Tools:
Recommend review to a friend »
Many reviews of 2002´s summer blockbuster "The Sum of All Fears" mention 9/11 and "the new post-Cold War era". However, comparing the fictional events in "The Sum of All Fears" to the real-life incidents following the September 11, 2001 attacks on America is like comparing apples to oranges. Yes, it´s true that apples and oranges are both fruits, and it´s true that detonating a nuclear device on American soil and slamming airplanes into American edifices are both attacks on America. However, the qualitative and quantitative outcomes of global nuclear war and non-geopolitical terrorist attacks differ greatly. Therefore, while I can understand that a lot of people developed instant, vicarious links between 9/11 and war-themed movies like "The Sum of All Fears", I have to say that those people are...wrong.
The kind of story that "The Sum of All Fears" relates is, in a sense, much more catastrophic and "old school" than the kinds of attacks orchestrated by Al-Qaeda. Tom Clancy´s novels focus on traditional geopolitical philosophies, even if the villains aren´t all from the same country. Also, while Al-Qaeda may be capable of inflicting horrible pain and death, it does not have the ability to destroy civilization as we know it. In order for truly catastrophic events to occur, the world´s great powers--from a conventional point of view--would have to participate in the destruction. The Cold War may be over, but China, France, India, Israel, Pakistan, Russia, the United Kingdom, the United States, and who knows what other countries still have nuclear weapons. Now, Russia and the U.S. may be friendly, but being friendly doesn´t preclude the triggering of thousands of nuclear missiles. The chemical and biological weapons of Third World countries worry us because they can be transported anywhere in the world with relative ease, but the religious fundamentalist remains very much what he has always been in the grand scheme of things--a pesky pest. The more things change, the more things stay the same.
In "The Sum of All Fears", an international group of neo-Nazis orchestrates a complicated plan that they hope will drive America and Russia to annihilate each other. The plan involves detonating a nuclear device in an American city. Since such an attack would be viewed as the worst kind of aggression against state sovereignty and security, American leaders would put their military forces on high alert, and Russian leaders would do the same in response. The neo-Nazis are betting on the possibility that the Americans and the Russians would destroy most of each other´s nuclear arsenals before additional nuclear weapons are launched, thereby rendering the world uninhabitable. Complicating matters is the fact that no one in President Fowler´s (James Cromwell) administration knows much about the new president of Russia (Ciaran Hinds). CIA analyst Jack Ryan (Ben Affleck) once wrote a paper about the new top Ivan, so CIA director William Cabot (Morgan Freeman) sends him to do some field work to ascertain the true intentions of the Russian government.
I won´t spend any more time on the plot--not because there´s no more story to relate to you but because a plot summary would rob you of one of the film´s greatest strengths--its ability to develop tension by increasing the stakes with each progression of the narrative. Much like Ben Affleck´s other 2002 movie, "Changing Lanes", several sides increase the stakes in a desperate game of brinksmanship. Unlike most thrillers or spy movies (where the lone hero blows up whole countries but no one seems to notice), "The Sum of All Fears" takes a deep hard look at the end of humanity.
There are many individual touches that wowed me more than a fierce gunfight could ever do. For example, during a social party, suddenly all the cel phones in the room begin beeping. The most important men in the presidential administration rush out of the room together while their wives remain seated. You would never think that a cacophony of beeping cel phones would signify so much brain, political, and military power, but "The Sum Of All Fears" shows you how things are done during major crises.
The movie does have its share of faults. For example, while the characters are usually written as smart, competent professionals, they sometimes display the kind of naïve hotheadedness that you know that world leaders in the nuclear age have spent their lives suppressing. There´s also the issue of Jack Ryan´s girlfriend, a character handled so awkwardly that she should´ve been dropped during the editing stages. Roger Ebert of the "Chicago Sun-Times" wrote it best in his review of the film: "I smile wearily at the necessity of supplying Jack with a girlfriend (Bridget Moynahan), who exists only so that she can (1) be impatient when he is called away from dates on official business; (2) disbelieve his alibis; (3) be heroic; (4) be worried about him; (5) be smudged with blood and dirt, and (6) populate the happy ending. We are so aware of the character's function that we can hardly believe her as a person."
Those of you who care about "The Sum of All Fears" as a "Jack Ryan film" rather than a stand-alone project will wonder, "How does Ben Affleck fare as Jack Ryan?" Most people know that Tom Clancy didn´t take much of a shine to Harrison Ford´s portrayal of Jack Ryan in "Patriot Games" and "Clear and Present Danger". (Personally, I preferred Alec Baldwin´s take on the character in "The Hunt for Red October".) Director Phillip Noyce, who helmed "Patriot Games" and "Clear and Present Danger", left the series at the same time as Harrison Ford did, and Phil Alden Robinson ("Field of Dreams"!) took over the helm. Many wondered how the filmmakers would handle a much-younger-than-Ford actor in the Jack Ryan part, but the task was not so difficult, after all. Think about it--if the James Bond series can have a new actor every couple of years, why can´t other motion picture series do the same?
Average user rating (1-5):
[release]10506[/release]