Two versions of the same plot — which is the more accurate representation of a story?
This is the question at the heart of any book-turned-movie, however, it is particularly relevant in Director Ang Lee’s daring new film adaptation of Yann Martel’s novel, The Life of Pi. Both the movie and the novel, which was previously considered by many to be ‘unfilmable’ due to its philosophical structure, follow the story of a young French-Indian boy, Piscine, or Pi, who is named after a swimming pool.
Pi is highly religious from a young age, and he accordingly becomes immersed in every religion that he encounters. “Believing in everything is the same as believing in nothing,” criticizes his father, a businessman and owner of a zoo, “Just use your reason.” Ironically, Pi’s father’s reason acts as the catalyst for Pi’s largest spiritual journey.
Due to political concerns, Pi’s father decides to move his family to Canada, where he hopes to sell the family’s zoo animals to fund their new life. Unfortunately, in the midst of the transoceanic journey, the ship that is carrying Pi’s family, as well as an entire zoo’s worth of animals, is caught in a terrifying storm and sinks.
By some strange twist of fate, Pi manages to survive the storm and finds himself alone in a tiny lifeboat — save for a few zoo animals, most notably the zoo’s oddly named Bengal tiger, Richard Parker.
Though the film is structured to explore questions (Can you be a Hindu-Christian? Do animals have souls? Can tigers be trained with plastic whistles?), if Pi will survive is not one of them — the story is narrated by an older, future version of Pi himself. Instead, the film aims to tackle the ‘how’ of Pi’s impossible shipwreck saga as future-Pi candidly relates it to a struggling Canadian writer. The two have met through yet another twist of fate (a writer looking for a story in French-India, and a French-Indian in Canada with a story to tell), a type of handy coincidence that seems to appear quite frequently to Pi. So frequently, in fact, that it begs to be seen as more than mere coincidences of fate, but rather as parts of “a story that will make you believe in God.”
With this bold spiritual declaration that is made early on, then repeated throughout the film, it is easy to see that Lee has his work cut out for him. Somehow he must make a cross-denominational religious film appeal to a wide range of viewers, all while he avoids offending any parties. Unquestionably, there is no better man for the job, as Lee, director of Crouching Tiger Hidden Dragon, is no stranger to merging seemingly opposite concepts when it comes to cinema (such as the East and West in Crouching Tiger).
Lee skillfully manages to flesh out the book’s sometimes-slow narrative with vivid cinematography as well as with his use of 3D technology. The result is a beautiful movie, aesthetically comparable to Christopher Nolan’s Avatar. The exciting and stylized world in Pi may make some viewers unwilling to leave once the two hours and six minutes of the movie is up. Though it seems the film is not entirely unconscious of this — in one scene, Pi describes his need to leave a utopic island, for he fears he will never return to the real world if he stays.
Though devoted fans of the book may find parts of the film disappointing (notably, the end), there is no doubt that Lee’s film stunning adaptation can stand on its own. Ultimately, it is up to the viewer to determine which version they prefer.
And does Pi make you believe in God? It seems that is up for the viewer to decide as well.
