*** Official "THE SUM OF ALL FEARS" Discussion Thread (1 Viewer)

[Alex Spindler]

The only note that would suggest that the bomb was going to be less than capable was when they removed the core and mentioned that it had been completely corroded. That, and I believe there was some talk by the recovery team or the newscasters that the bomb was less than capable.

 

[Jim A. Banville]

Okay, "Spinnaker" was the Russian Pres's counselor/sidekick, whatever... What I don't understand is that he (Spinnaker) has the knowledge of where the bomb came from (when he is communicating with Ryan on his PDA and said "You stole it", I think the scenario would have been that the CIA "appropriated" it from our stockpile and gave it to Israel through some secret/unathorized deal between our governments), but doesn't bother to tell the Russian Pres, who could use that info to stop WW3?!

Now, for not showing the explosion, I agree eith what someone said ealier about showing less can cause more fear than showing everything. In addition, I think we have all seen enough exposions in our live's (real and in movies) that showing the shockwave, rolling black wall of dust and mushroom cloud was a good balance.

I liked the Neo-Facists as the "villians" since it was unexpected.

Oh yeah, I really liked the movie. I could care less about continuity in the Jack Ryan series and adherence to the book. This film stands on its own.

 

[Danny R]

The bomb was a dud? It seemed to make quite a mess.

Relatively so, yes. If properly detonated, Baltimore would have been toast. What we saw was more on scale with a tactical nuke than a Hiroshima size one, which is what it should have been.

Would the cell phone and wireless e-mail really work in the area immediately after a blast, even if it is a dud?

This is why books are often so much better than the movies!

In the book, we find that the nuke had a significant effect on communications, taking out a number of satellites as well temporarily (due to a power surge transmitted from all the satellite uplink trucks associated with the Superbowl.)

This also had a significant effect on the "fear factor", as the government though it HAD to be an attack, simultaneous aimed at our president as well as our ability to communicate.

Likewise the scene at the beginning of the movie also plays an important part that I think was understated in the movie... that the current president and his crazy national security advisor didn't take those practices seriously, and thus panic'd when the real emergency came.

 

[Peter Kline]

1. "The Sum of All Fears," $31.2 million.

2. "Star Wars: Episode II — Attack of the Clones," 20.7 million.

3. "Spider-Man," $14.5 million.

4. "Undercover Brother," $12.1 million.

5. "Spirit: Stallion of the Cimarron," $10.7 million.

6. "Insomnia," $9.8 million.

7. "Enough," $6.8 million.

8. "About a Boy," $4.1 million.

9. "Unfaithful," $3 million.

10. "The New Guy," $1.5 million.

 

[Patrick Sun]

It's been ages since I read the book, but didn't the bomb go off at Mile High Stadium during a playoff game (not the Super Bowl)? I still remember my head swimming in bomb minutia on the chapter that Clancy tried to describe the physics of the bomb, and why it was basically a dud.

 

[Hakan Powers]

Patrick,
IIRC the bomb went off at a superbowl game in Denver. My US Geography and football stadium expertice is not good enough to know if Mile High Stadium is in Denver though
I've been looking forward to this movie for ages.. have read the book 3 or 4 times and it stays good every time. Bummer I have to wait until september for the damn flick to open here in Sweden though

 

[Matt Pasant]

Mile High Stadium "was" in Denver. The Broncos have a new stadium, now its what... Invesco Field at Mile High?

-- Matt

 

[Michael*K]

I was looking forward to this film but found it a major disappointment. It's obvious that Affleck doesn't have the acting chops to handle a complicated character like Ryan. He was okay near the beginning when he played the analyst getting his feet wet. But I found him completely unconvincing following the detonation. He just didn't carry himself with any authority that would lead me to believe that he could get everything accomplished that he did.

I thought the "disturbing" images of the detonation and its aftermath were played very conservatively and weren't very convincing. I think all of those old Department of Defense videos that showed the effects of an actual bomb detonation have far more staying power and are much more frightening.

I think when Spinnaker was referring to the plutonium and said "you stole it," he wasn't referring directly to Cabot, but the CIA in general. I had the assumption that the CIA spirited the uranium to the Israeli's much in the same way that weapons were covertly sold to the Iranians back in the 80's.

The romance didn't work at all and I found the picnic at the end after tens of thousands of people had fried 40 miles away to be laughable. And Ryan's girlfriend's face emerged remarkably unscathed after having a glass wall explode in her face.

The best parts of the movie in my opinion were Liev Schrieber (underutilized in this movie) and the ending where we get to see the terrorists being offed to classical music.

Finally, am I the only one that felt Ryan's girlfriend has a face that bears a passing resemblance to Sandra Bullock's and the Russian president had an uncanny resemblance to the character actor James Karen?

 

[RobertR]

Mile High Stadium "was" in Denver. The Broncos have a new stadium, now its what... Invesco Field at Mile High?

Correct on both counts, Mike.

 

[Chuck C]

HERE ARE CHUCK's Complaints:
same for me (on all three counts )
Many things were unnecessary like the guy's heart condition, Jack swiping the CIA card and building suspense, and driving the truck through the flames and crashing it.
Many cliche lines: "this conversation never took place...what conversation?" "am I going to die?...yes." "an attack now would be suicide" "they'd be crazy to bomb us now"
The three office workers were cliche too...the young guy, the black guy, and the woman....the office itself looked more like a high school conference room. Ryan's conversations back and forth were sickening. Not answering the pager/phone because of sleepiness or cutesy stuff is the biggest cliche in the big book of cliches, and it was done twice in one movie!
The director used too many artistic camera tricks which distracted me. He should not have departed from the great style he used in Sneakers.
Robinson also did not explain the neo-nazi theme well enough for the average movie-goer to understand what was going on. And was the ending a rip-off of the end of The Godfather? I think so.
Worst of all was Jack Ryan's character. The director made him out to be lowly CIA agent that couldn't even tie his own shoes. Hey I love Ben Affleck, but his persona wasn't strong enough to convey the sense that he was a super-hero. I bet White House officials would have never listened to a man like Jack Ryan played by Ben Affleck.
If I posted this in the Review section, I'd include all I've written plus :star: :star: .

 

[Matt Pasant]

Jack Ryan, IMO, is not a super-hero. He is a man who uses his smarts and skill to work through problems effectivly. This is why I think alot of people were in favor of Alec Baldwin over Harrison Ford (taking Affleck out of the equation). Due to the different ways each approached the role.

The guy has a wife, a daughter, has to buy a teddy bear, and stop a nuclear war or two. His character to me has always been a man who has been put into extrodinary conditions and thinks his way through them. Not a super-hero.

-- Matt

 

[Brennan Hill]

Anyone else feel that the sequel this film is setting up is The Cardinal of the Kremlin? Or will Clancy just start over with a new story featuring Ben Affleck as Jack Ryan.

Ben Affleck may be a fine actor, but he does not come close to fitting the role as created in the books. Ryan came off as a complete idiot whenever he voiced his opinion in front of the President and others in the movie. Ryan always had unothodox ideas in the books, but he never came off like an idiot. He always had the intelligence and personaility to carry his opinions. I think Baldwin was closest to the role as written, Ford was close, but more charismatic as always. I just don't believe Affleck as Jack Ryan.

 

[Mark Lee]

Anyone know what Tom Clancy himself thinks of Affleck in the role? I know that when it came to the previous two Ryans, he actually preferred Alec Baldwin's portrayal to Harrison Ford's, but I'm curious where he rates ol' Ben....

 

[KlausWinkler]

I haven't seen it yet, but the President didn't believe JR in the book either, so I'm not sure it's Affleck fault.

As to TCs opinion aout him:

From: Tom Clancy ([email protected])

Subject: A message from Himself

Newsgroups: alt.books.tom-clancy

View: Complete Thread (39 articles) | Original Format

Date: 2001-06-03 08:42:10 PST

There has been some unkind criticism of Ben Affleck in this Interest Group.

I want to go on the record as saying the following:

I've met Ben Affleck. He's been a guest in my house, and we've had dinner togeher, part of which was a lengthy and wide-ranging conversation.

I think Ben Affleck is just one hell of a great kid, bright, articulate, and talented. Unusually for an actor, he can both read and write. You can speak with him for more than five minutes without ending up in a monologue. The

womenfolk find him good-looking, and I suppose he is. But more to the point, he's smart. "Dumb" is the one thing you can never fix, but "smart" is the one thing you never really have to fix. Ben's smart.

I and delighted to have him playing Jack Ryan. I could scarcely be happier, in fact, and I look forward to a long and fruitful creative partnership with him.

This is not to be taken as criticism of Harrison Ford. Mr. Ford's abilities and accomplishments need no defense or comment from me. But Ben Affleck is young and will be around for a good, long while.

Ben has the one ability that I find invariably indicative of intelligence: he knows how to listen.

I don't know that much about his political beliefs, but if he's as smart as he appears to be, that's unimportant. You can always do business with smart people. It's the stupid opinionated ones I can't abide. I found him reasonable

in every respect. Besides, you don't have to agree with people as a requirement to liking or respecting them. I could scarcely be more different politically from Alec Baldwin, but I have the utmost respect for him as an actor and a man. (Alec was very classy indeed with regard to Ben when he learned of Ben's new role in my work.)

So, people, if you like me and my work, as most of you appear to do (you know, it's easier to defend yourself against enemies than against friends, but that's

a subject for a lengthy discussion for which I do not have time), give Ben a fair shake. He is the face of Jack Ryan for years to come.

 

[John Thomas]

A disappointing movie (5.5/10); the inaccuracies were too much to forgive. Heck, it's Tom Clancy work. Part of its appeal is that he's such a good technical writer.

However, the attack on the carrier was simply ridiculous. The planes aren't spotted on radar. Then, the carrier is by itself without a battle group. Then, the phalanx weapon system fails to track/shoot down most of the missles. Just plain silly.

Now, I credit this to embellishment, but why couldn't an event (any event that escalates the situation) been a bit more believable?

The whole movie stunk of carelessness and seemed to be a rush-job. The chronological mistakes....oh brudda, that had be grating my teeth throughout the movie.

One more comment about Affleck: He's done some good work but it all seems the same. Every emotion seems like it's Ben's and not the characters. The 'urgency' mode that he goes into is the same one he displays in several other of his roles. He's just not good enough in my eyes to replace Harrison Ford as Jack Ryan.

 

[Ed Vandeweerd]

Hi

I have been a Fan of the "Jack Ryan" films since Harrison Ford's performances in both "Patriot Games" and "Clear and Present Danger". Harrison Ford's Jack Ryan has had an Intensity, Credibility, and believability that Ben Affleck's Ryan has not. I do not take anything away from Ben Affleck the Actor. I believe that although he has proven himself very capable in films such as "Changing Lanes" and "Pearl Harbour". Mr Affleck has taken on a role which is far too complex with an Intensity that "Prettyboy Ben" simply does not have. I have read review after review of this film and 95% of critics I've read simply say that Ben Affleck does not have the "chops" for this role. I was disturbed to read Tom Clancy's quote about Ben Affleck being "the future face of Jack Ryan" According to what I've read Clancy was delighted to have the opportunity to "re-invent" Jack Ryan. How can you re-invent an American Icon second in Popularity only to James Bond. Would that not be Tantamount to casting an American as James Bond? Don't be ridiculous! If Ben Affleck is the "future face of Jack Ryan" I predict we'll soon see the Death of the Franchise. I've passed my personal comments on to Tom Clancy at his website. In my closing comments I reminded him that it would not be wise to underestimate the intelligence of the movie going public. I believe that "Sum of All Fears" did respectably at the box office not because it's a good film but purely because of the curiosity around Ben Affleck's Portrayal of Ryan. Now that that's been satisfied. I think the best that "Sum of all Fears"can hope for when it comes to Video & DVD is a Quick trip to the cut out bin at Walmart.

 

[Leo Hinze]

This movie was a big disappointment. I was expecting something about how scary your first day of math class can be.

Stupid dyslexia.

 

[Michael*K]

Alec Baldwin is in my oppinion at best a mediocre actor. Where is he today?

Alec Baldwin nailed the role of Ryan and is by far the most convincing actor to portray him. Maybe a more appropriate question is "Where is Harrison Ford today?" He hasn't given a good character portrayal in any film since The Fugitive (1993!!!)

 

[Tino]

Ed Vanderweed

Have you even seen The Sum Of All Fears?

 

[BrianSmithe]

Just saw the movie last night. I liked some parts of it, but I was pretty dissapointed with Ben Affleck as Jack Ryan. Not one of my favorite movies, but it was tolerable. And John, I agree with you on your pointabout the carrier. I mean, it was just too unreal. The planes kept going on and off radar and then all of a sudden they fired missiles and the carrier was done. When they first detected the planes, they normally scramble fighters to intercept them. The only defenses they used were the cannons. That was a very dissapointing part of the movie!