The Sphere — 1998 Directed by Barry Levinson Based on the novel by Michael Crichton Adapted for the screen by Kurt Wimmer Screenplay by Stephen Hauser and Paul Attanasio Starring Dustin Hoffman, Sharon Stone, Samuel L. Jackson I just saw this film, some twelve and a half years after its theatrical release. American grosses describe this film as a flop; the $80m budget resulted in $37m at the box office. Quite frankly, I'm not surprised. The thing is that a stellar cast combined with an intriguing plot should have brought about an excellent film. One might criticize the sets, which weren't particularly advanced compared to 1989's The Abyss, but that shouldn't be a huge issue. Barry Levinson, as a director, is certainly competent. Well, okay, he's done good films before. But the script .... I never read much Crichton in my day; I just couldn't get into his stories. But everyone I know who has read his work swears by it. Some people even claim to find arcane wisdom in the novels. One would think, then, that a film like The Sphere would have incredible potential. Perhaps it's not Kurt Wimmer's fault. His credits include the recently-released Salt and the 1999 release, The Thomas Crown Affair. So, okay, maybe it is his fault. Stephen Hauser worked as a production assistant to Levinson on Sleepers, Homicide: Life on the Street, and Disclosure; The Sphere is his only writing credit. Paul Attanasio, on the other hand, is an executive producer for House, M.D., and several respectable writing credits including Donnie Brasco, Quiz Show, and The Sum of All Fears. Oh, wait, that was the Affleck one, wasn't it? So now we know what killed this film. Really, it should have been huge. Dustin Hoffman did well enough with what he had; Samuel L. Jackson did well enough with what he had; Sharon Stone ... well, she wasn't annoying as all hell, so call it a good day for her. But they had nothing to work with. One might, then, ask if anyone ever read the novel, and whether it was any good. Frankly, I've always suspected that Crichton is a specialty product, the result of American literature having fallen adrift in the latter twentieth century. The fact that the best known films built from his books—Jurassic Park, Congo, Rising Sun, and The Sphere—are generally weak films selling aspects other than the stories themselves only reinforces that notion. But it's tragic, in a way. Eighty million dollars, and they couldn't even get half of that back from American screens? The Sphere falls into a strange category, what I often describe as "genuine two-star films". That is, I'm not at all impressed, but don't feel as if I've just squandered two hours of my life. Still, though, it's a great disappointment. This should have been a great film. And that's the only reason I'm bothering with these words. Mostly I'm just puzzled by the experience. How can you get that kind of talent on the screen and still come up with such a vapid, useless film? On the upside, the supporting cast includes Queen Latifah and a bit part from—seriously—Huey Lewis. Yes, that Huey Lewis. I don't know what to tell you about that last. Two stars out of four. I guess I should have known, though. Looking through Levinson's filmography, I'm actually struck by how many bad films he's made over the years. Talk about hit and miss: twenty-four titles, and maybe a quarter of them are any good. That's Tinseltown for you.
I'm not a huge fan of the movie. I hear--duh--that the book was great (I've read a few Crichton novels: "Jurassic Park", "The Lost World", "Prey", "Andromeda Strain", etc.), but the movie missed the mark for me. There is ONE great part (or rather sequence). . . when they board the "alien" space ship and get to the bridge. That part always intrigued me. Enough so to watch it about once a year. ~String
I saw this movie when it first came out...I don't recall being overly impressed.. I'm actually watching it again right now..It's on "encore".. Only 35 mins in so far...But, still no more impressed than I was the first time around.
The sad fact is that movies seldom live up to the written word, If I go to see a movie, I go to watch it as a movie, and a seperate story, for the two to three hour format, a movie just has to cut out to much. The Book Sphere was outstanding, the movie sucked.
The only people over age 13 who read Chrichton books are, shall we say, "less than literary" in their outlooks. I know a few people who likewise swear by his work, but a glance at their bookshelves reveals a lot of Dean Koontz, Robert Ludlum, and other such airport trash novels. Which are fine as far as that sort of thing goes, but I think that one has to be fairly uncritical to exhibit an unqualified liking for Chrichton. In other circles I run in (and hardly snobby ones at that), he's a laughing stock, known for his agonizingly flat, banal exposition and dialogue. I have friends who've never once in their lives used the correct form of "they're/there/their" who consider his writing to be outright insulting to their intelligence. Not that being a terrible writer, in writing terms, has ever been much of a serious handicap for the sci-fi/fantasy genres. But even by those standards the guy is a hack. That said, the movie of The Sphere is watchable, if a bit belabored, and everyone has always insisted to me that the book is downright good. Can't say that I'll ever get around to reading it, but surely it says something that this book is the standard counter-example to assertions of Chrichton being a hack writer.
I think that Crichton's work is hit and miss (like most McLiterature these days). Jurrassic Park, Prey and Andromeda Strain were all pretty good. None were boring--though most are eye-rollingly concatenated. The Lost World and Timeline were pretty bad. I tried to read The Rising Sun, but couldn't get past the first chapter. ~String
I was about to say that you're out of your mind, but I realized that I was thinking of Event Horizon (which IS good). I thought Sphere was decent, but not great.
