|
|
|
Average Customer Review
Share your thoughts with other customers
|
|
|
› See most helpful viewpoints
|
|
15 of 16 people found the following review helpful:
Action-Packed! Lives up to the Spirit of the Book, 12 May 2006
The film begins with gripping scenes and haunting music ... Fighter jets landing, powerful spiritual music that is sad and almost like a funeral - setting the tone for what is to come. Ben Affleck plays the CIA agent Jack Ryan to perfection. There is great casting for all the major roles and key characters in the book. Although in the book, the city of Denver is the location used by terrorists for the attack, the choice of Baltimore, Maryland makes sense, since there is a port which clearly can be the point of entry for contraband. The fact is the film remains true to the intentions and spirit of Tom Clancy's book. There is political maneuvering, espionage, edge-of-your seat gripping moments after the attack and a very well executed plot. Suspense builds and the story unfolds ... The topic is fascinating and timely. It is almost like the "007" films of old ... You more or less know what to expect, but the ride is so engaging, you are caught up in the drama and events.
A nuclear bomb is discovered in the desert by a bedouin, left buried from a downed airplane during the '73 Israeli War. He suspects it has some value and can make money by selling it. An agent purchases it for a mere pittance, vastly less than its true worth ... so realistic. After the unexpected death of the Russian President, his replacement is investigated by the CIA. The US President, his advisors and the CIA are busy extracting information about this relative "dark horse" to discover his stand on the major issues. In the past, Jack Ryan had written a paper on him, extrapolating his views on world events ... He accompanies a delegation from the US to visit Russia and ensure nuclear disarmament is going according to plans. Each side assesses the opposition with wary reminders of the past ever in the forefront of their minds ... How difficult it was to learn about Soviet arms during the cold war, US agents had died trying to access .information ... now a delegation was freely being shown the labs, nuclear reactor and storage facilties. Times had indeed changed ...
The US President attends a filled to capacity football stadium in Baltimore, MD when suddenly, unexpectedly and rapidly Secret Agents usher him out ... A huge explosion occurs, with the mushroom cloud indicating a nuclear bomb went off. During the disaster, Jack Ryan seeks his superior, only to find him taking his last breath. He pays his last respects and uses his cell phone and ID bage to enter the White House. Jack had discovered irrefutable evidence that proves it was *not* a Russian attack. The nuclear substance originated in the United States. The fingerprints of the explosion and subsequent fall out are positive proof. However, suspense builds as the US President and Russian President are on stand-by preparing for war ... trying to read each others motives for action. The unraveling of the peace accords takes minutes although it took years and years to create peace and disarmament. The difficult decisions faced by the US President are depicted superbly ... The raw emotions arising during such a national disaster are naturally conveyed. The only failure in the film is the choice of selecting a disgruntled fascist group as the culprits for the attack. Keeping it closer to the story line in the book would have paid off huge dividends in the short and long run. In the years following 2001 and the Sept. 11th attack, using ancient history such as Nazi-like fascists as the enemy just does not play well with an audience. It leaves a huge credibility gap ...this is why it reminds me of the "007" films. Despite this one major flaw, for which I deducted one star, the film was a hit with this viewer. I highly recommend it.
Erika Borsos (bakonyvilla)
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you?
 
|
|
|
|
|
|
15 of 17 people found the following review helpful:
Good, but could be so much better, 13 May 2003
How much you enjoy this film depends largely on whether or not you’ve read the novel on which it is based. If you have, and are expecting a film closely based on it, you may be slightly underwhelmed. If you haven’t and are just wanting to see an action film that needs a little more thought than the average Schwarzenegger fare, you will probably be most impressed.
The main problem that the filmmakers had is that The Sum Of All Fears is such an enormous book with massive amounts of plot lines and characters, which is simply too much for a two hour long film, so a great deal is omitted. Another is that, with the possible exception of the unbelievable Executive Orders, it is probably the finest Jack Ryan novel, increasing expectations to unrealistic levels (probably the main problem with the film for me, to be honest). Yet another is the casting of Ben Affleck as Ryan. Affleck is a fine young actor and plays his part well, but the part itself seems all wrong. Changing of the story to make Ryan a rookie at the CIA does not really work, and is to the detriment of the film as a whole.
However, despite my gripes, I don’t want to give the wrong impression. I enjoyed the film a lot, and there is a lot to admire, not least the very impressive special effects for the nuclear explosion and the air strike scenes. It’s just as a big fan of Tom Clancy’s books, I was maybe expecting too much from the film.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you?
|
|
|
|
|
|
7 of 8 people found the following review helpful:
Welcome Jack Ryan MKIII, 11 Mar 2003
The first thing that everyone knows about this film is that we have the third reincarnation of Jack Ryan. And this can be a bit disturbing to some people.We've had the hammy Alec Baldwin and the heavyweight Harrison Ford. Now for film 4 we have the pretty but not that convincing Ben Affleck. This caused a dilemma for the director and led to a wholesale script rewrite. Out have gone the Arab terrorists of the book and are replaced by a neo-Nazi group of Europeans. Evidently we can't offend Arabs but Europeans are open season for Hollywood. The film still centres on a nuclear bomb being smuggled into the US and used to destroy a city. The other problem for the film makers was the need to reinvent Ryan as a younger character to accomodate Affleck. As such they have used it to show some of Ryan's earlier life and to include the meeting and courtship of his future wife. The film is an engrossing thriller but not a blood and guts action movie. There is a strong cast and a good, well told story. Does Affleck cut it as a young Jack Ryan? I think that depends on your view of him. I think he's a liitle too wooden but this is a good addition to the series. Let's hope he gets another chance.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you?
|
|
|
|
|
|
6 of 7 people found the following review helpful:
Great Thriller - Worth a Look, 20 Nov 2004
Films like 'The Sum of All Fears' often get an unfair press, reviewers moaning about poor characterization, over-emphasis on visuals, plot-holes and other such things, when all the time these movies - techno-thrillers, as they're often known - are just doing what they supposed to be doing: entertaining the audience on quite a basic, bubble-gum level. This latest cinematic re-working of a Tom Clancy novel - starring Morgan Freeman, Ben Affleck, and a whole host of other 'name' actors - succeeds admirably on that level. Although at times it's a little dumber than it needs to be (making Jack Ryan a lot younger than he is in the book is part of the problem), most of the time it has the right blend of wit, excitement, tension, and explosions to carry the audience through.Affleck is competent when he needs to be, and does a good job as Jack Ryan (Alec Baldwin was better, though, in 'The Hunt for Red October'), but the real star of the show is Liev Schreibner (playing special ops agent John Clark) who in his limited screen time completely inhabits his role, and turns out a fantastic performance. Schreibner is one to watch. The other performances are all good, but the script isn't really asking a lot of top-class actors like Morgan Freeman or James Cromwell, and what they squeeze out is dependent on the scene they're in. But 'The Sum of All Fears' isn't about the actors - it's about the drama, the excitement, the thrills and spills. Even though the plot isn't all that complex, it seems like there is a lot happening, and as long as you don't think about it for too long, it holds itself together. 'The Sum of All Fears' doesn't match the sheer quality of 'The Hunt for Red October', and lacks the charisma of 'Clear and Present Danger', but it is nevertheless a pretty good adaptation of the lengthy (highly recommended) Tom Clancy novel. If you're looking for a bit of entertainment, give it a go. (Additionally, Tom Clancy's audio commentary with Phil Alden Robinson points out a lot of the factual inaccuracies and plot holes present in the movie, but it's worth listening to for amusement value alone - Clancy obviously doesn't like the liberties taken in adapting his novel, and Phil Alden Robinson spends a lot of being corrected and sounding apologetic.)
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you?
|
|
|
|
|
|
3 of 3 people found the following review helpful:
Good as a stand alone!, 17 Aug 2003
The movie itself is not too bad and would probably be absolutely a great movie if you'd never read the book or any other novel by Tom Clancy. I truly understand the need to slightly change the events in a novel to make a movie, but this was only a glimmer of the novel at best. Ben Affleck being a good actor, he's still no Jack Ryan. This also pretty much rewrites Debt of Honor and Executive Orders down the road if they're to be made into movies as well. As stated above, a good movie, but definitely "Sum of All Fear's" in name only, not in substance. {ssintrepid}
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you?
|
|
|
|
|
|
14 of 18 people found the following review helpful:
An awe-inspiring, well-conceived thriller, 9 May 2004
Maybe I'm too easy to please, but I found The Sum of All Fears to be one powerful humdinger of a motion picture. I should point out that I came into this film with no preconceptions; I have not read any of Tom Clancy's Jack Ryan novels, nor have I seen any of the earlier movies starring Harrison Ford in the central role. I can certainly see how major and strange a transition it must be for fans to go from the older Ford to the young Affleck, and the obvious disparity between the film and the book that inspired it would also probably bother me had I previously read Clancy's 1991 novel. I was attracted to this movie for two reasons: one is the plot. Delaying the release of this film in the wake of the 9/11 terrorist attack was the right thing to do, given the subject matter dealt with here, but it also served to pique my interests in the film. As an old and unrepentant Cold Warrior now viewing the world through eyes permanently rimmed red by the reprehensible actions of cowardly terrorists, the idea of an American-Russian nuclear war brought about by the maneuvering of terrorists definitely spoke to me. The other aspect of the film that appealed to me was the prominent role played by Morgan Freeman. I've said it before, and I'm sure I'll say it again: in my opinion, Morgan Freeman is the greatest actor working today.The complex yet tightly-wound plot of this film is impressive. The sudden death of a Soviet (now Russian) leader still carries with it a significant amount of trepidation in the West, but this film takes such fears to an unprecedented level. The characterization of Russian President Nemerov is, I think, the most crucial element of this entire plot, and it comes off magnificently. Talk about being boxed in against a wall. Try being a new Russian leader already regarded as a hard-liner by basically everyone in the West (except for CIA analyst Jack Ryan) and then have forces that should be under your control but are not attack Grozny, Chechnya, with horrible chemical weapons. No Russian President can admit less than total control of his military. Then have a nuclear bomb go off in a major American city, a tragedy made to look rather convincingly as an act of Russian aggression. Americans are going to respond to such an attack with extreme prejudice. Thus, before you have your new Presidential chair adequately adjusted for your comfort, you're on the brink of nuclear war. Ciaran Hinds deserves all the credit I can give him for his convincing performance as President Nemerov; he (not Affleck, and not even Freeman) makes this motion picture the overwhelming success I think it is. The entire cast of this film is excellent (even Affleck), and so is the production value of everything you see. The special effects are impressive (and it was a treat to see just how they were brought to life in the DVD special features dealing with the visual effects), but these are just the trimmings on the real feast. The meat of The Sum of All Fears is a plot which is compelling, believable, disquieting, and, in the end, rather moving. This movie drew me in completely to its world of intelligence, espionage, deception, politics, and diplomacy, and I could not possibly give it less than five stars.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you?
|
|
|
|
|
|
2 of 2 people found the following review helpful:
A good film if you can get past the stereotypical view of the Russians in such films, 11 Dec 2006
Just watched this film again and it's got many of the things you want in a thriller. It's got tension, action and the story is interesting enough to keep you on the edge of your seat.
Morgan Freeman is excellent (as always) and Ben Affleck makes a good and credible Jack Ryan, geeky enough to not be an action hero yet capable of saving the day when needed.
I've not read the book so cannot say whether my only critism is within the film or the book but...
The biggest problem I have with this film is in the way the Russians are portrayed - yet again the USA will save the day and are shown to be totally professional and never do anything wrong whereas the Russians are shown to be slightly amateurish and riddled with dithering old war mongers. I found this a let down in what was, otherwise, an interesting story.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you?
|
|
|
|
|
|
2 of 2 people found the following review helpful:
I think not............, 2 May 2003
maybe it's beacause i have read the book, but maybe not, but this film is terible. it doesnt even follow the timeline set within the other "ryan" films. it occurs after clear and present danger, in that film ryan holds a higher position than in this film, just one of many glaring errors, just like the fact the ryan and cathy are actually married in all the films except bizarrly for this one. the differences with the book are many, basically the whole story line is different even down to the people who actually exploded the bomb, but that may have been changed due to the similarity with 9/11.overall rent it dont buy it, save you money for something, anything else. buy the book !
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you?
|
|
|
|
|
|
3 of 4 people found the following review helpful:
the sum of all CHEESE!, 21 April 2003
This film stinks. Ben Affleck takes on the role of a young Jack Ryan and just can't pull it off with his wooden acting. His young girlfriend's acting is even worse. The story itself is quite good and could have made an excellent movie if it wasn't sooooo cheesey. As the other reviews highlight the story revolves around a dirty atomic bomb (Yet another it's not the guy with a few thousand nukes I'm worried about it's the guy with one etc.). Terrorists make it look as though the US and Russia are bombing each other and almost cause another world war (Yawn!). can Affleck save the day? Bring back Harrison Ford or kill Ryan off cos Affleck stinks
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you?
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 of 1 people found the following review helpful:
I LIKED THIS, 16 Aug 2007
After reading several negative reviews, I was shocked when I finally saw `The sum of all fears'. I simply LOVED this movie . It was totally thrilling. It had all the ingredients of a great adventure and to top it off it was visually poetic and emotionally stirring.
I never read the book this is based on, and I'm not a Tom Clancy fan. I came into this movie expecting to hate it, because I have hated all the other films in the Jack Ryan series. They were too dry and technical, lacking immediacy or emotion and they felt more like lectures on the way government works and how the military operates than movies. Those films were made for Tom Clancy fans. The sum of all fears was made for a different audience, which is unfortunate since it is based on one of his novels. There is no doubt that it crosses the line into fantasy several times for dramatic effect. Things happen that probably wouldn't happen in real life. People do things that are impossibly heroic and unrealistic. I'm convinced this is why Clancy fans hate this adaptation. For me, these traits (considered flaws by many people) helped free the movie from the constraints of absolute realism, allowing it to become more poetic and powerful than it ever could be otherwise.
Director Phil Alden Robinson deserves most of the praise for this film. He's a new name for me, but looking at his filmography, it was interesting to see that he was the writer and director for field of dreams, another film that I totally loved. He was a very odd choice to helm this film, because field of dreams is a bizarre movie where reality and fantasy meet head on. It's an ultra surreal American fairy tale. It's like a happy David Lynch film, or a Luis Buñuel film with a wholesome center. This is not the kind of director you would normally choose to make a movie like the sum of all fears. The clash between the ultra realism of Clancy's material and Robinson's willingness to forgo realism in favor of dreamy fairy tale lyricism creates a wonderful sense of vibrancy that I would never have anticipated.
After seeing the sum of all fears, I am now convinced that Robinson will go on to make a huge name for himself. He is a truly gifted director with an incredible ability to communicate through images. I can't wait to see his next film. If field of dreams is any indication, he is just good a writer as he is as a director, and I am excited to see what other sorts of ideas he might produce.
The movie also has tremendous performances by Morgan Freeman, and (surprisingly) Ben Affleck. He's way to young to play Jack Ryan, so he doesn't even try. The Jack Ryan in this movie is a reinvented character. He's basically a young guy, with the mentality of an idealist, working his way up in the CIA, while trying to juggle a bachelors social life. For me, he works in this film and he plays that kind of character perfectly.
The bottom line is this: If you love Tom Clancy and you've read every one of his books, you're probably going to hate this movie. If you have never read the book, and have no real interest in Clancy's work, you'll probably at least enjoy it. If your like me, and you don't mind films that let drama interfere with rationality, you'll probably love it.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
| |
Customers who viewed this item also viewed
|
|
| |
|
|
|
![Sum Of All Fears Dvd [2002]](http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51XA86782TL._SL160_SL90_.jpg)
Amazon Home
![Clear And Present Danger Sp Edition [DVD] [1994]](http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/P/B00009P9KD.02._SL160_PE69_OU02_SCLZZZZZZZ_SL90_V257938472_.jpg)
![Patriot Games Special Edition [DVD] [1992]](http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/P/B00009P9KC.02._SL160_PE69_OU02_SCLZZZZZZZ_SL90_V257938472_.jpg)
![Tom Clancy DVD Box Set (Special Edition) [1990]](http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/41PGB5B30GL._SL160_SL90_.jpg)