Saw the preview.. What is this crap?

Guess so...

Bourne movies were pretty damn good. What's the problem?

Edit: Except Legacy of course.

[This message has been edited by Brian Earl Spilner (edited 12/30/2013 1:39p).]

quote:

---

What's the problem?

---

I think the problem is that Tom Clancy's Jack Ryan is nothing at all like Jason Bourne or the Jack Ryan in the upcoming movie. Analyst =/= trained field agent/assassin

From what I understand, the book Bourne was nothing like the movie Bourne. The movies were damn entertaining though.

It may be a good movie, but they have completely changed the character. It's not Jack Ryan.

Quoting myself:

quote:

---

The books tell most of Jack's backstory. He spent his time between being a Marine and the events of the books working for a finance firm and being an entry level intelligence analyst. Clancy repeatedly plays up how he has never been "out in the field" or been personally involved in violence; it's part of the character and why he reacts to things the way he does.

It might be a good movie, I just don't like it when they slap a famous name on a completely different character/movie to juice the marketing campaign.

---

If you want to make a Jack Ryan movie, great, I'll probably watch it. If you want to make a different movie, that's great too, but it should stand on its own merit.

1st bourne movie had some if only a little bit of the book in it. the next 2 were so far off the reservation its not funny.

i'm tired of action movies in general. hollywood has given up trying to create any sort of plot in them anymore. it's just one ridiculously long fight after another or giant explosions over and over again. that's not a movie. that's just a bunch of special effects for 2 hours.

Ulrich, that I'll agree with. At least the Bourne movies were somewhat based on the books. The new movie isn't based on anything, right?

[This message has been edited by Brian Earl Spilner (edited 12/30/2013 2:27p).]

To be honest, I get more of a John Clark vibe, rather than Jack Ryan.

Brian, would you care if a director did a prequel to The Hobbit and turned Bilbo into Conan?

I read the other day that the script of JR:SR wasn't even written as a Clancy-themed movie, but Paramount made the changes to the character names to fit their vision.

What would have been awesome and actually relevant is to make this movie about Jack Ryan JUNIOR as he joins the clandestine services of the Campus and have an older Jack Ryan played by Harrison Ford as President.

[This message has been edited by jeffk (edited 12/30/2013 2:53p).]

quote:

---

To be honest, I get more of a John Clark vibe, rather than Jack Ryan.

---

Didn't Clancy write a book that was mostly about John Clark?

Yeah, it's called Without Remorse and it's fantastic.

Bourne movie 1 was slightly like the book (maybe about 50% similarity if I remember). Bourne movies 2 & 3 were absolutely nothing like the books, which was good, because the Bourne books were horrendously cheesy and full of just plain amateurish writing and annoying characters. I have no idea how those books sold that well.

As they were, the movies were awesome (barring the escalating use of shaky-cam). If they had been filmed like the books were written, I can't even contemplate how cheesy and outright stupid they would have been.

As for the Jack Ryan movie, I'll probably catch it on blue-ray, but yeah, it just looks like a cash grab using a name the public is familiar with. Nothing like the real Jack Ryan character.

[This message has been edited by FL_Ag1998 (edited 12/30/2013 3:02p).]

The really annoying part is that there are still good movies to be made from the Clancy books. WITHOUT REMORSE. IT'S TIME.

I would love to see Without Remorse made into a movie, but Hollywood would find a number of ways to mess it all up

FL_Ag,

i don't think the 2nd & 3rd books are cheesy at all. i think they have be read with some context of the times. for decades, our gov and country thought the Ruskies and KGB were the most sophisticated and best spies in the world. it wasn't until the fall of the USSR that we found out a lot what we thought about their tactics and means to carry out espionage were vastly over estimated.

this also fits with books like Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy.

[This message has been edited by Sloan Kettering (edited 12/30/2013 3:20p).]

quote:

---

The really annoying part is that there are still good movies to be made from the Clancy books. WITHOUT REMORSE. IT'S TIME.

---

Absolutely.

quote:

---

Brian, would you care if a director did a prequel to The Hobbit and turned Bilbo into Conan?

---

Mr. Ramius, there is a Mr. Bay holding for you on line 2.

quote:

---

FL_Ag,

i don't think the 2nd & 3rd books are cheesy at all. i think they have be read with some context of the times. for decades, our gov and country thought the Ruskies and KGB were the most sophisticated and best spies in the world. it wasn't until the fall of the USSR that we found out a lot what we thought about their tactics and means to carry out espionage were vastly over estimated.

this also fits with books like Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy.

[This message has been edited by Sloan Kettering (edited 12/30/2013 3:20p).]

---

I think you misinterpreted what I was referring to. I don't think the technology/methods are cheesy, I just don't think it was good writing. Cheesy, cliché dialogue primarily. Something you'd find in a straight to DVD movie. And the main female protagonist (his wife/girlfriend, whatever she was) was annoying and Carlos the Jackyl had waaay too many lives (approximately 568 last I counted). The specifics of how Bourne did stuff was the only interesting part of the books.

quote:

---

1st bourne movie had some if only a little bit of the book in it. the next 2 were so far off the reservation its not funny.

---

What irritated me the most was not the fact they deviated from the books, its that they kept the titles the same. It made sense for the first Bourne movie, but there was absolutely no reason to keep doing it, especially by the time they got to Legacy.

They at least came up with a new title for this one, but the complete reboot seems pointlessly stupid. Why not do "Jack Ryan: Legacy", and have Ryan pass the torch to someone new? You could use his son like jeff suggested, or go a whole new direction. It would be so easy to use the existing storyline as a jumping off point, but rebooting the entire thing makes absolutely no sense.

There is even a perfect model, the other book series Clancy "co-authored".

Hollywood goes out of its way to be a jackass sometimes.

Robert Ludlum is pretty meh as far as spy fiction goes. There are far too many plot twists in his stories for them to be even semi-plausible.

quote:

---

If you want to make a Jack Ryan movie, great, I'll probably watch it. If you want to make a different movie, that's great too, but it should stand on its own merit.

---

I agree with that.

[This message has been edited by Deputy Travis Junior (edited 12/30/2013 7:01p).]

quote:

---

From what I understand, the book Bourne was nothing like the movie Bourne. The movies were damn entertaining though.

---

Book Bourne is actually a far bigger badass than movie Bourne. He's legit superhuman in the books on a level that makes movie Bourne look like a boy scout.

I guess I haven't been paying close enough attention. I just assumed this movie was Jack Ryan Jr. and his work with The Campus.

quantum,

exactly. why use the book names at all.

quote:

---

Book Bourne is actually a far bigger badass than movie Bourne.

---

This. Movie Bourne kinda lucks his way to Zurich, book Bourne murders/blackmails/etc and just generally wrecks shop in order to get papers and reach Zurich.

Bourne movies SUCKED!

The reason this movie is being made is the same reason every single non-comedy (and even a lot of those now) movie that gets released is either an adaptation of another popular work, a sequel, a reboot, etc. Hollywood has realized that the best way to make money is by sticking a brand name on it and the audience is built in.

Someone wrote this story for a film with an action character and rather than take a risk with it and throw it out there, they decided to pay a license fee to Clancy and slap the Jack Ryan brand on it and they are assured of at least a baseline of people going to see it because they read every book Clancy wrote, and a larger number of other people that are familiar with the films go see it because they know that this is a franchise film and they saw "the other ones" too.

I guarantee you this conversation happened.

"Uh, if we release this just as 'Shadow Recruit' will people even know what it is, theres no book called 'Shadow Recruit'."

"Yeah, nice catch! Lets call it 'Jack Ryan: Shadow Recruit" to make sure we pound that this is a franchise film over the consumers' head."

To be fair, it's a solid business strategy.

Case in point: That new Paranormal Activity spinoff that looks absolutely god-awful. In the trailer it shows the name of the movie before adding the "Paranormal Activity" on top. When I saw it in theaters there was no reaction to the trailer whatsoever. As soon as the words Paranormal Activity appeared, everybody groaned.

It might be a terrible movie, but I guarantee people will be more aware of it simply from the Paranormal Activity title on top.

I agree that it makes sense. Its just disappointing that there is very little mainstream originality out there. We need more filmmakers that are the brand names that people want to see the film because of who is making it I guess. Pixar is a good example, but even they seem caught now in making cash grab films based on Toy Story, Cars, Monsters, Nemo, etc as often as they are producing an original story.

quote:

---

We need more filmmakers that are the brand names that people want to see the film because of who is making it I guess.

---

For sure. Just a handful of guys fall in this category for me. Scorsese, Nolan, Cameron, and Tarantino. Spielberg used to but not so much these days.

good lord Speilberg's latest work is so meh.

here's his last 5 movies.
Lincoln - despite the hype this is extremely underwhelming movie saved by some utterly fantastic acting performances
War Horse - total piece of crap movie beginning to end
The Adventures of TinTin - have not seen or really looked into this one, so i'll not judge
Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull - indiana jones and aliens. need i say more.
Munich - great movie.

out of 5 there's 1 definitely good movie.

Yep. Could not have been less interested in Lincoln. War Horse was decent, but forgettable. 7/10, IMO.