Professor Popinjay's Compendium of Perspicacity

A Non-Review by Professor Popinjay

I would never assume to write a review of something I’ve not actually seen. I think that would be dishonest. I’ve detected such a practice amongst some well-published critics and I find it deplorable. Sometimes it’s easy to miss the point of a film but to make wild assumptions from scenes taken entirely out of context clearly as a result of having not watched the whole film? PATHETIC!!!

I’ve definitely seen Sahara (2005) starring Matthew McConaughey. But I remember only one thing about it. He makes a land sail. That was cool. All the land sail scenes are in the trailer. That’s all I remember and, as I understand it, that’s all that was worth remembering.

I know a bunch of facts about the film. It went WAY over budget, did poorly in theatres, and was the cause of legal battles between producers and Clive Cussler until 2012. No one cares about this.

Would I see this again just to remember it? Why? So I can forget it again in another 20 years? There’s plenty of stupid films I’ve not yet seen to be wasting time seeing things that weren’t memorable in the first place.

The one justice I can do for this film is disassociate it from Clive Cussler’s novel of the same title. As I understand it, it’s a much better book. But then, isn’t that what everyone who’s read a book says?

Clive was notably disappointed with the film, hence the legal battle. He claims they (I assume gnomes) “tore the heart out of the book.” From what I can tell, they streamlined the plot and spent zero time on character development. But hey, I didn’t read it so I guess I can’t critique it yet.

My buddy Mike, however, DID read the book and enjoyed both it and the movie. Granted, he admits to being very forgiving when it comes to movies. 

Obviously, everything that goes into a book doesn’t always translate well into a movie. Sometimes certain aspects have to be excluded entirely. Aside from a lot of missing character development (a strong department of Clive’s writing, Mike insists), the film’s overall tone is VERY different from the book. The book takes itself quite seriously, according to Michael, but the producers of this film seemed to want to create this fun lighthearted adventure à la National Treasure or Pirates of the Caribbean.

Clive had similar dissatisfaction with the 1980 film adaptation of his novel “Raise the Titanic” featuring the same Dirk Pitt character, this time played by Richard Jordan. I have curiosities as to how that one compares to the book also. Does Clive just not like movies? Did they (gnomes) give that film the Not-so-super serious Fun Adventure treatment? I guess I’ll have to see it and read it.

Saraha may have been panned by critics but my take-away from Mike is that there’s something to enjoy here if you’re not overly picky and I think that opinion has merit. I’m sure I was probably too preoccupied to give this film my full attention for whatever reason which I suppose is not the film’s fault. Maybe I should give it another chance.

At any rate, it sounds like I should definitely read more Clive Cussler.

Special thanks to Michael Ellis for his insights on this film and book. I’ve stopped asking Mike if he’s seen this or that and now I just ask “What did you think of…?” He’s seen everything.