I just don't get it!

Sahara - great flick, right? well t beats me why Cussler didn't get behind it. I mean he says he was worried that the script didn't follow the book exactly, but what about what he's doing now with all the co-authors with their different take on the Cussler world. Cussler's gotta be doing it for the money, so why was he so fussy with Sahara where he could made a bundle, yet he's not worried about all these authors taking his stuff in half a dozen different directions?

rant over

It's not so much what the co-writers are doing but that Dr. C is creating an empire of franchised properties that will continue his imprint into the future. Dr. C is definitely well off financially so there is no concern about needing the money.

Well, that's not necessarily a point of unanimous agreement, but I'll allow that it was a fun movie, if not everything I had hoped for. But here's the point. It was a box office turkey, and despite what the producers said in their lawsuit, I would very much doubt that the movie tanked because Cussler grumbled. I bet you could count on one hand the number of die hard Cussler fans who boycotted the movie because they knew that there had been some contention among the principals. We all went to see that movie, because we were all hoping for the best.

And the reason there aren't any more Cussler movies in the offing has as much to do with the dismal performance at the box office as it does with Cussler taking back his option. If both Cussler movies so far have been bombs, who on earth would finance another? So, if you want to lay blame for the fact that there won't be anymore Dirk Pitt movies, at least in Clive Cussler's lifetime, then look at the real reasons why the movie failed to attract audiences from outside the Cussler-sphere.

Even Larry McMurtry's "Hollywood; A Third Memoir" had some not so nice words about the movie, Raise the Titanic and it's author. And Larry was just as critical about Lew Grade, the owner of Marble Arch studios. The company that made Raise the Titanic.

I would have to agree wholeheartedly with that !

I hafta say that when CC got his underoos in a knot over the screen play and played the sue-counter-sue-whatever game he kind shot himself in the foot.

He had an action franchize in the making with a loyal fan base already in place, he didn't have to creat one.

Okay so the first movie wasn't what he wanted it to be; get over it, gather the major players, go back to the drawing board and get it right for the next movie.

Always a fan , but his whole attitude through out kinda turned me luke warm to his books and not exactly jumping at the chance to pick them up again.

I would have to agree with Swimmer.

Being positive and moving forward seems to me like a better route. However, standing up with your principles is also sometimes necessary. As for the money issue. I think he is trying to build future income, probably from royalties, to support his family and organizations when he can no longer work. As a father I can't blame him for that. However he may have burned a bridge in the movie industry. Too bad, I would have liked to see another one made.

I understand Clive's position, but after Raise the Titanic went so bad, you'd think he would keep a tighter grip.

Two years ago, I nearly sold a couple of movie scripts. It was a small studio, bidding on two stories. The deal fell apart when they wanted me to sign a document releasing creative control to them, I refused.

Dissected-one story was within their means (I don't think they intended to make the movie). The second movie was definitely out of their financial grasp. They were low balling me on the scripts (1k per script-going rate is 50k per). I think they intended to sell the more expensive movie script to a large studio.

The scary part-they later used a major plot device in an unrelated movie. Nothing that I could sue over, but that is so typical of Hollywood.

Well, that's not necessarily a point of unanimous agreement, but I'll allow that it was a fun movie, if not everything I had hoped for. But here's the point. It was a box office turkey, and despite what the producers said in their lawsuit, I would very much doubt that the movie tanked because Cussler grumbled. I bet you could count on one hand the number of die hard Cussler fans who boycotted the movie because they knew that there had been some contention among the principals. We all went to see that movie, because we were all hoping for the best.

And the reason there aren't any more Cussler movies in the offing has as much to do with the dismal performance at the box office as it does with Cussler taking back his option. If both Cussler movies so far have been bombs, who on earth would finance another? So, if you want to lay blame for the fact that there won't be anymore Dirk Pitt movies, at least in Clive Cussler's lifetime, then look at the real reasons why the movie failed to attract audiences from outside the Cussler-sphere.

I have too agree with this sentiment......both movies were poor representations of Dirk Pitt, so if it were me I'd be very reluctant to get into another involvement with Hollywood.

Raise The Titantic was a bomb because the movie simply was not very good even if a movie-goer haddn't read the book. The special effects were very good but the plot was thin and hackneyed and character development non-existent. Richard Jordan didn't give any depth or excitement to the character of Dirk Pitt and Jason Robards, while a wonderful actor, simply didn't fly as Sandecker.

Sahara was better, particularly William H. Macy as Sandecker...but actor playing Al Giordino didn't get the essence of the character right. Nor did Matthew McC really portray the Dirk Pitt we know from the books.


In defense of Hollywood (if there can be one) adapting a well-written book to the screen is difficult at best. Book authors have an advantage because they have time to write in detail about the characters, their thoughts and feelings and motivations....on screen, you have a short time to SHOW it and hope the viewer gets it. Hence, the depth of a character and the little plot twists are usually lost.

The best a movie can hope for is to capture the essence of a story, distill things to the absolute essentials of telling that story, and then make it visually interesting. "Raise The Titanic" succeeded in the visual aspect only, and while "Sahara" was better it has the same limitations as any movie adaptation must.

I think the problem with the movies (and i liked both raise the titanic which got me started reading the books and sahara), is that there is to much going on in there to fit in one movie.
Its probably been said by someone before but I would probably have to say that the pitt novels would probably be better suited as a collection of mini series but thats just my opinion.

The ability to translate a big novel into a two hour movie is indeed a very limiting challenge. But to my mind, the real problem is simply this:

When an author writes a book, it is a very solitary thing. One writer, putting all those ideas onto paper. Others will read it critically and suggest a few changes, but in the end, the book is exactly what the author wanted it to be. But a movie is very much a collaborative effort. The screenwriters (and there will usually be several who will work the story idea in stages) will not always see the same story the author wrote. The director and producers--especially the executive producers who supply the money--will also want to see their idea of what the story is come to fruition. Even the actors will bring something to the characters, which may not resemble at all what the original author had in mind, much less the screenwriters. And when all is finally done, an editor will cut and paste several hours of film together, leaving most of it on the cutting room floor, and for good or bad, that is the final interpretation.

Several of us have suggested that instead of trying to make the Dirk Pitt books into movies, the industry should instead try to develop original stories that dovetail the books. This is a very good idea, though there will still be some frustration with the way the characters are portrayed. Something like this is intended for James Rollins SIGMA Force series, and I really hope that they develop it in such a way that the characters from the books are not used. I would like to see NUMA brought to the screen in the way Clive imagined it--a government agency saving the world. But in the end, if another movie gets made, it will still be the product of dozens of different creative people, all adding their own ingredients to the stew.

But NUMA is a non profit organization not a government agency. There are different possibilites either way. With our esteemed Dr. C I do not see a movie being made until his son Dirk inherits the mantle.