| Overall Grade: |
B- |
|
| Story: |
N/A |
|
|
| Acting: |
N/A |
|
|
| Direction: |
N/A |
|
|
| Visuals: |
N/A |
|
|
Fan of the book, but the movie is like a comic.
by Richard B (movies profile)
Feb 3, 2006
18
of
24 people found this review helpful
I've been a pretty big Clive Cussler fan for about 10 years now. I've always liked how he did little "what if" twists on history... and I had read some reviews before this movie came out, so I was a bit leery, having suffered through some very bad book-to-movie adaptations like Congo, Pay It Forward and the like. Yet, at the end, I did have fun watching this movie, and here's why.
Basically, if you are a fan of the books, you have to view this movie like a Dirk Pitt comic book. What that means is you take a Clive Cussler book, strip out most of the historical significance, the science, the patriotism, the problem-solving, and the seriousnesses... and you're left with a campy action comic book. Sometimes in the books, you get a feeling like Dirk Pitt is an avenging angel righting the wrongs and delivering justice, albeit unwillingly, to the evildoers. That doesn't really happen in this movie. Perhaps because of Raise the Titanic, the producers were leery of making it too serious of a movie... which, of all of Clive Cussler's books, has some of the more disturbing themes. In the book, there's issues of cannibalism, slavery and torture, and one of the bloodier conflicts of any of Cussler's books. Again, this movie doesn't have that.
Some say that this movie is supposed to mimic Raiders of the Lost Ark, but I think that also misses the mark. To me, it echoed the Mummy and other movies that poke fun at itself while delivering action and thrills... and, all things aside, Sahara does do a great job at that. It is funny, and though it is not Dirk Pitt or Clive Cussler verbatim, the kind of world and Dirk Pitt it creates works quite well.
There are some neat images in the film, and usually when there was scenery, it was much easier for me to discern between the Dirk Pitt I was watching, and the one I read about.
I think Matthew McConaughey did a good job at Dirk Pitt, though without the patriotism and seriousness, he was more of a scoundrel early in the movie than in the books. By later on, the theme had evened out some, and I'd like to see a Pitt who could be serious and I think McConaughey can do it. Of course, in the books, Al Giordino is a stocky italian, but Steve Zahn pulls off the mood of Giordino surprisingly well. Ironically, I felt Giordino's character in the movie was closest to the book. The second closest was probably Sandecker as Macy... my biggest problem was that I expected Sandecker to raise hell and highwater in the movie, but that never happened. Still, Macy did a good job, and I'd like to see him more developed in the movie. I probably had the biggest problem with Rudi Gunn. In the books, he looks like a nerd, but he knows how to shoot a gun and definitely doesn't act like a nerd... I still laughed and liked the Gunn in the movie, but the difference in characterization was the hardest for me to overcome.
Plot-wise, the movie was light, but ok. My biggest beef with the new plot is it's never explained why Massandre tries to keep Rojas with him. Of course, a lot of the stuff that actually happens in the movie is pretty implausible, but then again, the same kinds of things happen in the books. The difference is, the books back up the plot with a few facts and some development to make it at least imaginable.
Overall though, the casting and the action was great. I would've liked to see a few more characters from the books, but again, looking at it like I would a Dirk Pitt comic, I do think it was worth seeing. I do hope that if this does become a franchise, they add a tinge of seriousness, but taken as what it is instead of what it could've been (not serious and not fun), it's cool. It's just close enough to the books to be enjoyable, and where it breaks away from the books, it doesn't do it to the point that it dishonors the books. |
My Public Profile 
