do the things that he does, we can’t help but hope that they will somehow find each other.  When they do, on a wind-swept field, it’s a perfect shot, so perfect that we get the sun between them and a touching of heads and don’t even need the kiss that so many would want (that comes at the end).

The Source:

Pride and Prejudice: A Novel in Three Volumes by The Author of “Sense and Sensibility”  (1813)

I am not a fan.  I have made this clear time and time again.  I specifically wrote about this book here (down towards the bottom) so I feel no need to write more about it.

The Adaptation:

Again, there are others who can do this better than I can.  They are devoted to the Austen novels and can point out any change, no matter how large or small.  The main change, of course, that is always pointed out, is that Wright (and it was Wright’s decision) decided to move the period back from when the novel was published (1813) to when the novel was written (late 1790’s) which also has an effect on the costumes and the art direction.

The Credits:

Directed by Joe Wright.  Screenplay by Deborah Moggach.  Based on the novel by Jane Austen.
note:  Uncredited screenwriting by Lee Hall and Emma Thompson (the IMDb even lists the scenes Thompson wrote).

The Constant Gardener

The Film:

This is a film year where the top choice is hard but there are a Top 3 that are easy to distinguish but after that, choosing the last two in a Top 5 is really hard.  I often think of The Constant Gardener and think that it must be in the Top 5 because it was so brilliant in its story-telling, in its acting, in the timeliness of what it had to say, that of course it’s in my Top 5 and yet it’s not.

A man comes into the office of another man.  They both are medium level diplomats working for the British government in Kenya.  The first man, played by Danny Huston in one of those roles that helped establish him as a great actor who often shouldn’t be trusted (after his performance in Silver City had established him, for me at least, as the exact opposite), is telling the second man, played by Ralph Fiennes, perhaps the greatest English actor of his generation, that his wife is dead.  The eerie calmness with which Fiennes’ Justin Quayle takes this news will help set the stage for the rest of the film as we follow the mystery through to discover how she died and why.

Quayle’s wife, Tessa, is kind of a mystery to Quayle himself.  They meet when she challenges him at a small presentation he is delivering and they instantly fall for each other, although we eventually will learn that she has manipulated the meeting.  She will fall in love with him almost as much as he falls for her but it will take longer as she grows to man the she doesn’t yet know she should love and he is engrossed by her beauty, intelligence and courage.  Unfortunately, the first opens doors, the second makes the doors more complicated and the third one shuts door so firmly that, as mentioned, the film begins with her death.

All of this forms a more than satisfying mystery that takes Justin back to England and then back to Africa again as he seeks to unravel the spool of thread she has left behind that can lead him to the answers.  It brings in such great character actors as Bill Nighy, Pete Postlethwaite, Donald Sumpter and Archie Panjabi as he slowly starts to discover what his own government has been doing to the people of Africa.  Most of it all it awakens within Justin the kind of feelings that Tessa had often hoped to reach, the kind of thing that could bring out moral outrage in a man who has until now quietly served his country and believed in that servitude as well.

The film is complex and that actually works perfectly because the book was complex in its own right.  We get more of Tessa on-screen than we got in the book but that’s because flashback scenes work better than narrative and because it gives us more of Rachel Weisz’s fantastic Oscar winning performance (she just barely misses out on winning the Nighthawk) that really helps drive the film.  We understand why Justin is so haunted by what has happened because we see the kind of energy, honesty and passion that Tessa brought into his life.  If, in the end, it only leads to more tragedy, we can understand that as well, because who would want to live without such passion.

The Source:

The Constant Gardener by John Le Carré  (2001)

My relationship with the works of Le Carré is a little odd.  Looking down the list of his published novels in the hardcover of this book, I have (and have read) the first nine, all of which I have in mass markets (most rather pulpish).  Of the remaining eight, I have none (because I like how I have my books and the rest haven’t really been released in mass markets) and have only read this one (because of this) and The Night Manager (after the mini-series aired).  He’s a very good author and well-worth reading but I don’t feel the need to go out and read the ones I don’t own when there is still so much for me to read and I don’t want to buy them in trade editions.  So, an impasse.  But for now, I have read this one and it’s not a surprise that it’s quite good.

There were two things about the book that were rather a surprise.  The first is that this book is much more structurally complex than his earlier ones, although I suppose that shouldn’t have been a surprise.  The second, is that after writing for so long about Smiley and the inner workings of intelligence, this book has a very dim view of the British government in general and the people who do work in other countries.  True, it’s fiction, the story of a tuberculosis drug being tested on Africans because the company doesn’t care if they die, and the government tries not to know, but they still come off really badly and it’s all about the murder of a British citizen that is essentially sanctioned if not down-right ordered by her own government just to keep this matter silent.

As mentioned, it’s a strong book with a fascinating plot that really pulls you in.  It takes a mid-level diplomat and pulls him from the life he is so used to and drags him across the globe as he tries to solve the mystery, not just of his wife’s death, but in some ways, of her life as well.

The Adaptation:

This is an excellent example of how to take a complex novel and make a first-rate film out of it.  First of all, the film mostly follows the novel although there are some characters in the office in Kenya that are mostly cut and the plot is somewhat simplified when it comes to the pharmaceutical company.  Second, it takes later actions and combines them, both in terms of place and time.  Instead of involving a bunch of actions and characters in Italy, it combines them with characters in England and it drops an entire journey to Canada that gets quite complex, cutting the character in those scenes entirely.  It even holds true all the way to the conclusion, with the actions after Justin’s death coming before we actually get Justin’s death, just like in the book, with his actual death coming at the absolute end.

The Credits:

Directed by Fernando Meirelles.  Screenplay by Jeffrey Caine.  Based upon the novel by John Le Carré.

A History of Violence

The Film:

I have already reviewed this film as my representative film for David Cronenberg when I listed him in my Top 100 Directors.  It’s a great film, the best film ever made by Cronenberg, in fact, one which takes the title and really applies in different forms.  It somehow didn’t get nominated for Actor or Supporting Actress but then earned a surprise Supporting Actor nomination for a performance that doesn’t even begin until there’s less than 20 minutes into the film.  A great, but very violent film.

The Source:

A History of Violence, written by John Wagner, art by Vince Locke, lettering by Bob Lappan  (1997)

It’s interesting that this isn’t by the same creative team that made Road to Perdition because the two graphic novels are similar in style and content (both dealing with trying to escape from violence and gangs in big cities) and both were turned into critically acclaimed films within a few years of each other.  This is a decent graphic novel but not nearly as good as the film.  It’s the story of a man who accidentally becomes a hero by stopping a killing, only to find that brings his past around.  Eventually he is forced to return home to rescue a childhood friend.

The Adaptation:

If that last part doesn’t sound familiar, that’s because it’s not in the film.  The original graphic novel is broken into three chapters.  The first chapter is followed in the film fairly closely, although the Ed Harris character is a bit different than the one in the book and Viggo isn’t missing a finger (and it isn’t being carried by Harris).  The second chapter, which tells the story of the past is completely excised from the film; Viggo just gives a brief description while in the book it covers 1/3 of the total.  But that’s okay because the background is completely different anyway.  In the book, he was a kid who ripped off the mob and escaped when his friend didn’t and then in the third part he goes back to rescue his friend (who’s been kept alive and tortured for 20 years which is ridiculous and loses me entirely between the grotesqueness and the absurdity) while in the third part of the film he goes back to confront his brother.

The Credits:

directed by David Cronenberg.  based on the graphic novel by John Wagner andVince Locke . screenplay by Josh Olson.

Batman Begins

The Film:

I have already reviewed this film when working through my For Love of Film: Batman project.  It’s a brilliant film, of course, that gets a bit shafted on the Nighthawk Awards because 2005 is a really, really good year for film and it’s really tough to land anywhere.  But it was, by a good margin, the greatest comic book ever made at this point and it would only be the preparation for the next film to come.

The Source:

Batman, created by Bob Kane and Bill Finger  (1939)

It all comes from the original creation of course (and while Finger isn’t listed below from the credits, he is now officially acknowledged as a co-creator as he always should have been).  But this film also takes a lot from Year One (see more about that here), thus the picture on the right.  But it mixes things together from the history of the character (rather than just straight up adapting Year One) and does a great job of coalescing those into a coherent whole.

The Adaptation:

As just mentioned, this is really a synthesis of various stories about Batman over the years.  I was fooled by the use of Decard because of “The Man Who Falls,” and a lot of details come in from Year One (like Flass or Gordon’s fight against corruption or the bats coming to the rescue, which in a hilarious bit in Year One, lead to mass rabies shots).

The Credits:

Directed by Christopher Nolan.  Screenplay by Christopher Nolan and David S. Goyer.  Story by David S. Goyer.  Based upon characters appearing in comic books published by DC Comics.  Batman created by Bob Kane.

Der Untergang

The Film:

A madman who hates everything, a sociopath determined to burn down the world rather than lose, rants and raves at everyone around him.  He is a vicious racist who hates everything.  The irony, of course, is that I am writing these words after finishing watching the film on the morning of 7 November 2020, just after another man of the same description has been declared by all the media the loser in the most pivotal election in my lifetime.  Both men go down in flames and try to take the world with them.  Hitler was responsible for the deaths of millions even if you don’t lay the war deaths at his fate while his 21st Century version is only responsible for hundreds of thousands but he makes up for that by leaving us with his reprehensible spawn who continues to try and work his evil for him.

Current politics aside, of course, this is a film about the last two weeks of the life of Hitler as he rants and raves in his bunker.  The war is long since lost but he longer cares about that.  He wants to make certain that he takes everyone with him.  If his scientists had made it to the atom bomb before we the Soviets made it to Berlin, the world would likely not exist.  So why watch a film about the greatest evil ever unleashed upon humanity in his last desperate times?  Because it’s really well done, I suppose.  The quality of the script is what convinced Bruno Ganz, better known for such films as Wings of Desire, to try his hand at playing Hitler and he’s brilliant.  It also gives us an understanding of those people inside the bunker and what was going on with them, from the ones struggling to right the ship enough so that everything didn’t burn alongside them to those that were quite willing to follow Hitler into a mass of ash and dust.

It’s not just the script (which I clearly think is great, falling just outside the Top 10 in a very tough year) or the performance (again, Top 10, but in a truly remarkable year).  There is the direction from Olivier Hirschbiegel, who humanizes the situation even if such a man himself can never be humanized.  There is also Alexandra Maria Lara as the female lead (Hitler’s secretary) in a remarkable performance that helped her break into the worldwide film market.  There’s a fantastic cast that includes Juliane Kohler (who had been the Oscar winning Nowhere in Africa just two years before on the other side of the Holocaust), not to mention multiple actors who would go on to big blockbusters and Oscar nominated films like Thomas Kretschmann and Christian Berkel.

Downfall, when it comes down to it, as a human story about inhuman times and an inhuman monster.  It doesn’t have answers, but it does have compelling storytelling and fantastic acting.  It’s not a fun film to watch but it’s a film that should be watched.

The Source:

Der Untergang: Hitler und das Ende des Dritten Reiches by Joachim C. Fest  (2002)

A short (less than 200 pages with photos and bibliography included) non-fiction narrative of what was going on in the bunker from the time that Hitler and his men entered it on 16 April up through Hitler’s death and the end of the war.  A compelling, well-written book.

Bis zur letzten Stunde by Traudl Junge and Melissa Müller  (2002)

I was unable to get hold of this book.  It’s a memoir written by the main female character in the film (far prettier in the film than in real life but that’s fairly standard in films) beginning with her appointment as Hitler’s secretary in 1942 and running through his death.  She originally wrote it in 1947 but it wasn’t published until 2002.

The Adaptation:

Since I couldn’t get hold of Junge’s book, I can only assume the opening scenes (set in 1942) come from her memoir as the Fest book, the source of much of the film, only covers the last couple of weeks of the war, starting on 16 April, after Hitler and his closest aides went down in the bunker, for the most part, to never emerge.  The film does a good job of dramatizing the events portrayed in Fast’s book without ever contradicting anything in them.  There’s not as much dialogue in the book as in the film but that’s often the case for non-fiction books adapted into films.

The Credits:

Regie: Olivier Hirschbiegel.  Drehbuch: Bernd Eichinger.  nach dem gleichnamigen Buch von Joachim Fest. und >>Bis zur letzten Stunde<< von Traudl Junge und Melissa Müller.

Capote

The Film:

I have already reviewed this film as one of the five nominees for Best Picture in a very hard year to actually choose the best film.  Capote was kind of pushed to the back, the surprise nominee for Best Director and the least assured of a Best Picture nom (I doubt anyone would have been surprised if Walk the Line had been nominated instead).  But it is a great film.  People often know what will kill them but it’s much more rare to know what will destroy them and these events, which lead to his greatest book, would also lead to the destruction of Truman Capote.

The Source:

Capote: A Biography by Gerald Clarke  (1988)

Like many films based on true stories, the filmmakers could have made the film without the book (indeed, the following year would bring Infamous, a film about the same story but based on a different book).  Also, of course, the book is a biography but the film is not a biopic, but rather the story of a period of Capote’s life.

This book actually annoyed me in one sense.  I’m not a biography reader in general (other than political history) and I only really needed to read a small part of the book (see below) but I found myself continually sucked in to Capote’s life, to the way her interacted with the society around him, the way he was a wunderkind and his life at the top and I couldn’t keep from reading.  Part of it was Capote’s life, of course, but a lot of it was also Clarke’s writing and it’s a wonderful biography and absolutely worth reading.

The book covers in-depth Capote’s trips back and forth to Kansas and the way the writing of the book took over his life and how he needed them to die in order to finish the book.  The irony is that Clarke seemed to need the same, discussing this at the start of the afterward, how it took him 13 years to write the book (including nine doing research while Capote was still alive, allowing him great access (in fact Clarke was so close that after Capote’s partner Jack died, Clarke ended up with Capote’s ashes)) and it didn’t seem like he could finish while Capote was alive.

The Adaptation:

The best evidence of not calling the film a biopic is that the main text of the book runs 547 pages but the actions of the film begin on page 317 with Capote reading the paper and end on page 354 with the executions, taking up well less than 10% of the book.  Some dialogue comes straight from the book and a lot of the scenes at least are inspired by the book.  The biggest deviation is in the use of Harper Lee.  She is not mentioned that much in the book and there is very little about her own book but it provides a nice counterpoint in the film (the success of her book and the film).

The Credits:

Directed by Bennett Miller.  Screenplay by Dan Futterman.  Based on the book by Gerald Clarke.

proof

The Film:

Catherine is beautiful but she wears dowdy clothes and hides out in her father’s house.  Catherine is brilliant but she has pushed it down to a place where it can not be seen, refusing to interact with other people and keeping her gifts a secret.  Catherine is perhaps falling in love but she’s not sure she trusts the man she’s falling for because he’s looking over her father’s work and her father was very sick at the end and his brilliant mathematics work was long in the past.

“Proof” is a complicated word that has many layers.  The 1991 film of the same name actually deals with photographic proofs.  This film’s title, on the basic level, refers to a mathematical proof, something you may remember from high school math.  Finding a new proof is the dream of any serious mathematician, but there are others kind of proof to be found in life and those are also some of the things that Catherine is dealing with.  Can you have proof that you are in love?  Can you have proof that you are losing touch with reality and perhaps going insane?

This isn’t so much an ensemble piece as a look at four characters and the way they interact: Catherine, her father Robert (who is dead but thanks to mental illness that doesn’t stop him from appearing), her sister Claire and Hal, the man who was a student of her father, becomes a lover to her and someone Claire actually begins to worry for a while doesn’t even exist.  In a cast with Anthony Hopkins, Hope Davis and Jake Gyllenhaal, all of them fantastic, the film belongs to Gwyneth Paltrow, teaming back up with director John Madden, who directed her to an Oscar in 1998 although this was a film where she actually deserved the Oscar and she didn’t even manage a nomination.  She holds the film together as Catherine starts to descend out of reality, worried that she inherited both her father’s brilliance and his madness.

Proof of inheritance is something else to think about.  Did Catherine inherit her father’s gifts and his frailties?  As we watch Hopkins and Paltrow interact, knowing he’s dead (something we learn about after we’ve already met him), we wonder if she can find a way past that proof and find a semblance of life.  It’s a measure of her performance that we perhaps believe that she can.

The Source:

proof: a play by David Auburn  (2001)

This is a brilliant play and it’s not just me saying that because it won the Pulitzer Prize and the Tony.  It’s the story of Catherine, a woman living in the shadow of her famous mathematician father (who has died) and wondering if she has his ability and his mental illness.  It originally starred Mary-Louise Parker and it would have been great to see her on film (but Gwyneth is fantastic).  Parker (who also won the Tony) actually starred opposite Ben Shenkman (who was nominated for a Tony) years before they would both star in the television version of Angels in America.

The Adaptation:

While the film opens things up a little (the original play only had four characters) and adds in a few extra little scenes, the film is so close to the play that it’s easy to sit there and read the play alongside the film.

The Credits:

directed by johnmadden.  based on the play by davidauburn.  screenplay by davidauburn and rebeccamiller.

King Kong

The Film:

I have already reviewed this film as one of the five best of the year.  Kudos to the Golden Globes for nominating Jackson for Best Director in a year where he definitely deserved it and not getting sucked in by Crash.  Yes, the film didn’t need to be as long as it was (I believe the T Rex-Kong showdown is at the time point where the original film ended) but it’s a masterful epic that has all the wonder and amazement of the original but adds in some first class writing, directing and, most importantly, acting.  Fay Wray screamed a lot but Naomi Watts actually gives a brilliant performance that absolutely deserved an Oscar nomination.

The Source:

King Kong, directed by Ernest B. Schoedsack, needs original credits

I have actually already reviewed the original film as well because it’s one of the five best films of 1933.  I have long been a fan of it, ever since the first time I saw it (though, sadly, I saw the 1976 version long before I saw the original) and indeed, it was supposed to be the first RKO film I had ever seen in the theater but the weekend we were supposed to see it is when COVID-19 really exploded in the States and we didn’t go to the showing.  One of the great all-time Horror films (the question of genre is a constant one – many classify it as Action or Adventure or Fantasy and there are books that include it in Sci-Fi which makes no sense since there is no Science involved in it at all but I consider all Monster films to be Horror films) and the first truly great visual effects on-screen.

The Adaptation:

While the story is mostly the same, just expanded, with a couple of exceptions, this film dumps the original version’s clunky dialogue and rewrites the script, vastly improving it.  Of course we do end with the same final line, because that is a classic (except delivered much better this time).  Amusingly, one of the few times in the film we get dialogue straight from the original is the scene between Watts and Chandler on the ship when they are acting in the film within a film and their dialogue is verbatim the dialogue between Ann and the mate in the original.

The Credits:

Directed by Peter Jackson.  Screenplay by Fran Walsh & Philippa Boyens & Peter Jackson.  Based on a story by Merian C. Cooper and Edgar Wallace.

Other Screenplays on My List Outside My Top 10

(in descending order of how I rank the script)

note:  As with every year from 1989 to 2005, you can find more about every film I saw in the theater on the Nighthawk Awards.
note:  For the second year in a row, this list is much longer than the year before.

• Saraband  –  A Top 10 script in almost any other year.  Bergman’s brilliant sequel to Scenes from a Marriage and his last film.
• Twin Sisters  –  Another film that would be Top 10 in almost any other year.  2002 Oscar nominee in Foreign Film, based on the novel by Tessa de Loo about two sisters torn apart by World War II.
• Wallace and Gromit: Curse of the Were-Rabbit  –  Fully reviewed here as the best Animated Film of the year.  Adapted because Wallace and Gromit had already starred in three brilliant shorts.
• Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire  –  The first film in the series where a lot of sub-plots had to be laid by the wayside and thus probably more confusing for people who hadn’t read the books (who hasn’t read the books?).  Film reviewed here and the book here.
• Don’t Move  –  Great Italian film based on the novel by Margaret Mazzantini.
• Corpse Bride  –  Quasi-adapted, based on an old folktale.  Fully reviewed here.
• The Ice Harvest  –  At mid ***.5, the first non-great film listed here.  But snarky as hell and great fun.  Very black Crime Comedy based on the novel by Scott Philips with a surprisingly rather heart-warming ending.
• Sin City  –  Frank Miller’s dark comic book series is brought to vivid life with fantastic visuals.
• Oliver Twist  –  Roman Polanski provides the latest version of the Dickens novel with a solid Fagin played by Ben Kingsley.
• Breakfast on Pluto  –  After already tackling The Butcher Boy, Neil Jordan adapts Patrick McCabe again and provides a rare leading role for Cillian Murphy with a rare Irish role for Liam Neeson.
• Mrs. Henderson Presents  –  Solid story of The Windmill, the British theatre that never closed during the Blitz and had nudity.  Based on the book by Sheila Van Damm, the daughter of the Hoskins character.
• Walk the Line  –  The writing is not as good as the acting (which is fantastic) but it’s still solid for a biopic.  Based on two autobiographies by Johnny Cash.
• Everything is Illuminated  –  I hated the book and I hate the author even more but the film turned out to be quite funny and charming, especially the line “My grandfather informs me this is not possible.”  This and three of the next four (not Howl) are high *** films.
• Where the Truth Lies  –  Solid erotic thriller from Atom Egoyan based on the novel by Rupert Holmes.
• Howl’s Moving Castle  –  The wonderful Fantasy novel by Diana Wynne Jones becomes a similar but also very thematically different film by Miyazaki.  Reviewed here.  That makes this the only year where all three of the Oscar nominees for Best Animated Film are adapted.
• In Her Shoes  –  Jennifer Weiner’s novel becomes a solid film thanks to the script and the acting.  I’m the very rare guy who would rather be with Toni Collette than Cameron Diaz.
• Shopgirl  –  Steve Martin’s debut novel becomes a touching film with the rare post-Juliet appearance of Claire Danes with red hair.

Other Adaptations

(in descending order of how good the film is)

note:  The adaptations go up for the third straight year, adding another eight films but then again, I’ve seen over 400 films from 2005.

• Star Wars Episode III: Revenge of the Sith  –  The rare **** film with no points for its script.  Good story, but weak screenplay, especially any scenes with Anakin and Padme.
• Oldboy  –  A ***.5 film that’s all about the way it’s told rather than the script itself.  In spite of being the second in Park’s vengeance trilogy it’s actually adapted because it’s based on a manga.
• War of the Worlds  –  Spielberg’s take on the Sci-Fi classic is low ***.5.
• The Chronicles of Narnia: The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe  –  There was the animated version (made for television) and BBC did a live action back in the late 80’s, but the Chronicles finally come to the big screen.  Solid entertainment and a high *** for books I’ve loved my whole life.
• Jarhead  –  Sam Mendes’ third film is an adaptation of the hit memoir about the Gulf War.  At high *** that makes it one of Mendes’ weakest films.
• Mother of Mine  –  Finland’s Oscar submission is based on the novel by Heikki Hietamies.
• Memoirs of a Geisha  –  I want this film to be better than it is because I really like the book (and still own it).  It has a couple of quotes that hit me hard enough when I first read the book back in the fall of 1999 that I wrote them down (“Young girls hope all sorts of foolish things, Sayuri.  Hopes are like ornaments.  Girls wants to wear too many of them.  When they become old women they look silly wearing even one.”, p 295) and (“Sometimes,” he sighed, “I think the things I remember are more real than the things I see.”, p 427).  And the film looks absolutely gorgeous and is well acted.  But it’s not just better than a high *** film.
• North Country  –  Charlize Theron earns her second Oscar nom in this adaptation of the true-life lawsuit based on the non-fiction book.  This film made Niki Caro the rare female director to direct Oscar-nominated performances in multiple films but none of her films since have earned a single nomination.
• Memories of Murder  –  Based on a play about South Korea’s first serial killers, it was the second film from its director (Bong Joon-ho), a man who, along with his star (Song Kang-ho), is a lot more well-known now thanks to Parasite.
• Red Dust  –  This film, however, based on the novel by Gillian Slovo, is by a director who would beat Bong to the Oscar by almost a decade, Tom Hooper.
• La petite lili  –  French adaptation of Chekhov’s The Seagull.
• The Producers  –  Mel Brooks made a fun Musical from his film and it dominated at the Tonys.  The film version is good and enjoyable but not nearly at the same level as the original.
• Balzac and the Little Chinese Seamstress  –  The novel by Dai Sijie was a big success and he actually directed the film version himself.
• Serenity  –  I admit I have never seen the show but the film doesn’t actually make me want to see the show.  I find a lot of the language and concepts annoying rather than interesting.  The interplay between characters can be fun but the way Tudyk dies in the film and then they’re just having a happy ending bothered me.  I do love the score and the opening few minutes (“Define interesting.”).
• Bride and Prejudice  –  Austen via Bollywood.
• Charlie and the Chocolate Factory  –  More faithful to the original book and a better film than the 1971 as a whole but I prefer Wilder’s disturbed performance to Depp’s creepy one.
• An Unfinished Life  –  Lasse Hallström’s adaptation of Mark Spragg’s novel has Redford and Freeman but also J-Lo and Josh Lucas so it evens out.
• Kiss Kiss Bang Bang  –  Not in fact an adaptation of Pauline Kael’s book of film criticism and I’ll address her for a second since I just watched a documentary about her last night and Mank is still a big film at the moment: Kael is an essential film critic to read and very entertaining but I don’t think that highly of her actual criticism.  You should read her but with several grains of salt.  Back from the digression, this is adapted from the novel Bodies Are Where You Find Them and has fun performances from Downey and Kilmer.
• The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy  –  It’s either this or Lord of the Rings as my favorite novel of all-time.  The (increasingly inaccurately) trilogy and the film itself are both reviewed here.
• Dark Water  –  This film shouldn’t actually be here but it got missed in 2002 due to spreadsheet inconsistencies.  This is the original 2002 Japanese film based on the short story by Koji Suzuki (and which got conflated in a spreadsheet with the American remake which is below).
• Separate Lies  –  First it was a novel called A Way Through the Wood then it was a play called Waiting for Gillian and now a mid-*** film called Separate Lies.
• My Summer of Love  –  The adaptation of Helen Cross’ novel about a lesbian relationship stars Natalie Press, whose career is not much after this and Emily Blunt who you have probably heard of as she is one of the more beautiful and talented actresses at work today.
• Tony Takitani  –  Interesting Japanese film based on a short story by the country’s greatest novelist, Haruki Murakami.
• Innocence  –  A 2004 French film based on a novella by Frank Wedekind.
• Ladies in Lavender  –  Charles Dance writes and directs this adaptation of a 1908 short story but it’s all about the dames that are starring (Judi and Maggie).
• Lila Says  –  French film based on the popular French novel.
• Asylum  –  Interesting British Drama based on the novel by Patrick McGrath.
• Not on the Lips  –  French Musical based on a 1925 stage production.
• Millions  –  Frank Cottrell Boyce normally teams up with Michael Winterbottom but this time, adapting his own novel, he writes for Danny Boyle.  Ebert loved it but I actually think it’s one of Boyle’s weaker offerings.
• The Ax  –  French film from former Oscar nominee Costa-Gavras based on a Donald Westlake novel.
• In My Country  –  Originally called Country of My Skull which is what the South African memoir its based on was called, John Boorman looks at the reconciliation hearings.
• The Prize Winner of Defiance, Ohio  –  Good performance from Julianne Moore is the only real reason to watch this adaptation of the memoir by Terry Ryan.
• The Beat That My Heart Skipped  –  French remake of the 1978 film Fingers.
• Zathura: A Space Adventure  –  Quasi-sequel to Jumanji based on the book by Chris Van Allsburg stars two future YA franchise stars (Kristen Stewart, Josh Hutcherson) and the actor I refer to as “douchy Zach Braff.”
• Good Morning, Night  –  Italian film based on a non-fiction book about the Red Brigades.
• Eros  –  An anthology film from three major directors (Antonioni, Wong Kar-wai, Soderbergh) with the Antonioni short apparently based on something he had already written.
• Mrs. Palfrey at the Claremont  –  Joan Plowright stars in the film based on the novel by Elizabeth Taylor (a different one).
• Paheli  –  A Hindi film based on a 1973 Hindi film.
• The Libertine  –  Johnny Depp gets in practice for what his 2020-era life will be.  Adapted from the play by Stephen Jeffreys.
• Duma  –  Kids Animal film based on the children’s book How It Was with Dooms from Carroll Ballard who has made much better films in this genre (The Black Stallion, Far Away Home).
• A tout de suite  –  French film based on writing by Elisabeth Fanger that the IMDb calls a “story” and Wikipedia, in the same entry, calls both a novel and a memoir.  We’re down to low ***.
• The Great Raid  –  World War II film based on two different non-fiction books.
• Caribe  –  Costa Rica’s first Oscar submission, based on a short story.
• The Welts  –  The 2004 Polish Oscar submission based on stories by screenwriter Wojciech Kuczok.
• Layer Cake  –  Based on a novel by J.J. Connolly, Daniel Craig shows off his action and coolness chops in a try-out to play James Bond.
• Black  –  A Hindi remake of The Miracle Worker.
• Pooh’s Heffalump Movie  –  The third Pooh film in six years, not the best but not the worst.
• Broken Flowers  –  Jim Jarmusch isn’t usually thought out in terms of adaptations but it’s based on an idea by two people who aren’t him so oscars.org treated it as adapted.
• Ellie Parker  –  Like District 9 and Whiplash would later do to far greater effect, this is an expansion of a short film.
• Just Like Heaven  –  Romantic Comedy based on a French novel and not the fantastic Cure song.
• The Sisterhood of the Traveling Pants  –  In spite of cheesy YA source material and ghastly pop songs on the soundtrack, not actually a bad film.
• Parineeta  –  Bollywood adaptation of the 1914 Bengali novella.
• Don’t Tell  –  Italy’s Oscar submission which earned a nomination in spite of not being that good.  Based on a novel by director Cristina Comencini.
• Herbie: Fully Loaded  –  I have this (and the next film) listed as *** so I’ll leave them there but I wonder if I typed that by accident because they seem like they should be worse.  The fifth (and so far, final) Herbie film, this one with Lindsey Lohan.
• Cheaper by the Dozen 2  –  Sequel to a remake that was unnecessary in the first place.
• The Dying Gaul  –  Disturbing Drama by Craig Lucas based on his own off-Broadway play.  With this film we reach **.5.
• Criminal Novel  –  Italian Crime film based on a novel that was based on real life and later would have a television series based on it.
• Mysterious Skin  –  I give Gregg Araki credit for finding the adult actor in Joseph Gordon-Levitt but not much else.  Based on the novel by Scott Heim.
• The Memory of a Killer  –  This Dutch Crime film brings us down to mid **.5.  Based on a novel by Jef Geeraerts.
• Appleseed  –  Japanese Anime film based on a Manga series.
• The Greatest Game Ever Played  –  Several problems.  First, it’s a golf match, not a game.  Second, nothing about golf would ever qualify for that title.  Third, the only time the word “greatest” should be used in any conjunction with Shia LeBeouf is with the word “douchebag” (and even not then given Elon Musk).  Fourth, the greatest game ever played was Game 6 of the 1975 World Series.  This dumb film is based on some non-fiction book about golf.
• Off the Map  –  Sadly, even Joan Allen can’t make this adaptation of Joan Ackermann’s play very interesting.
• Primo Amore  –  Bad enough to have anorexia and erotic in the same film but also based on an apparently autobiographic novel.  Italian film.
• Thumbsucker  –  Mike Mills wins the future Damien Chazelle award for not preparing me for how much I will like his later work.  Filmed just a few miles away from me when I still lived in Oregon.
• Chicken Little  –  The fable gets a Disney film that isn’t all that good in spite of a strong voice cast.
• Beauty Shop  –  The Barbershop films get a spin-off.
• Ringu 2  –  We hit low **.5.  This is the original Japanese sequel, originally released in Japan in 1999 but held back from the U.S. and dumped on DVD at the same time that the remake’s sequel was released on DVD.  The remake, also by Hideo Nakata, is much lower down.
• Alone in the Dark  –  Adapted from a video game and directed by Uwe Boll.  I feel like I wasn’t paying enough attention and was way too easy on this film but I’m not going back to re-watch it to give it the lower rating it most likely deserves.
• Heights  –  Chris Terrio’s directorial debut (and so far, his only film) is a reminder that Argo is probably a fluke.  Co-written with Amy Fox who wrote the original play.
• No Entry  –  Hindi remake of a 2002 Tamil film.
• Dark Water  –  Remake of the Nakata film listed above and the film that actually belongs here.
• Fun with Dick and Jane  –  Who wants to watch Jim Carrey and Tea Leoni in a remake of a Jane Fonda – George Segal film?  Not me nor the critics but apparently audiences since this mediocre remake of the 1977 film made more than Were-Rabbit and Corpse Bride put together.
• The Legend of Zorro  –  I loved the first one but this was just a waste.  The fun is gone and the kid is annoying.
• Bee Season  –  I had heard good things about the book so I read it and I hated it.  So I read her next books in galleys (Wickett’s Remedy) and hated that too.  Myla Goldberg is not for me even if the Decemberists, who I love, have a song about her.  The film is mediocre.
• Because of Winn-Dixie  –  Forgettable Kids film about a girl and a dog that is somehow from the director of Smoke and the author of The Tale of Desperaux.
• Assault on Precinct 13  –  I think the original Carpenter film (like many of his films other than Halloween) is over-rated so I don’t mind that they remade it but did they have to remake it with Ethan Hawke?  We drop past high ** and directly to mid ** with this film.
• Constantine  –  And speaking of actors I loathe, let’s take a brooding, interesting Alan Moore comic book character and have him come to life on screen as Keanu Reeves?  Maybe approved by the same DC exec who would later let them cast Ryan Reynolds as Hal Jordan?  Also has the not greatest douchebag (see above) and the frontman for one of the most over-rated bands of the 90’s.
• Renart the Fox  –  The classic French fable becomes a crap Animated film.
• Prozac Nation  –  The book was a big deal when it came out in 1994 (I was actually prescribed Prozac in 1992 and I told the therapist to go to hell and never took it) but the film, made in 2001, was a mess and Miramax kept dicking around with it and finally dumped it on cable in 2005 without actually giving it a real theatrical U.S. release.
• Rent  –  The stage Musical is much beloved and “Seasons of Love” is a fantastic song but I don’t think much of the rest of the songs and the characters are all insipid and I would gladly punch all of them in the face.  And that’s just the stage; the film is also poorly directed and other than Rosario Dawson the acting isn’t very good (surprising given that it’s all the original actors).  With this film, we’re at low **.
• Hostage  –  Bruce Willis Thriller based on a novel by Robert Crais.
• Must Love Dogs  –  Mind-numbing Rom Com based on the novel by Claire Cook.
• Fantastic Four  –  Terrible story, appalling performance by Julian MacMahon as Doctor Doom and pretty bad ones from the four.  It’s hard to fathom that this is the same Chris Evans that I so love today.
• Be Cool  –  Not usually a good sign when a writer writes a sequel after his novel is adapted into a film, almost like they’re trying to get paid for sequel rights.  Nothing about this awful sequel to Get Shorty is good.
• Dominion: Prequel to the Exorcist  –  Down to *.5. now.  This is Paul Schrader’s version of what had been released the year before as Exorcist: The Beginning.  This is better than that film at least, which is all that can be said for it.
• The Fog  –  Another remake of an over-rated John Carpenter film.
• Transporter 2  –  Jason Statham beats people up again.  Somehow this film got its director, Louis Letterier, a job directing The Incredible Hulk.
• Elektra  –  We reach mid *.5 with this sequel to Daredevil.  Jennifer Garner looks hot as Elektra but that doesn’t excuse this mess.
• The Ring Two  –  The remake wasn’t great and didn’t deserve a sequel and certainly not one this bad.  Directed by original director Hideo Nakata but still terrible.
• Doom  –  Another video game adaptation and even Karl Urban and Rosamund Pike can’t save it.
• Gulliver’s Travel  –  One of literature’s great novels gets a crap Animated adaptation.
• The Longest Yard  –  Here come the remakes in full force.  Adam Sandler instead of Burt Reynolds?  Hard pass.
• Bad News Bears  –  Billy Bob Thornton is at least the right casting for this remake but it’s still terrible.
• Aeon Flux  –  Did you understand it?  Then you’re probably a good step ahead of the filmmakers.  Based on the MTV series from the early 90s.
• Sahara  –  Actually not a remake of any of the previous films with this name but a terrible adaptation of the Clive Cussler novel.
• The Honeymooners  –  I’ve actually never seen the show so that doesn’t bother me.  But the film is pretty terrible.
• The Bridge of San Luis Rey  –  We reach low *.5 with this adaptation of the classic novel.  A Pulitzer Prize winning novel, three Oscar winners in the cast plus Keitel and Byrne and it’s still awful.
• Diary of a Mad Black Woman  –  Since these films are going to be regular occurrences from here on out, let’s deal with it here.  I hate Tyler Perry’s films.  There must be people who think him dressing as Madea and acting like a nightmare is funny but I’m not one of them.  I’m glad he provides a lot of jobs for Blacks in the industry but I wish his films weren’t so awful.  He’s written a lot of plays and made use of Madea a lot, so from here on out, I can just say, Tyler Perry film and be done with it.
• The Amityville Horror  –  Remake of a Horror film that wasn’t good to begin with.  We’ve reached *.
• State Property 2  –  Forgettable Crime sequel to a film I already forgot.
• Mindhunters  –  Renny Harlin botches Agatha Christie with this take on And Then There Were None.  How does this man keep getting jobs?
• Miss Congeniality 2: Armed and Fabulous  –  The first one wasn’t funny but it made money so they made a second.
• Derailed  –  The first TWC film.  Based on a novel by James Siegel.  Down to mid *.
• Bewitched  –  I’ve at least seen episodes of the original show.  I wish I hadn’t seen this film.
• xXx: State of the Union  –  The second in the series and the one without Vin Diesel so the acting isn’t quite as bad.  We’ve reached low *.
• Yours, Mine and Ours  –  A real-life story became a book then a film and now a remake.
• The Wedding Date  –  My feeling on the people from Will & Grace is that only Megan Mullally should be allowed to do anything and only when teamed with her husband.  Based on a novel by Elizabeth Young.
• A Sound of Thunder  –  A Ray Bradbury short story becomes a really bad Sci-Fi film.  This is really bad even for Peter Hyams, its director, whose 18 films average an appalling 41.7.
• The Devil’s Rejects  –  Couldn’t Rob Zombie have stuck to singing where his appalling taste wouldn’t come into conflict with my OCD?  Sequel to House of 1000 Corpses.
• Godzilla: The Final Wars  –  The last in the Millennium Series and the last Godzilla film for a decade, the longest gap since the series began in 1954.
• Saw II  –  Torture porn continues and more people die.
• G  –  Now that it’s in the public domain, everyone can make a film version of Gatsby but they will be hard-pressed to be worse than this one.
• House of Wax  –  Will the remakes never end?  At least this film has a steel pipe thrown through Paris Hilton’s head.
• Jiminy Glick in Lalawood  –  This was originally listed below as a film I deliberately skipped.  I hate Martin Short and hate him more in makeup.  But since it was literally the only MGM film released after 1975 that I hadn’t seen, I let the OCD take over.  Based on the show which I’ve never seen and never will.  Not funny even a little.
• The Dukes of Hazzard  –  A couple of rednecks drive around in a car with a Confederate flag.  Yeah, I’ve never bothered to see the show.  Saw the film to cover my OCD.  Dividing the box office by my rating (5), you get $16.05 million per point, the highest total in 2005 but not even in the Top 10 through 2005 and not even in the Top 50 today.
• Son of the Mask  –  Well, at least it’s not a remake.  But, while I’m not a fan of “comedic” Jim Carrey, you still don’t make a sequel without him.
• Deuce Bigalow: European Gigolo  –  But you shouldn’t make any film with Rob Schneider.  Fully reviewed here as the worst film of the year.  Doubly bad for him being such an asshole about it all.

Adaptations of Notable Works I Haven’t Seen

• Fever Pitch  –  This is deliberate, of course.  It’s also ironic, in a couple of ways.  First, I don’t give a shit about soccer but I own the book.  Second, I love baseball and love the Red Sox more and have never seen the film.  I only own the book because this memoir about being an obsessive Arsenal fan is in an anthology with High Fidelity and About a Boy.  I refuse to watch the film because it’s just pandering to Red Sox fans and it stars a fucking Yankees fan.  Most Red Sox fans I know never saw the film and the ones who did see it didn’t like it.  It’s a romantic comedy pretending to be about baseball based on a memoir about soccer.  And directed by the Farrelly brothers at that.  Fuck all of them.  It shows where the line on OCD can be drawn because up through 2005, it’s not only the highest grossing film I haven’t seen (accounting for 86% of the box office I haven’t seen in 2005), it grossed more than every film listed on BOM that I haven’t seen from 1977 to 2000 combined.  It is literally the only film to make the Top 100 in domestic gross prior to 2011 (starting in 1977) that I haven’t seen.  But it will be eclipsed when we get to 2011.

Fever Pitch grossed $42 million (#69) in the States.  The highest grossing sequel I haven’t seen in 2005 is God’s Army 2: States of Grace (#312; $203,144).  Of the other 10 Oscar eligible films aside from Fever Pitch none are adapted.