Cool News
Robogeek ponders THE SUM OF ALL FEARS!
Folks, Harry here... When last I intro'd Robogeek, I drug him around like R2 did Goldenrod in AOTC, but this time the gathering of gears and tubes and fluids (too secret to discuss here) has seen a movie that he and I agree on. SUM OF ALL FEARS is a wonderful film. Now this weekend you find yourself with a choice. SUM OF ALL FEARS or UNDERCOVER BROTHER. I loved both. Frankly, my first choice given the news these days would be to go see UNDERCOVER BROTHER. Frankly the sheer amount of news coverage of the Pakistan/India showdown... and alleged fears coming from the CIA about possible low level nuclear eruptions here... the fear of Nuclear Power Plants being targeted... Well, it is just enough for me to say go Laugh. HOWEVER, if you want to confront those fears, to see what is possibly on the otherside of your fears. See this film first. Remember, it exists in its own universe, not the previous universe of JACK RYAN or necessarily in our universe, but rather a fictional universe. Suprisingly, I've read reviews that didn't quite understand that. Here's that sputterin' sparkin' maelstrom of links...
Greetings, citizens!
expect to be writing, about a movie I almost didn't bother to see.
So I saw THE SUM OF ALL FEARS last night. Frankly, I was torn; there
was also a sneak of UNDERCOVER BROTHER, which was really tempting
(seriously) - but it was a longer drive. And a sick and twisted inner voice
told me it'd rather pay to see UB than TSUAF, so I should avail myself of
the opportunity to see the latter for free. (Plus, I'd already missed out
on an earlier sneak.)
To be perfectly honest, if Buffy and
24 hadn't concluded their (brilliant)
seasons last week, I wouldn't have bothered. As it was, I showed up to the
theater late, and was lucky to find a seat (both screens were packed).
I haven't particularly cared for any of Paramount's Jack Ryan movies
since THE HUNT FOR RED OCTOBER (which I think is pretty damn good), and was
far from excited about seeing Ben Affleck take over the role previously
inhabited by Alec Baldwin and Harrison Ford. I was also concerned by the
substantial changes made from Tom Clancy's remarkable 1991 novel, some of
which to accommodate the casting of Affleck. (I couldn't help but ask, Do
we really need another franchise ruined by prequels?) So my expectations
were modest at best - and that's probably being charitable.
But holy crap! Much to my (pleasant) surprise, TSOAF more than
overcame my expectations - as well as the crappy Cinemark Theater's tepid
sound - and impressed the hell out of me. It's a rare breed of film: a
summer blockbuster with a brain, demonstrating that entertainment and
intelligence aren't mutually exclusive, but ideally intertwined. And on top
of all that, it slyly suspended my disbelief to the degree that I actually
believed Ben Affleck could save the world. Who woulda thunk it?
TSOAF is arguably the best Jack Ryan movie yet, and probably director
Phil Alden Robinson's best film. It also emerges as a text-book example of
how to jumpstart a flailing franchise - and demonstrates the importance of a
good, solid script (this one by Paul Attanasio and Daniel Pyne). What could
be another by-the-numbers, uninspired entry into a tired franchise (see the
recent James Bond, Star Trek, and Mission Impossible films) is instead both
intellectually engaging and emotionally engrossing.
And it is as resonant as it is relevant.
There was a HREF=http://www.nytimes.com/2002/05/26/magazine/26NUKES.html>superb
article on nuclear terrorism in this Sunday's (5/26/02) New York Times
Magazine by Bill Keller, which was prefaced by these stark words on the
cover:
"The best reason for thinking that a nuclear terrorist attack won't
happen is that it hasn't happened yet, and that is terrible logic. The
problem is not that we are not doing enough. It is that there may be no
such think as enough. How scared should we be?"
TSOAF is an uncannily timely film - and a scary one. Unfortunately, as
is the case for far too many films these days, the ad campaign has given
away key plot points that would have best been kept unrevealed (though
granted, many people have read the book). If you've seen even one TV spot,
you've seen more than you should (esp. if you haven't read the book).
Assuming you have seen at least one TV spot (and paid attention to it),
it should not constitute a spoiler to tell you that something Very Big and
Very Bad happens. It has potency not because of flashy special effects (no
T2 nightmare here), but because of context. Of all the Jack Ryan movies,
TSOAF is the most convincing and texturally realistic - even though it
contains the most extreme act of cinematic terror this side of INDEPENDENCE
DAY. What happens before and after The Event is gripping, especially given
the state of the real world we find ourselves in, but also because it is so
convincingly rendered. The stark fear that the fate of the world could be
in the hands of people with insufficient information on which to base
critical decisions... well, that pretty much trumps any horror movie right
now, doesn't it?
Chillingly, it isn't at all a leap to consider The Event in TSOAF could
actually happen, nor is it a reach to imagine a scenario involving India and
Pakistan mirroring the U.S. and Russia in the third act (without the benefit
of trusty Jack Ryan).
Some might condemn Paramount for releasing this film now, calling it
dangerously alarmist. But I think one can more readily argue that it'd be
irresponsible not to release it, especially now. It is the proverbial
cautionary tale for our times (and will likely be seen by far more people
than will read the New York Times piece, for better or worse).
Oh, and it's also a Very Good Movie.
Robinson's direction is assured and efficient, crafting an expertly
entertaining movie based on a sharp, well-engineered script by Attanasio and
Pyne. My hat is off to all of them, as well as producer Mace Neufeld, for
delivering a consistently engrossing film. This is a solid piece of work
that avoids the sort of mistakes that so annoyed me in, say, THIRTEEN DAYS.
(Kudos as well to D.P. John Lindley, editor Neil Travis and composer Jerry
Goldsmith.)
Front and center, Ben Affleck shines as Jack Ryan in what - a year later
- is pretty much the anti-PEARL HARBOR. With this, CHANGING LANES and,
hell, JAY AND SILENT BOB STRIKE BACK, I find myself once again a fan of the
actor, and genuinely enthused to see him in Mark Steven Johnson's DAREDEVIL
next year. He's a genuine leading man, and - gasp! - a good actor again
(like we remember from CHASING AMY and GOOD WILL HUNTING).
In addition, there's particularly strong supporting work by Morgan
Freeman as C.I.A. Director Cabot, Liev Schrieber as C.I.A. agent John Clark,
and Ciarán Hinds as Russian President Nemerov. Bridget Moynahan is also
quite good as Dr. Cathy Muller (the future Mrs. Ryan), and James Cromwell is
solid as President Fowler. Philip Baker Hall, Bruce McGill, Ron Rifkin,
Alan Bates and Colm Feore also deliver nice work, though they have less to
do. But all in all, this is a very strong package, cast-wise.
Granted, TSOAF demands the viewer throw out pre-existing Jack Ryan movie
continuity, but that's a small price to pay for such refreshingly smart
entertainment. New life has been breathed into this franchise, and that's a
good (and exciting) thing. Why can't more franchise movies be this
good?
(BTW, when's the last time we've had a summer start off with as many
genuinely good movies as TSOAF, CQ, ABOUT A BOY, INSOMNIA, and yes, even
SPIDER-MAN? I don't expect the rest of the summer to be as good, but I hope
it will be. Wouldn't that be a treat?)
- Robogeek
P.S.: Once again, I highly recommend Bill Keller's excellent article
"Nuclear Nightmares" from this Sunday's (5/26/02) New York Times Magazine,
which is available online at
2/05/26/magazine/26NUKES.html
TSOAF is an uncannily timely film - and a scary one. Unfortunately, as
is the case for far too many films these days, the ad campaign has given
away key plot points that would have best been kept unrevealed (though
granted, many people have read the book). If you've seen even one TV spot,
you've seen more than you should (esp. if you haven't read the book).
Assuming you have seen at least one TV spot (and paid attention to it),
it should not constitute a spoiler to tell you that something Very Big and
Very Bad happens. It has potency not because of flashy special effects (no
T2 nightmare here), but because of context. Of all the Jack Ryan movies,
TSOAF is the most convincing and texturally realistic - even though it
contains the most extreme act of cinematic terror this side of INDEPENDENCE
DAY. What happens before and after The Event is gripping, especially given
the state of the real world we find ourselves in, but also because it is so
convincingly rendered. The stark fear that the fate of the world could be
in the hands of people with insufficient information on which to base
critical decisions... well, that pretty much trumps any horror movie right
now, doesn't it?
Chillingly, it isn't at all a leap to consider The Event in TSOAF could
actually happen, nor is it a reach to imagine a scenario involving India and
Pakistan mirroring the U.S. and Russia in the third act (without the benefit
of trusty Jack Ryan).
Some might condemn Paramount for releasing this film now, calling it
dangerously alarmist. But I think one can more readily argue that it'd be
irresponsible not to release it, especially now. It is the proverbial
cautionary tale for our times (and will likely be seen by far more people
than will read the New York Times piece, for better or worse).
Oh, and it's also a Very Good Movie.
Robinson's direction is assured and efficient, crafting an expertly
entertaining movie based on a sharp, well-engineered script by Attanasio and
Pyne. My hat is off to all of them, as well as producer Mace Neufeld, for
delivering a consistently engrossing film. This is a solid piece of work
that avoids the sort of mistakes that so annoyed me in, say, THIRTEEN DAYS.
(Kudos as well to D.P. John Lindley, editor Neil Travis and composer Jerry
Goldsmith.)
Front and center, Ben Affleck shines as Jack Ryan in what - a year later
- is pretty much the anti-PEARL HARBOR. With this, CHANGING LANES and,
hell, JAY AND SILENT BOB STRIKE BACK, I find myself once again a fan of the
actor, and genuinely enthused to see him in Mark Steven Johnson's DAREDEVIL
next year. He's a genuine leading man, and - gasp! - a good actor again
(like we remember from CHASING AMY and GOOD WILL HUNTING).
In addition, there's particularly strong supporting work by Morgan
Freeman as C.I.A. Director Cabot, Liev Schrieber as C.I.A. agent John Clark,
and Ciarán Hinds as Russian President Nemerov. Bridget Moynahan is also
quite good as Dr. Cathy Muller (the future Mrs. Ryan), and James Cromwell is
solid as President Fowler. Philip Baker Hall, Bruce McGill, Ron Rifkin,
Alan Bates and Colm Feore also deliver nice work, though they have less to
do. But all in all, this is a very strong package, cast-wise.
Granted, TSOAF demands the viewer throw out pre-existing Jack Ryan movie
continuity, but that's a small price to pay for such refreshingly smart
entertainment. New life has been breathed into this franchise, and that's a
good (and exciting) thing. Why can't more franchise movies be this
good?
(BTW, when's the last time we've had a summer start off with as many
genuinely good movies as TSOAF, CQ, ABOUT A BOY, INSOMNIA, and yes, even
SPIDER-MAN? I don't expect the rest of the summer to be as good, but I hope
it will be. Wouldn't that be a treat?)
- Robogeek
P.S.: Once again, I highly recommend Bill Keller's excellent article
"Nuclear Nightmares" from this Sunday's (5/26/02) New York Times Magazine,
which is available online at
2/05/26/magazine/26NUKES.html
-
+ Expand All
-
Need this movie over in the UK now! It sounds damnably good, I'm going to cover my ears and go "LA LA LA LA LA" when the trailer surfaces. You can be sure of it! P$
-
May 30, 2002 6:38:25 AM CDT
Not surprisingly, that numb-nut over at JoBlo.com didn't lik
by cash bailey
That fool has no idea. He loved BATTLEFIELD EARTH and had the hide to say that THE MUMMY RETURNS was better than FELLOWSHIP.
-
I'll make a sorry excuse for his ass. He only loved Battlefield Earth cos he interviewed John Travolta before hand and thought he was a great guy, so he probably would have felt guilty giving the film a bad review. He doesn't like fantasy films which is why he only gave Fellowship 7/10. I can't remember him ever giving The Mummy Return cudo's over LOTR. But to keep on talkback, TSOAF sounds pretty good. Still can't imagine taking Affleck seriously for a minute, never mind two hours.
-
For Gods sake what is this obsession with prequels. why cant we drive a story and its characters FORWARD instead of going backwards. I really liek the Jack Ryan films with Harrison Ford and its a shame they went for this idea instead of a sequel with Ford in it. Sounds like a cool movie but, if this franchise is to stand any chance of the success it deserves, A *SEQUEL* MUST BE MADE.
-
"TSOAF is arguably the best Jack Ryan movie yet, and probably director Phil Alden Robinson's best film." OK, let's not get ahead of ourselves here. I've seen "Sum," and it's great. But I wouldn't put it above "Hunt for Red October" or "Field of Dreams," both classics in my mind. But yes, please don't go into the theater thinking "The Sum of All Fears" is supposed to the "The Hunt For Red October IV" or anything. This is Part One of a brand new series. You will like it so much more if you do that. And Affleck, if you're reading this, you proved me wrong. Congrats.
-
Boy the US likes to blow itself up. The movie was very lame. Then after the big blow up the US strikes out at the Russians based on no firm evidence. The political structure and chain of command for this decision making process was rediculous. The dipiction of Russian politics was worse. Then the secret agent guys are all gloating that they know who it sleeping with who but they don't pickup on the bomb coming into the US. And what was the plan of these terrorist fascists anyway. Lame, lame lame film. And poor timing after 9 11.
-
Yo! I caught a screening of Sum last night that my local radio station was holding and H O L Y S*** it was freakin intense!! Affleck does a good job and the entire movie makes you think about the situation and that it could happen. I give the studio credit for releasing this movie...finally someone has the cajones (sp?) to move ahead despite 9/11. Excellent flick.
-
'Cause, as a Montreal resident, I'm getting a little tired of trying to suspend my disbelief but failing when I see some obvious, obvious reminder that it was filmed here, like the highway sign in the "Chicago" tunnel clearly indicating the way to Dorval & Mirabel airports in DRIVEN (though the bulk of that was filmed in Toronto). Besides the fact that "the EVENT" was filmed in the Olympic Stadium, I mean. Also, does this film overcome the "Montreal curse", which entails that big Hollywood pictures filmed here must totally suck ass (see: SNAKE EYES, BATTLEFIELD EARTH and ROLLERBALL), excluding films actually set in Montreal like THE SCORE? ________________________________ Another thing; wasn't the nuke in the novel pretty much a dud in that it only raised the stadium itself and just a few blocks of Denver around it? And I don't remember the Vice President actually being warned of the attack beforehand.
-
I'm looking forward to this flick. Could be a good opportunity to relaunch an aging franchise. The books were starting to get a little silly with Jack Ryan as the president so I think it is smart to bring it back to when he just worked as an analyst for the CIA. More potential there.//And Harry, you shouldn't start two sentences back to back with the word "Frankly". (See, I'm cool because I can nitpick grammar. Not.)
-
May 30, 2002 10:06:38 AM CDT
This film is obviously a victim of unfortunate timing.
by johnnytremaine
Given that--
1. South Asia seems ready to go nuclear,
2. the frightening NY Times Magazine piece regarding nuclear terrorism, and
3. the U.S. VP and FBI Director saying publicly that another major terror attack, nuclear or conventional, is a matter of 'when' not 'if',
---I'll bet that executives at Paramount are pleading to the heavens "Why, why, why?" Then again, the movie could be a hit because of the audience's morbid curiosity. Ben Affleck was interviewed on MSNBC yesterday and seemed to be backing away from the film, saying that the movie may not be for everyone these days. Too bad; I hear it's a well made thriller. Maybe the studio could rerelease it during the second biggest movie season in November/December. -
to the idiot who "saw it last night" and didn't like it... it took me about 4 words into your second sentence to realize you were jumping ahead and telling us what happens directly after the spoiler we already know.
why don't you pull your head out of your ass? -
OK, maybe I'm just being stupid, but as far as I could tell, this movie takes place in 2002. So how could Jack Ryan be just entering the CIA and be younger than he was when he was played by Harrison Ford in two movies which took place in the '90s? Aren't movies in a series supposed to make some kind of linear sense? Also, it bothered me that Bill Clinton was mentioned in passing, yet the movie takes place in a fictitious United States where James Cromwell is President. Come on, either this movie takes place in the real world, or it doesn't. Combine this with the needless replacement of the story's villians from Arabs (which WOULD be relevant in 2002) to neo-Nazis (not), and the result was a jumbled mess. I'm at a loss to understand why this movie is getting the positive reviews that is.
-
... binarybaby. This film is a stand-alone Jack Ryan movie. It takes place in the present day and it has nothing whatsoever to do with the other films. Who knows if that will be a point of contention with some people, but i agree with RoboGeek. I'm all for re-starting the franchise if the movies will be as good as Sum of All Fears. I saw it at a press screening about a month ago and it was unfinished print, and i was still impressed. Hopefully, this doesn't get buried underneath all the movies that have opened, and are opening, around it.
-
It was excellent. Well acted, well written (I've also read the book). Their purpose was to start the series again with this movie. Clancy is said to be working on an "alternate timeline" for jack ryan because he likes this one so much. It is a great film, and the story really resonates with today's headlines. Go watch it. Robogeek is dead-on right in his review.
-
aw, c'mon! He sucks. He's got as much presence as Gwen Stefani's tits! I'm wondering why guys like him, Josh Hartnet, and Freddy Prinze Jr keep getting force-fed to us.
-
First off, I don't know where you go, but around here the Cinemark has the best sound system available. 8^P. Anyway, I was put off by this movie at first because the trailer looked nothing like the book. Then I remembered that the book was 600 pages of boring crap, and then the bomb went off. The rest of the book was actually worth reading. But, everything leading up to the bomb just sucked balls. Who cares if the arabs are now nazis, or that this story is supposed to take place after Clear and Present Danger... as long as they don't waste the first 3/4 of the film on boring political crap then I'll watch it.
-
Sorry man. Thought the trailer gave it all away anyway. Along with the best joke of the film. Will watch the spoilers next time. Thanks.
-
I am still resistant to this movie because I am a fan of the novels. TSOAF is a sequel to what we have already seen in the Jack Ryan series. If they wanted to do a prequel, they should have shot The Cardinal in the Kremlin (and set it in the 80s) or Without Remorse (which would be a John Clark movie). The biggest problem I have is that there is a pivotal scene in the book that cannot carry in the film due to the position Ryan carries in the book. It involves a HUGE confrontation with the President. I just can't see it working in the movie. If you liked the film, go read the book. AD out
-
May 30, 2002 2:15:07 PM CDT
So! This movie is supposed to be a "prequel" to the others, even
by wardog
Babble-babble-babble-babble. This makes no fucking sense, but i suppose the studio in drastically rewriting it felt they needed some stupid invalid angle on recasting Jack Ryan with Affleck. Now, I'm not slamming Affleck, and the movie looks pretty damned good ON ITS OWN, but what I liked about the novel was its incredible complexity--hell, Clancy even offers a novel solution as to the conflict over Jerusalem--and the double climax, the faulty nuke and climactic confrontation between Ryan and President Fowler (which was fan-damn-tastic.) ****** I dunno. I'm tempted, but this is too much of a revision of the novel, and seeming to ignore the other Jack Ryan movies. ******* As for a Jack Ryan "alternate reality," hell, ALL Jack Ryan NOVELS are Clancy's own alternate reality.
-
I'm a huge fan of the novel (which I firmly think is the best about Jack Ryan) and I can't wait for the film. Okey, I had some doubts about this prequel thing and about Affleck as Ryan, but if Clancy was exec. producer then it won't be completely f***ed up. He probably understands that a good movie is better for a franchise than a bad one, just look at SW. SOAF sounds very good from what I've heard.
-
Saw it last night. Horrible. The entire movie was Ben Affleck (or Morgan Freeman, or another spy, etc.) doing research and trying to gather information on the bad guys. Looking at satellite maps. Talking about research papers. Analyzing the Russian President's motivations when they attack Chechniya (off screen of course. God forbid they actually show any action.) "Mr. President, we are in a de facto state of war with Russia." Bored yet?
-
SPOILER:
"Then after the big blow up the US strikes out at the Russians based on no firm evidence."
Umm...a US Nave vessel was attacked by Russian fighters. That's pretty "firm" in my book. -
If they wanted to make a prequel, they shold make a real prequel and set it in the seventies. This way Jack Ryan could be younger than he is in Red October and the Sovier Union would still exist. I miss films where the USSR are the bad guys. They were perfect at it and corrupt Russian generals just isn't as intimidating. They should also start to make bond films set in the sixties when the East-West paranoia was at it's peak. My mental image/conseption of Russia is dwarfed by the one I used to have of the USSR (or CCCP which looks cooler).
-
"Umm...a US Nave vessel was attacked by Russian fighters. That's pretty "firm" in my book"
I obviously haven't seen the film, but there are a lot of countries in the world (and I mean A LOT) that have Russian fighters. -
May 30, 2002 4:07:18 PM CDT
Do You Think That NYTimes Article Was Basically A PR Spin for Su
by nocureforfools
of course it was. but man, i tell you, before the whole WAR AGAINST EVIL or the Legion of Doom or Cobra or Spectre or whatever nonsense is supposedly going on now, i was remarking to some friends about how i missed the threat of apocalypse. after the fall of the Soviet Union, it was like this really fun spectre of mass destruction just lifted which made the previously plausible Mad Max scenario seem so distant, so unlikely. now, thank gosh, we're all back to that Cold War apocalypse paranoia... but even better! this time it's the EVIL EMPIRE v. the EVEN EVILER SHADOW PHANTOM RELGIOUS PSYCHO ORGANIZATION. it's like the best comic book you've ever read, complete with all the satire built right in! can anything be funnier than DUBYA's President Alfred E. Numan thing? and the Phantom VP ensconed in some Super Secret Bunker just like Dr. Strangelove? and then you have the KKKhristian Warlord True Believer / Atorney General Ashcroft calling for mass arrests sans miranda rights and covering up naked statues? it's perfect! all of them versus COBRA COMMANDER and DESTRO er uh, i mean Osama Bin Laden and his eyepatch wearing Pals PLUS Saddam Hussein who didn't even have anything to do with it AND what's even funnier, was already soundly trouched by the McEMPIRE ten years ago! it's like when Darth Vader narrowly escapes after the Death Star is destroyed and comes back to flip the bird to Lady (Sort Of, Kind Of) Liberty. so now: it's back: APOCALYPSE PARANOIA! it's like an old friend or dangerously violent uncle some back for a visit until martial law is declared and people are shot in the streets for not joining in on the nationalism fad that started after 9/11. who wouldv'e known that the entire plot of the satirical masterpiece Starship Troopers was so dead-on? weird. and scary.
-
But who is gonna save US from Ben Affleck?
-
May 30, 2002 6:13:34 PM CDT
And don't forget that Affleck was the bomb in Phantoms, yo!
by togmeister
I wanna see this movie. But 'Phil Alden Robinson's best movie'? Well, Field of Dreams is in my all-time top ten, so i don't think THAT is going to happen.
-
I use to hate him but he was very good in CL and it was a great, original film (this site did not give enough credit to this fine film) so i'm looking forward to seeing him as Jack Ryan.
-
isn't Jack Ryan supposed to be white? so why is Chris Rock playing him. And why did Anthony Hopkin's take over the James Earl Jones role? Confused.
-
Smart script. Great performances. Terrifying plot, which will hopefully serve as a wakeup call to America and the world.
-
i mean, honestly, we should look to hollywood to let us know what REALLY could happen? Neofascists? that's what we should be worried abiout? fascists? what about militant islamic fundamentalists who have declared jihad? that didn't wake you up? i heard gentle ben droning on about what a wake-up call this movieis the other day and it made me sick. hollywood has such a fucking collective ego, it's unbelievable...for example, the studios and talent agencies became fortresses after 9/11....as if these arabs were going to go after ICM or CAA next...unbelievable...and lately i've heard lots of hollywood people postulating that osama, et al. are probably planning to blow up a theater next to kill the summer box office. i know america and pat obrien and seemingly every local newscaster has an unhealthy obsession with how much money studios make each week (we don't have up-to-the-minute reports as to how much steinbrenner took in during the latest bosox series)...but to think that these arabs are going to try and sabatoge the summer boxoffice...it's asanine....if you're not awake by now, stay asleep.....ben affleck can exist just as logically in your dreams as he can in a 'serious' movie about a nuclear detonation inside america....
-
The old USSR was the straight-up shiznit as far as bad guys go. A giant Nuclear-armed totalitarian Superpower bent on world domination in the name of Communism: straight outta central casting! All those tanks, missle-launchers and goose-stepping soldiers parading down Red Square every May Day; the Korean War; Vietnam; Lenin, Stalin, Khrushchev ("we will bury you!") and Brezhnev; purges and show trials; the Cuban Missle Crisis; the Bear and Backfire bomber fleets; the Red Army, the Red Air Force; the KGB; Sputnik, Salyut, Soyuz and the whole messy space race to the moon; the Iron Curtain; the Wall; East Germany--holy CRAP that musta been a scary time to be alive!! Friggin' way more alarming then the lame-by-comparison Nazis, IMOHO. Kinda makes Osama and Co. look like the candy-ass punk bitchez they are, too. But at least the commies weren't flying jets into skyscrapers, and the U.S. could hold them off with The Bomb. *Sigh.* Hollywood should forget about the overused Nazis and use the Soviets as foils more often. Toppu o Nerae! -
neither funny or poignant. Get a life.
-
Saw it last night at the premiere in Hollywood (watched Ben get swamped by model chicks at the bash afterwards) and I have to say that his Ryan is much closer to the book's Ryan then Ford ever was. As much as I loved Ford in this series, his age and super star status means he just about controls any situation - in fact, I see him more as a President, then an advisor. Affleck's age and naivity was much more in line with the book, IMO.
SPOILER
My only complaint was how little regard anyone in the president's small circle gave Ryan's attempt at getting them information they so desperately needed. Okay, so they wouldn't take his call - what about his entire staff at the CIA? Couldn't any of them call the pres and tell him the plutonium was from US? Having the advisor on Air Force One hang up on him was utterly stupid. -
while i personally find liberal politics repugnant (i like the term USATODAY had in an editorial a long time back, 'proto-socialist throwbacks', and no, i am not a republican, i am a subgenius), i really liked your post. here's to living on the brink! alec baldwin should have stuck with jack ryan, he might still have a viable career. POLITICS: i found this on a bulletin board at the local Borders. i like it. THE REALIST MANIFESTO / Whereas history has shown that all collective organizations invariably become corrupt, I hold all collectives, political, social, religious, or financial, as corrupt. / Whereas history has shown emotion to be the least-stable platform for human endeavor, I hold all unrestrained emotional indulgence as destructive. / Whereas all corrupt collective organizations resort to emotional manipulation of the masses to secure their ends, the vast majority being susceptible to such exploitation,
I hold all such behavior as reprehensible. / Whereas the mass-media is nothing more than a conduit for collective propaganda,
the unwarranted imposition of views, opinions, and beliefs being unacceptable, I hold the mass-media in general as a menace. / Whereas the existence of altruism in the strictest sense of the word is a known fallacy, I hold all claims to altruism as suspect. / Whereas intellect alone stands as the attribute that distinguishes man from animal, the cumulative effect of the emotional self-discipline of each individual being the sole means for the present and continued civilization of mankind as a whole, I hold the rational intellect as essential. / I summarily reject the collective as a viable social construct. / I summarily reject emotion as a desirable human attribute. / I summarily reject the mass-media as a valid representation of reality. / I summarily reject altruism as a legitimate motive. / I recognize one actual crime - deliberate infliction of suffering. / I recognize one function of government - defense against threats. / I recognize one value in violence - employment against the violent. / I recognize one basis for human endeavor - coherent logical thought. / I recognize one hope for the future - benign application of science. / I will not suffer the weight of the arrogant few or the ignorant mob. -
Phil Alden Robinson's best film was Sneakers, despite Ben Kingsley's wonderfully weird accent ("Gimme the bawks, Maahty!"). The best Clancy film is The Hunt For Red October, although Patriot Games has its moments, and Clear and Present Danger has one of the greatest action sequences in all of film. Without Remorse really needs to be made, but as a standalone, unconnected-to-anything film, and not with Liev Schreiber as John Clark. And they'd better make it a period piece, not gut the story by updating it. I never read TSOAF, mostly because I got about a hundred pages into it and was so freaking BORED I gave up, which is something I rarely do. I'm told it was good. I hope the movie doesn't suck.
-
I agree with the analysists when they say that America may not be ready for such a film so early on in the post 9/11 era. Right now, movies that deal with themes of terrorism and nuclear weapons are too close to home for my own likings and I would prefer that film producers not be allowed to create such movies. That way I don't even have to see their posters when I go to movie theater and be reminded that terrorism is something our society has to deal with.
-
I agree with the analysists when they say that America may not be ready for such a film so early on in the post 9/11 era. Right now, movies that deal with themes of terrorism and nuclear weapons are too close to home for my own likings and I would prefer that film producers not be allowed to create such movies. That way I don't even have to see their posters when I go to movie theater and be reminded that terrorism is something our society has to deal with.
-
You mention in your post that Ford would make a good Jack Ryan President. You're right! Someone before mentioned that Sum is the best Clancy book. Have you read Debt of Honor? I know that will never be made into a film, the brother of a slain Japanese fighter pilot takes a 747 and rams it into the Capitol Bldg, killing a whole bunch of leaders, making Ryan the President! That was a great book!
-
May 31, 2002 12:58:32 AM CDT
Is it just me or does this movie's release date seems badly
by nuke mayhem
The wound america got on 9/11 is still fresh, and showing americans movies about forign countries having nuclear weapons is not helping the matter. Now America (who's still fighting the war on Terror) can have a fresh reminder of how they can sunddenly die tommorow under a mushroom cloud by the hands of our nation's enemies if a A-bomb turns up missing.
-
Without Remorse has already had three scripts attempted in the last 5 years / two studios and the last ones were updated to the present. I just read the latest and I have toask - Why does WITHOUT REMORSE need to made? Its vengence, Rambo mentality has been done to death in countless films since this book hit the stands. Post tramatic stress syndrome - blackouts to vietname - jesus, how cliche can you get?
-
It's a wakeup call, as was the NY Times piece, regarding the impending nuclear terrorist threat. People tend to forget that domestic security isn't only about keeping boxcutters off of airplanes. The fact is, we're all in more danger than we know and reminders are needed from time to time in order to keep us vigilant. If you're already awake, you should embrace quality films that elevate the masses to your lofty perch of enlightenment instead of pissing on movies you haven't yet seen.
-
where? i dont see any review. just a bunch of ass kissing on a shitty movie, justlike that piece of shit changing lanes, hint hint, it was done in the 80s, they called it TRADING PLACES! fuck this site in thier stupid asses, start posting actuall reviews with opinions instead of crap like this, "i love director and i'll drop a big movie" stupid stupid stupid.
fuck 9/11, fuck them in thier stupid asses too! if you dont like the shit dont see it. -
Which is kind of hard since we are the same age. If they would have had Affleck cast as Ryan when the series of movies started, maybe I could believe it, but being a purist, this film totally ignores the book it's based on. AFFLECK IS NOT THE RIGHT AGE! I know that's a nit-pickity thing, but if you follow chronologically, he will become president soon. How can you do that in 5 years when Affleck's Ryan is not established yet. I love Morgan Freeman, but I have no desire to see this film. Just my two cents, as if anyone will really read this.
-
Clancy's next Ryan book is a story set before Jack Ryan was where he is now. Why couldn't they wait to film that book? Than way I wouldn't be so mad. I'm not really all that mad, my girlfriend is because she is a Tom Clancy junkie. Me I just don't like that they are ignoring the other films and filming a version of the book that is not like the book. Enough complaining. I have spoken, I will not discuss this ever again. I won't go see the film, and I will continue to read the books. That's my choice.
-
May 31, 2002 11:39:57 AM CDT
Uh, obogeek, You Forgot SW: AOTC On Your List of Engaging Films.
by leto iii
-
At least that's what Hollywood's trying to sell to us.
Too simplistic? Probably. It's just ever since I saw him on Entertainment Tonight seriously... I say SERIOUSLY... discussing the current war on terrorism, SERIOUSLY as if he actually has knowledge the rest of us don't... I have rejected the very idea of seeing this movie.
They should have shelved it until NEXT Summer. No, they are trying to capitalize on real tragedy. Only Affleck can save us, if only that damn President would LISTEN.
Please people, wait for the video on this to come out. Let's explain to Affleck and the rest of these sucking Hollywood, coked out mules that this is not acceptable.
For the love of God... if you have to see a movie or two this week, give Spider-Man another viewing... or AOTC... or Insomnia... Insomnia has this whacky idea of showcasing Al Pacino (specifically doing this just to remind us of how good an actor he can be), Robin Williams (bringing the "Good Will Hunting" Robin with him), and Hilary Swank (proving that she choses her roles based more on character and less on screen time... that Oscar of hers isn't a fluke, she's a force to be reckoned with) in a meaty, relaxed plot of redemption, twists, and great dialogue. See THAT movie... again, if you have to. Please.
-
May 31, 2002 1:22:02 PM CDT
Duchovny or Quaid would make a better Ryan than Affleck.
by christopher3
-
i assume you mean randy quaid and you are spot on. we could get the back story on those white shoes he gave to clark w. and he could defeat the terrorists by serving them contaminated helper..."more helper, edna"...
-
LOVED the movie! Having read the book was really curious how they were going to cram everything in 2 hrs.
But the changes they made retain the main plot of the movie and still allowed for a fast paced movie with a healthy mixture of action, drama and suspense. I think this is going to bring new life to the franchise!
Some points;
The book that involves Ryan becoming President after a Plane crashes into the Capitol Building is Executive Orders not Debt of Honor -Excellent Book.
Harrison Ford was signed to Play Ryan in this movie...after many of months and script changes at his request (he was a major supporter of the bad guys nationality being changed) HE bailed out of the project leaving Paramount without a star...Affleck expressed interest -Clancy loved the idea having always thought Harrison too old...having Affleck play a younger Ryan inspired Clancy to write Red Rabbit.
-
Let's see, this prequel has wooden acting, unrealistic digital effects, way too much talk and a story that conflicts with the other films in the series and he loves it?? Aren't these the same reasons he hated AOTC? I'll just save my time and skip this hypocritical moron's reviews in the future.
-
Neo-Nazis are a band of maroons who have zip as far as money and power. Why the hell did they change the bad guys from Arabs to Neo-Nazis?? Where they afraid they would offend any Arabian terrorists?? Sorry folks, there where no Neo-Nazis flying those jumbo jets!
Readers Talkback
User Login
Top Talkbacks
- Whitney Houston 1963 - 2012 -- 273 total posts 271 posts
- New JUDGE DREDD post production footage pops up -- 92 total posts 92 posts
- AVENGERS enemy revealed as pink boardgame pieces... You might suffer some form of elation... SPOILERS!!! -- 160 total posts 69 posts
- There's a STAR TREK video game that is going to lead into JJ's STAR TREK 2 apparently... -- 151 total posts 63 posts
- Does ‘SNL’ Rhyme With ‘Deschanel’?? Learn Which SATURDAY NIGHT LIVE Vet Hosts After Sexy Zooey!! -- 67 total posts 59 posts
- HANNA's Saoirse Ronan to boss around seven little people -- 60 total posts 57 posts
- To Commemorate The 3D Release Of STAR WARS EPISODE I: THE PHANTOM MENACE, George Lucas Wants You To Know...Greedo Shoots First!! -- 484 total posts 49 posts
- Here's The Red Band Trailer For Drafthouse Films' THE FP! -- 69 total posts 42 posts
- Friday Brings SWEEPS DAY NINE!! Gab Here About Tonight’s FRINGE!! Plus Einstein on TIM, Wiig On PORTLANDIA, MAHER, CLONE, GIFTED, GRIMM, SPARTACUS, SUPERNATURAL, GOLD RUSH And More!! -- 120 total posts 32 posts
- SPACE 2099!! -- 183 total posts 24 posts