crazyrabbits23
yes.
- AKA
- Alex
Finally getting around to rewatching some of the 90s Tom Clancy films -- I'm working on a project for TVTropes (trying to build the character pages for all three films), and had to go back and check on some moments and scenes to get some more clarity, particularly in the case of Hunt for Red October and Patriot Games.
I always liked Clancy's work, and I used to pore through some of the mainline books when I was much younger -- I even got into some of the weird spinoff stuff like Op-Center and Net Force, which should probably be its own discussion. One thing I always liked about the books was that it was steeped in tech and explanations that were informed by real-world concepts, and the whole Cold War/shadowy espionage vibe in a lot of them really appealed to me.
It is extremely weird to me to see a trilogy of films (Red October / Patriot Games / Clear and Present Danger) that I enjoy so much and is so well-regarded, and yet, are so disparate and disconnected from the source material. There's so much stuff in this series that comes out of left field, and so much stuff that's either:
(a) brought in from the book to the film, but given no context, or
(b) created solely for the film and hits like a lead balloon, just as much as the novel events that inspired them
That I found myself shaking my head several times throughout the trilogy.
They do stuff like introduce Gates McFadden (Star Trek TNG) in a seemingly-major role as Jack Ryan's wife, Cathy -- who shows up in one scene, has a British accent (which she inexplicably drops from one line to the next) and disappears completely after the opening sequence. The Ryan family lives in London in Red October... except the next film explicitly points out that they don't, and that they've only gone to London for a vacation. Patriot Games does weird stuff like introduce a CIA handler who's set up to be a major character in future films (Marty), only for him to disappear from one film to the next, while a much more minor character (Rose) is somehow the only other person in the CIA offices (barring Admiral Greer, who gets knocked out of commission at the beginning of Present Danger) to make the jump from the second film to the third. The actress playing Cathy Ryan (McFadden in Red October, Anne Archer in Present Danger) had the majority of their role cut from the final print. New characters routinely get introduced as if Jack Ryan (and the audience) should know them already... which they probably would, if they were explained as well as they were in the book.
It's also weird to me that they had two (technically three, if you count Affleck in Sum of All Fears) actors playing the same role, in a trilogy that is functionally meant to be connected via James Earl Jones' Admiral Greer character, who couldn't be more different if they tried. Alec Baldwin (playing the role Harrison Ford initially wanted, but bowed out of when he realized Sean Connery had top billing on the first film) plays Jack Ryan as a jokey, almost neurotic analyst who is way out of his depth and plagued with insecurities about his past, while Ford's Jack is a much more stoic, less-jokey (kind of deadpan, really) analyst who is much more capable with weaponry and thinks nothing of throwing himself into the fray.
I never understood why Clancy himself was so down on Patriot Games and Clear and Present Danger, though. He complained that the film adaptations of his work missed the spirit of what they were about, but frankly, Patriot Games' film ending works far better than the book, where Sean Miller is just captured again and Jack again refrains from pulling the trigger on him. Clear and Present Danger's film ending gives Jack way more to do in Columbia (he has major agency over the plot) versus him basically just being mission control for Clark's mission in the book. And there of plenty of other moments where the demands of the short runtime didn't lend themselves to long, technical explanations like the book.
And yet, this trilogy has some of my favorite film moments in any trilogy. The reveal of the GRU mole in Red October. The shot of the IRA hitmen walking up the hill to Kevin O'Donnell's house during a windy night in Patriot Games. The Columbia attack sequence in Present Danger, or the slow-burning "print the documents before they get erased" scene from the same film. It pisses me off that they set up a massive sequel hook at the end of the third film (Jack testifying against the President, which could have major ramifications down the line) and then spent a good six years trying to adapt The Sum of All Fears into a workable film... and a novel that was already partially covered in the events of Present Danger. They never even bothered to adapt Debt of Honor, which was written in 1995 and would have been just as good an installment for a fourth entry.
And while I like the film version of The Sum of All Fears, it doesn't have much of the weight of the previous entries, sets up characters it never does anything else with (Liev Schreiber would have been a fantastic John Clark if they'd bothered to do more with him), and the factions/enemies are so forgettable it hurts.
It's certainly been an interesting experience watching the series. Not sure if I want to watch the Amazon series or the new Without Remorse adaptation.
I always liked Clancy's work, and I used to pore through some of the mainline books when I was much younger -- I even got into some of the weird spinoff stuff like Op-Center and Net Force, which should probably be its own discussion. One thing I always liked about the books was that it was steeped in tech and explanations that were informed by real-world concepts, and the whole Cold War/shadowy espionage vibe in a lot of them really appealed to me.
It is extremely weird to me to see a trilogy of films (Red October / Patriot Games / Clear and Present Danger) that I enjoy so much and is so well-regarded, and yet, are so disparate and disconnected from the source material. There's so much stuff in this series that comes out of left field, and so much stuff that's either:
(a) brought in from the book to the film, but given no context, or
(b) created solely for the film and hits like a lead balloon, just as much as the novel events that inspired them
That I found myself shaking my head several times throughout the trilogy.
They do stuff like introduce Gates McFadden (Star Trek TNG) in a seemingly-major role as Jack Ryan's wife, Cathy -- who shows up in one scene, has a British accent (which she inexplicably drops from one line to the next) and disappears completely after the opening sequence. The Ryan family lives in London in Red October... except the next film explicitly points out that they don't, and that they've only gone to London for a vacation. Patriot Games does weird stuff like introduce a CIA handler who's set up to be a major character in future films (Marty), only for him to disappear from one film to the next, while a much more minor character (Rose) is somehow the only other person in the CIA offices (barring Admiral Greer, who gets knocked out of commission at the beginning of Present Danger) to make the jump from the second film to the third. The actress playing Cathy Ryan (McFadden in Red October, Anne Archer in Present Danger) had the majority of their role cut from the final print. New characters routinely get introduced as if Jack Ryan (and the audience) should know them already... which they probably would, if they were explained as well as they were in the book.
It's also weird to me that they had two (technically three, if you count Affleck in Sum of All Fears) actors playing the same role, in a trilogy that is functionally meant to be connected via James Earl Jones' Admiral Greer character, who couldn't be more different if they tried. Alec Baldwin (playing the role Harrison Ford initially wanted, but bowed out of when he realized Sean Connery had top billing on the first film) plays Jack Ryan as a jokey, almost neurotic analyst who is way out of his depth and plagued with insecurities about his past, while Ford's Jack is a much more stoic, less-jokey (kind of deadpan, really) analyst who is much more capable with weaponry and thinks nothing of throwing himself into the fray.
I never understood why Clancy himself was so down on Patriot Games and Clear and Present Danger, though. He complained that the film adaptations of his work missed the spirit of what they were about, but frankly, Patriot Games' film ending works far better than the book, where Sean Miller is just captured again and Jack again refrains from pulling the trigger on him. Clear and Present Danger's film ending gives Jack way more to do in Columbia (he has major agency over the plot) versus him basically just being mission control for Clark's mission in the book. And there of plenty of other moments where the demands of the short runtime didn't lend themselves to long, technical explanations like the book.
And yet, this trilogy has some of my favorite film moments in any trilogy. The reveal of the GRU mole in Red October. The shot of the IRA hitmen walking up the hill to Kevin O'Donnell's house during a windy night in Patriot Games. The Columbia attack sequence in Present Danger, or the slow-burning "print the documents before they get erased" scene from the same film. It pisses me off that they set up a massive sequel hook at the end of the third film (Jack testifying against the President, which could have major ramifications down the line) and then spent a good six years trying to adapt The Sum of All Fears into a workable film... and a novel that was already partially covered in the events of Present Danger. They never even bothered to adapt Debt of Honor, which was written in 1995 and would have been just as good an installment for a fourth entry.
And while I like the film version of The Sum of All Fears, it doesn't have much of the weight of the previous entries, sets up characters it never does anything else with (Liev Schreiber would have been a fantastic John Clark if they'd bothered to do more with him), and the factions/enemies are so forgettable it hurts.
It's certainly been an interesting experience watching the series. Not sure if I want to watch the Amazon series or the new Without Remorse adaptation.
. Not sure what to rate it.... 3.2/5 stars.
