Rating: 
Summary: Hollywod Blows It Again.
Review: I can best describe the movie "The Sum of All Fears" as: What a tragedy that such a compelling and relevant (in light of the horrific events of last year) film with an All-Star cast was thwarted by a such a lack-luster story line and an utterly pathetic performance by the film's lead actor, Ben Affleck.My main objection to this film is the casting of Ben Affleck as Jack Ryan. Givin the previous performances by Harrison Ford and Alec Baldwin, Affleck can not possibly substitute aside from the fact that Affleck possesses neither the talent to portray nor or understanding of the character Jack Ryan. I'm not trying to launch my own little smear campaign against Affleck, however, he must understand and Hollywood must understand that Affleck is not a character actor. I found Affleck's performance in "Armageddon" to be right on, however, it was not a character role. I do hope Affleck does not take on projects like this until he has developed the ability to become the character he is portraying as such they will only serve to tank any possible acting career. The numerous "corny" attempts at sentiment, which has become too commonplace in today's films, only adds insult to injury. After watching only 15 minutes of the movie I figured out ... The new hallmark of modern films is the giving away of the entire story in the first 30 minutes of the film. On a positive note, I can now determine whether or not the film I'm watching will be any good without wasting too much time with it. A good film, a film that will be remembered has to have 1.) An intreeging story. 2.) Character actors. 3.) Appropriate sentiment. I was mildly entertained by the special effects and a few scenes that didn't include Affleck (notice I didn't include special effects as a core element of a good movie; Hollywood needs to remember this fact). I can only hope that they don't make anymore Jack Ryan movies like this; my over all rating for "The Sum of All Fears" is .25 cents (the amount I would pay to see the movie again).
Rating: 
Summary: Worst Movie of 2002....WHY?????
Review: Where do I start? Maybe by saying that this is one of the worst movies I've seen in 2002,or maybe I should try to explain how badly directed this movie is...This movie looks like a spy movie from the mid-80s,It is so old-fashioned and boring that you would lose your mind. Ben Affleck (the worst actor on the planet) is the worst Jack Ryan yet, and I can see why Harrison Ford didn't do this project. He's not convincing in any of the scenes he's in. Morgan Freeman, as talanted as he is, adds nothing to this movie and it's look more like the producers didn't count on Affleck to carry the movie on his own shoulders. There are many blah-blah scenes in this movie, too many russian dialouges and bad action scenes. Why couldn't they bring a young director that would have turned this boring movie to a good action thriller with different camera angles (Behind Enemy lines-John Moore,is a great example) and slow motion scenes? There are times in this movie when you'll think you're in some kind of a bad tasted spoof on spy movies from the 80's... 2/10.
Rating: 
Summary: Divide and conquer
Review: Ben Affleck plays a young CIA agent caught in the crossfire between the US and Russia. A coalition of power-hungry men is contriving to start a war between the two superpowers, in order to gain world domination. Affleck figures this out while the entire US government seems totally puzzled as to why attacks are suddenly occuring on strategic US locations. The movie is slick and the action is non-stop, but the premise of a young PhD. who has written a paper about the new Russian president and thus knows his every motivation is a little hard to swallow.
Rating:
Summary: Least-Favorite Clancy Movie
Review: To date, this is probably the worst Clancy adaptation. Granted, this is set in a time frame before the others, but it is hard to imagine Jack Ryan being THIS incompetent. Come on, even summer interns would not have such problems. Some details are left out or hardly mentioned at all and other trivia goes on and on. Not to mention the lame how-fast-can-we-end-the-movie ending. Seems like the production must have been shut down and they had to scrounge what sections of film they had. Compared to the other Clancy movies I would give it an even lower rating, but since it is watchable in its own right, three stars.
Rating: 
Summary: One of the best political/strategy movie I ever watched
Review: I live in Brazil, and this movie came to theaters only last july, without any major ads or publicity. One night I had nothing to do and went to the movies to watch it, when the movie finished, I got out of the theater amazed by the smart and well written story, and most of all, the logical sequence of facts that led to the final and most exciting moments of it.
If you are attracted to the last 60 years of the world's history, you will CERTAINLY like this movie.
I've already read other Tom Clancy's novels (Red Storm Rising, the Cybernation series, et al), but The Sum of All Fears surpasses all of them. The only problem is that this movie could be more than 2 hours long, since the novel is much more detailed and has some passages not present the the movies, but it's perfectly comprehendable, since the producers had to cut many interesting chapters of the original novel in order for the movie to fit into the time it did, and that's why I don't give a rate of 5 stars, but "only" 4 ;-)
Rating:
Summary: Pretty bad.
Review: As expected... daft storyline, predictable and inaccurate. Morgan Freeman, what were you doing here? The explosion was quite nice though.
Wait till TV...watch the explosion then switch over.
Rating:
Summary: Hard to Translate from Book to Screen
Review: This is a very good and very scary book about things that could be going on right now unfortunately. However, when moved from the printed page to the silver screen, much is lost in the transition. This si about a terrorist attack on the US with a weapon of mass destruction taken from an Israeli plane which crashed during the Seven Days War, carrrying such a weapon.Once the "device" has been delivered and exploded this film loses much of it's credibility as Jack Ryan after crash landing in a helicopter seems to manage to wind his way through the horror of an atomic bomb blast, organizing the opppostion on his cell phone and comandeering vehicles as necessary. The whole aftermath of the explosion is taken to a relatively happy (if that is possible) ending and it's probably just as well, as some people might have trouble sleeping at night if the really think about this story too much. Morgan Freeman and Ben Affleck give solid performances, but eveyone knows that Jack Ryan looks like Harrison Ford, and that is somewhat disconcerting.
Rating: 
Summary: Great Movie (despite Affleck)
Review: Affleck...same guy, different movie. He plays the same guy in every movie; same inflection at the same times, same mannerisms, etc., but this time it is a really great movie. The cinematography is excellent, the score is exactly what it needs to be to convey the gravity of the situations, and the special effects are nothing less than spectacular (the DVD includes a very interesting piece on how they manufactured many of the special effects to give very believable depictions of disaster). Morgan Freeman, Liev Schreiber, and James Cromwell were perfectly cast for their roles. Even if Affleck lacks the intellectual believability and seasoned exterior of those who previously played Jack Ryan, he does convey the eagerness and hubris of youth fairly well. If you haven't seen it, make this your next rental or purchase. It's an audiovisual pleasure to experience.
Rating:
Summary: Disappointing
Review: Ben Affleck's Jack Ryan is unconvincing. The rest of the characters, Morgan Freeman in particular, badly hampered by Affleck, carry the movie to mediocrity at best. Comments in the special features praising Affleck's performance are just as unbelievable as Affleck's pathetic attempts to be Ryan. Please, Mr. Clancy, don't let movietown and Affleck ruin Ryan in your next blockbuster. Glad I didn't buy the DVD.
Rating:
Summary: The sum of mediocrity
Review: The Sum of all Fears wants to be so much more then it is, and it has all the pieces to make a good action-filled political thriller. It just doesn't put them together the right way. Redefining Tom Clancy's character Jack Ryan (Ben Affleck) as a younger CIA officer at the bottom rung of the ladder, it's the story of a missing nuke discovered by radicals who wish to dominate by manipulating the United States and Russia into war. The idea is intriguing, and there are some fun action scenes when disaster strikes, but it never seems to reach the depths of political intrigue and tension that The Hunt for the Red October and other great genre films had. It just falls somewhere in the middle between political intrigue and mindless action flick. Much of this is probably due to the editing the novel had to go through to make this two-hour film. The novel's near 1,000 pages make it difficult to translate without making it feel rushed. If Sum of all Fears had an additional twenty minutes (which would still be a suitable length for the American public to sit through), it would allow for more intelligence, political debate and tension building. Still, its hard to not find some entertainment here. Morgan Freeman in a supporting role as a presidential aid and James Cromwell as the president put their great talent to use, and though Ben Affleck is no gift from the acting gods, he is able to hold his own with the heavyweights. And while most scenes leave you unsatisfied, they still build up some excitement and tension in their diluted state. This ones best seen as a rental except for the Jack Ryan film completists. Worth seeing once, then quickly forgettable.
| 
