Tom Clancy's "Hunt for Red October" Book versus Film

[Gary Compton]

My favorite film of all time is Hunt for Red October with Sean Connery, quickly followed by Crimson Tide... Yes okay! I admit I am a submarine buff.

I have watched the film 20 odd times and just got the book today. In view of comments on Dan Brown on one of the other threads what does everybody feel about Tom Clancy as a writer and have many off you read the book?

 

[Switchback]

i've never read the book, but in my experience when books are made into films, the film hardly ever stands up to the book. cuckoo's nest and to kill a mockingbird are the only films i've enjoyed as much as the books...

 

[Connavar]

I have read and enjoyed a couple of Tom Clancy books like Rainbow Six. He is good for his genre.

I wouldnt compare him to Dan Brown......

 

[DeepThought]

I'm 100% sure that the book will be better.

...in my experience when books are made into films, the film hardly ever stands up to the book...

My experience as well.

...I wouldnt compare him to Dan Brown...

Agreed.

IMO the most successful transfer from book to visual medium:

The Lord of the Rings (of the same name); can't imagine anyone doing a better job than this, though of course, you cannot satisfy everyone (where's Tom Bomberdil???)

Bladerunner (PKD, Do Andriods Dream of Electric Sheep?); though vast plot changes and dialog, the theme remained the same (what it means to be human). This is a rare case in which the film became a huge cult hit despite the aforementioned changes from the great novel.

Cheers, DeepThought

 

[Razorback]

I’ve read most, if not all, of Clancy’s major novels, including Hunt for Red October. As Connavar stated: “He is good for his genre.” Hunt was a good read, but I enjoyed some of Clancy’s other works more. I don’t think I’ve ever seen a movie that I liked as well or better than a good book. That said, I think the Hunt movie is one of the better movie adaptations. It reflects the book much better than the other Clancy movies.

 

[ChrisBfla]

The story of the book, The Hunt for Red October, is very interesting. At the time he wrote it, Tom Clancy was an insurance agent making about $32,000 a year. His reseach was so flawless that the FBI actually paid him a visit over it.

Once he finished the manuscript, he could not get an agent or publisher to take it on. They all rejected the book as being far to technical. He finally got a small press publisher to take it. They had only been publishing boat desings and marine architecture. I think he had to basically beg them to take it on. Anyway, it was then picked up by a majot house, made into a movie and Tom Clancy went from struggling middle class to millionaire.

I suppose that all of us who write would like to have this much success.

Chris

 

[Clansman]

I have seen the movie several times, and read the book twice.

The movie is as good an adaptation as could be expected, but the book, as always, is better (I agree with DT, that LOTR movies enjoy the same fate. They are an excellent adaptation, but they are not as good as the book). Movies are never as good as the book, because they cannot convey as much information about the story. The book always has more.

There are minor plot changes from the book to the movie, especially the ending, which is more complex in Clancy's book. However, the screenplay is a darn good one. Good acting too, though the movie is getting a little bit dated. Great quote in the movie about politicians ("I'm just a politician, and that means I'm a thief and a liar. When I'm not kissin' babies, I'm stealin' their lollypops." or something like that). If you liked the movie, you should like the book more.

The Red October adaptation is far, far better than of any other Clancy book. They were okay on Patriot Games and Clear and Present Danger, but they totally ****ed up The Sum of All Fears, which was one of the scariest books I ever read, and predicted in about 1990 the terrorism of this decade, and I think the FBI uses the book as an instruction manual about how easy it would be to plant a dirty nuclear bomb. That Holloywood could wreck such a good story is not surprising, but tragic.

 

[Connavar]

Clansman which books are his better ones outside Rainbow six books ? Cause i have only read those and it was a long time ago.

Are Jack Ryan's books that became Harrison Ford movies one of his better books ?

 

[dustinzgirl]

Book version. Makes it easier to skip the boring parts.

Sum did suck, and badly, and I never even read that book.

I liked Clear and Present way better than the Hunt, because I think the Hunt is just really, really, really boring.

There's another one, but I've got the flu.

 

[Clansman]

I preferred the Jack Ryan books, which are Hunt for Red October, Cardinal of the Kremlin, Patriot Games, Clear and Present Danger, The Sum of All Fears, Debt of Honour, and then one about China invading Russia (I forget its name). By the end of this series, the story was getting pretty ridiculous. Up to Sum of All Fears they were pretty darn good, Debt of Honour was a small step down, and then forget the last one, which was pure airport reading tripe. There was also a prequel for one of his other characters, who you see in the Clear and Present Danger movie, John Clark, and the prequel is set in the late 1960's. It was pretty good.

Conn, go with Hunt to Sum, and you'd be fine. There are back story details that are chronological, so it is better to read in order, but not necessary. The first Clancy I read was Sum. DON'T WATCH THAT MOVIE. It stinks.

 

[Pyan]

and then one about China invading Russia (I forget its name).

The Bear and the Dragon...

Executive Orders, though, comes between Debt of Honour and Bear and the Dragon...

Dan Brown v Tom Clancy?
Dan Brown's books ended up in the local charity shop - Clancy's sit on my bookshelf. No comparison.

 

[ghost8772]

Read the book, saw the movie. as far as the Navy side of things, great follow through. The complexity of things going on in Clancy's book could not become a 2 hour movie. Would have been cool to see some of the other games Uncle Sam played on the Soviets in film.

 

[Clansman]

The Bear and the Dragon...

Executive Orders, though, comes between Debt of Honour and Bear and the Dragon...

Dan Brown v Tom Clancy?
Dan Brown's books ended up in the local charity shop - Clancy's sit on my bookshelf. No comparison.

Yes, I'd forgotten that one! I think Debt of Honour was the last really good one (the ending was a bit far-fetched, but this IS a fantasy site, right?). Executive Orders was still pretty good (as memory serves), but The Bear and the Dragon stank it up...

Couldn't ever get into Dan Brown.

 

[tangaloomababe]

I would have to say I am not a fan of Dan Brown's novels. Maybe I am readying the wrong ones but I have read three now and they are easy enough reading but just not that good.

However back to the thread at hand. Much as I like Hunt for Red October and it is a very good film I have to wonder if Tom Clancey's Character for Sean Connery had a Scotish accent, bet he didn't. That always irks me about the movie, other than that its excellent.

It would take a very good movie to be better than the book, simply because a movie cannot convey in a few short hours what takes days maybe weeks to read. The depth of feeling and various emotions and details cannot be put into a movie, having said that the LOTR trilogy does very well except as Deep Thought has already said
"Where's Tom"?

 

[Clansman]

I guess we should have had a poll, because it looks like the book wins.

 

[Rosemary]

I have only seen the movie, it was ok. I watched it only because I had read an article about Tom Clancy.

For his research, Clancy supposedly had more books on anything naval than the Admiral had in his study.

I am sure that if I had read the book first, I would have been disappointed with the film. That's what usually happens to me anyway.

 

[clovis-man]

Yes, I'd forgotten that one! I think Debt of Honour was the last really good one (the ending was a bit far-fetched, but this IS a fantasy site, right?).

I don't have my copies of the books anymore, but didn't Debt of Honour end with an airliner being flown into Washington D.C.? Seems pretty real to me.

 

[Clansman]

I don't have my copies of the books anymore, but didn't Debt of Honour end with an airliner being flown into Washington D.C.? Seems pretty real to me.

MAJOR HUGE GIANT SPOILER FOR DEBT OF HONOUR

Yes, it might, except that the pilot took off from Canada, not Dulles (or whatever it is called now) or Boston or New Jersey. The flight plan was not pre-approved, like the 9/11 planes. It was hijacked by the pilot in Vancouver, taken to Montreal, and then flown down the east coast on an illegal flight path. It was on the illegal flight path for several hours before slamming into the Capitol Building, during a joint session of Congress, killing almost all of Congress, the President, the cabinet and the Supreme Court.

The 9/11 planes were in the air for only minutes before they struck their targets, and they started off as approved flights, before altering for only a number of minutes before hitting their targets. Also, killing almost all of the US government in one fatal blow, with perfect timing? With a no-fly zone over DC proper? Patrolled by the US Air Force? It goes far beyond the attacks in 9/11, which is why I found the ending a stretch. Not to mention, I read the book in the early 1990's, when the idea seemed pretty inconceivable. Maybe that carried over to my comment above, as it is certainly more conceivable today, but the circumstances Clancy sets out are pretty far fetched. The ending allows Clancy to set up government as he sees fit in the next book (fewer politicians, more real Americans in congress). Something of a deux et machina, in my opinion.

This is why the earlier books seemed better to me. They had plausible circumstances, whereas as the series progresses, the circumstances get less and less plausible, and fit Clancy's more right-wing, big military, idealism.