'Sahara' Lawsuit Costs Author Clive Cussler $14 Million More

Remember Sahara, the one-off attempt to give Matthew McConaughey his own action franchise? It was a big time flop, and now author Clive Cussler, who already lost one lawsuit against producers Crusade Entertainment, is forking over even more money for a movie he's credited with trying to sabotage. Los Angeles Superior Court Judge John Shook on Monday ruled that Cussler owes another $14 million in legal fees, which the author's attorney, Bert Fields, says the verdict will be challenged, meaning a four-year legal battle will drag on even longer. "The jury [in the previous case] decided in favor of Clive Cussler on most of the issues," Fields said. "The judge took that away from Cussler. We're absolutely 100% confident that it will be overturned." This whole thing got really ugly before the film even came out, with Cussler suing Crusade for breaking a deal for script approval. Crusade launched a $100 million countersuit, claiming, among other things, that Cussler instructed his fans to boycott the film. The Hollywood Reporter has done all the math for us, and has determined that Cussler might be out nearly $30 million, all for a film that on its own lost about $80 million. That's gotta be a good feeling.

Comments

[Betan testravosky]

Cussler's book was a fun action adventure novel. Most of the Dirk Pitt series is - although later in his career, Cussler rehashes previous material from his earlier works. Technically it's not plagiarism, but you find yourself stopping in a chapter and going "hey, he used this same scene four novels ago" ... I wasn't expecting the movie to follow the Sahara novel verbatim like, say, the Harry Potter films. There's just too much action, too many side-plots, too many humanly impossible scenes - the movie would cost way too much to make. However - what I personally didn't expect was Crusade Entertainment's hacked up "National Lampoon meets Lawrence of Arabia" piece of crap. Seriously, Matthew McConaughey wasn't suited for this part. His Dirk Pitt character wasn't anything like the Dirk Pitt of the books. In matter of fact, the entire casting - smelled worse than camel dung. Crusade kept only the most marginal of the original plot, which quickly degenerated into stupidity. I believe directors have the right to make certain adjustments so that a movie can be reasonably made from a novel - as long as they remain true to the novel. What Crusade Entertainment did went beyond reasonable - what they barfed across cinema screens wasn't even close to the plot or characters of Cussler's book. It was as if Crusade hadn't even bothered to read the Sahara novel. What could have been a blockbuster - Crusade basically ruined by trying to make a second rate late night Matthew McConaughey action flick. Crusade sabotaged it themselves the moment they veered from the novel. And Penelope Cruz - I'm no Cruz fan because I don't think she has any talent - but not even she was a redeeming value in this really BAD movie. This is just another case where Hollywood just can't get it right - the material was there to produce a cool original film for once, but once again Hollywood fouled it up. Heck - if I made a film as bad as Sahara, I'd change my production company's name too ... exactly what Crusader Entertainment did when the changed their name to Bristol Bay Productions. Mental note: don't waste time seeing a Bristol Bay Productions film. ;^)