Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

The Sum of all Trite

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • The Sum of all Trite

    Has anyone seen 'The Sum of all Fears'? I saw it at the cinema and this film is the worst I've seen in a while - at least Signs (with it's seemingly infinite plot holes) has suspense.

    I saw this film as going badly at the very beggining, when a military plane was blown up carrying a nuclear missile. Even though the plane and its pilot were incinerated in the air, the photograph of his wife and child survived. So apparently in 1973 kodak invented explosion-proof photographs - which allowed for an incredibly overused cliche (the wreckage being surveyed and the photograph lying amongst it). Oh, and apparently nuclear bombs can survive such explosions and remain intact.

    And speaking of cliches, why did the African-American guy die just as he was revealing important information to Ben Affleck? How ****ing overused is that? It is a sign of incredibly lazy (or incompetant) directing to still have a 'They key is hidden in the ..aaah' death scene.

    The ending made me want to throw up. Wow, Ben Affleck and the pretty girl stayed together? Wow, what a surprise, they live happily ever after and every single bad guy dies!

    The thing that was worst about the film however, was that unlike films created during the Cold War, the enemy was the European Union . You start to get an inkling of anti-Europeanism near the beggining, when a European is talking to some branch of the EU about standing on our own two feet and he has a swastika on his watch.
    Then later in the film it goes on about how Europe is 'far-right' and it is 'Aryan nations working together for the first time'. That's strange, I was under the impression that the EU was mainly left-liberal.

    All in all this film is lazy, improbable and downright offensive.

    So what did you think of it?

  • #2
    You didn't read the book, didja?

    In the Book, the Terrorists were Palestinians, who had some thugs dressed as Sovs attack Western troops in West Berlin (the Book was published in 1991). Nuclear bomb did go off, but it was in Denver.

    The Production company decided they wanted to "Update" the story, because, apperently, Palestinian Terrorists are f--king archaic.

    That having been said, it seems to me the Austrian is suppose to be Haider, you got a British dude, and you got a lePen dude. Not bad, I guess. I'd still prefer that they stuck with the Palestinian terrorists. Blame it on liberal Hollywood, who;d much rather have rich white guys be the baddies.

    Ben Afflack's charecter is Jack Ryan, and in the book Jack Ryan has been married for some years (I think he's 40 or so in the book). Though you couldn't tell from the movie, this is the same charecter from
    The Hunt for the Red October, Patriot Games, and Clear and Present Danger.


    So, stop your whining and read the damn book.
    Today, you are the waves of the Pacific, pushing ever eastward. You are the sequoias rising from the Sierra Nevada, defiant and enduring.

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by Lonestar
      You didn't read the book, didja?

      In the Book, the Terrorists were Palestinians, who had some thugs dressed as Sovs attack Western troops in West Berlin (the Book was published in 1991). Nuclear bomb did go off, but it was in Denver.

      The Production company decided they wanted to "Update" the story, because, apperently, Palestinian Terrorists are f--king archaic.

      That having been said, it seems to me the Austrian is suppose to be Haider, you got a British dude, and you got a lePen dude. Not bad, I guess. I'd still prefer that they stuck with the Palestinian terrorists. Blame it on liberal Hollywood, who;d much rather have rich white guys be the baddies.

      Ben Afflack's charecter is Jack Ryan, and in the book Jack Ryan has been married for some years (I think he's 40 or so in the book). Though you couldn't tell from the movie, this is the same charecter from
      The Hunt for the Red October, Patriot Games, and Clear and Present Danger.

      So, stop your whining and read the damn book.
      I was commented on the film, not the book. And I hardly think it's liberal to be opposed to the European Union

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by red_jon


        I was commented on the film, not the book. And I hardly think it's liberal to be opposed to the European Union
        But it is to avoid offending "Minority groups" and making the bad guy a white, rich dude.
        Today, you are the waves of the Pacific, pushing ever eastward. You are the sequoias rising from the Sierra Nevada, defiant and enduring.

        Comment


        • #5
          I purposely didn't see the movie because I loved the book so much & I knew they were going to wreck it.

          If you wanna see a good movie: The Bourne Identity.

          Comment


          • #6
            The Bourne Identity was diappointing... there was very little actual plot if you think about it. More a premise than a fully detailed story. Nice action seens though.

            A friend of mine, who also happens to have read everything by Tom Clancy, said that Hunt For Red October was really the only good movie based on a Tom Clancy book.

            For me the best part of The Sum of All Fears was the 'splosion, but that wasn't even all that great. It was at least entertaining, took my mind off of our terrible world for awhile.
            Click here if you're having trouble sleeping.
            "We confess our little faults to persuade people that we have no large ones." - François de La Rochefoucauld

            Comment


            • #7
              Lonestar : I read Clancy's books, but hate them for their incorrectness , as well. It sometimes takes insurmountable leaps of faith in the plot.
              Damn Addictive , Though. He's a kick ass story teller.
              urgh.NSFW

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by Lonestar


                But it is to avoid offending "Minority groups" and making the bad guy a white, rich dude.
                So why wasn't the bad guy an American?

                Anyway, RJ, you know you only went to see that film cos it had Ben Affleck in it.
                "Love the earth and sun and animals, despise riches, give alms to every one that asks, stand up for the stupid and crazy, devote your income and labor to others, hate tyrants, argue not concerning God, have patience and indulgence toward the people, take off your hat to nothing known or unknown . . . reexamine all you have been told at school or church or in any book, dismiss whatever insults your own soul, and your very flesh shall be a great poem and have the richest fluency" - Walt Whitman

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by Clear Skies


                  So why wasn't the bad guy an American?

                  Anyway, RJ, you know you only went to see that film cos it had Ben Affleck in it.
                  It was a coin toss between Ben Affleck and Will Smith

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    I posted a thread about this when I saw it about a month ago. I think "Sum" was possibly the worst movie of the year. And Ben Affleck has a frighteningly large head.
                    It is much easier to be critical than to be correct. Benjamin Disraeli

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Hey, There's nothing wrong with a large head!

                      /me has a large head.
                      urgh.NSFW

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        I haven't read a Clancy book since I tried to read Red Storm Rising, (back in the 80s, before I was a commie, so get that idea out of your head). It bored me, made me think about The Hunt for Red October, and how there was no tension in the plot of that book. Every plan always came off.

                        People says he's gotten better, but I'm still skeptical.
                        Christianity: The belief that a cosmic Jewish Zombie who was his own father can make you live forever if you symbolically eat his flesh and telepathically tell him you accept him as your master, so he can remove an evil force from your soul that is present in humanity because a rib-woman was convinced by a talking snake to eat from a magical tree...

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Now some plans fail . But they're the ones made by terrorists.

                          I hate the way he always portrays the Americans as the PERFECT good guys. I have no problem with painting the americans as good guys . It is to be expected . But here ,nothing , not a hint of criticism , The plot is always black'n'white . But his detailed descriptions .... they make it all worth while.
                          urgh.NSFW

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by Azazel
                            I hate the way he always portrays the Americans as the PERFECT good guys.
                            You're just mad about the way you come off in the book version of The Sum of All Fears.
                            I make no bones about my moral support for [terrorist] organizations. - chegitz guevara
                            For those who aspire to live in a high cost, high tax, big government place, our nation and the world offers plenty of options. Vermont, Canada and Venezuela all offer you the opportunity to live in the socialist, big government paradise you long for. –Senator Rubio

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Did anyone else wanna smack the US President in that film? Or at least watch him get blown apart

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X