The Sum of All Fears

Russia and the U.S. are on the verge of a nuclear war all masterminded by a terrorist. Jack Ryan (Ben Affleck) knows, but can he convince both the governments?

There's more to it but, basically, that's the plot. As it is, it's pretty good. It may be a little disturbing, however, to some people after 9/11. If this had been released before then it would have been seen as just another Cold War movie. It's very well-done but no great shakes...the attack scenes are frightening to watch.

Affleck is very good as Ryan. He's young, good-looking, intelligent and Affleck's low-key acting fits the Ryan role like a glove. Morgan Freeman shows up (again) as a mentor to Ryan. Nothing against Freeman, but hasn't he played this role once too often? Also John Cromwell is excellent as the president (completely covering his British accent).

So, an enjoyable drama...unless 9/11 really hit you close to home. If it did, avoid this.

People seem to expect jack Ryan movies to be more or less the way they imagine the books to be. This phenomenon is almost never the case when a movie comes out BASED ON THE BOOK. I emphasis BASED because it is never MEANT to be exactly what the book is. In "Sum Of All Fears", there is a switch from Arab to Fascist terrorists. Sure, some scenes are changed and others, unfortunately, left out. But being that the book is only based on the story, it is NOT GOINT TO BE the story itself. Somethings don't translate well on screen. A book is several hundred pages long. A movie two hours, and they can't very well put every detail from the book into the movie. I saw the film and thought it was good. I also saw all the other Clancy films and enjoyed them for what they were. Maybe not so good by comparison to the book, but never the less good for what they were. As for some characters, for example, Mary Pat Foley would have been unrecognized had it not been for the credits. She is known more for her role as a spy in "Cardinal of the Kremlin", which would make a great movie, if they ever did it.

First thing that struck me was the casting of Ben Affleck- im not sure why and if this was just me, but i expected him to come out with some punch lines and start cracking jokes at any second- he just didn't fit the role for me personally. Morgan Freeman also didn't seem to have a solid cast in this movie.

The story was fairly captivating however, Cromwell was good to watch as always and Morgan Freeman did his best given the role Overall worth a rent but probably not a buy guys. Catch it on TV if you can and you will be probably entertained for that night.

7/10

As an average espionage movie, this is a good flick. In fact, if the names involved weren't "Jack Ryan" and Tom Clancy, and if we hadn't actually seen some terrorist disasters in the last eight months, I would've thought it a really well-done intelligence thriller, looking at how Russia and the U.S. might head towards nuclear war if somehow a nuke went off in the U.S. during a time of tension. Affleck and Freeman seemed fine, but I keep on reminding myself supposedly that these are the characters that should have become James Earl Jones and Baldwin.

After September 11, and especially with the Clancy/Ryan films that have already been made, "Sum" just feels wrong. Philip Baker Hall's line about the response from the Russians, "This is canned!" feels like a description of the whole film. How can you blow up Baltimore and still have a happy go-lucky ending? If you are going to, ADMIT that you're just trying to make a fun Friday night flick, and not a TOPICAL IN-DEPTH film about U.S. security, which is kind of what Affleck and Clancy have been claiming they're doing. (Kind of like claiming the ridiculous "Air Force One" was a serious look at how to respond to terrorism on board the president's plane.)

Also, if this was a film about nuclear war, then it should have stuck to that possibility. If it's a film about the hunt for some terrorists planning a nuclear attack, that would be a different story. The way the film neatly wraps up everything in the end (with the exception of the destruction of BALTIMORE) is both silly and pure Hollywood. I'm disappointed, and I hope this is a hiccup in an otherwise intriguing series of well-done espionage films.

This movie is very good and worth the money to go see. IF... you are able to forget that you read a book by the same title who's author was the executive director of the film. If you are able to separate the two you will enjoy the film. I found that I was able to enjoy the film but had long discussions and was bothered by many inconsistencies from the book. The location of the action (Baltimore), the time (2002), the time the activity took place in Jack Ryan's life (early), the level of his position within the CIA (low), the lack of any other fears to sum up, all were very different from the book and while I was able to enjoy the film as I watched it is has been bothering me more as I reflect on it.

So my recommendation is see the movie then read the book, I have found that to be true with most of Clancy's work. I guess a movie just can't handle the whole story.