Sum of all Fears

[xirtam]

Looks like I'll have to pick another movie for next weekend, KingNothing. Tonight it's SOAF.

 

[DevilsAdvocate]

I am so geeked about this flick! I have been waiting for what feels like an eternity (a month or so)

 

[Justin218]

I just saw it and thought it was really good. I'd recommend it to all of you.

 

[Hammer]

what time are up picking me up, sweetpants?

Originally posted by: Skoorb
Looks sweet. going tonight

 

[Vernor]

I have an instinctual dislike for movies whose plot was shaped by political pressure groups, even when I think that the original was probably Clancy's last good effort.

 

[neomits]

Just got back from seeing it. I thought it was really good. Affleck isn't even in it that much and the amount he is in he's good. The opening segment and end segment are REALLY well done and John Clark kicks ass. I can't wait till they get to Rainbow Six.


Oh yeah and Ryan's wife is INCREDIBLY HOT!!!!!!!





****SPOILER****






I think that the nuclear explosion could have been done better. It just didn't do it for me. That and they could have at least showed the CBG doing a little more damage. I mean sure you can fly in under radar but you have to get past some ships. OH well. Its hollywood.

 

[bonk102]

i want to go see it but none of my friends want to go with me damnit

 

[Maetryx]

I'm still upset that the moviemakers replaced the Islamic terrorists with "neo-fascists". "Neo-fascists" are to politics what "satanists" are to religion. Anyway, that stunt reminds me too much of Spielburg politically correcting E.T. by digitally replacing the handguns with walkie talkies for the re-release.

Here we are in America where Islamic terrorists really are the enemy and we can't even make a movie that might offend our enemies? Islamic terrorists are badguys. They deserve to be stereotyped and used as propaganda in our media. I just can't understand it.

 

[xirtam]

Maetryx, I think the idea was that we didn't want to stereotype all Islamic peoples as militant and terrorist. But I agree with you generally in that all terrorists are "bad guys" and should be used as examples.

Almost every change that is made as a politically correct move turns my stomach.

I feel your pain.

...but I think I'm still going...

 

[johnjohn320]

I just got back from it.

Now, I've never read the book, so without trying to compare anything to anything else, I thought the movie was excellent. Above-average acting, great effects, a somewhat-confusing but interesting plot. Definitely worth a viewing in my opinion.

 

[GTaudiophile]

I just got back from seeing it. I enjoyed it. Ben Affleck and Morgan Freeman do a good job (Ben's gf in the movie is hot!). The acting of those around the President is so-so, and I felt as if the Russians took a better, more calm approach to it all. The Americans were too quick to get their gun off.

The hype of mass-destruction was needless, though. Not nearly as bas as I thought it would be.

 

[Emos]

Maetryx, I'm still looking forward to seeing the film (loved the book) but I'm also

at the fact that the original bad guys (Islamic terrorists) are now politically correct "neo-fascists". WTF?

 

[Alphathree33]

I just got back from The Sum of All Fears. It is definitely better than spiderman, probably better than starwars and easily takes the cake over ID4 -- which was my favorite american action/patriotic/save-the-world movie before this.

Before watching this movie I'd recommend watching some Kubrick anti-war stuff like Dr. Strangelove or Paths of Glory. A lot of scenes in TSOAF really reminded me of those movies.

 

[Rainsford]

Having read both the book and now just seen the movie, I'd say that I think the movie actually did some things better. Without giving anything away, the Russians were used to a much greater detail in the movie than in the book, it gave a whole lot more tension to the situation than was in the book. And the Nazis weren't as out of place as I assumed they would be.

Oh, yes, and Cathy was very hot.

 

[Rainsford]

Originally posted by: Emos
Maetryx, I'm still looking forward to seeing the film (loved the book) but I'm also

at the fact that the original bad guys (Islamic terrorists) are now politically correct "neo-fascists". WTF?

See the movie, they aren't as out of place as you would think they would be. The change was done very well.

 

[hzl eyed grl]

I just got back from watching it. I loved it. It definitely held my attention far better than AOTC did.

 

[CocaCola5]

Just saw it, I give it 8/10. The part that was sloppy was the ending where Affleck is too much all over the place. Also, whats with the three f16s scene, that didn't seem very real, considering the level of events.

 

[SinNisTeR]

Originally posted by: Alphathree33
I just got back from The Sum of All Fears. It is definitely better than spiderman, probably better than starwars and easily takes the cake over ID4 -- which was my favorite american action/patriotic/save-the-world movie before this.

Before watching this movie I'd recommend watching some Kubrick anti-war stuff like Dr. Strangelove or Paths of Glory. A lot of scenes in TSOAF really reminded me of those movies.

sorry to ask, but whats ID4? (independance day 4? lol)

 

[lawaris]

 

[Nefrodite]

Originally posted by: Maetryx
I'm still upset that the moviemakers replaced the Islamic terrorists with "neo-fascists". "Neo-fascists" are to politics what "satanists" are to religion. Anyway, that stunt reminds me too much of Spielburg politically correcting E.T. by digitally replacing the handguns with walkie talkies for the re-release.

Here we are in America where Islamic terrorists really are the enemy and we can't even make a movie that might offend our enemies? Islamic terrorists are badguys. They deserve to be stereotyped and used as propaganda in our media. I just can't understand it.

u have to remember the book came out in 91.

and yes i just saw it, not bad amazingly timely, with the threat of nuclear war between pakistan and india, and terrorism rearing its ulgy head(as ussual)

 

[Tiger]

Just got back from a late showing.
If you read the book you're going to be mildly disappointed with it.
We go from Arab terrorists in the book to Neo-fascists, Denver to Baltimore, and din't really see Baltimore take the big one. I suspect a lot of the movie got re-shot after 9/11.

 

[Nefrodite]

Originally posted by: Tiger
Just got back from a late showing.
If you read the book you're going to be mildly disappointed with it.
We go from Arab terrorists in the book to Neo-fascists, Denver to Baltimore, and din't really see Baltimore take the big one. I suspect a lot of the movie got re-shot after 9/11.

hm interesting, if true that would make for a very interesting split version dvd probably wouldn't do it though i've only read the 1st couple chapters of the book i bought it too late to finish b4 i saw the movie.. thing is 1k pages thick hehe and yes, the book is way detailed, i was hoping for more israeli battle scenes from the book b4 that one plane got dropped ah well.

 

[joohang]

I just came back from watching it.

I agree with most of the stuff other people already mentioned. Definitely worth paying.

 

[Viper GTS]

My thoughts...

Worth seeing, but don't expect it to be anything like the book.

The biggest problem, I believe, is that Clancy's books simply contain too much detail to lend themselves to a film script. They are forced to leave out the sub-plots that weave their way into the final outcome, skipping from major point to major point - almost in outline fashion. But what can you really expect in a couple hours?

Some Clancy books were better suited for movie (Hunt For Red October, Patriot Games), & others that have not yet been made will as well (Without Remorse, Rainbow Six).

Even if it takes you a long time to read his books, go read the book after you see the movie. You'll be much more impressed.

Viper GTS

 

[xirtam]

Well, I saw it. It was indeed enjoyable.

amazingly timely, with the threat of nuclear war between pakistan and india

Hmmm... I think that threat has existed for my entire life...