“The Circle” Was Not as Complete As It Should Have Been
This past weekend, I saw the new Tom Hanks and Emma Watson thriller “The Circle”. I left the theater very disappointed in the directing, the writing, and the overall themes of the story.
Now, don’t get me wrong: adapting a book (this was an adaptation of the novel by Dave Eggers of the same name) into a movie is hard. You can do nothing right and get everything wrong. Especially if it’s a solo book. Then you have one chance to get it right. If you don’t, you lose. That’s it, game over. Unfortunately, it seems like the case for The Circle.
The book and movie share the same premise: They follow young Mae Holland, a woman who is dissatisfied with her menial job and life, after she gets a job at the illustrious technology company The Circle. Mae is taken in by The Circle’s ideals of transparency. She gets a front row seat to what they will do, and how far they are willing to go, to get everyone on board with them. In short, a plot that would make George Orwell very proud.
The book it was based on was full of intrigue, suspense, lust, and questions on the nature of humanity. What we crave, what we are willing to sacrifice, and how much we are willing to let others see were integral factors of Mae’s story. The movie just squished all of it together and glossed over the themes. The story was rushed and mostly told through montages that past too quickly for the audience to get a proper idea of what was going on. The time jumps also rushed right by with no indicators that time has passed. An important character in the book, one who drives Mae’s shift in her opinion on The Circle and its ideals, was cut. One of the biggest mysteries of the story was revealed early on, destroying the intrigue surrounding it. The story, in short, just became an idea, a glimpse of what it could have been.
My theory is half of the movie ended up on the cutting room floor for the sake of length. The book is hefty, but that doesn’t mean you chop it down to such small, insignificant pieces. You chop the fat, not the meat of the story. In this case, they did the opposite.
This is not to say there was nothing good about it. The cinematography was stunning and with a more complete story could have been fantastic. The acting done by the cast, Watson and Hanks especially, was good. But it all falls back to the rushed story. No matter the acting skill, we can’t get to know or empathize with characters if we are given little to no time with them. I love Emma Watson and she did very well, but I couldn’t empathize with Mae because I was not able to see a change in her. Her shift was choppy, awkward, and didn’t hit the same way it did in the book. The shift in Hank’s character was the same. In fact, it was the same for all the characters.
Lastly, the themes were way too obvious or were completely ignored. The carnal nature of man and the control we wield or give up, in the form of two of the male characters was completely cut. The idea of surveillance and constantly knowing being bad was pushed way too hard. The interactions of other Circlers and Mae were weird and preachy in its favor, which shoved the opposite idea right in your face. The book was able to keep things subtle while the movie took a megaphone and essentially blasted ACDC at, what the audience expected to be, a Vivaldi concert.
Turning a book into a movie is difficult. But if you’re going to leave most of the important, profound, and hard hitting stuff on the cutting room floor, here’s my advice: don’t expect a good reception from your audience for it. Then, you’ll just be surprised and disappointed.
