concept

Hollywood is filled with book-to-screen adaptations that have ignited grumbling and spirited debates. Even before its release, Zoe Kazan’s interpretation of John Steinbeck’s sprawling 1952 masterwork, “East of Eden,” roused passionate opinions from loyalists of the text on social media.

Much of the discourse surrounds Kazan’s creative choice in how to portray the book’s infamous antagonist, Cathy Ames, in Netflix’s seven-episode limited series out Thursday.

Steinbeck’s multigenerational saga ruminates on family, the power of choice and the nature of good and evil — deeply exploring the biblical stories of Cain and Abel and the fall of Adam and Eve — through the intertwined destinies of two families, the Trasks and the Hamiltons. Cathy (later known as Kate) functions as a chilling, destructive force in the saga.

Kazan pared down much of the Hamilton family’s story for the show and centered Cathy (Florence Pugh), whose arrival alters the lives of the Trask brothers, Adam (Christopher Abbott) and Charles (Mike Faist). In doing so, Kazan dared to humanize the character who has been considered one of literature’s most definitive symbols of pure evil, described by Steinbeck to be a “psychic monster” born without a conscience or kindness.

“I’m trying to protect my mental health by not being too much online,” Kazan said in a video call from London on a recent weekday. “I do think it is not surprising to me that this character brings up a lot of strong feelings for people … I’m excited to see what people think once they actually see what we have made and aren’t just anticipating something.”

Mike Faist as Charles Trask, Christopher Abbott as Adam Trask and Florence Pugh as Cathy Ames in Netflix’s “East of Eden.”

(Netflix)

When Kazan, an actor who has expanded her creative footprint behind the camera, first pitched the series in 2019 and was asked about which actor she envisioned as Cathy, she replied: “I have one.” She had seen Pugh in “Midsommar,” “Lady Macbeth” and “Little Women,” marveling at how the actor’s ultra femininity lived alongside her masculine energy.

“The range on that girl … I was like, if anybody can do that, they can play Cathy,” Kazan says. “It allowed me to write Cathy as complicated and mysterious [as I wanted] and with so much shadow and light.”

When it came to Adam and Charles, Kazan knew Abbott and Faist could depict the psychological nuance beyond the binaries of the nature versus nurture debate: “I wanted an Adam where you felt what his true nature was and the nature that his father had pushed him into … and I knew we needed that in Charles as well.”

Adapting a classic is hardly a simple endeavor, particularly one that has been done before. That Kazan would choose “East of Eden,” which unpacks legacy and generational shadows is apt: Her grandfather, Elia Kazan, famously directed the 1955 film version starring James Dean. The actors of the Netflix series are eager for viewers to see her vision come to life.

“When you do an adaptation of a book, especially a seminal American novel, no matter what, you’re always going to be up against it because … whenever somebody reads a book, the budget in their heads is unlimited,” Abbott says. “I think this is such a great adaption in its own right.”

Pugh adds: “I’m excited for people to do the stuff that I’m doing now, which is [to say], ‘Oh my God, let’s read this and see how it fits against what I’ve got in my head.’”

Over a video call together, Pugh, Abbott and Faist reflected on their journey to adapting Steinbeck’s epic story, including their first experiences with it and filling in the shades of these characters who remain timeless allegories of the human condition. This conversation, which contains spoilers, has been edited for clarity and length.

Florence Pugh, left, Christopher Abbott and Mike Faist take on some of literature’s most indelible characters — Cathy Ames, Adam Trask and Charles Trask — made famous in John Steinbeck’s classic “East of Eden.” (Photographs by Sophia Spring / For The Times)

When did you first encounter the book?

Faist: My first encounter with the story was the James Dean, Elia Kazan film. That was a movie that I watched, especially when I first moved to New York and wanted to be an actor. It wasn’t until Zoe and Florence asked if I’d be interested in doing this, that I picked up the book.

Pugh: I want to say maybe my early 20s, I read the book. I only watched the movie recently to prepare myself for these kind of conversations. I’m rereading the book now while we’re heading into press, just so I can like fine-tune what I thought I knew … there’s so much love that’s being breathed into every single sentence of every chapter [in this adaptation], and that is solely down to Zoe’s fantastic brain and her ability to want to dig deeper.

Abbott: A lot of my favorite books I’ve picked up and put down numerous times before actually plowing through it — that was the case here until Zoe approached me about doing it. I was like, “Well, this is a perfect excuse to finally [finish].”

This adaptation lit up social media early on for centering Cathy. She is such a polarizing figure. Some see her solely as an evil monster. Some argue there is more nuance to what’s driving her actions. Florence, how do you see her?

Pugh: It’s tricky because I know I’m gonna get asked this again and again, and I guess I’m still trying to figure out how to word it without totally pissing people off. I love finding characters that people automatically think are villains and trying to find a way for you to love them — it’s my favorite thing to do.

I read these episodes, and I was listening to Zoe and how she was wanting this to come from Cathy’s perspective, how Cathy was her hero and how she’s just been championing Cathy ever since she first read the book — that was so f— exciting to know that we’re not gonna just point the finger and say that she’s evil. It is my job to do my skills as good as possible so that I can argue in defense of them. I believe that I can argue for her, which is terrifying but also really cool. I care for her deeply. I understand where she went and why. Does she do some terrible things? Absolutely. Is she a product of the situation that she grew up in? Totally. You can’t get raped as a child and and you be totally fine for the rest of your life.

Florence Pugh as Cathy Ames. She hopes the adaptation prompts curiosity: “I’m excited for people to do the stuff that I’m doing now, which is [to say], ‘Oh my God, let’s read this and see how it fits against what I’ve got in my head.’”

(Netflix)

That detail was not explicitly stated in the book. What were your conversations with Zoe about it?

Pugh: That’s why we ended up choosing the way that we explained it and the way that we showed it — that little girl is so tiny you can’t even imagine anything bad happening to her, and the fact that she’s holding “Alice in Wonderland,” [in her mind], there’s so many through lines through Cathy and Kate’s life that all come back to that moment. You don’t need to do much. Everybody has the sinking feeling of what might happen to a vulnerable child in that situation. In the book, I think it’s constantly playing with the themes of can we trust her? Is she already a monster as a child?

What Zoe has done is made her a real human, and has given her cause and has given her time to understand. That moment that is alluded [to in the book ] — if Cathy asked the boys to tie her down, and whatever it is that they were doing to her — it’s no longer alluded [in the series]. That [assault] happened, but maybe people didn’t believe her.

Mike, what were you interested in excavating with Charles, this Cain archetype who’s tormented by rejection and jealousy?

Faist: What is amazing about this story is — and it’s the entire through line of the entire novel — is this idea of timshel. What happens in a person’s life, and the burdens that they carry, then the choices they make, and every single moment as they continue to live it. Charles jumped out at me. There was just something about him that I was very drawn to — and along with that pull, there’s this feeling of dread, where you say, “Oh God, I can’t believe that I’m about to jump in and do this thing.” You end up surrendering yourself to it. It is scary and deeply exciting.

Abbott: I don’t have a brother. You forget too that they’re half brothers and what that dynamic is like, what kind of Freudian s— pops up. I think the through line for Mike and I, because there’s a lot of conflict there, that it always comes from a place from love. The letters, as they [Charles and Adam] get older, that are written or the letters that he starts to write and doesn’t send, when there is hate between them, it’s because they love each other so much. Otherwise, it would just be indifference. A lot of that happens in the things that are unsaid.

1

2

1. Mike Faist as Charles Trask. (Netflix) 2. Christopher Abbott as Adam Trask. He found the sibling relationship intriguing: “I don’t have a brother. You forget too that they’re half brothers and what that dynamic is like, what kind of Freudian s— pops up.” (Kirsty Griffin / Netflix)

When Zoe approached you, Chris, to play Adam, you questioned whether she actually meant for you to be Charles?

Abbott: I’m just used to being typecast, so I thought she made a mistake. Zoe’s mentioned this idea of masculine and feminine energy — what one presents and what one actually holds, and the old switcheroos of that. The very first email, I was like, “Oh, are you sure?” But I was excited to play with all the nuance of and the layers of what this is. I had seen the movie before, and it [covers] only the last 100 or so pages. It’s really gratifying to play a part where you get to see someone’s whole life and how this guy goes from being this wanderer, drifter to this to stoic, depressed, rigid older man.

What moment between these characters were you most eager or nervous to depict?

Faist: The scene that I reflect back on the most, that actively had the biggest impact on me, is the scene between Cathy and Charles, where she comes into his room and the two of them share this intimacy together. We had talked about what we were wanting to do, then on the day, none of it was really working. I remember Florence had this really specific thing she wanted to bring to the scene. And it was really powerful — there’s these very rare moments when you genuinely feel someone’s objective actively working against your own. [Pugh makes a quizzical face.] No, it’s good! It creates this friction and this tension that does exist and does live.

Abbott: That was your favorite, huh?

Faist: I’m sorry, Chris! That one was just such a visceral feeling of, I know what my character wants in this thing, and her character is very much wanting the exact opposite and the literal clash of that that moment and the feeling of that — I’ll never forget that.

Pugh: It’s such an important scene to get right because it literally is the ending moment of those two; it added so much pressure on the day of shooting. It’s actually really hard when you’re trying to do a sex scene that’s consensual, but it’s definitely not at the right time. The coolest thing about it is it wasn’t working and we had to push everyone out. Everyone was whispering and everyone was trying to figure out what they were comfortable with us doing and, eventually, Mike and I were just like: Right. Done.

Florence Pugh, with Christopher Abbott, left, and Mike Faist, says “East of Eden” endures because “every single one of these characters is struggling to survive realistically.”

(Sophia Spring / For The Times)

Chris, you have the daunting task of, in the closing moments of the series, delivering the word that’s the thrust of the whole story —timshel.

Abbott: I think that was the last scene I shot. I can’t say I was being lazy, but the character had a stroke so he was laying there. You just gotta listen [in a moment like that]. Hoon [Lee, who plays Lee] is reading from the Bible. You take in the room. I nailed it in one. [Pugh and Faist laugh.]

People have deep feelings about “East of Eden.” And it seems to have had a real resurgence recently, even outside of curiosity about this adaptation. Why do you think that is?

Abbott: That’s a big, existential [thing to think about]. There’s a ton of themes in the book that are relevant: displacement, family, love. The themes in the book aren’t specific to the time period. All great works are that.

Pugh: It’s also about generational trauma and change in healing. One of the things I recognized immediately when I started rereading the book months ago, the first few pages about the Salinas Valley describe very quickly that this place is about growth, change and moving on. What I’ve taken from our adaption of Cathy and her generational trauma and what she’s doing to her kids is that not everybody is going to get it right. The reason I think why people keep picking it back up is every single one of these characters is struggling to survive realistically, and they are all making decisions that affect and domino-effect other people around them. Us learning about how we could have done better will always be relevant. And especially with America, and what we’re watching in terms of its constant battle against racism and immigration. It’s relevant to life and to our lives.

Lockheed Martin has unveiled a modular airframe concept for its stealthy and combat-proven AGM-158 Joint Air-to-Surface Standoff Missile (JASSM) family that could support multiple configurations, launch methods, and sensor packages while making use of the existing JASSM and Long-Range Anti-Ship Missile (LRASM) production infrastructure. Highly survivable, the missiles are an incredibly important and staple weapon for the U.S. military, and for select export customers.

Called AGM-158 FLEX, the new concept is centered on a common airframe with interchangeable components. Lockheed Martin says it has invested more than $35 million of its funds in the effort so far, including airframe design, testing, prototype production, subsystem qualification, and work with suppliers.

The company says the FLEX design will use removable nose sections that can accommodate sensor suites associated with the AGM-158 family. A removable boat tail would allow the same basic airframe to be configured for different launch methods, including air, surface, and subsurface launch. That would open the AGM-158 architecture up to ground-, ship-, and submarine-launched applications, although Lockheed Martin has not provided details on the specific launchers, platforms, or configurations envisioned. It’s worth noting the LRASM has been tested in vertical launch configuration for vessels equipped with the Mk 41 launch system.

In addition to the Navy vertical launch tests, the idea of moving the JASSM family beyond its traditional combat aircraft launch platforms is not new. The Air Force’s Palletized JASSM concept, better known as Rapid Dragon, has demonstrated the ability to deploy JASSM-ER from palletized launchers carried inside cargo aircraft, using an expendable airdrop system. FLEX takes a different approach by building those kinds of launch options into the airframe architecture itself, with modularity supporting various launch configurations for the same basic weapon.

Rapid Dragon Flight Test

For aircraft-launched weapons, Lockheed Martin says FLEX will retain compatibility with current and future JASSM and LRASM launch platforms.

The company is also proposing multiple airframe lengths. A 206-inch configuration is associated with the supersized JASSM-XR, while a 168-inch version is consistent with the dimensions of JASSM-ER. Lockheed Martin says JASSM-XR will be the first configuration of the FLEX airframe.

The Brand New AGM-158 Extended Range

The AGM-158 family has already grown well beyond the original JASSM. The AGM-158A is the baseline stealthy air-launched land-attack missile, with a publicly reported range of roughly 230-330 miles, while the AGM-158B JASSM-ER uses a more efficient engine and additional fuel to roughly double that reach, to around 575 miles or more.

Alongside the land-attack variants is the AGM-158C LRASM, which uses the JASSM airframe but substitutes a sophisticated imaging infrared anti-ship seeker, electronic support measures, datalink, and other capabilities, for operations against heavily defended surface combatants.

Finally, the much larger JASSM-XR is being developed with a substantially stretched fuselage to carry more fuel and a larger 1,000-pound-class warhead, with a range expected to approach or exceed 1,000 miles. This would give it a similar striking capability as the Tomahawk cruise missile, although in a stealthier package.

Beyond range and launch options, the company is pitching its new FLEX concept as a way to simplify future upgrades. Components could be replaced as they become obsolete or new capabilities become available without necessarily requiring a completely new missile design.

That approach could have an industrial-base advantage, particularly as the United States seeks to increase production of long-range weapons. Lockheed Martin says FLEX would use the existing JASSM/LRASM production line, supply chain, mission-planning infrastructure, and software ecosystem rather than establishing an entirely new manufacturing and support architecture.

The company says its JASSM/LRASM production infrastructure includes a 225,000-square-foot facility opened in 2022 with increased automation and a robotic paint line.

Notable, however, is the fact that FLEX is being proposed at a time when the U.S. Air Force is pursuing affordable mass as a key priority.

For example, as part of a slew of low-cost cruise missile offerings, the service has been moving ahead with the Extended Range Attack Munition, or ERAM, a new air-launched missile explicitly intended to provide a relatively low-cost, rapidly producible standoff weapon. The Air Force conducted a live-warhead ERAM test in January of last year, less than 16 months after the program received its initial contract, and described the weapon as a means of generating mass against fixed targets. ERAM is understood to have a range of between 150 and 280 miles, putting it below the reach of the baseline JASSM, let alone the JASSM-ER or XR.

However, the emerging class of lower-cost weapons are intended very much more to complement than compete with JASSM. While the Air Force plans to buy thousands of the cheaper missile, the JASSM will still be needed to take up the higher end of the cost and capability list.

Lockheed Martin mentions that FLEX should “unlock future cost savings,” but this sounds more about giving customers the ability to swap out components and upgrade capabilities on existing missile rounds, to avoid obsolescence, rather than facilitate mass production.

As it stands, JASSM has evolved into a family of increasingly capable and longer-range weapons, but those capabilities necessarily come with a different set of cost and production considerations than a weapon designed from the outset around large-scale production. Lockheed Martin’s announcement does not disclose a target unit cost for FLEX, nor does it explain how the eventual cost of a FLEX-derived weapon would compare with a baseline JASSM or LRASM. The unit price of the latest subvariants of the JASSM-ER is around $1.2 and $1.5 million, according to official budget documents.

The new weapon is a way of getting more variants and launch options out of the established JASSM/LRASM architecture, potentially with less development work than creating entirely new weapons. Whether that translates into enough savings or production capacity to satisfy the military’s growing demand for large numbers of standoff weapons remains to be seen.

For Lockheed Martin, the proposal also offers a way to extend the relevance of the AGM-158 family as the company and the Pentagon pursue additional range, new launch platforms, and potentially new launch methods.

The flexibility of the missile could be particularly relevant to the Agile Combat Employment concept, and the wider U.S. military in the Indo-Pacific, where forces are expected to operate from a larger number of dispersed and potentially austere locations. A common missile architecture that can be adapted to different launch platforms and different target sets could allow weapons to be positioned and employed across a distributed force rather than tying particular missile variants to particular launchers.

The original JASSM/LRASM has also become a significant export weapon, with Australia, Finland, Poland and several other U.S. allies cleared to acquire variants of the missile. While the advanced capabilities of the weapon have seen its export opportunities carefully controlled, FLEX could potentially open up the market to more customers, including less-advanced, ‘sanitized’ versions.

Lockheed Martin’s announcement provides few details on FLEX’s eventual cost, production rate, schedule, or specific performance beyond the stated airframe dimensions. For now, the concept demonstrates that the company is seeking to create a more adaptable architecture around an established missile family, one that has played a critical role in numerous operations since its introduction.

Contact the author: thomas@thewarzone.com