Own the rights?
18 out of 21 people found the following comment useful :- High-Tech Whodunnit, 27 May 2006 Author: ccthemovieman-1 from Lockport, NY, United States
This movie is not always easy to understand but if you give it a couple of looks, which it is worthy of doing, all the pieces finally fit and it's a good two hours of entertainment.This modern-day crime movie may have a lack of action compared to others of its genre but it never loses your attention. Sean Connery, Wesley Snipes and Harvey Keitel star, along with Cary-Hiroyuki Tagawa, Kevin Anderson, Mako and Tia Carrere. This is a high-tech story (at least for 1993) as two cops try to figure out who murdered a woman. It's Japanese-big business-politics intrigue with surveillance cameras being the key to figuring out a murder.Connery and Snipes complement each other as a "buddy" cop duo with Connery being mostly responsible for making this story interesting. The still-suave ex-James Bond plays the cool veteran and it's fun to watch him operate.The only complaint I might have is the ending, a stupid romance-type story with Snipes and Carrere that was very post-climactic and not needed.
16 out of 21 people found the following comment useful :- Great Book Turned Into Average Thriller on Film..., 17 March 2003 Author: MovieAddict2009 from UK
"Rising Sun"There is an old Japanese motto: "Business is war." Well, that sentence is taken to new heights in the Philip Kaufman thriller "Rising Sun," based on the best-selling novel by Michael Crichton.Wesley Snipes plays Web Smith, a Japanese-American liaison officer in LA who is called on duty after a young woman is found dead at the opening party for the new Japanese company named Nakamoto. Sean Connery plays John Connor, a retired liaison officer who is an expert on Japanese customs and culture. He is requested to come on call as well, and does, trailing along with Web.When they get to Nakamoto, they find Tom Graham (Harvey Keitel) and other cops hovering over the body of the dead woman. Soon, foul play is suspected, and Smith and Connor must find the killer before it is too late."Rising Sun" is taken from a great novel, and turned into an average thriller. There is nothing spectacular about the film. It stays surprisingly true to the book, but the very few things that stray from the course of the novel turn out to be the blunders.There are no sparks flying between Sean Connery and Wesley Snipes. I think that Snipes was a bad casting decision. Connery is perfect for the character of John Connor, but Snipes just doesn't fit Peter Smith - whose name was changed to Web Smith for the film, for no apparent reason other than Peter isn't a suiting name for Snipes.The director/screenplay writer of "Rising Sun" - Philip Kaufman, who brought us "The Right Stuff" - seems to have charisma and obviously tries to keep the film true to the book. Unfortunately, however, there is an element of suspense missing from the film. There are no real surprises. In the novel, Connery's character John Connor seems to know everything that is going to happen, but there is still a sense of suspense. In the film, however, Connery's Connor seems to know TOO much about everything that is going to happen. Instead of being one step ahead like he was in the book, he seems to be twenty steps ahead in the film. There is one scene that really jumped out at me where Connor walks in and says, upon discovering a man believed to be dead, "Oh, I was wondering when he'd get here!" In the novel, Connor gives a reason why he knew the man wasn't dead. In the film, he just seems to know the man is still alive for no apparent reason. If Connor knows everything that is happening, everything that has happened, and everything that is going to happen, why keep Web - and us - in the dark? At least Connery fit the character of Connor - it would have been about ten times worse if they had chosen someone else.Believe it or not, the film might have been better if it had NOT been so close to the book. What I mean by this, is that by making everything just like the book, Kaufman raises the expectations a notch, and when ONE SINGLE THING is changed from the book, the audience is disappointed, because by then we have come to expect everything in the movie to be like the book. Expectations wouldn't have been so high if he had made everything different from the book. Which is NOT to say I don't enjoy that he stayed true to the book. It's a confusing opinion. In some ways, I enjoy how true to the novel the film was. But there is just something missing. Even though the cast is top notch for the most part, Snipes just didn't fit. And while Connery was perfect as Connor, he seemed to know too much about what is going on. There is no real suspense. Perhaps that is the biggest flaw of the film.A great book turned into an average thriller worth seeing once.3/5 stars -John Ulmer
7 out of 8 people found the following comment useful :- Good! But not Great!, 17 July 2005 Author: amwcsu from United States
*** This comment may contain spoilers ***
I like this movie for its simple, yet intricate plot and interesting peek into the Japanese culture, customs, and traditions. Rising Sun has its strengths in the technological sector using mini-CD's in their security cameras, something that rare...even in 2005; unheard of in 1993. Very interesting. This Michael Chricton venture has the right mix of corporate warfare and abrasive politics in each of the characters from the racist pig and "Ugly American" extrordinaire Tom Graham to the mysterious techno-whiz played by Tia Carrare.But what I don't understand is how Sean Connery's character becomes such an aficionado of the Japanese culture? The explanation is very weak especially when it concerns his relationship with Eddie Sakomura. Snipes adds some bite and boldness to the mix but he plays into that "not so bright sidekick" stereotype that many African-Americans fall into. It would've been more interesting if the roles were reversed.The ending is one of the most compelling scenes of the entire film...yes this would be considered a FILM not a MOVIE. It shows the bond of the conspirators falling apart piece by piece. First, the senator's sexual escapade is revealed to his co-workers and his wife via fax machine. Then he interrupts an important meeting at Nakamoto headquarters by calling his co-patriot, thus revealing that Ishihara had something to do with this murder. Lastly, the killer is unmasked and flees capture only to be cornered by Eddie's allies and thrown into a vat of wet concrete to his doom. I'll admit it its a frightening way to die but the killer/ sleaze ball lawyer deserves it. But must they change this ending at the last minute to replace Ishihara with Richmond(the killer)? I thought movies were supposed to be art wrought with controversy.
8 out of 12 people found the following comment useful :- A solid, enjoyable film whose pace covers it despite plot holes – the heavy cast also make it worth seeing, 10 July 2004 Author: bob the moo from Birmingham, UK
During a high level executive meeting between a Japanese corporation and an US weapons contractor a young woman is found murdered. Due to his connections Captain John Connor is sent to lead the investigation with Lt Web Smith. The investigation is immediately hindered by the Japanese culture, the shadowy business figures and political pressures, however before long Connor and Smith are presented with a cctv disk that shows the murder being carried out by a known suspect. When the suspect dies in a chase the investigation seems over but a closer investigation of the evidence shows that the case is far from closed.Not being a real big fan of Michael Crichton, I wasn't sure how I'd like this film – I'm not a big traveler and don't buy my books in the airport when I do travel! It was apt then, that I wasn't overly taken by the plot here and felt that its pace was more responsible for it being an enjoyable thriller than any great skill in the writing. In its essence the glossy story takes in technology, big business, Japanese cool and political goings-on – all these and other things combining to mean that it moves well and is consistently busy. This is not to suggest that it all fits together because it doesn't; the plot has holes and lose strands within it that distract if you think too much about it – happily its pace and revelations did not give me too long to linger over these and I managed to enjoy it, the problems being forgotten in all the gloss.On top of this gloss is piled a cast that is worth seeing no matter what they are doing together, and their presence and ability further cover for a plot that doesn't always serve its many characters as well as they deserve. Connery has fun in the sort of role he seems to greatly favour now – distinguished, wise men of age who can still dish it out if need be. He is easy to watch and only at times does he feel like he's forcing it (like when he suddenly shouts). Snipes does not look as confident but that may be because his 'look' has dated here and changed since 1993. However he is still good and has his moments despite being given a rather secondary role to Connery's. It the support cast that surprised me though – so many well known faces in supporting or minor roles. Keitel is very good, playing an interesting character that goes nowhere but is still interesting and well delivered; Tagawa is gifted a fuller role than he often gets and does well with it. Wise is OK but he forces it and didn't convince me as much as I would have liked – still did the job asked of him though. People like Mako, Carrere, von Bargen and Buscemi all add depth and make the film feel fuller than it is even with some small (and perhaps unnecessary?) characters.Overall this is a slick and enjoyable film even if it is as much style and pace as it is substance. The plot doesn't totally fit together but its mix of techno-conspiracy, political plotting, sex and intrigue all keep it moving along enjoyably enough and the impressive and rather charismatic cast only help to make it feel all the slicker. Worth a watch even if some may find it a little inconsequential in regards some bits of plotting.
12 out of 20 people found the following comment useful :- "Get Ready To Bow", 14 February 1999 Author: Michael Coy (michael.coy@virgin.net) from London, England
Scenes of cowboys on horseback, and Cole Porter's "Don't Fence Me In"... reassuring cultural markers which quickly dissolve as we find ourselves in the steely 19990's in a Los Angeles that has been snaffled by the Japanese. The western and the music are mere karaoke images. Americans had better learn how to bow, because their masters are moving in."Rising Sun" is a sophisticated thriller which flips neatly between fear of the sinister Japanese (electronic surveillance, big business buyouts, Yakuza) and a deep understanding of, and reverence for, Japanese culture. Wesley Snipes plays Web Smith, a lieutenant in the LAPD assigned to investigate a murder on the Los Angeles premises of a Japanese corporation. He has Captain John Connor attached to him (Sean Connery), an older man who is believed to have 'gone native' and sold his soul to the Japanese.At every turn, American short-sightedness is losing out to the Japanese hardball players. One of the film's morals is, if we don't like the way they are buying up our assets, we have no business selling them in the first place. Japanese strength comes from the social discipline and immense intellectual vigour of their way of life. "We may come from a fragmented MTV-rap-video culture," says Conner, "but they do not."Conner has studied the eastern way and is respected by the Japanese for his grace and learning. He guides Web Smith along the path of enlightenment in the course of solving the murder mystery. They adopt the traditional sampai-kohai relationship, the tutelage of a wise elder from which a worthy young man learns.In this story of cutting-edge video fakery, the film exploits images intelligently. We see reflections of Web and Jingo on the TV monitor as they analyse the 'ghost'. Connor effects a clever 'look-back' on the lab's video camera, hinting at hidden permutations in the characters' relationships. Time after time, we are led persuasively down a line of reasoning, only to find that it is a chimera. As Connor says, "When something looks too good to be true, then it's not true."There are some weaknesses in the film's structure. 'The Weasel', the journalist tracking Web, is badly misconceived. His place in the story is negligible and his dramatic possibilities are abandoned almost as soon as he is introduced. The reliance of Web on his old 'brothers' to intimidate the Japanese pursuers is lame and patronising, with its 'boyz'n'the hood' silliness. To describe these 'rough neighbourhoods' as 'America's last great advantage' is patent hogwash. The corrupt senator is the tired stock-in-trade of these thrillers, and fails to convince. The reaction of Morton's wife to the fax transmissions is utterly unrealistic and melodramatic. That two LAPD cops should beat up half a dozen Japanese thugs using karate is frankly insulting, even to Japanese thugs.The performance of Sean Connery is very impressive. He plays Connor with the clear intelligence and the confidence in his own powers which such a man would surely possess. He alone understands both cultures, and therefore he alone can solve the riddle. Because Connery is convincing, the film is a success.
6 out of 9 people found the following comment useful :- Business is war, 21 April 2007 Author: lastliberal from Florida
It is hard to pass up a Sean Connery movie, especially one with Wesley Snipes. You can just see Lt. Smith (Snipes) learning from Captain Conner (Connery) and taking those lessons to Washington in Murder at 1600.Connery was exceptional in this thriller with multiple twists and turns, and Snipes did a great job as his student. Harvey Keitel added a great dimension as a racist dirty cop.I was also glad to see Steve Buscemi in his usual slimy role. I hadn't seen Tia Carrere since True Lies and she play a super role her as a tech wiz. And, I always like seeing Mako.Great thriller with great characters. Put this on your list to see.
6 out of 9 people found the following comment useful :- 100% actor movie, 4 March 2002 Author: Mika Pykäläaho (bygis80@hotmail.com) from Järvenpää, Finland
"Rising sun" is clearly "an actor movie". My definition of an actor movie is this: it's a movie people are dying to see mostly/only because of the great, gifted and well-known actors and a movie that basically works because of those recognized actors. Another example would be, let's say, James Mangold's "Cop land". Sylvester Stallone, Robert De Niro, Harvey Keitel, Ray Liotta, Robert Patrick, Michael Rapaport - all appearing in a one otherwise quite basic thriller. Of course it's true marvelous cast alone can't save a film if everything else stinks. Luckily "Rising sun" includes a good, entertaining and exciting script and a nice story with lots of surprises.I'm still pretty sure it would be a film that's very easy to forget without the fine actors. They are the force that keeps everything else working. Sean Connery and Wesley Snipes in the leading roles are quite amusing and I have to admit, most interesting pair. Naturally everybody wants to see if they got any screen chemistry. Certainly it's also always very nice to enjoy the uncontested talents of great men like Harvey Keitel and Steve Buscemi - even if the film isn't the biggest highlight of their careers. Ray Wise is pretty terrific in a significant role as Senator Morton - even though every time I see his crooked face it only makes me think of Leland Palmer - his peculiar character in the television hit series "Twin peaks". So by all means, watch Philip Kaufman's "Rising sun". I know you want to.
1 out of 1 people found the following comment useful :- Lame material by today's standards, 2 November 2006 Author: redrabbitbone from United States
The only reason why I had given this movie a four is because the actors who were involved in this film were trying really hard to pull their parts off all the way until the end. Before I go into my review, I want to first point out that reading the message threads to this movie A. I didn't know this was another book turned film and B. I didn't know that Japanese culture is extremely racist but then again, what else is new? C. I have never been out to Los Angeles, Japan or read the book and D. I put all of this out there so you know that despite these facts, it has no part in playing in the review. What you get is me just seeing the movie "today" for the second time, the first was when it had came out. Off of that, you get my mind's perception of things based off of that and that's it.Alright, my gripes with this flick is well, it was released in 1993, assumed it was made in 1992 and everything back then was just cheesy. I guess race issues was hitting the screen in a serious flux during that time because to me it just seems like the issues or scenes concerning indifference are so consciously thought out because I guess of the uncomfortably level of busting a multiracial cherry, that it's a major hit or miss mark. I particularly notice this in Spike Lee's Jungle Fever as well. Which I don't understand because there was supposedly a very steamy/seedy scene with Rachel Welsh and Jim Brown a decade and a half before that but whatever.Like for instance, the scene when Connors and Smith being chased by the would be yakuza thugs in the blue hatchback convertable through the hood in L.A., and all the brotha's came up to their car to hear their dilemma before helping them out after catching up with Smith who I assume was the neighborhood football hero. Then when the brotha's went up to the bad guys car and scared them off. I don't know about you and I don't know about Japanese thug culture but I assume from all of the other millions of references to this subject, that these guys wouldn't scare easy like that, I mean they look like a bunch of bad dudes-wouldn't you agree? And the next thing is the whole mysterious profile of Connor's the retired Liason officer called in to help Smith. Mysterious as in why did he totally convert himself to be into Japanese culture that deep and who was he or what has he done exactly in the land of the rising sun to get major respect amongst the Japanese Business executives? I don't know, maybe I went to clean up the kitchen on that part because I did get easily distracted a few times. And I don't know about you but right from the bat, I knew that Leland, lol., excuse me, the guy who played the senator and his crony lawyer were the one's responsible for that girls death. Which I also need help on that one, perhaps I walked to the bathroom on that one because was killing her really necessary other than not having a movie to go off on? Was Senator Leland so powerful that he couldn't get caught up in such a scandal? If this was the case, why do stuff like that in the first place? I would of understood because his wife was paralyzed, so what was the senator to do?Also, is it me or is there an underlying tone of "the japs are taking over" but now, "we have to deal with it" in the movie?I guess during that time, it was a good popcorn fetish but looking back at it today with an older mind, in a semi-different time, well, it's just cheesy but if you have an hour and few minutes to kill and it's on TV, I say go for it, but I wouldn't buy or rent it. I'm pretty sure there are other movies that cover similar if not the same controversies and scandals that are brilliantly executed on a lower budget.
1 out of 1 people found the following comment useful :- The Sun rises, the expectations fall, 14 July 2001 Author: Bothan from Birmingham, Alabama
***SPOILER WARNING***Michael Crichton is the king of details when comes to his books. His stories go down to the absolute detailed mechanics of their subject so that we arise knowing a little more about it then we did when we started - This is a guy who does his homework. Rising Sun was about eccentricities of a competitive Japanese conglomerate. He really got inside this world and gave you a feel for what it must be like on the inside.What aggravates me about `Rising Sun' as a movie is that it seems to have been adapted by someone who learned by watching cop-buddy movies. It takes place in Los Angeles where a new Japanese conglomerate is just getting started. A woman is found dead in a conference room strangled to death and the killer seems to be the girl's lover Eddie Sakamura (Cary Hiroyuki-Tagawa) who is a shrewd businessman with some ties in the criminal underworld. But in order to keep the new conglomerate from looking bad right from the start, they decide to call in a crime expert.Enter John Conner (Sean Connery), a worldly-wise detective who is able to figure things out just by observation the way Sherlock Holmes might have. His Watson is Web Smith (Wesley Snipes) one of those slick movie cops who constantly insults his partner and throws out a stream of glib one-liners because well – he's a black movie cop.This combination is what sets the movie on the wrong track. For most of the movie Connery uses his knowledge of Japanese culture and motives to gather information while Snipes stands by and tosses out a joke and gives the wrong information. Why was this necessary? Why does the sidekick have to be wrong all the time. Why isn't he able to counter Connery's information with his own knowledge? I could imagine a good sidekick being played by, say Giancarlo Giannini. You would have two very intelligent men working together instead of the approach of having Snipes say something stupid and Connery countering it.And what about the dead girl? There is never an attempt to give us much emotional interest in her. She is just a sexy model, killed in a kinky murder to be the movie's McGuffin. There is actually more time spent on the video of the murder then on the victim. A video disk was taken of the killer with the face blotted out and covered with the image of someone else, but who cares? This is a movie with so little emotional interest.Rating: ** (of four)
2 out of 3 people found the following comment useful :- One of Crichton's best novels becomes a below-par thriller, 30 June 2008 Author: TrevorAclea from London, England
Rising Sun is a textbook example of how to take a sure-fire, can't lose property and cock it up completely. It's not just a matter of the producers controversially changing the nationality of the killer that makes Rising Sun such a appointment: where Michael Crichton's novel weaved a multi-stranded web, turning issues into clues and bombarding the reader with information and clues to keep you guessing, director Philip Kaufman simplifies and makes it all patently predictable. Subplots are poorly handled, often either never followed through or simply forgotten, and you don't even care that much about who done it, or why.Of course, there is a difference between what makes a good book and what makes a good film, but before the rot set in Crichton didn't just write novels that read well, he wrote novels that play - turning one of his books into a film should be more a matter of editing than adapting. Yet, extraordinarily, the producers have either dropped or diluted everything that made the novel such a huge bestseller.Crichton's strength was always his ability to put over big issue in a pulp format, but while Kaufman does tidy up his typically messy ending, hedrops most of the issues, patronisingly soft-pedalling the novel's economic/political debate, leaving just the pulp. It's rather like making The Third Man and ditching all that guff about cuckoo clocks and black marketeering, and getting rid of Orson for good measure. It may now be a gaijin who kills the girl, but it's Kaufman who kills the movie.Kaufman has shown he can take mainstream material and imbue it with a greater significance and still turn out a terrific picture with Invasion of the Body Snatchers and The Right Stuff (and let's not forget, he was one of the creators of Indiana Jones), but perhaps he'd just spent too long making art movies in the interim. Here there's a snobbery to his direction, a contempt for his material that shines through in almost every frame - he thinks he's better than this, but still comes out looking like an amateur.Where Crichton's novel was not the racist tract many claimed at the time (Crichton's criticism wass aimed directly at America's short-sighted business/political strategy), Kaufman's film comes perilously close to being just that. The xenophobia of the scene where Snipes sets some homeboys on the Japanese who are following him is an uncomfortable and tasteless exercise in ethnic stereotyping that doesn't belong in this movie.The most astonishing lapse is in the appallingly acted and staged scene where Snipes is interrogated by his superiors. While this provides the novel with an effective framing device, only a complete idiot would include the American PR man for the Japanese corporation implicated in the conspiracy and a muckraking reporter among those present. Kaufman does. Not only is he hopeless at staging action, but scenes such as the suicide are handled with an ineptitude bordering on the infantile while some of the sexual overtones are feeble beyond belief - hey, don't forget that close-up of the next door neighbour's crotch so we know what Wesley's thinking, Phil! If anything, the absolute stinker of an epilogue is even worse, coming on like the warm wrap-up to a 70s cop show and spelling out Connery and Carrere's relationship just in case we're too thick to work it out for ourselves.Much blame for this must attach itself to executive producer Sean Connery. Too many years of being denied his due as an actor and still, one suspects, trying to overcompensate for his years in Bondage have left him a sucker for a 'quality' director and a name writer, often with disastrous consequences (cf. A Good Man in Africa). Yet if Kaufman kills the movie, Connery gives it the kiss of life. Connery is never less than watchable, and he's certainly one of the few things worth watching here, whether barking Japanese in a Scottish accent or deliberately losing at golf. It's one of the best displays of pure star quality energising a moribund picture you're likely to see.Wesley Snipes is wildly miscast in a role that didn't just have Andy Garcia's name on it but his address and a photo of his wife and kids as well. Instead we get a another of his typically one-note aggressiveone-size-fits all performances. Supporting performances are dubious at best, with Mako, Carey-Hiroyuki Tagawa and Stan Egi faring best, countered by Ray Wise and Kevin Anderson, both even phonier than their roles.When Rising Sun concentrates on the plot mechanics, such as the manipulation of an incriminating recording of the murder, it's fine, but what should have been great is merely an average potboiler distinguished by Connery's presence. Rupert Murdoch, who took a strong personal interest in the picture, said that if they got it wrong they deserved a sound kick in the a**. If you happen to run into him, you might want to take him up on that.
Add another comment
