Ostaggi della paura

If you are a fan of John Sandford's awesome Prey novels, you will NOT like this movie. Even though I don't consider myself a purist, Eric LaSalle has taken way too many liberties in adapting this great novel to suit his needs/wants. (I thought I saw him name somewhere as a Producer).

If you haven't read any of Sandford's books, start now. Don't let the disappointment of this Hollywood-ized version lead you to believe that Sandford is just another hack.

The only two characters in the TV movie that even closely resembled the picture I had in my mind's eye are Bill MacDonald as Detective Sloan and Jayne Eastwood as Police Chief Roux and their characters were barely developed to the point where I could like them as much as their parchment-dwelling counterparts.

One of the reasons I like the characters in the novels is that they are real. LaSalle's Lucas Davenport is just another TV cop who is Superman - doing everything himself, surrounded by cops who would be lost without him.

In case you hadn't noticed, I didn't like this movie. Within the first five minutes, I was tempted to turn it off. Then, I decided that I wanted to write this review, so I struggled through it for the sake of 'knowing what I was writing about.' If you are tempted to see this as a re-run, don't. Get the book. Better yet, get Rules Of Prey (the first of nine Lucas Davenport novels by Sandford thus far) and start the journey the right way. Hmph.

Although the ABC version of Mind Prey was fairly entertaining, I was nevertheless disappointed by the writers' characterization of Lucas Davenport. The Eriq LaSalle version has almost no similarity to the character as carefully developed by the Prey author, John Sandford.

If this does become a series, I would certainly watch again.

And did I hear Davenport say "Minnesota PD"? What gives with that?

Having read many books from the "Prey" series, I was looking forward to see how it would be transferred to the small screen, but ended up extremely disappointed with how this movie was done. Lucas Davenport from the movie was nothing like the Lucas Davenport in the book. The book was written using very specific locations in Minneapolis, where as the movie used boring, generic "Holly-ronto" locations.

And the acting...you could tell that they probably spent most of the budget for donuts and coffee! I would like to see some of the other "Prey" books transfered to the screen, but HELLO! lets try to do a better job!

Eriquie La-salle mopes his way through another movie since leaving "ER". the acting is good, the cast is good, it's an alright movie just out-dated. they even tried to update by the detective being some kind of gamer. And this guy being his best fan.

Oh-kay a serial (Killer/Rapist/kidnapper) has kid-napped a mother and her kids to play a game of cat and mouse with the detective who investigated him from before. Hey don't get me wrong i used to love these movies back in the day. i'd watch rent them and woo wooo woo. But now with three different "CSI", Numbers, Criminal Minds,this seem old and outdated.

The late Lawrence Sanders created one of the most interesting characters and series of novels with Archie McNally, the witty, erudite and completely engaging playboy-investigator for his father's prestigious Palm Beach law firm. After his death, these novels were undertaken by Vincent Lardo, who has maintained the character/series (in my opinion) even better than Mr. Sanders.

Stuart Woods has created a character, Stone Barrington, a well-to-do New York City lawyer and ex-police officer, who troubleshoots the important cases for a major law firm where intrigue and danger are involved.

However, John Sandford's Lucas Davenport is a character equal to, and perhaps even a bit more interesting than these other two handsome, urbane and competent investigators. The "Prey" novels are all superb, and amount to the best efforts in this genre, ever. Lucas spends a great deal of his time up to his ass in snow and ice in the north country, in Minneapolis and other parts of Minnesota, North Dakota, etc. And he's a bit "rougher" than the other two fellows, but perhaps even a bit smarter, and like them, well-to-do and probably the richest of the three.

All three authors have developed these key characters (along with their main cohorts) so that you have the most vivid pictures of them in your mind. Being the most prolific of the three, you'll see a bit more of Lucas than Stone or Archie. However, with characters like these, you never tire of them, and look forward eagerly to their next appearances. Since my first readings of all three, I haven't failed once to get every new offering at retail/hardcover, as soon as available.

But ---- whoever thought-up this presentation should seek counseling, not just from a U.S. shrink, but should visit a team in Vienna. Eriq LaSalle is an excellent actor. But his resemblance of the character, and his presentation of the role in this flick, is farther afield than: (a) Mickey Roonery as Rhett Butler; (b) Woody Allen as Huey Long; (c) George Hamilton as Malcolm X; (d) or even Yakov Smirnoff as Abraham Lincoln.

I'm just surprised than John Sandford allowed this presentation to be completed in this fashion, and with this casting and portrayal of the character who is the most significant aspect of an outstanding, diversified writing career. I cannot help but believed he and/or his agent and attorney somehow signed an agreement with some fine print they failed to read thoroughly.

Some aspects of the story were presented in "O.K." fashion -- however, this film has to get only 1*, for the total failure to present a lead character even vaguely resembling the actual.