"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

[denydenydeny]

The first inkling that I can find reporting that the villains in the film version of Tom Clancy's The Sum of All Fears had been changed was on Harry Knowles's aint-it-cool-news website, on 3/14/01. The report, from an extra on the film, indicated that he'd seen the shooting script and

I glanced at the page it was opened on, and it said something about "Ukraine not producing much but being all over online". i guess that confrims that the "enemy" isn't Muslim but East European.

Most of the comments on the site at the time were negative remarks concerning the casting of Ben Affleck as Jack Ryan, replacing Harrison Ford. Only a few of the people complained about the change of villains at the time:

Well, apparently they are changing so far: 1) the enemy 2)Jack's age 3)his job 4)his marital status 5) his life experiences. Great. Just great. I guess he never was a Marine, or a stockbroker, or a teacher, or a FATHER. He's just some punk in the CIA. Oh yeah. This movie will be awesome. "pun" intended.

Later, another website reported the full summary of the script, confirming that the movie changes the villains from Muslim terrorists to neo-nazis:

A shady neo-nazi group headed by a mysterious Austrian billionaire (Alan Bates) is trying to set up World War III. To begin the onslaught, they set off an atomic bomb in Chechnya. The American government is shocked thinking the Russians did that themselves. The President (James Cromwell) issues a warning to Russia not to aggravate the situation. Investigating the situation in Russia is a lowly CIA agent, Jack Ryan (Ben Affleck), who's being mentored by a presidential advisor (Morgan Freeman). Looming in the background is the next step of the plan, setting off an atomic device on American soil.

I had not been following the progress of the film, so I was not aware of this change. The trailer for the movie was released on 2/28/02, and is linked here.

By the time the trailer was ready, of course, the events of September 11th had pushed the issue of Islamic terrorism into public consciousness. The comments on aint-it-cool-news were pretty much unanimous on the subject:

Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't SUM OF ALL FEARS(the book) have the villians as ARAB TERRORISTS?? If so, doesn't having them as Nazis in the movie make Paramount's sum of testicles zero? CAN WE AT LEAST BE ACCURATE AND HONEST ABOUT WHO THE TERRORISTS REALLY ARE???? I'm sorry if it offends good-meaning Arabs, and I'm not defending Nazism at all, but the fact is the WTC wasn't destroyed by the NEO-NAZI'S!!! While Neo-Nazi's are definately evil people, THERE IS NO EVIDENCE that they have the skill, the will, or the means to carry out an attack of nuclear magnitude. 9-11 proved that Islamic 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.

Obviously the story here has caved in to the conventions of political correctness. But, remember the terrorists due manage to succesfully detonate the nuke during the super bowl. Can you imagine the backlash against pandering terror hysteria? Scaring people is one thing, depriving them of sleep is quite another. Even entertainment disguised as hyper-real political thrillers must have a conscience.

Talk about plot inconsistency - can anyone, anyone give me a valid explanation for why European neo-Nazis would want to quote-unquote "Rekindle the Cold War"? Deep-seeded vengeance for WWII? Come on, that's the most retarded thing I've ever heard.

DO NOT SEE THIS MOVIE!!! It's PC Garbage!!! Comment: The moment it was announced that the studio changed the ISLAMIC terrorist antagonists into Neo-Nazis, this movie was destined for failure. The reson why Tom Clancy made the terrorists ISLAMIC RADICALS, is because he writes real-world political fiction! The books are semi-beieveable because the readers know these scenarios are possible! Thats what makes Tom Clancy novels good. Has anyone in the USA and UK turned on the TV and seen the middle east?? All of Assyria are murdering each other over a thousand year holy war! They are obviously insane and are bent on GENOCIDE! The last group to do this were the Germans and They are considered to be evil. Maybe Neo-nazis were the antagonists in the screenplay because they are white and we all unfortunatey know what happens when you have non-white stereotypes...outrage. The reason that middle-east people are depicted as terrorists is that 95% of them are bent on world destruction! Sorry Affleck, I want you to succed, but I refuse to see this Politically Correct propaganda...

The myriad ways they've changed SoaF around for the movie version must make it the suckiest adaptation of all damned time. And I'm not just talking about trying to avoid pissing off the whole Muslim world either. Fucking arrogant Hollywood shitheads. Clancy himself should have done the script for a mini-series on HBO.

Only white racists make realistic villains in the fantasy land that is Hollywood Comment: As far as I am concerned, Neo-Nazi fascists can burn in hell. However, I am convinced that that movement consists of about 10 inbred idiots living in a shack in rural Idaho. Meanwhile, 75 percent of people in the Arab world believe that Jews are responsible for the WTC and Pentagon attacks and that there are a lot of them who would like to see a nuke go off during the Superbowl. It is obvious that these spineless Hollywood bastards think that only white, racists make good villains. I am glad to see that my fellow geek brothers and sisters see through this crap. Semper Fi

They changed the Islamic terrorists to NEONAZIS? Why the heck would neonazis want to nuke the Super Bowl? The end of the book has the President deciding to wildly nuke the Middle East in retaliation and Jack Ryan talking him out of it. Making the terrorists neonazis totally ruins the end dynamic of the story! God, what typical Hollywood pandering. I'm right in the target demographic for this movie: young male, Tom Clancy fan, Ben Affleck fan. But because of this PC crap, I refuse to see this movie. I hope the reduced box office for this film was worth the ass kissing of the Muslim activists. PS: This is even worse than what they did with "Rising Sun," making the killer an American instead of Japanese.

I saw the trailer today before We Were Soldiers, and it makes very clear who the terrorists are, with a prominent shot of Alan Bates's swastika watch--what all the neo-Nazis are wearing this year, apparently.

[185JHP]

Yet more proof that the "View From Sunset Boulevard" gang members are agenda-driven "social terrorists." They're not just greedy for bucks - they want to inoculate as many people as possible with their wacky leftism. Shameful. "To Live And Die in L.A." had a Muslim homicide bomber - but they're rare in Hollywood productions.

[SkyPilot]

Not on MY list of films to see... now if you talk about We Were Soldiers, that is on my BUY list, especially after seeing Mel Gibson in it!

I love Mel Gibson.

I love this quote by him (and it ain't no "Urban Legend"):

"Feminists don't like me and I don't like them... I don't know why feminists have it out for me, but that's their problem, not mine." —
Mel Gibson (star of The Road Warrior, Braveheart, The Patriot, Ransom; 100% Pro-Life)

Good thing Mel directed Braveheart himself. Had he "sold the rights" to the same clowns who did The Sum of All Fears, they would have:

1. Changed the villain from Edward the Longshanks to Fred, the white Republican voter in Florida who sent Katherine Harris a Christmas card.

2. Altered the script so the Prince and Phillip, his homosexual lover, celebrate "Diversity Day" in the city of York.

[N. Theknow]

His work has gone down hill in his last couple of books (The Bear & the Dragon" and "Rainbow 6").

Clancy fell off my "must read" list even before he came out with these two books. (When superhuman Dr. Ryan "dove" five times in three pages it was all I could take, before he could have "diven" any more) Unfortunately, someone still gave me these and all I could stomach of either one was about the first 200 pages. I gave both of them to the church book fair as I didn't even want them on my bookshelf.

Sum of all Fears was, in my estimation the beginning fo the end for Clancy as an author of any significance.

To see that even this drivel is altered and starring Ben Epicac Affleck is a further testament that no one is taking Clancy seriously anymore.

Wonder if it will outdraw that box office smash "Pearl Harbor" which also starred hasBen.

[paul51]

Do you honestly expect a movie to be an accurate reflection of anything?

[sheik yerbouty]

I did not think the book wou;d have been so tampered with. What makes it worse, is that the producer, Mace Neufeld was approached by CAIR to tone down the Arab terrorism(they were not exclusively Arab), and having no backbone or cojones, decided to change the plot altogether.

[sheik yerbouty]

Maybe one day they'll grow a spine.

[Ditto]

"Ben Afleck is enough incentive to make me stay away....

I don't even know who the hell Afleck is, but I swore off spending money on Clancey movies after Hollywierd butcherd the last one I paid to see --- "Clear & Present Danger."

[Ditto]

Seriously, are there any actual Neo-Nazi terrorist organizations which are a credible threat to anyone?

Ya. Pick just about any Arab country. They were all helping Hitler during WWII, they all have socialist economies like Hitler's, and they all hate Jews.

[hattend]

...We Were Soldiers, that is on my BUY list, especially after seeing Mel Gibson in it!

Dittos...I just saw that movie about 2 weeks ago and it is a must buy.

The whole time I was saying to myself...."Holy crap! That's how America used to be."

Kudos to Mel.

[hattend]

In any case, remember that his character, the CIA director, dies of cancer in Clear and Present Danger. Kinda weird to have him popping up again.

No more weird than having Jack Ryan get 25 years younger.

[Green Knight]

Point taken. But what I meant was are there any Neo-Nazi terrorist organizations out there whose membership consists of the "classic" Neo-Nazi. (I.E. Aryan skinhead, mostly Germans) I'd be seriously surprised if any such organization which posed a credible threat existed. As far as I know, street gangs and loudmouth protesters is as far up as Neo-Nazis go. Certainly nowhere near the level of "International Terrorism" which Al-Qaeda's at.

[GOPJ]

Soon to be one more Hollywood flop...