"Neo-Nazis" are now the villains in the film version of Tom Clancy's THE SUM OF ALL FEARS

Aint-it-cool-news and other websites ^ | 3/10/02 | self

[sheik yerbouty]

I heard this when they were in the production phase, but it wasn't written in stone. I personally will not see this revisionist, bend over for the jihad film.

[rbmillerjr]

TOM CLANCY used to have principle and not sell out this badly on a movie. GREED KILLS

[rbmillerjr]

bump I'm not seeing it.

[veronica]

Aw gee now...how unfair. One would not want to make villians out Neo-Nazis now, would one!?

[VOA]

Fundamentalist Arabs do have the skill, the means, and the motivation to attack the U.S.
and Israel with such devestation. Clancy knew that when he wrote it and
Paramount sold him out.

I'm sorry I can't give you a link to a transcript, but I heard Clancy on the radio
soon (within a week?) on radio after 9-11.
And at that time he related that the villans had been changed to Neo-Nazis...and that
Ben Affleck was taking over the Harrison Ford slot.

I nearly puked.

Otherwise Clancy gave a good interview and I'll give him the benefit of the doubt...
he's probably under contractual obligation to not dis the film or it's lame
"star", otherwise he probably could be sued by Paramount for a gazillion dollars.

He probably never imagined that such damage would be done to his work.

I saw the trailer when I saw "We Were Soldiers" on opening day.
I WON'T be seeing the flick. Just like I didn't see "Pearl Harbor"...as I realized
it was IMPOSSIBLE to tell the whole story of what happened there without at least
an "R" rating for what happened.

[gg188]

Do I understand this correctly: Tom Clancy wrote it, that Arabs and moslems were the bad buys in the book, but for the movie, this has been changed to "neo-Nazis"?

[ArcLight]

When Clancy was on C-Span a few weeks ago, he said that he doesn't try to exercise control over what Hollywood does with his books. He just sells them the rights, cashes the check and moves on. So he has no control over what they do with Sum of All Fears, and doesn't mind it. He seems to be unashamedly saying, I'm in it for the bucks. Considering the steady deterioration in his books, I can believe it.

[genefromjersey]

The big problem is: when you sell rights to a film,the buyer can do just about anything he/she wants with it. A good example was the very conservative novel Advise and Consent which film maker Otto Preminger turned into a "liberal" movie.

[sheik yerbouty]

Have you read the book, Veronica/ I have no love for nazi pinheads, but the story was about a bunch of jihadist lunatics that got hold of a nuclear bomb.

[jrewingjr]

I have read every Clancy novel and love them for their reality. If Tom wants to have his books made into movies, he needs to retain creative control or not bother having them made. All the movies so far have been disappointing compared to the novels, but this blatant butchery on so many levels is way too much. I will boycott this PC movie.

Clancy has enough money to produce the movies himself; he doesn't need Hollywood's spin. Quit selling the film rights, Tom. You will make more money producing YOUR vision of YOUR novels.

[veronica]

This is done every day I am sad to say. Expect more of it. It's a very PC business.

[l33t]

Substituting Neo-nazis for Muslim terrorits is not only patently PC, it is also idiotic as it concerns commercial success of the movie.

[My Favorite Headache]

Well this movie sounds like total ass. I hate Ben Afflack Insurance as it is. Total sell out...change everything to "Blame Whitey"

[hattend]

Ben Afleck is enough incentive to make me stay away.

[Miss Marple]

Well, although I am quite irritated at Harrison Ford, the casting of Ben Affleck in this is ridiculous. Now that I know that they have completely changed the book, I can cheerfully save my money to buy another Clancy novel, and too bad for Paramount.

If they are going to change the plot, location, and characters, why do they even buy the book? It would be cheaper just to pay for an original screenplay.

Affleck will be as successful in the Ryan role as George Lazenby was in the Bond movie.

[rbmillerjr]

Aw gee now...how unfair. One would not want to make villians out Neo-Nazis now, would one!?

You're missing the point. Clancey's novels have a sense of realism which this takes away. Secondly, it's a PC argument. The radical leftists in Hollywood will not let the Arabs be portrayed as, in fact, they are...and was written in the book.

[aomagrat]

[denydenydeny]

Aw gee now...how unfair. One would not want to make villians out Neo-Nazis now, would one!?

That's not the issue.

The issue is political correctness. The novel of TSoaF was a perfectly good thriller with villains whose motivation makes sense. The film version isn't.

[PoisedWoman]

, he needs to retain creative control or not bother having them made.

If his movies are distorted to this extent, he has only himself to blame. I don't read his books or watch movies made from them, but do know of problems in dealing with HoWood studios. One client of mine who had absolutely NO clout whatsoever sold her story to a studio and demanded and got a clause inserted stating that the woman who played her in the film would have to be Hispanic, as she was herself. If unknown people can insist on such integrity, a mega-HoWood player like Clancy should insist on quite a lot and expect to get it.