Mind Prey (1999 TV Movie) User Reviews

Entertaining, but a disappointment nevertheless

[RWR · 5/10 · 18 April 1999]

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?

alright movie no-complaints.

[nathan-yeo · 5/10 · 11 August 2009]

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 But now with three different "CSI", Numbers, Criminal Minds,this seem old and outdated.

Artistic Butchery

[Curt_S · 3/10 · 23 March 1999]

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.

Casting way off

[jwl1643 · 3/10 · 21 March 2005]

Being a huge fan of the prey novels, I thought they stuck to the book fairly well but the casting completely ruined the movie for me. It seems who ever cast this movie has never read the books. The complete mangling of the casting included all the key characters. Davenport, Weather, Sloan and black did not reflect how they were created at all. The only saving one was the casting of the villain. He was played well. If they decide to do more of these movies I can only hope they recast all the ongoing characters and the creators do more research into who they are casting. The Prey novels have a huge following and i know they had to be disappointed in who they saw on the screen compared to the image they had in their imaginations.

Awful Awful Awful

[jjuergen · 4 June 2004]

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!

Not too bad...if you've never read a Prey book...

[muledear58 · 3/10 · 8 September 2006]

But as one of the many fans of John Sanford out there, this film is probably the worst casting job I'd ever seen! I will agree with another 'critic' that the roles of Sloan (Bill MacDonald) and Marie Roux (Jayne Eastwood) were well cast, very believable characters, but Eric LaSalle as Lucas and Nicole Ari Parker as Weather just did NOT fit!! And Lucas drives a Porsche...not a PONTIAC!!! And when did he start working for the 'Minnesota PD'???

I realize that there has to be a LITTLE 'artistic license' when it comes to making a movie like this, but they need get the casting a little closer to looking like they are described in the book, and maybe get the plot a little closer also. I'll give this one three stars simply because it DID show a little of the darker side of Lucas, but overall, they missed it!!

Better than average network TV production

[gordem · 7/10 · 22 March 1999]

This film had a superior plot, suspense and fine acting from the lead players. Some lines were a little trite...."all's clear at the southend"...over the radio from a surveillance cop, and some of the technical references were exaggerated but on the whole, the film was surprisingly good considering contemporary network fare. If it's rerun, get the popcorn ready and enjoy....it's worth watching.

Perhaps the worst characterization in the history of stage or screen

[caa821 · 1/10 · 24 May 2007]

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.

Ridiculous

[donlessnau-591-637730 · 1/10 · 12 June 2010]

Lucas Davenport is white, not black.

Stupid casting decision and not anywhere near related to the series.

Bizarre.

It's like casting Pee Wee Herman to play Shaft.

What were they thinking?

Why do movie makers do this time and again?

No one who likes the books wants to see changes in the characters or story lines.

Don't make stuff up or re-write stories to be more PC.

What would the writers think about this?

I can't believe Sandford signed off on this piece of crap.

If a character is a white male in the series, don't cast the movie with a black female. Keep the gender and race the way it's written. That's as bad as watching revisionist Robin Hood stories with Maid Marian running around Sherwood kicking tail like some warrior. Never happened. Wouldn't happen.

Stop this PC garbage.

TV Movie with an edge.

[bball-4 · 10/10 · 14 June 1999]

This film is very dark, and is a far cry from any of the forgettable "Disease of The Week" telefilms that many have come to love. The photography and acting were solid and John Sanford's weak playboy character of Lucas Davenport was made more complex and much more interesting in the film version. Edgy film making and brutal scenes will bother some. Many local ABC affils. did not air the film because they felt it was offensive.

Great TV film! LaSalle does well

Take Sandford's name out of the title - it's an insult.

[tristabella721 · 1/10 · 13 September 2006]

I agree with most of the other posters here that Mind Prey was not adapted well at all, and almost an insult to the edgy writing of John Sandford. Anyone who has read the books is likely to be disappointed in this poorly casted and very weakly adapted made for TV movie.

I personally have never cared for Eric LaSalle's acting style. Because he is so deadpan in every role he is in, ER's moody Dr. Peter Benton playing Lucas Davenport - I do not think LaSalle has the acting range nor passion to make a role like Lucas believable. I saw this movie as no more than a vanity project for LaSalle {he has a producing credit, too} - he should have stayed on ER.

Also, the lisp of Black {who is gay in the books} was the last straw to me, and removed any shred of respect I had for the attempt to make this story into a movie.

My own casting opinion would be an actor such as Ralph Fiennes for Davenport - low key, but capable of intense acting. And maybe Madchen Amick as Weather. But those of us who have read the books know that Sandford's heavily layered and detailed stories may be difficult to adapt to film at all.

Storyline was good, cast was way off.

[jpress6902 · 3/10 · 5 December 2006]

I just saw this movie for the first time last night. I was very disappointed. The storyline seemed to be very close to the book, but whoever did the casting, has no idea of what Davenport, Weather, Sloan or anyone else are like. Eriq La Salle as Davenport? Not even close. I have been reading the prey books for years and am a huge fan, I have always had a mental picture of Lucas in my head and La Salle is just not it, he is a little to mild-mannered. I have always wanted someone to make a movie of the prey books,and I knew it would be hard to cast Lucas, but they could have done better than that. La Salle wasn't cool enough to play Davenport. And Davenport has always driven a Porsche! That's like his trademark! All in all, I wasn't impressed with the movie and I don't think Sanford would be either.