For those of you who are not war
movie fanatics or are able to erase bad memories, there was a remake of the
Humphrey Bogart classic starring Jim Belushi.
I kid you not! It appeared on TV
in 1995 and I believe I watched it when it premiered. That’s right – I had no life even back
then. The movie was directed by Brian
Trenchard-Smith (“The Siege of Firebase Gloria”). He used extras from the Royal Australian Air
Force and Royal Australian Army for the Germans.
the guy on the left is not Humphrey Bogart, trust me |
the tank that won the Battle of El Alamein |
“Sahara” sticks pretty closely
to the original script so it was obviously intended to bring a color version to
a new generation. In that respect it
succeeds fairly well. If you have not seen
the original, this is an acceptable substitute.
It’s the pyrite version. Besides
the color, you do get more realistic combat with more authentic wounds. Actually, I don’t remember a single German
being just wounded. The mortality rate is 100%. The two despicable Germans get
what they deserve. Some of the good guy
deaths are surprising and poignant. The
acting is acceptable. No one embarrasses
themselves, including Belushi. He
actually is comfortable in the role if you can get beyond prejudice against him
as an actor. The dialogue is not
terrible and there is some character development of the “where ya from?”
ilk. The music is TVesque.
I know you were expecting me to
rip this movie apart and I am sorry if you are disappointed. Those of you who follow this blog know that I
am not enamored with classic war movies. Older does not automatically mean great. The original “Sahara” is a very good movie and did not need a remake,
but to judge the new one on its own merits is only fair. It is a decent little time waster and a nice
effort for a made-for-TV movie. Get over
the fact that it stars Jim Belushi.
GRADE = C
Good write up! I'm watching it as this is being typed. This is the second viewing, and it's as good as the first one. Also, I am a Belushi fan and that adds to the enjoyment of seeing a SERIOUS performance by an erstwhile actor. Thank you for mentioning it. Take care.
ReplyDeleteWow, a Jim Belushi fan (the one and only?). Seriously, he is not a bad actor and does fine in this role.
ReplyDeleteIt's always bad when the viewer has a more logical battle plan than the combatants in the movie. Had the Germans waited for nightfall, they would have had no problem overunning the fortress, instead they did head on attacks in daylight and lost more than half their number. Movie directors think we're stupid.
ReplyDeleteAren't we?
DeleteBogart was better as the Sgt... But the remake is OK.
ReplyDeleteIf I remember correctly, its based on (highly dramatized) a small group that did hold a well vs overwhelming odds during WWII.
Its not that the viewer might have a better battle plan... its a docudrama. The plan is essentially fact and worked.
The small group was a bit larger than in the movie... But "The Alamo" movies only show a few defenders when there were about 200 defenders. (reports vary slightly over 180 to almost 260)
I love your review. I read the plot and said "well this sounds bloody terrible, they're all going to die". I looked at my husband and said "the geniuses are going to take a stand against a troop of Nazis at a waterhole". How bad was it? Meh.. Reading your review was the best part, thanks it was great.
ReplyDeleteThe reviewer is typical. They cant create anything so they just shit on other peoples work. This wasnt a bad remake and it did show that Belushi dose have some versatility as an actor. The reviewer like most current liberals firgets that the Afrika Corp were fanatic nazis thst had a tendency to massacre captured english and american prisoners. A pilot wigh an iron cross could be relied upon to be a fanatic nazi and was protrayed as such. All in all I liked the movie. Not as much as the original as I really like Bogart. Its worth a watch.
ReplyDelete