a someone who have both read the novel and see the film and i have a different take on why the film be such a flop . first and any comparison between novel and film be purely superficial . they be two different animal . the novel be probably intend a a satire and but it arrive a a cross between tragedy and polemic instead . any comedic element such a those which later form the stylistic basis of the film version be merely incidental to the author uniformly cynical thrust . and l the omnipresent white suit of the author fool you into think this be another mark twain and think again . a more apt literary precedent would be the spectre of ambrose bierce in a top hat and tail . tom wolfe be equal part clown and hack and more celebrity than author and always look for new grist for his self absorb mill . it be therefore no wonder that the excellent production skill and direction lavish on the making of the film be doom from the start . unlike true satire and which translate very well into film and polemic be ground not in universally accessible observation on some form or other of human behavior and but in a single mind attack on specific people whether real or fictional straw men who have somehow earn the wrath of the writer . any effort to create a successful filmed story or narrative from such a beginning must have a clean start and free of the writer influence or interference . have say that and i too find fault with the casting . it be not merely that incompetent like bruce willis and melanie griffith fail to measure up and but that real talent like tom hank and f. murray abraham and and morgan freeman be either totally wasted or give role that be mere caricature . there be enough topical material here for a truly great film satire and but it fail to come even close .