Well, this topic has been of interest to me as of late since I decided I liked "Sahara" enough to watch over and over again. I thought it was a fun movie, terrific funnies by Steve Zahn as usual. ("No way man, African war zone! Ship of death!") Oh, and the soundtrack? KICKIN'. I had kind of really hoped for sequels. It was a fun popcorn movie in the style of The Mummy. People have compared it to Indy Jones, but that is far too superior. But it seems right on par with the Mummy, which I enjoyed and which I own. (maybe I'll watch that tonight...)
So, from what I understand, Clive Cussler writes lots of popular books about Dirk Pitt and his adventures. So far, only one other book has been made into a movie-Raise the Titanic. Apparently it bombed big time, and Cussler slunk away for a time, having been stung. He came back to Hollywood again, and asked for, and was given, cast approval and script approval. And ten million dollars. He then proceeded to make a nuisance of himself rejecting script after script after script after script after script. I believe they went through about seven or eight screenwriters and countless scripts. He also turned down several potential Dirk Pitts, because they didn't have black hair and green eyes, because, you know, there is no such thing as hair dye or contacts. After about a year and a half of this malarkey, the producers, who had been tearing their hair out, were desperate to get the friggin' picture MADE, and basically told Cussler that THIS was the script they were going to use, and THIS was the star they were going to use, and he could like it or lump it. Cussler lumped it, threw a raging tantrum and proceeded to tour the country, signing autographs and disparaging the movie every chance he got. All this before it was even released. And then, after it was released, (making not off the charts money, but decent money, enough that the producers were thinking a sequel could work) he decided to sue for breach of contract. Paramount promptly countersued.
Now here's my thing. As someone who has written for both the page and the screen, and as someone who LOVES movie and adores books, I can see both sides. I understand how hard it must be for an author so see a story, a character, that you have thought on and labored on and spent sleepless nights on taken apart and changed. That would be a really hard thing to see happen. But, as a movie girl, I also understand that there is almost NO PIECE OF LITERATURE IN EXISTENCE that is going to translate to the screen WORD FOR WORD. PERIOD. There are some that have come awfully close-the first Harry Potter, Fellowship of the Ring (shut UP Bombadil people), The Pelican Brief, The Shawshank Redemption. But not many. For crying out loud, people, THE BIBLE has gotten hacked to pieces by moviemakers in more ways than one.
Basically, unless you want an outrageously long and expensive movie, you have to make some cuts. I'm glad they do. I like my version of Nicholas Nickleby. I tried to sit through an eight-ten hour BBC stage version that they did at the Royal Shakespeare Co. and released on video...couldn't do it. And the Charlie Hunnam version is one of my top ten favorite movies. Now, Sahara? 700 pages. TWO prologues. You do the math. I'm still trying to finish the BOOK. The movie was so fast paced and quick witted...I WISH the book was as much fun.
Many, many books have been turned into perfectly servicable, if not GREAT books by making some, sometimes MANY and BIG changes. Case in point? JAWS. Yeah, Benchley had words with Spielberg while it was being made. Ya know what? He cried all the way to the bank, too. Other greatly changed book=good movies? The Bourne Indentity. The Neverending Story. Planet of the Apes. The Princess Diaries. Almost any great piece of literature by Shakespeare, Austen, or Dickens.
Some authors just don't understand how movies are made. Movies are made by entertaining people, and different people are entertained by different things, and you have to be able to cater to a lot of different people in the same way in order for them to come see your movie. And you want a LOT of people to come see your movie, so it will make a lot of money. So Cussler's sold ten million books. Ok. He's now complaining this ludicrious idea that Hollywood has ruined him as an author, that the movie was so bad that people won't buy his books anymore. That's completely ridiculous. His books are his and his alone, and at last count, he had about 19 other books besides Sahara. That's like saying I'm never reading John Grisham again because I hated The Firm. (I didn't actually hate it, but I did like other Grisham books=movies better.) People will buy his books because they like his style of writing, not because Hollywood makes big movies out of them. That's what fan bases are. Of course, if your movie does well, then you get to add people to your fan base, because they will read the book because they liked the movie so much. (Like I did for Lord of the Rings) I read a great quote by I think it was Dashiell Hammet (I could be wrong) when asked if Hollywood had ruined his books, he looked behind him at his bookshelf and lazily replied, "Nope. They're still there."
I think Cussler is making a HUGE fuss and is acting childish and selfish. The moviemakers, icluding Matthew McConaughey, took great personal interest in the film, and for him to be all pissy about it...well, it just bothers me. The movie did fairly well. Sequels would have solidified his fan base, made him MORE money...what's his beef?
If he really hates the movie adaptations of his books, well, he shouldn't sell any more rights. Raise the Titanic, shame on them, Sahara, shame on you, Clive.
And yet I understand how it feels to want to share what you've created with the world, to see and hope others feel the same exhiliration, the fear, the passion YOU felt when you were writing.
But hey, at least HE's been published.
Just my two cents. And here's a link to the original article.
http://www.latimes.com/entertainment/news/movies/la-me-sahara8dec08,0,3301265.story?coll=la-headlines-entnews
.JPG)