The Arrangement Novel vs. Film

Kazan's film The Arrangement (1969) is based on his 1967 novel of the same title. The book is out of print, but was a runaway bestseller.  And you can see why, its full of sex talk and sex scenes and also includes: attempted murder, attempted suicide, arson, divorce, adultery, indecent exposure, and  a trip to the nut house. Its an easy read - a potboiler -  and must have been "shocking" in 1967.  But its a bit long at 537 pages and its oddly written. Lots of dialogue. Almost no description of the character's physical surroundings or looks.  The suicide attempt is 3 sentences.  The shooting is a paragraph.

The  Film Adaption.
You'd think film director Kazan would've written a movie friendly novel that would be easy to adapt. But The Arrangement is the exact opposite. For example::

• Its written in first person and details Eddie Anderson's subjective feelings and thoughts. But those are difficult to translate to film.  Kazan tries to get around this by showing Eddie's dreams or visions, and even has Kirk talk to himself - but its not very successful.
• A big chunk of the novel addresses Eddie's Greek parents and his life as a child..  Its the best part of the novel, but almost impossible to film. Kazan tries to cover it in a few "flashbacks" but its very superficial and  doesn't work.  
• The novel has too much dialogue and far too many characters for a two hour movie. And sadly Kazan didn't use good judgement on what to include. Instead of focusing on a few characters or ONE part of the novel, he gives us a condensed version with all the main characters but with less dialogue.  As a result, the characters seem underdeveloped and their actions almost random.
•  Finally, none of the four main characters, Eddie, his mistress, his father, and his wife are really likable. In the novel, that's OK, because we're given detailed reasons to understand their behavior. But in film, you can't do that - its all external and objective.  What you see, is what you get. And Kazan does nothing to soften the characters. So, its a long ride.

The Problem of Casting
The movie also suffers from casting problems. Kazan uses well-known supporting actors - even if they don't fit the part. For example, Richard Boone is ridiculous. Who buys Boone as a Greek or as Kirk Douglas' father?  And Hugh Cronyn is all wrong as "Arthur" the family lawyer. In the novel, "Arthur" is a tall, classy lawyer and full of good advice, He eventually marries Florence.  Cronyn turns "Arthur" into a shifty, little pipsqueak (which is why he's so good in The Postman Rings Twice). In the novel, Florence is Eddie's dutiful wife, who feels obligated to help him get over his "Rough patch."  She loves him almost to the very the end.  Deborah Kerr  is all wrong as Florence given that Kirk Douglas is Eddie.  Its hard to think of two lead actors with less chemistry.