The Sum of All Fears (2002) User Reviews

Jack Ryan Saves the World!

[bsmith5552 · 7/10 · 10 November 2002]

"The Sum of All Fears" is the latest film in the Jack Ryan series as written by Tom Clancy. In the previous films, Ryan was presented as a family man and played by Alex Baldwin and Harrison Ford. This time around we are asked to accept a Ryan who is 25 years younger (Ben Affleck), unmarried and a nerdy, wet behind the ears CIA historian. The age difference would have been more believable had the film been set in 1973, when the story begins, rather than the present.

Anyway, the story is about a disgruntled ex-Nazi, Dressler (Alan Bates) who acquires a nuclear device and plans to instigate a war between the USA and Russia and then take over when the super powers destroy each other. The new Russian President, Nemerov (Ciaran Hinds) is set up by Dressler to be blamed for a nuculear attack which wipes out a large part of Baltimore. U.S. President Fowler (James Cromwell) calls in the CIA headed by William Cabot (Morgan Freeman).

Cabot enlists the aide of historian Jack Ryan (Affleck) because Ryan has done a thorough study on Nemerov. Ryan believes the Russian to be innocent even though all around him believe him guilty. As each side prepares to launch their respective missles, Ryan and CIA Operative John Clark (Liev Schrieber) are busily gathering information and Ryan is racing against the clock to convince Fowler of Nemenov's innocence.

Affleck tries his best to make us forget Harrison Ford but to no avail. He simply cannot be taken seriously as the man who holds the world's fate in his hands. Freeman is excellent as always and Cromwell and Hinds stand out as the two world leaders. Bates makes a nasty villain and Schrieber is good as the mysterious man with a past, Clark. Bridget Moynahan appears as Affleck's love interest and future wife.

The real star of the picture are the special effects. The nuclear explosion is realistic and believable and the attack on the aircraft carrier is equally good.

I hope that in the next Jack Ryan movie, he is portrayed by someone who is at least old enough to shave.

A snappy and surprising thriller

[Leofwine_draca · 7/10 · 2 January 2017]

Here's a fresh interpretation of a popular Tom Clancy novel, which mixes CIA jargon with presidential anguish into a pleasing, pulse-pounding brew. The impact of the 9/11 disaster is readily apparent in this suspenseful movie which is part disaster-film itself. The old trick of US vs. Russia (but not really) is familiar territory, but through crisp writing and engaging characters the story is given time to develop, strengthening the clichés and making everything very watchable. A strong budget leads to some very effective effects sequences, and cinematography and score are both excellent. The cast is also populated with some strong character actors – Liev Schrieber has never been better than here, as a spy; Morgan Freeman does his 'wise old mentor' role with skill, wit and relish; James Cromwell makes for a very human and believable president; even the usually bland Ben Affleck comes out good, having followed in Harrison Ford's shoes as the heroic Jack Ryan.

The opening of the film sets the style well and leads us into some very dark areas. One of the major incidents in the film involves a nuclear weapon exploding in a packed US city, which makes for pretty frightening viewing. Realism seems to be 100% through and through and there are no annoying plot holes or discrepancies. The last half of the film racks up the suspense levels with tons of action and adventure, making this a film to be watched and a darned sight better than most modern fare.

Exciting and thrilling installment in which a young analyst , Jack Ryan, must supply advise to US President , then goes into action

[ma-cortes · 7/10 · 31 August 2014]

Jack Ryan's entry with lots of noisy action , thrills , chills , tension and amazing thriller . This blockbuster is an acceptable adaptation of the novel by Tom Clancy , companion to other prior renditions . The title is paraphrased from a Winston Churchill speech; "Why, you can take the most gallant sailor, the most intrepid airman or the most audacious soldier, put them at a table together - what do you get? The sum of their fears." It deals with CIA analyst Jack Ryan (Ben Affleck) along with a ranking member (Morgan Freeman) of Presidential administration must thwart the plans of a terrorist faction that threatens to induce a catastrophic conflict between the United States and Russia's newly elected president by detonating a nuclear weapon at a football game in Baltimore. As there are 27,000 Nuclear Weapons and One Is Missing . Now Ryan goes back in action for the most vital assignment of his life : to save the President (James Cromwell) and the nation .

Stirring outing filled with emotion , suspense , chills , twisted intrigue and extraordinary nail-biting action scenes . This film is a prequel to the others in the Jack Ryan series . The 'Harrison Ford' films are direct follow-ups to The hunt for Red October (1990) despite the recast of Alec Baldwin's role . Nevertheless, in this film we see Jack Ryan meet John Clark, something which also happens in Clear and present danger (1994) . Therefore this film might be best understood as a reboot of the Jack Ryan series . Interesting screenplay plenty of twists and thrills by Paul Attanasio and Daniel Pyne . However , the filmmaker changed the villains from Islamic extremists , in the novel , to Neo-Nazis ; this was done because prior to the 11 September 2001 attacks, he did not believe Arab terrorists could plausibly accomplish all that was necessary for the plot to work on film . Good production design , in fact , the CIA scenes were filmed at the actual CIA headquarters ; this was one of the times the CIA had ever done such a thing . And this was the first American film unit to enter the Kremlin , though Red Heat (1988) was the first American unit to film in Moscow . The spectacular "Super Bowl" scene takes place in Baltimore , the two teams playing in the game are portrayed by the Toronto Argonauts and the Montreal Alouettes . Real U. S. Marines along with two Marine Corps CH-53E Super Stallion helicopters were used for the sequence of rescuing Fowler from the wrecked motorcade . The picture has a very good support cast who gives excellent performances such as James Cromwell as President Fowler , Bruce McGill as National Security Adviser , John Beasley as General Lasseter , Philip Baker Hall as Defense Secretary , Joseph Sommer as Senator , Michael Byrne , Liev Schreiber , Alan Bates , Sven-Ole Thorsen , Ron Rifkin , Colm Feore and special mention to Ciaran Hinds as Russia President . Spectacular musical score fitting to action and suspense by maestro veteran Jerry Goldsmith . Colorful and atmospheric cinematography by John Lindley . The picture is well directed by Phil Alden Robinson , though Philip Noyce, director of previous entries, was offered to direct but turned it down and Wolfgang Petersen was also offered the chance to direct but declined.

This blockbuster is an entertaining adaptation of the novel by Tom Clancy , companion to ¨The hunt for Red October¨ by John MacTiernan with Alec Balwin and Sean Connery , followed by ¨Patriot games¨ (1992) by Philip Noyce with Harrison Ford taking over the role of Ryan from Alec Baldwin and again ¨Clear and present danger¨(1994) by Philip Noyce with Harrison Ford and Anne Archer . Then Harrison Ford dropped out of reprising the role of Jack Ryan because he and director Phillip Noyce could not agree on the script and Noyce ended up dropping out of the film as well. And finally , Jack Ryan: Shadow Recruit (2014) by Kenneth Brannagh with Chris Pine as Jack Ryan , Keira Knightley and Kevin Costner .

Forget that you have read the book.

[svannozzi · 11 June 2002]

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.

Not bad

[preppy-3 · 7/10 · 26 June 2002]

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.

Read the Book...

[MovieAddict2016 · 7/10 · 23 December 2002]

"The Sum of All Fears," based on the # 1 New York Times bestselling novel by Tom Clancy, features Ben Affleck as Jack Ryan, a historian who somehow or another, by writing a paper on the new Russian leader, is spotted by the CIA Deputy Director (Morgan Freeman).

"The Sum of All Fears" is even more powerful in this day and age, but nevertheless, it stands nowhere near as great as the novel, which is usually the case with films taken from books. In the following I will point out some differences that weren't crucial to my opinion on the film, but just interesting.

The film is a prequel to the other Jack Ryan films, while the novel was a sequel to the other books. In the book, a lost Israeli nuclear warhead is picked up by Arabs some twenty years after the war it was lost in. In the film, a modern-age Hitler is attempting to begin turmoil between Russia and the U.S. with the nuke -- there are no arabs. Also in the novel, the way the bomb was sneaked into the superbowl was much more interesting than the method they used in the film. Also, in the book, Morgan Freeman's character was a dumb man who hid throughout the novel. In the film he's a hero.

There's countless other things that don't really matter, but still made me a bit disappointed in the film.

The film was in no way awful, and is the best Tom Clancy movie to date, but it's still not as good as the book.

3.5/5 stars --

John Ulmer

Um, yes, I need to deliver some information to prevent a war, is that cool with you guys? Worth a rent.

[james-forrest · 7/10 · 30 December 2007]

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

"...we are now in a de facto state of war with the Russians."

[classicsoncall · 7/10 · 17 July 2021]

This is a taut espionage/political thriller while watching, but some of the scenarios require a suspension of disbelief upon considering real world implications. Although a nuclear weapon can be set off at ground level, it's generally triggered in the air above it's intended target at a precise altitude. That's one, with the aftermath of the blast causing radiation poisoning for miles around the surrounding area, something which wasn't even brought up as a concern, except for a mention of the wind in a northern and westerly direction from the explosion site. You're pretty much not expected to think about things like that while watching, but I just can't help it myself.

The global political machinations involving Russia's intervention into Chechnya prefaced by a little more than a decade the unrest in the Ukraine when Russia annexed Crimea in 2014, so that was somewhat prophetic. From a present day standpoint it's easy enough to point that out, but I don't know if anyone was thinking about that back in 2002 when this film was released. At that time, everyone was still focused on 9/11.

Considering it's a Jack Ryan story, with the hero portrayed by Ben Affleck, you have to allow for some latitude in the amount of freedom allowed the character to access the levels of command he was able to given his civilian position. Especially after his mentor William Cabot (Morgan Freeman) died, but I guess that's why it's called a thriller. With all due respect to novelist Tom Clancy, who wrote the book upon which this film is based, the idea of a rogue outsider attempting to foment war between opposing powers in order to step into the breach after they destroy each other, is not itself entirely new. A similar plot element was used back in 1977 for the James Bond film, "The Spy Who Loved Me". Same idea, but with British and Russian nuclear subs about to fire upon Moscow and New York City until Bond makes the save.

Well Made Thriller

[eastbergholt2002 · 8/10 · 10 March 2007]

Sum of All Fears is an enjoyable thriller and the type of movie the Hollywood studios have always been good at making. It's slick, expensive-looking, well-acted and two hours of far-fetched fun. Ben Affleck plays CIA Agent and superman Jack Ryan PhD. Ryan is a former marine, linguist and all-round polymath who saves the world from impending disaster. Affleck is youthful and convincing as Ryan and makes him seem fallible and likable. Ryan becomes a confidant of the wise and sensible CIA Director Bill Cabot (Morgan Freeman) and acquires a beautiful and successful girlfriend (Bridget Moynahan) who believes he's a historian.

The plot is complicated and involves a new Russian leader (Ciaran Hands) who spouts anti-U.S. rhetoric. A Russian chemical attack on Chechnya increases the tension between the two countries. An Israeli atomic bomb is found in the Egyption desert,a relic of the 1973 Arab-Israeli conflict. Neo-Nazi terrorists (led by Alan Bates) want to provoke a nuclear conflict between America and Russia. They acquire the bomb from a South African arms dealer and explode it in Baltimore. The U.S. blames the Russians and the two countries are about to commence all-out nuclear war until Ryan works out what is happening and it all ends happily. The message is that the new Russian leaders are reasonable men signifying that the world has moved on from the Commie bashing flicks of the 1980s.

The idea of a terrorist nuclear attack is topical, but unfortunately the Neo-Nazi villains seem very 1970s. The film has good character actors in supporting roles (e.g., Liev Schrieber, James Cromwell). I much prefer Afflek's Ryan to that of the 52 year-old Harrison Ford who by 1994's Clear and Present Danger seemed too old and surly for the role.

The evolution of enmity

[rmax304823 · 6/10 · 26 March 2005]

It's easy to make somebody look villainous. You give him a grim dark face, something along the lines of Bela Lugosi, deprive him of any sense of humor, have him speak with an accent, and light his face from below with a hideous green key light. While you're at it, make him a full foot shorter than his American counterpart, played here by John Cromwell who -- and this is a little-known fact -- is the third tallest human being on the planet. All these conventions are adhered to in this movie. The Russian Premier thinks as reasonably as the American president, but it's hard to believe his lines when they come from a mouth with lips that resemble a fresh two-inch incision on somebody's belly.

The real problem isn't making someone look like the enemy. It's deciding who should be the enemy in the first place. The Soviets provided us with bad examples for decades but -- well, they are, let's say, no longer available to Hollywood. As the Cold War wound down, even Ian Fleming had trouble. The real SMERSH had to be changed to the fictional SPECTRE because Fleming's conscious was beginning to trouble him.

In "The Sum of All Fears," the Nazis are resurrected, a kind of generic villain to whom no one will object. How could things possibly go wrong? Is someone going to write an angry letter to the New York Times and say, "Hey -- wait a minute! My grandparents were Nazis and I'm offended"? The movie calls them "terrorists" and throws in, let me think, Aryan supremacists, and some others into the stew, but they speak German and we all know who they are.

The plot? This group of terrorists decides (for reasons I seem to have forgotten) to blow up a nuclear bomb in America, an act which they figure will provoke a response against Russia, who will then respond because they must show their strength, and so forth, until there is a nuclear exchange and the world is basically blown apart. Jack Ryan, or "Doctor Ryan" as everyone calls him, figures out the plot and barely prevents the plan's success.

I enjoyed watching the movie. Great shots of airplanes. Special effects, some of them a bit obvious, involving the exploding bomb in Baltimore during the Superbowl. (Does Baltimore have a pro football team? The Crab Cakes or the McHenrys or something?) There's a big hole in the middle of the movie though. Ben Affleck has a big chin and looks the part. I'm sure he's a good guy but he is lightweight for the part. Both Alec Baldwin and Harrison Ford were able to bring strength and some underlying humor to the same role whereas Affleck hits his marks and speaks. I hated to see Morgan Freeman die half-way through. And John Cromwell is a splendid actor but the part doesn't allow him to do much with his character.

The climax is borrowed from "The Godfather." Nessun Dorma -- the aria de jour -- swells in the background while we see the president and the premier signing some sort of joint anti-war treaty, and this triumphant scene alternates with bloody assassinations.

Tom Clancy is an interesting guy. I've only read "The Hunt for Red October" and I can understand why it was all the rage at the military academies. It was really retro. But it was also filled with exciting bits of technology -- how nuclear powered subs work and all that. He evidently used to spend a lot of time shooting at targets with a large caliber pistol. And I saw him perform for his charity, along with three other celebrities, on "Jeopardy." The other contestants bungled their buttons and stumbled over their answers and joked about their own inadequacies. Clancy didn't do that. He smiled politely throughout, was thoroughly decorous, and answered every question flawlessly and without iterative comment. He demolished the competition. In interviews he's been candid and friendly. I'd like to have a beer with the guy sometime.

The Sum Of All Cop Outs

[michael_russell · 3/10 · 19 January 2004]

I read the book "The Sum of All Fears" with fascination--Palestenians discover an Isreali nuclear device lost when the aircraft is shot down in the six day war, sell it to Al Queda, and the arab terrorists proceed to blow up Denver with said nuke.

I was very much looking forward to this movie, only to find that for fear of offending Al Queda, the director and screenwriters had substituted some ridiculous plot about German Nazi's and turned the whole thing into a melodramatic hash.

This could have been a GREAT, prophetic, movie. instead it became a silly waste of money and talent. I know Tom Clancy hated the movie, so did I.

Let's see. Who else has 27,000 nukes for us to worry about?

[hitchcockthelegend · 8/10 · 22 September 2012]

The Sum of All Fears is directed by Phil Alden Robinson and adapted to screenplay by Paul Attanasio and Daniel Pyne from the novel of the same name written by Tom Clancy. It stars Ben Affleck, Morgan Freeman, James Cromwell, Ciaran Hinds, Liev Schreiber, Bridget Moynahan and Michael Byrne. Music is scored by Jerry Goldsmith and cinematography by John Lindley.

Film is the fourth film to feature the character Jack Ryan (Affleck). It is set in present day 2002 but with Ryan younger than in the other films and at the start of his career in the CIA. Plot is Cold War themed and finds America in a sweat when it is found that renegade terrorists have a nuclear weapon in their possession; just as a new supposed radical president takes up office in Russia.

Our most basic common link is that we all inhabit this small planet, we all breathe the same air, we all cherish our children's futures, and we are all mortal.

2002 saw two great thrillers released that starred Ben Affleck, one was Changing Lanes, the other was this Jack Ryan based effort that attempted to reboot the series. Coming a year after the September 11 attacks and featuring a plot involving terrorists using a bomb that America supplied the Israelis in the 70s during the Yom Kippur War, it was material too close to the bone for some critics. Yet the film did well at the box office in the States and including Worldwide takings it garnered well over $100 million in profit. Impressive figures considering it's not an action blockbuster, it relies on brain over brawn and leading man Affleck was on the back of Pearl Harbor and bearing the brunt of critical scorn.

Each day we lose a little bit more of our separate, sovereign ability to determine our own futures... and each day the world comes a little bit closer to that terrible moment when the beating of a butterfly's wings unleashes a hurricane God himself cannot stop.

Comforted by the superb cast around him, which also includes the likes of Colm Feore, Phillip Baker Hall and Alan Bates in support slots, Affleck proves perfect for the material to hand. Without doubt he's no Harrison Ford, in the same way Moynahan is no Anne Archer, tough boots to fill in the roles of Jack and Cathy Ryan respectively, but in a re-jig of Ryan the character, we now have the arrogance of youth dressed up in slacks and t-shirt, a smart brained youngster beginning his CIA career at a perilous time, a time that thankfully is devoid of jingoistic flag waving, but of adult political sensibilities. Affleck's Ryan as a character is as refreshing as the writers' responsible attitude is.

You dropped the bomb on Hiroshima. You dropped the bomb on Nagasaki. Do not lecture me on Chechnya!

With shades of the Cuban Missile Crisis and a Fail-Safe like finale, The Sum of All Fears rounds out as a nail biter of a thriller. Dig deeper and some implausibilities surface, but we are asked to tune into the paranoia and get in deep with the characters trying to avert global catastrophe, to decry the film's cerebral thriller qualities is churlish. The Jack Ryan parts of the film involving Cathy the girlfriend are the least interesting, but here's the thing, young Jack Ryan is just one of the components making up a far bigger whole. The film isn't solely a Jack Ryan movie. The source novel was a door stopper, so inevitably much as been excised from it, and inevitably fans of the book have been vocal in their displeasure; though we would have needed another hour of film to even get close to Clancy's big block of fiction. So in place is a picture that is uncomplicated in structure and story telling and comes in at under two hours running time. It's credit to director Robinson that The Sum of All Fears engrosses from start to finish.

It was hoped that the reboot would herald the start of a run of more Jack Ryan based movies, but in spite of the great box office, this didn't materialise. But that is in no way any marker to the quality of the film, or its standing in the Jack Ryan series. Judge it on its own merits and ideas and the rewards are many, especially on a second viewing. At the time of writing Jack Ryan will return to the big screen in December 2013, titled simply as Jack Ryan, with another young actor, Chris Pine in the role of Ryan. Undoubtedly that will be high on action, such is the way of drawing in the young dollars at the multiplexes these days. But if it has half the tension and brains of Robinson's picture then we will be blessed. If not? Then there's an even bigger reason to treasure Jack Ryan's 2002 version. 7.5/10

decent, flawed Clancy adaptation

[HelloTexas11 · 6/10 · 17 January 2009]

There is a certain inanity to 'The Sum of All Fears' and it begins to grate after a while. It is Jack Ryan (portrayed here by Ben Affleck) constantly being seen by his government superiors as 'the boy who cried wolf.' Yes, this is a continuing aspect of the character, but it is WAY overdone here, to the point of absurdity. Ryan is belittled, ignored, disbelieved, lectured, and generally made to look like a fool. At one point, he actually has a member of the cabinet on the phone during a crisis in which Ryan has a crucial piece of the puzzle, and the guy hangs up on him! Please tell me our government isn't THAT stupid. The story basically is that a mischievous third party tries to provoke a war between Russia and the United States, and damn near succeeds when they acquire an old Israeli nuke that disappeared back in the 70's. They set it off in Baltimore and the US administration naturally suspects the Russians. The problem is, the film audience learns about the weapon very early on, and so Jack Ryan's uncovering of the truth, in bits and pieces, seems interminable. Between no one else in the government believing him and the agonizing amount of time it takes him to put two and two together, filmgoers may begin tearing their hair out. Ben Affleck resembles Alec Baldwin's Jack Ryan much more than Harrison Ford's. Despite the urgency of much of his dialogue, Affleck comes off a bit shallow, and at times seems more annoyed at things in general than worried about the possibility of a nuclear showdown. Like the whole thing is keeping him from ordering concert tickets or something. Morgan Freeman plays his boss at the CIA and he's good as always, and James Cromwell is quite believable as the US President. 'The Sum of All Fears' doesn't feel a part of the same world really as the other Tom Clancy films, even with the presence of old hands like Cromwell. The Ryan character is diminished too much, and there is no other presence in the film substantial enough to take his place. So we essentially have an ensemble piece about a horrific set of events with a lot of interesting things taking place and a number of characters dealing with them. Taken on those terms, 'The Sum of All Fears' is a decent thriller.

Great book, horrible, HORRIBLE adaptation (SPOILERS)

[clevanator · 1/10 · 8 July 2002]

Let me preface my comments by saying that I loved Clancy's book when I first read it ten years ago. It was a gripping page-turner, and a marvelously intricate work, building suspense in layers. I've since re-read it several times.

I realistically expected that elements of the massive tome would have to be changed or condensed for the screen version. But so much is changed, and so many critical elements removed, that it hardly resembles its novel origins. As a result I find it difficult to believe that Tom Clancy had much creative control over this effort, though he's credited as "Executive Producer".

First, for some inexplicable reason, this movie jumps away from previous Clancy continuity by completely revamping the character of Jack Ryan. Rather than a middle aged CIA administrator, Ryan is now a young handsome PhD with little Washington experience. Apparently this is to boost the "chick-flick" quotient of this outing, as it adds nothing tangible to the film, and only detracts from the continuity that had been built to this point. There's even a scene where Kathy is asked how "cute" Ryan is on a 1-10 scale, and she says a "12". Ugh! They had time to include this garbage, yet skip vital character development later in the film?

Yet, even worse, this Ryan is the Uber-Ryan. Yes, the man is everywhere, and involved in virtually every action sequence in the film. He finds the bomb lab in Russia (and saves Clark, CLARK, for crying out loud, shouldn't it be the OTHER way around???), races to Baltimore in a helicopter to warn President Fowler(who in yet another huge change is caught in the blast himself) he gets caught in the nuclear blast(and hardly gets his hair mussed, how cliche!), he personally sifts through the rubble of Baltimore for evidence (another inexplicable change, as Denver was the city nuked in the book, then goes on for a cliched confrontation with the terrorists (who are VERY poorly developed character-wise, totally unlike the book) mano y mano in a darkened Baltimore warehouse. Oh, and I almost forgot, there was the obligatory (and oh so overused) Hollywood "death" scene where Ryan (again, Ryan personally) kneels at the bed of Morgan Freeman as he expires in a "tearful" sequence. Yes, it was painful but not in the way intended.

I thought Clancy's books sometimes stretched the believablity of Ryan's capabilities to the breaking point, yet this goes way beyond anything Clancy has previously done. It's Super-Ryan to the rescue, more 007 than distinguished, cerebral CIA analyst, even though he supposedly had little if any experience in espionage, forensics, or any of that. It is very cliched, and very tiresome to watch, at least for anyone that's actually read the books.

One of the best parts of the novel was the realism. Reading it, you really believed that the plot Clancy put in motion could occur. Not this movie. Believable Islamic terrorists were replaced with cartoonish middle-aged white european neo-Nazis who make stock Hitler-loving speeches that any avid movie-goer has heard a million times before. Dr. Evil would love these guys. They even got to kill one of their own rank, ala Dr. Evil, after he experienced the convenient cinematic "crisis of concience". You could see it coming a mile away! I guess that's so we can understand these men are serious and mean "business"

Oh and on the subject of business, since the typical european Neo-Nazi is young, skinheaded, devoted, but not terribly affluent these Nazis were conveniently well-to-do businessmen with the financial assets and experience to put their scheme in motion. Is this Tom Clancy or James Bond? I guess its not "politically correct" to feature the actual type of real world Middle Eastern "gentlemen", with the aid of foreign government sponsorship who even now are striving, again in reality, to make weapons of mass destruction to use against us? I guess its always "safe" to once again bash caucasian conservative-appearing men in business suits. Whatever the reason, its another major plot element from the book down the tubes.

On the subject of the bomb; there was a great deal of detail in the book about the bomb that was completely overlooked in the movie. For example, in the book, the bomb was originally intended to be a multi-stage, ie, HYDROGEN bomb. It fizzled. The original yield was overestimated by twenty fold by military analysts because of reflection of the snow, and other factors. The President's advisors didn't think terrorists could build a multi-stage weapon, thus the suspicion was immediately upon the Russians. It was only after frantic detective work that the true yield of the bomb was discovered, and it put Ryan on the proper track AND gave him leverage to help defuse the situation(no pun intended). It's a common worry that terrorist groups might get ahold of a low yield fission "suitcase" bombs, yet right from the start in the movie no one, including the President, suspects terrorists!

Another fond memory I have of the book is that Clancy took us to the very brink of Armageddon where the US and Russia were nearly in a shooting war because of the misinterpreted size of the bomb, and the tank battle that the German terrorists cause to happen in Berlin. Yet here, the Russians attack and virtually destroy a US nuclear carrier, we bomb a Russian airbase, and we're still standing at that brink. Somehow, I think if events got that far, there'd be no turning back. Clancy seemed to know that when he wrote the book; he seems to have forgotten it here though.

These are just a few of the major problems with this film. The pacing is bad; one minute the bomb is still being constructed, and a few minutes later its already placed in Baltimore and about to explode, with the cliche of Ryan hot on the trail, trying to warn the President. In the book, the bomb catches everyone completely off-guard, but not here, ANOTHER irritating change. There is also very little character development, the President's motivations are poorly understood, the paranoia of Fowler over the new Russian President's motives was poorly developed, etc etc.

Avoid it if you can. I turned the last 5 minutes off, it was so bad.

Holes big enough to fly a jet through

[mrchaos33 · 5 July 2003]

This is a ridiculous movie. First the casting of Ben Affleck as Jack Ryan just doesn't make sense, chronologically (he's already been played by the much older Harrison Ford and Alec Baldwin) or physically - Affleck just isn't commanding enough for the role. Secondly the movie is simply capitalizing on North America's new found fear of terrorism on home turf, and thirdly the screenwriter Paul Attanasio took huge liberties with the Tom Clancy novel, including, in a stroke of misguided political correctness, changing the bad guys from Middle Eastern to Nazis. Of course everyone hates Nazis, so the filmmakers are not going to offend anyone (Hollywood finds it so hard to get good hateful villains now that Russia is no longer communist) but are we to believe that there is a worldwide conspiracy by super-rich and powerful Nazis to pit two world powers against one another? And how, after the blast (yes, there is a huge atomic explosion), does Ben Affleck piece together this entire conspiracy using only a cell phone and a palm pilot? I'm willing to suspend disbelief in most movies, but this movie has holes big enough to fly a jet through.

Ben Affleck is Great as Jack Ryan in this Exciting Thriller

[lukem-52760 · 7/10 · 15 September 2022]

Harrison Ford was excellent as CIA Analyst Jack Ryan back in the 90's with his Classic Thriller's, Clear & Present Danger & Patriot Games, both excellent films & now we have Ben Affleck in the role & he's very good.

The Sum of All Fears is a proper all American terrorist threat thriller & feels very 90's & is very well made. Fears is not very violent & i liked that, it's a proper Saturday night popcorn thriller that you could watch with your family.

Ben Affleck is a great actor & a big movie star & has made loads of good to excellent films including, Paycheck, Deception aka: Reindeer Games, Changing Lanes, Daredevil, Batman vs Superman, Justice League, Pearl Harbour, Argo, Triple Frontier, The Town & many more. I've always liked Affleck as an actor & he makes a near perfect "Hollywood" leading man. Here the always likeable Affleck plays CIA Analyst Jack Ryan who is on a mission to track down a nuclear weapon that is in the hands of terrorists. Are the Russians behind this? Jack Ryan is trying to figure it out before it's too late. Affleck is surrounded by a very good cast with the legendary Morgan Freeman & Liev Schreiber (also starred with Affleck in the 1998 horror thriller PHANTOMS) & Bridget Moynahan & James Cromwell & many more recognisable faces.

The Sum of all Fears is a well paced & suspenseful Spy thriller about terrorists & their evil intentions. "Fears" is a fun & exciting film with some great action moments & nice cinematography & a thrilling score. Fears is a basic terrorist & bomb thriller story that feels very 90's & old school, its so much fun & Affleck is very good in another likeable role.

Affleck is one of the best Action Thriller stars working today.

Watch this movie for Morgan Freeman's performance

[philip_vanderveken · 6/10 · 22 June 2005]

A nuclear war! Ever since the first atomic bomb was dropped on Hiroshima in Japan, all people fear it. During the Cold War period (1945-1990), many movies were made in which the Americans had to fight off the USSR. Think for instance of "Top Gun", one of the most popular movies about this subject at that time. But even today the fear for nuclear attacks hasn't diminished. Today they fear extremists and terrorists rather than the Russians and that's exactly the idea on which the story of this movie was based.

"The Sum of All Fears" starts with the sudden death of the Russian President. He is quickly succeeded by a man whose politics are virtually unknown to Washington. The CIA is convinced that he is a hardliner and because the United States is very critical of the Russians' treatment of Chechneya, they fear the man. And their fear becomes truth when the Russian President tells them that Chechneya is an internal issue and none of their concern. CIA analyst Jack Ryan, who did research on the man, doesn't think he is a hardliner, but while Ryan and his boss, Bill Cabot, are inspecting disarmament at a Russian nuclear site, 3 Russian scientists have mysteriously disappeared. Although the Russians have explanations for their absence, none of them are true. In the meantime in Austria, a neo-fascist has developed a frightening plan to incite a war between Russia and the U.S. He will use an unexploded Israeli bomb from the deserts of the Middle East. And than the unimaginable happens: a nuclear bomb explodes in U.S. city and America is quick to blame the Russians...

What I probably liked most about this movie was the acting by Morgan Freeman. That man really is a class of his own. I don't know many other actors who are able to save a rather mediocre movie like this one from complete oblivion. For the rest I don't see many other reasons why you should watch this movie. The rest of the acting is in a range from 'OK' at best to a 'could be worse' and the story is rather far-fetched, although not necessarily unbelievable. Even though I don't consider it to be very likely that a Neo-Nazi group would be able to start a nuclear war between Russia and the U.S., that doesn't mean that a terrorist attack with a 'dirty' bomb isn't possible.

Overall I would say about this movie that Morgan Freeman's performance the best reason to watch it. The rest of the acting isn't very special and the story didn't really do it for me. That's also why I can only give it a 6.5/10.

Underrated political thriller

[willcrabbe · 7/10 · 14 June 2021]

This film is definitely one for my 'criminally underrated' list. Not underrated in terms of success, as it brought in three times its budget at the box office, but in terms of critical and general response. I see so many highly negative reviews of this film and I can't quite understand why. Sure, It may be a little slow to build up, but after the major inciting event of the film occurs, the tension and action do not let up. The score from Jerry Goldsmith is magnificent and really helps to elevate the drama and grand-scale of the film.

Really, I strongly recommend this film if you're looking for a taut political thriller. It may be cliched, overly reliant on convenience and silly in parts, but it offers a terrifying glimpse into a potential nuclear conflict between the USA and Russia.

Philip Morris commercial portrayed as a movie

[courtjes · 6/10 · 18 August 2021]

Movie starts out slowly then picks up the action. Tom Clancy always delivers in books or movie adaptations.

Movie practically screams "use Phillip Morris" cigarettes though. A vending machine scene slowly shows all their brands.

So sick of Hollywood taking Big Tobacco money to push addiction on viewers.

Enthralling film. LOVED IT

[Undead_Master · 10/10 · 30 October 2002]

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.

Plenty of Action and Suspense

[Uriah43 · 6/10 · 7 January 2015]

"Jack Ryan" (Ben Affleck) is an analyst for the CIA whose advice is sought by the director "William Cabot" (Morgan Freeman) because of a paper Jack wrote a couple of years earlier concerning the new President of Russia "President Nemerov" (Claran Hinds). As it so happens the war in Chechnya is a current concern of the President of the United States "President Fowler" (James Cromwell) and he wants to know everything about President Nemerov that he can. However, when a rogue general resorts to chemical warfare President Fowler rejects Jack Ryan's assertions that President Nemerov did not order it. This causes any further advice by Jack Ryan to be treated with equal disdain when something big happens. Now rather than reveal any more of this film and risk ruining it for those who haven't seen it I will just say that this movie had plenty of action and suspense but a few scenes lacked realism which caused the movie to seem a little implausible here and there. Even so it managed to keep my interest and for that reason I rate it as slightly above average.

Good movie, bad adaptation

[eroblesp · 4/10 · 30 December 2004]

OK, I enjoyed the movie. But I also have read the book several times, and the comparisons are inevitable, as several other people have done.

I just don't see the point of the most obvious changes from the novel : why using a Neo Nazi fanatic instead of Middle East terrorists? why a very young and single Jack Ryan instead of a married and older character? (Harrison Ford would have been terrific again) Of course a scene aboard Air Force One is more eye candy that a President trapped on Camp David because of a storm and a damaged helicopter. And : where is Ding Chavez??? A character from "Clear and Present Danger", is almost adopted by John Clark after being rescued, and they work as partners.

Some gaps on the story are too difficult to accept : you mean that the ONLY person able to communicate that the bomb was not Russian, is a obscure junior CIA adviser? what about all the agencies and personnel deployed on the explosion site? are they all mute? (On the book, Ryan passes the information but he is not believed by a hostile President and his Nac.Sec. Adviser, *and* a possible power struggle on the Russian government is completely left out).And how come that you can link without any problem from a Palm in the middle of a burned city?

An exciting movie

[Okonh0wp · 8/10 · 16 May 2004]

This film is exciting and suspenseful and that has more than a little bit to do with the talk of terrorism and nuclear threats are so pervasive in the news today. Oliver Cromwell plays the dumb president, Morgan Freeman plays the slightly more intelligent Seceretary of State John Cabot, and Ben Afflect plays our hero, CIA operative Jack Ryan. We've supposedly seen him before in Clear and Present Danger, but it was a different actor from a movie that has long since been forgotten since its release a decade ago, so there's not much of a sequel feel to it. This leads to the only real drawback of the movie: since we're expected to be familiar with these guys, there's virtually no development of the characters. I'm not criticizing the actors, but at the end of the movie I left knowing nothing about the characters other than their names, their job titles, and that they all shared a common goal of preventing the nation from being blown up. However, the story in which CIA analyst Jack Ryan tries to uncover a plot to bring Russia and the United States to the brink of nuclear war, more than makes up for the lack of characterization. It moves at an exciting pace, it is packed with plenty of action, and it has the same draw as TV shows like Alias, 24, The Agency, and West Wing, taking us behind the scenes of an important government agency which we otherwise wouldn't have access to. The difference here is that we know we're seeing something authentic because Tom Clancy does his homework. The story is bold and unpredictable but Affleck's character comes through in an exciting climax, where he has to give a persuasive speech to both his own president and the leader of Russia to avoid an all-out war. If you don't live in the Greater Baltimore Area, it's a happy ending! *** out of ****

Exciting, just don't think about it too much

[blanche-2 · 7/10 · 3 October 2009]

Ben Affleck has a go at playing Jack Ryan, the Tom Clancy hero, in "The Sum of All Fears," a 2003 film also starring Morgan Freeman, James Cromwell, Liev Schreiber, Alan Bates, and Bridget Moynihan. I'll admit I'm not familiar with the books, but it does seem that either the screenwriter or Clancy made this an earlier story - by Patriot Games and Clear and Present Danger, Jack, Harrison Ford in those films, is married to Cathy; here, they're just dating. Also, Affleck is younger than Ford. That's odd, because this film seems to be cashing in on 9/11, so it should really be after the other films...so I'm confused.

That's what I mean about this movie - I enjoyed it, but it's one of those things that, if you think about it, makes very little sense. Here, some sort of Nazi splinter group has purchased an old bomb and is making the Russians think that the U.S. has attacked them and vice versa. Amidst the chaos of a huge atomic explosion that wipes out a stadium, it's up to Jack to reach someone in power before they push the red button and each country wipes out the other, leaving the world free for - who, Germany? - to take over. Not that there will be much left.

There's a lot of action, and the movie goes fast enough so that you don't notice the holes right away.

Affleck is likable, but you'll have a hard time lining him up with the Jack Ryan of Ford. Alec Baldwin has also played Jack; that's maybe a closer comparison. James Cromwell is terrific as a no-nonsense President; Morgan Freeman underplays and is very good.

People that have read the book hate this movie, so if you've read the book, I wouldn't bother seeing this.

Hollywood should apologize to all of us Ryan fans

[silvergrandam01 · 1/10 · 19 March 2007]

I have read every Jack Ryan book and loved each one. Unfortunately someone always decides to make a movie out of it. How Clancy hasn't b*tch-slapped someone yet is beyond me.

How the movies fare so far.. Patriot Games.. acceptable. Hunt For Red October.. One of my favorites,even if different from the book, it basically got it right. Clear and Present Danger.. that's where things really started to jump the track, and fiction crept its way into an already fictionalized story.

But this one... this one is truly a horrible horrible event for literate people the world over. I won't list every detail changed and mutilated from a once great story, but suffice it to say this movie is basically in name only a representation of the book. All other details are conveniently changed or overlooked.

I understand that Clancy books are involved and takes some effort/intelligence to keep with the complex plots, but they always come to a great point, and leave me wanting more. This movie does not. If someone took my work and did an end-round with it like they did with this waste of film, I'd be homicidal.

Hate isn't a strong enough word. Vile isn't a strong enough word.

Then to cast my literary hero with Ben Affleck just pours more salt into a gaping wound in the side of my head. What a crock.

Pearl Harbor was a totally ruined movie which inconveniently had a historic battle (which I'm sure the veterans of were extremely interested in seeing done in modern effects! or did we forget that this should have been more of a tribute to THEM) interrupt everyones love lives, but at least the Japanese still attacked for Christ sake. This movie doesn't even go that far.

The real fun is how many clueless people say "wow, what a great movie" and don't even begin to realize what they're really missing by not PICKING UP A DAMN BOOK EVERY ONCE IN AWHILE!!!

Hollywood, continue to play down to the lowest common denominator if you must, but leave the worthwhile stuff in life alone for those of us that can still read. Stop making crappy movies "based" on great books.