Evaluating Film Translations

Prompt: What makes a successful and effective film translation? What are three evaluative criteria that you think are essential for assessing a film translation? Fully explain each.

As Susan Orlean pointed out, a film does not need to be a literal translation of of a text to be an effective one. Screenwriters can be very creative with their adaptations and still produce a successful project, as long as they follow some general and flexible guidelines. I think the three most important evaluative criteria for assessing a film translation are preservation of the main themes and morals, preservation of the general storyline or topic, and creativity.
I think the themes and morals of a piece of literature are usually indeposable in producing its film adaptation. In Susan Orlean's "Foreword," she says that Adaptation "captured (and expanded on) the essential character of what the book, I hope, was about: the process of trying to figre out one's self, and life, and love, and the wonders of the world; and the ongoing, exasperating battle between doing what's easy and what's good; and the ongoing, exasperating battle between looking at the world ironically and looking at it sentimentally." All of this has been taken from the essence of the book and expressed in the movie through the characters of Charlie, John, Donald, and Susan.
I think that keeping the same basic subject and plot of a book is very important. It is clear throughout the film that the screenwriter, Charlie Kaufman, has a lot of difficulty staying true to the topic of the book: orchids. He eventually finds a way to incorporate orchids through Laroche's story. Remaining faithful to the original work is respectful to the author, and will make writing the screenplay a lot easier.
Creativity and having a "wow factor" greatly impact a film. Controlled creativity (creativity that doesn't interfere too much with the first two criteria) keeps the viewer engaged and entertained. Some "Hollywoodization" should be allowed. Also, a film should definitely have a great ending. If a viewer gives an hour and a half of his or her life to a film, he or she should feel that it was worth while in the end. At the film's conclusion, the viewer should feel changed in some way, however small. An ending can truly make or break a film.

Adaptation

Although the film Adaptation was a bit depressing and lagged at times, I ended up really enjoying it. The problem the screenwriter had to face was that the book Orchid Thief was mostly about orchids themselves- not the "thief." Kaufman's character (the screenwriter in the film) says that he's having trouble emphasizing John Laroche's character because there is simply not enough of him in the book.
The screenwriter fixes this problem by guessing about what may have went on in John's life and making up his own ending. All of the essential elements of a great Hollywood movie were incorporated. There were drugs, guns, a car chase, violence, a wild animal, and sex. Although this ending was not true to the real life story of Susan Orlean and John Laroche, the screenwriter decided to "wow them in the end," as he learned from the writing seminar, and it worked. I was on the edge of my seat. I also enjoyed the part when he kisses the girl he loves and drives off feeling hopeful for the first time. All in all, I would say that Adaptation is a good movie.