Rating: 
Summary: Absolutely terrible!
Review: If you have the need to spend money on this story, treat yourself and buy the book. The movie is aweful and does no justice to the book. I cannot beleive Tom Clancy had the restraint to hold back and allow the slaughter of his book into this movie. And while I do not dislike Ben Aflick, he does not fit the part here. The Jack Ryan in the book is a much older, expereinced and seasoned character.
Rating: 
Summary: mostly mediocre, but with some good elements
Review: There are some good cinematic moments in this: the bold, disorienting cut to the drums and National Anthem of the pro football game, the pagers all ringing at once at the press corps dinner, the opera-scored intercutting of the treaty signing with the assassinations of the plot's perpretators (though that one is lifted straight from "The Godfather"). It's entertaining enough for a while, but it's also unimpressive and pretty mediocre. Ben Affleck is reportedly a smart guy, and he delivers his lines naturally enough, but he makes only a minimal effort to inhabit a character or even carry the story. He makes Actor Faces he's seen in other movies, and it seems like in every scene he just happened to walk into frame on his way from his trailer to the on-set catering truck. As David Thomson has pointed out, he's boring and criminally lucky (especially now that he's in mid-gropefest with J. Lo). Morgan Freeman is indeed as professional as always. He seems more British than American in his approach, eschewing Method acting, taking roles in crummy movies where he uses his voice, gait, and expressive face to move the role along. It's the Michael Caine approach to acting, and it's always a pleasure to watch. But the movie should really have been about John Clark, the CIA field operative played by Liev Schreiber. His investigation into the plot takes him from Russia to the Ukraine to Israel to Syria, and it's fascinating to follow him in his work. Wry and capable, without machismo, he even proves empathetic, as with the Arab dying of radiation poisoning. And Schreiber is a real actor, with ten times the talent of Affleck. (He also aces the Russian language in a long conversation, whereas Affleck butchers it in a single mumbled sentence). His handling of the two Ukrainian guards at the abandoned compound is funny and surprising, and Schreiber really seems to be enjoying himself. If you rent this, rent "The Hunt for Red October" as well to see this sort of thing done right.
Rating:
Summary: Would've done better as a TV mini series
Review: The Hunt for Red October came the closest to being like one of Tom Clancy's novels, none of the others since have done as well. The Sum of All Fears is an example of this with the studio taking the title and some of the characters from the story and throwing away most of the plot.
I will say that I think maybe Ben Affleck, say what you will about him, is at least a little better cast than Harrison Ford was. He is at least more in line with being the correct age for the character Clancy wrote about (and I think Clancy approved of him as well). The movie is all right for light entertainment (?) but if you will read a 6 or 700 page book you should really spend your money there instead as all of the Clancy stories visually would work better as TV miniseries.
Rating: 
Summary: An insider's perspective
Review: This movie comes the closest to being an acurate portrayal of the CIA of any I have seen. We're still just a little too omniscient, but otherwise it's very close. One incident in the film that I have since heard people complain was unrealistic- when Morgan Freeman's character demands the jacket and tie from someone for Jack to wear. I wonder whether someone at the Agency told them that story and they just lifted it directly. Briefers have been known to demand ties, jackets, even shoes from their co-workers so they can look presentable at briefings, and no one objects. Others are bothered by the film's departure from Tom Clancy's original words. While this is certainly true, I think the essential character of the book, and more importatly the point it was trying to make have been preserved. It does annoy me a little that they changed the timeline, putting this story before even Patriot Games which should be first. The idea, I suppose is to set Ben Affleck up to play Jack Ryan in several more films. Harrison Ford is getting a little old, after all.
Rating:
Summary: Well, at least the title is the same...
Review: I am an avid Clancy fan...given that, I was very disappointed when I heard that Clancy (as executive producer) had approved such dramatic story line changes for the movie. I thought it was a cop out to bow to "politically correct" changes in making the terrosits neo-nazis instead of arab extremists. HOWEVER, given that I knew that the movie was radically different from the book, I watched the movie with an open mind. If you ignore the fact that there is a book of the same name, the movie is fairly interesting, albeit a little unrealistic. I enjoyed the acting, visual effects and plot development. As always, Morgan Freeman was excellent; and although Ben Affleck was OK as Jack Ryan, I still think Alec Baldwin played Ryan the best in _The Hunt for Red October_ (I didn't care too much for Harrison Ford's interpretation of the Ryan character). Elements like Mary Pat Foley getting Baltimore police to the docks within minutes to save Ryan, while ignoring the fact that all of the police would be otherwise engaged after a nuclear weapon went off a few miles away were disappointing. I'm also still annoyed by (a) the fact that Jack and Cathy are dating and not married (b) the bomb was in a snack machine at 'the Baltimore Forum' instead of a truck outside of the superbowl in Denver and (c) that Clancy was too chicken to stay true to his plot line. Bottom line--if you are a Clancy fan, try to ignore the fact that he wrote a book with the same title--its the only thing the movie and it have in common.
Rating:
Summary: Acting ok, the plot excellent, the romance boring, outcome +
Review: The movie is about the end of the cold war and the general mistrust and desire to assert political presence between the super powers. The world has changed over the last fifty years, Europe and Russian have transformed. The primary shift in the balance of power has been the de-emphasis ground troop invasion power too third world countries nuclear strike capacity. The enemy is small mobile factions with an deadly agenda. Young Jack Ryan's analysis of the new Russian President, in the end, prevents world destruction as he fights to keep the super powers from destroying themselves, after a terrorist group detonates, a dirty bomb during the super bowl and nearly kills the President. Clancy's book and now movie explore military calculated response, military readiness and protocol, first response, and breakdowns under pressure. The tie to the past remains a theme with communication going back and forth between the President and the Russian President over a red phone. The movie has a few surprises like the death of the CIA director. The movie maintains a common theme as with all of Clancy's books, "The russians don't want war" just the hardliners. The movie is riveting and returns the viewer back to the time where first strike scenerios and counter responses were a great fear in the world. The world leaders are still capable of destroying the world, social events have become targets, and the vulnerability of the dirty bombs have become a reality. The movie creates a real tension, the acting was ok, the plot was excellent, the romance was boring, and the outcome definitely Clancy.
Rating:
Summary: DON'T SPEND ONE CENT ON THIS HORRIBLE ADAPTATION
Review: The challenge facing any screenwriter attempting to adapt a Clancy novel is what to cut from the massive tome to fit the dreaded two-hour film run-time limit (that theater owners so desperately covet). For instance, the huge scope of "Red October" was cut to the bone, but just deftly enough to be a decent film. The plots of the other two (Clancy books made into films) actually lent themselves well to film adaptation. Also, in light of 9/11, a case could be made that "Sum" is Clancy's most terrifying and realistic novel, so great care should have been exercised in bringing this to the screen. The cinematic result, however, is so hackneyed, so utterly ludicrous, that what was supposed to be high drama and suspense delivers nothing to the devoted Clancy fan but utter disappointment. The film's first problem is the casting of Ben Affleck as Jack Ryan. Clancy's Jack Ryan is a CIA analyst, an intellectual who is always forced into reluctant action by circumstance. Affleck's portrayal of Ryan is nothing but the same wide-eyed, slack-jawed, one-note performance that he has phoned-in on every film he's ever done. Wherever he delivers any line concerning analysis of data, people or scenarios, Affleck is totally unbelievable as Ryan. At least Alec Baldwin, and especially Harrison Ford, correctly nailed the nuances of Ryan's character. But those guys are actors WITH chops, something Affleck is totally devoid of, and boy, is it obvious and ugly to
watch. The second problem is the concession (to the Islamic community in this country) that the producers made of shifting the book's main protagonists from Islamic terrorists to Neo-Nazis. In one scene, the Nazi Big Cheese (the always wonderful, but here, totally wasted Alan Bates) reflects that Hitler was stupid for taking on the Russians and Americans instead of getting them to destroy each other. He plans to do just this by detonating a nuclear bomb on U.S. soil, and an associated rogue military act, to goad the two countries to full nuclear war and then rule the world afterward. Well, Mr. Nazi, you must be as stupid as Hitler, because how bright do you have to be to figure out that an all-out nuclear weapons exchange between those two countries would poison nearly the entire planet and leave nothing much left to rule?! In the book, the full-scale nuclear exchange scenario was not the design of the Islamic protagonist, but rather a horrifying extension of external circumstance surrounding the detonation of a terrorist's single atomic bomb. The film's revised premise is a terrible compromise that just makes no sense whatsoever. The film's biggest problem, however, is the script, which heaps contrivance upon contrivance, going from bad to worse as the film progresses. Examples: There is a jarring instant geographical shift of Ryan from the U.S. to a covert mission deep inside Russia with no explanation of how he got there; Ryan in downtown post-nuclear explosion Baltimore, clad in nothing but a sweater, with no apparent radiation/fallout after-effects; Ryan using the crashed helicopter radio that still functions after being EMP'd by the nuclear detonation (didn't the screenwriters do ANY research on the subject at all, or at least watch a "Broken Arrow" DVD?); Ryan utilizing his mentor's PDA (also exposed to the EMP but also still miraculously functioning) to communicate with the CIA's deepest mole inside the Kremlin (anybody at the CIA have a security problem with one of their own having a direct communication link to their highest level Russian source???!!!). And here's one for you: Ryan is running thru post-blast downtown Baltimore because he's chasing the bad guys who installed the bomb: Why would those guys still be in Baltimore? To hang out and roast radioactive weenies? No, it's because the screenwriters needed to set up a ridiculous fight scene with the personal bodyguard of the Nazi Big Cheese, who had never been shown in the U.S. prior to this scene, and, WHY WOULD HE BE THERE WHEN HE KNOWS THE BOMB IS GOING TO DETONATE??!! And just when you think it's over, just when you thought it couldn't get any more ludicrous, the final scene is so silly that the writers should be locked up and never allowed near a Powerbook ever again. The wonderful supporting cast are the only redeeming thing this vapid clunker has to offer (once again, the magnificent Morgan Freeman rises above terrible material). And one wonders: Clancy himself is listed as exec producer of this croaker. Maybe not having enough cash to buy the Minnesota Vikings a few years ago was such a blow to his ego that he's willing to compromise the book he fashioned with such wondrous detail and imagination, just for the almighty buck. Geez, Tom, your fans, and especially Jack Ryan, deserve a WHOLE lot better.
Rating:
Summary: Clancy Readers, Don't Waste Your Money
Review: If you have never read this, or the other Clancy/Ryan books, you will see that this is anything but Clancy; with only the barest core of the original story present. Meaning, the loss, recovery and use of an Israeli nuke. The rest is pure Hollywood crap. Check this: the story presents Ryan before he and Kathy married, now think what year that timeline puts you in, then imagine him with a wireless PDA sending and receiving instant messages in real time; and doing so following a nuclear explosion (EMP had not damaged any communications in this story). NOT! Why in the world did Clancy let them do this to his story? Easy answer: money. I guess the same can be said for Freeman (an outstanding actor) and Aflak (an OK actor). So, save you money and pass on this less than poor movie.
Rating:
Summary: GREAT
Review: This movie is not like the book. At first i found the movie to be moving a little slow in terms of action,but towards the middle things started to pick up.The movie started to get intense.It's one of those movies where you don't know whats going to happen next. At one point it seems like America and Russia are going to go to war,but then the whole movie turns. The Nazi's where also spun into this plot trying to start a war between the Russians and the Americans but one man (Afleck) stops the whole thing.A great movie.
Rating:
Summary: Good Entertainment
Review: Not the best of the Clancy novels brought to the screen, this one is kind of dull, plodding and uninspired, at times feeling like a made-for-television film just going through the motions. Of course the novel upon which it based wasn't one of Clancy's best, either, so perhaps that's part of the problem. That said, I found Ben Affleck and the gorgeous Bridget Moynahan to be the best casting of Jack and Cathy, to date. Sure, Affleck came across as somewhat dull in the role, but lets be honest, Ryan is an intelligence analyst and a former Marine with a PHD is history, not a rock star. Certainly, I wish the producers had left the plot alone and stayed a little more faithful to the novel, but it will do. This is an enjoyable, if flawed, film, and is worthy entertainment which is worth a look, especially if you are a fan of Clancy, or the genre.
|
