Ryan O'Neal Books

Helmed by "Platoon" director and Vietnam vet Stone, "Born" is a profoundly moving portrait of a macho athlete whose horrific battle experience causes him to reassess his politics and reorient his give-`em-hell attitude. Cruise, in an ambitious turn away from heartthrob roles, plays Kovic with precision and conviction, especially at his darkest moments, delivering the finest work of his career. Co-written by Stone and Kovic, "Born" reflects the pain and anger felt by an entire generation of returning US soldiers, and will leave a lasting impression.

How could it have happened? Thousands of innocent soldiers and civilians killed for nothing? The most powerful nation on earth, having free speech and a free press, duped into a totally unnecesary and even counterproductive war? A Congress fooled by a dissembling and deceitful administration, with few dissenters.

Well, it happened again in 2003, and watching this movie, one of my favorites, is even more heartbreaking now than it was when I first saw it years ago. It's a period piece starting in the '50s, beautifully filmed, wonderfully acted, and perfectly capturing the spirit of three decades that I know well from personal experience. It's the story of Ron Kovic, who volunteered for duty in Vietnam, was severely wounded, and returned to find that not only had the war been unnecessary, but he and his fellow veterans were not all that welcome, especially when they started exercising their rights to protest the continuation of the war.

This is Stone's best movie by far. The joys of family life, the horrors of war, the pain of catastrophic injury, the trauma of alienation, the exhilaration of redemption... all are depicted movingly and accurately. In this movie, Stone is uncharacteristically as understated as John Williams' wonderful score. There are scenes, such as when Cruise's character, based on a real story, returns to his old neighborhood on Long Island to find his parents,family, and neighbors uneasily prepared for him, that always bring tears to my eyes. But that is just one of many such scenes.

Stone also is dead-on in his depiction of the attitude of the American public toward returning Vietnam veterans and the veterans' despair and bitterness. Alas, I fear that we have not seen yet the development of those same feelings as we have yet to see very many returning Iraq War veterans in this war, which never made any sense, but we will.

It's amazing to watch this movie again now and to see all the parallels with Vietnam, beginning with the killing of innocent civilians, confusion in the fighting, deaths of minority and working class kids, etc.

Like I said, it is heartbreaking to see this happen again, but this movie ought to be re-released or be shown in schools. Of course, being realistic, it has so much profanity and explicit references to sex that it will never be seen by those who ought to see it--impressionable kids who are brainwashed by government propaganda.

A side note: George W. Bush was probably at the 1972 GOP Convention that is depicted in the last part of this movie, so he was probably there when Ron Kovic and other Vietnam Veterans against the War were spit upon and gassed by police. Why John Kerry and his campaign did not bother to mention this--and a number of other things having to do with unnecessary wars--in the 2004 campaign is beyond me.

This is a movie to watch with your teenage son or daughter and to discuss afterward.

To be in a hot sun in a thick heavy uniform is very hard especially for those who never been in hot countries.You'd get easily confused and combined stupidities.
This movie features an ambitious young man dreams to be a hero of his land fighting enemies in other people's land.Ron Kovic has been brought up in a good family,but ends up for the rest of his life on a wheelchair.This... must be hell.
If you're born without legs,you'd never feel this kind of suffering.if you don't have love but have your legs,it would be different.Think what war can do to your children.
Kovic is interprated by Tom Cruise, an actor we have never seen so sad and depressed like in this movie.Oliver Stone is to me the 'Hero' of Vietnamese war's movies.Never forget that handsome Yankee Doodle Boy as young Kovic too.

Born on the Fourth of July follows the journey of Ron Kovic from his innocent childhood in the 1950's through his experience in the Vietnam war and its aftermath. His painful journey reflects the tumultuous journey that America took during the Vietnam War years.

Tom Cruise, delivering an intense performance as Kovic, and director Oliver Stone, a Vietnam Veteran, allows us to share in the raw emotions of the character. John Williams provides a brilliant score to add to the emotional punch.

This film was made when Stone could command a big budget post-Platoon and before he succumbed to the excesses of his later films - Born on the Fourth of July stands as his finest film.

Everything that people love and detest about Oliver Stone's films is in full flower here--ambitious theme, strengthen visual style, undisguised political biases...

The film is also an important turning point in Tom Cruise's career, completing his transformation from rising star to serious actor... He received his first Academy Award nomination for his role as antiwar activist and Vietnam veteran... Though Ron Kovic's story is presented as a distillation of the political and a violent social commotion that America went through from the mid-sixties to the mid-seventies... At heart, it's propaganda...

Stone begins the story as a twisted cinematic version with boys playing war in suburban woods... It's Massapequa, Long Island, 1956...

Ron Kovic grows up as a typical American white kid who believes in God, country, sports, and sex... His father's (Raymond J. Barry) leaving his forceful mother (Caroline Kava) as the dominant personality in the home... To Ron, she's a repressive slave driver who sets a standard he can never measure up to... That, in part, is why he enlists in the Marines, straight out of high school... Cut to the Cua Viet River, October 1967, where Sgt. Kovic is in his second tour...

The short vision of Vietnam that Stone presents here is even more surreal and horrifying than the violence in "Platoon." An attack on a village is a disaster, and the Marines' retreat from it is even worse for Kovic... That nightmare is settled when Kovic is seriously wounded, sent to a MASH unit, and then to a Bronx Veteran's Administration hospital...

Paralyzed from the waist down, Kovic sank into a deep depression... From that moment, the next hour or so is a steep downward spiral of self-pity, drunkenness, anger, misery, and, most important, guilt over one incident for which he cannot forgive himself... It's honest, unflattering, and ugly...

Cruise's performance is one of his best, capturing both the cocky, insecure young man and the haunted veteran...The motion picture is never boring and, until the last reel, the action moves forcefully...

If Stone had elected in the middle section to spend less time rolling about with pleasure in Mexican fleshpots and to pay more attention to Kovic's full development, he might have created the antiwar epic he was aiming for, revealing the physical and psychological costs of one of the most tragic events in history...

Helmed by "Platoon" director and Vietnam vet Stone, "Born" is a profoundly moving portrait of a macho athlete whose horrific battle experience causes him to reassess his politics and reorient his give-`em-hell attitude. Cruise, in an ambitious turn away from heartthrob roles, plays Kovic with precision and conviction, especially at his darkest moments, delivering the finest work of his career. Co-written by Stone and Kovic, "Born" reflects the pain and anger felt by an entire generation of returning US soldiers, and will leave a lasting impression.

How could it have happened? Thousands of innocent soldiers and civilians killed for nothing? The most powerful nation on earth, having free speech and a free press, duped into a totally unnecesary and even counterproductive war? A Congress fooled by a dissembling and deceitful administration, with few dissenters.

Well, it happened again in 2003, and watching this movie, one of my favorites, is even more heartbreaking now than it was when I first saw it years ago. It's a period piece starting in the '50s, beautifully filmed, wonderfully acted, and perfectly capturing the spirit of three decades that I know well from personal experience. It's the story of Ron Kovic, who volunteered for duty in Vietnam, was severely wounded, and returned to find that not only had the war been unnecessary, but he and his fellow veterans were not all that welcome, especially when they started exercising their rights to protest the continuation of the war.

This is Stone's best movie by far. The joys of family life, the horrors of war, the pain of catastrophic injury, the trauma of alienation, the exhilaration of redemption... all are depicted movingly and accurately. In this movie, Stone is uncharacteristically as understated as John Williams' wonderful score. There are scenes, such as when Cruise's character, based on a real story, returns to his old neighborhood on Long Island to find his parents,family, and neighbors uneasily prepared for him, that always bring tears to my eyes. But that is just one of many such scenes.

Stone also is dead-on in his depiction of the attitude of the American public toward returning Vietnam veterans and the veterans' despair and bitterness. Alas, I fear that we have not seen yet the development of those same feelings as we have yet to see very many returning Iraq War veterans in this war, which never made any sense, but we will.

It's amazing to watch this movie again now and to see all the parallels with Vietnam, beginning with the killing of innocent civilians, confusion in the fighting, deaths of minority and working class kids, etc.

Like I said, it is heartbreaking to see this happen again, but this movie ought to be re-released or be shown in schools. Of course, being realistic, it has so much profanity and explicit references to sex that it will never be seen by those who ought to see it--impressionable kids who are brainwashed by government propaganda.

A side note: George W. Bush was probably at the 1972 GOP Convention that is depicted in the last part of this movie, so he was probably there when Ron Kovic and other Vietnam Veterans against the War were spit upon and gassed by police. Why John Kerry and his campaign did not bother to mention this--and a number of other things having to do with unnecessary wars--in the 2004 campaign is beyond me.

This is a movie to watch with your teenage son or daughter and to discuss afterward.

To be in a hot sun in a thick heavy uniform is very hard especially for those who never been in hot countries.You'd get easily confused and combined stupidities.
This movie features an ambitious young man dreams to be a hero of his land fighting enemies in other people's land.Ron Kovic has been brought up in a good family,but ends up for the rest of his life on a wheelchair.This... must be hell.
If you're born without legs,you'd never feel this kind of suffering.if you don't have love but have your legs,it would be different.Think what war can do to your children.
Kovic is interprated by Tom Cruise, an actor we have never seen so sad and depressed like in this movie.Oliver Stone is to me the 'Hero' of Vietnamese war's movies.Never forget that handsome Yankee Doodle Boy as young Kovic too.

Born on the Fourth of July follows the journey of Ron Kovic from his innocent childhood in the 1950's through his experience in the Vietnam war and its aftermath. His painful journey reflects the tumultuous journey that America took during the Vietnam War years.

Tom Cruise, delivering an intense performance as Kovic, and director Oliver Stone, a Vietnam Veteran, allows us to share in the raw emotions of the character. John Williams provides a brilliant score to add to the emotional punch.

This film was made when Stone could command a big budget post-Platoon and before he succumbed to the excesses of his later films - Born on the Fourth of July stands as his finest film.

Everything that people love and detest about Oliver Stone's films is in full flower here--ambitious theme, strengthen visual style, undisguised political biases...

The film is also an important turning point in Tom Cruise's career, completing his transformation from rising star to serious actor... He received his first Academy Award nomination for his role as antiwar activist and Vietnam veteran... Though Ron Kovic's story is presented as a distillation of the political and a violent social commotion that America went through from the mid-sixties to the mid-seventies... At heart, it's propaganda...

Stone begins the story as a twisted cinematic version with boys playing war in suburban woods... It's Massapequa, Long Island, 1956...

Ron Kovic grows up as a typical American white kid who believes in God, country, sports, and sex... His father's (Raymond J. Barry) leaving his forceful mother (Caroline Kava) as the dominant personality in the home... To Ron, she's a repressive slave driver who sets a standard he can never measure up to... That, in part, is why he enlists in the Marines, straight out of high school... Cut to the Cua Viet River, October 1967, where Sgt. Kovic is in his second tour...

The short vision of Vietnam that Stone presents here is even more surreal and horrifying than the violence in "Platoon." An attack on a village is a disaster, and the Marines' retreat from it is even worse for Kovic... That nightmare is settled when Kovic is seriously wounded, sent to a MASH unit, and then to a Bronx Veteran's Administration hospital...

Paralyzed from the waist down, Kovic sank into a deep depression... From that moment, the next hour or so is a steep downward spiral of self-pity, drunkenness, anger, misery, and, most important, guilt over one incident for which he cannot forgive himself... It's honest, unflattering, and ugly...

Cruise's performance is one of his best, capturing both the cocky, insecure young man and the haunted veteran...The motion picture is never boring and, until the last reel, the action moves forcefully...

If Stone had elected in the middle section to spend less time rolling about with pleasure in Mexican fleshpots and to pay more attention to Kovic's full development, he might have created the antiwar epic he was aiming for, revealing the physical and psychological costs of one of the most tragic events in history...

I just returned from 3 weeks in the UK and think the reviews over sold this book. It was not at all the travel bible I expected. You know the comments about how weak the maps are? Well....... if it isn't on the map, it isn't in the book. This book is an excellent resource if you are looking for ideas on what to do with your time in Britain but if you know what you want to do and expect it to be in this book you will most likely be disappointed.

If you just want to see the standard tour stuff, you are better off looking up the visitor information center location for each major city you're visiting and heading straight for it when you arrive. You can book your city tours and attractions and get the best deals on city sanctioned accomodations from the visitor centers.

I had a car for half the time and used the rails the other half. This book did not have the detail for either modes of travel. I needed a little more detailed maps, local rail stations and how the underground connected with major hubs in the major cities. I did not even see anything on the Heathrow Express into the London Paddington Station. That is elemental info for getting into London from the airport.

This book is not bad, it just was not right for me and was not what I expected. I knew where I wanted to go and what I wanted to do and there was very little about those things in this book. They really tried to cover too much in a single volumne. They need to break England, Wales and Scotland into individual volumes.

I still recommend this book but don't rely on it to get you where you want to go and copy just the pages you need (including the area maps at the beginning of each section)instead of lugging the whole book all over Britain. I ended up leaving mine in a the hotel because it was just one heavy item too many.

You want a guidebook with a touch of attitude, Lonely Planet books are for you. They may lack some of the warmth and reach of other books, but they also cover things no one else touches. All the big name sites and attractions are here but so are some spots that most tourists never think of. Lonely Planet Great Britain is unique and I'd recommend it to anyone.

This is the third Lonely Planet travel book I've purchased, and as usual, it surpasses every other book. All the information is easy to understand, well organized, and relevant. Don't think it's going to include Ireland though, because it's actually part of the United Kingdom, not Great Britain.

This is an excellent guidebook. The only problem with it is the quality of the city maps, which are almost impossible to read. I saw an earlier edition in which they were in color and much better. They must have tried to save money in this edition by doing them in grayscale.

In planning a trip to Great Britain, I have purchased three travel books: Lonely Planet, Eyewitness and Frommer's. I would rank them in that order as far as helpfulness in planning our trip. Here are my reasons: I have found Lonely Planet's sections on "where to sleep" and "where to eat" are much more extensive, informative and include a wider variety in price ranges than the other two books. Also, they have more information on some of the smaller towns, that are off the beaten track. I enjoyed the wonderful photographs, maps and illustrations in the Eyewitness Guide to Great Britain and if you can afford two books, it is a great way to prepare for what you will see. However, since I only have room for one travel book in my small suitcase, I plan to take the Lonely Planet book with me on our upcoming trip.

If even HALF of what she wrote (because there is always three sides to a story) is true then I think Ryan O'Neal is the worst type of father that there is. Reading this story made me realize why todays child stars (think Britney Spears) are in such a mess. Read this book and get the scoop on how it was to grow up as "Hollywood Royalty". It is definitely not the fairy tale story that you expect to read. I need to take a shower after reading this book.

NIELSEN RATINGS 1974 1975 TV SEASON

Here are the season average Nielsen ratings for the 1974-75 television season.
Only series are included in the ratings.
The number preceding the series name is the series ranking.
The network carrying the series is in parenthesis, and the average rating follows.

1. All in the Family (CBS) 30.2
2. Sanford and Son (NBC) 29.8
3. Chico and the Man (NBC) 28.6
4. The Jeffersons (CBS) 27.6
5. MASH (CBS) 27.2
6. Rhoda (CBS) 25.9
7. The Waltons (CBS) 25.7
8. Good Times (CBS) 25.6
9. Maude (CBS) 24.8
10. Hawaii Five-0 (CBS) 24.6
I I . Mary Tyler Moore (CBS) 24.0
12. Rockford Files (NBC) 23.8
13. Kojak (CBS) 23.5
14. Little House on the Prairie (NBC) 23.1
15. Police Woman (NBC) 22.9
16. SWAT (ABC) 22.6
17. Bob Newhart (CBS) 22.5
18. World of Disney (NBC) 22.2
19. Mannix (CBS) 21.7
20. Cannon (CBS)
-The Rookies (ABC)
-Sunday Mystery Movie (NBC) each 21.5
23. Streets of San Francisco (ABC)
-Cher (CBS) each 21.3
25. Paul Sand (CBS) 20.9
26. Gunsmoke
-Medical Center (both CBS) 20.7
28. Adams of Eagle Lake (ABC) 20.6
29. Carol Burnett (CBS) 20.5
30. Tony Orlando and Dawn (CBS) 20.3
31. Emergency (NBC) 20.2
32. NFL Football (ABC) 19.8
33. Barnaby Jones (CBS) 19.6
34. ABC Sunday Movie 19.1
35. NBC Monday Movie 19.0
36. Caribe (ABC) 18.9
37. NBC Saturday Movie 18.8
38. Wesnesday Movie of the Week (ABC) 18.7
39. Mac Davis (NBC)
- CBS Thursday Movie, each 18.5
41. Smothers Brothers (NBC)
-That's My Mama (ABC) each 18.3
43. World Premiere Movie (NBC) 18.0
44. The Manhunter (CBS)
-Harry 0 (ABC) each 17.8
46. Apple's Way (CBS) 17.7
47. Tuesday Movie of the Week (ABC) 17.6
48. Petrocelli (NBC)
-Happy Days (ABC) each 17.5
50. Lucas Tanner (NBC) 17.4
51. Six Million Dollar Man (ABC)
-Movin' On (NBC) each 17.1
53. Marcus Welby (ABC) 16.6
54. CBS Friday Movie 16.2
55. We'll Get By (CBS) 16.1
56. Adam-12 (NBC) 15.9
57 The Law (NBC) 15.8
58. ABC Monday Movie 15.7
59. Born Free (NBC) 15.6
60. Sons and Daughters
- Dan August (both CBS) 15.2
62. Archer (NBC)
- Baretta (ABC) each 15.1
64. Sunshine (NBC) 15.0
65. Bob Crane (NBC) 14.9
66. ABC Saturday Movie
- Planet of the Apes (CBS) each 14.8
68. Hot l Baltimore (ABC)
- Barney Miller (ABC)
- Ironside (NBC), each 14.7
71. Karen (ABC) 14.5
72. Get Christie Love (ABC) 14.3
73. Sierra (NBC) 14.1
74. Kolchak (ABC) 13.6
75. Sonny Comedy Revue (ABC) 13.2
76. Odd Couple (ABC) 13.1
77. Paper Moon (ABC) 12.5
78. Nakia (ABC) 11.9
79. Friday Comedy Special (CBS) 11.2
80. Khan (CBS) 11.1
81. Texas-Wheelers (ABC) 11.0
82. Kung Fu
- Kodiak (both ABC) each 9.9
84. The New Land (ABC) 7.9

I first found out about this book in 2004 in a magazine. There was a brief sampling of what was to be read in the book. After reading the brief sample, I felt compelled to buy this book at Wal-Mart, and am so glad I did. Tatum tells her life story exactly as she experienced it. Everything is told with magnificent detail: her turbulent upbringing, her off and on relationship with her her mother, Joanna Moore, her abusive relationship with dad Ryan, and her failed marriage to tennis jerk John McEnroe. Tatum also talks about the making of Paper Moon in a chapter, and the goings on behind there, and that her relationship with her father became strained when she won an Oscar for her work in the movie. She also talks about her problems with drugs, and how it had affected her younger years as well as her marriage. When you read this book, you almost seem to feel that Tatum is telling you her story in person. She also tells about how her dad tried to play director in some of her later movies, and of how abusive John McEnroe was during her marriage. You basically seem to feel sympathetic for her when reading about her troubles with her dad and husband. She was determined to break free from her problems (including drug use), and able to get her life on the right track. A must read for anyone who wants to know more about Tatum O'Neal. Open this book, and you'll get the story word for word. Two thumbs up for Tatum!

I was a big fan of Tatum O'Neal until I read this book. She said that she never graduated high school but yet she sure does use some big words in this book. She lied so much in her youth I'm wondering how much of her story is really true. The constant name dropping and their drug uses is horrible. She is like "poor, poor me".

Gripping, heartrending, and intense! I think this book will appeal to everyone although it will most definitely be more heartrending to those who followed Tatum from a child actress. I finished the book in two days and it was almost impossible to put it down. Tatum's strength to carry on and her mature responsibility for the actions she took despite what she was put through as a child and the fact that drugs and alcohol seem to run in her genes, will make anyone stop and think about their life. It sure did for me.

It is truly amazing how this child survived everything she did and then grew up to be the amazing and inspiring woman that she is. I would have loved to hear more about how much Farrah Fawcett impacted her life and more of the divorce battle between her and John McEnroe but taking into consideration her children, it's easy to see why she held back in revealing all. This story is very gripping and will undoubtedly live in the back of your mind. Take her words as advice because if she can overcome all her hardships at such a tender age then we all can survive and carry on.

Original, fun, with a sad unconventional ending. A definite love it or hate it movie. Makes you appreciate what you have rather than taking everything for granted as David Ames does. If you "don't get it" at first, watch it again. If you watched it once and hated it...don't bother.

For many years this has been one of my favourite films. The very film itself is very "Faustian", in it's theoretically never ending quest for love, experience and knowledge. It also has a much darker side to it, reminding me somewhat of another absolutely wonderful dark film; "The Jacket", with a touch of "Donnie Darko". I've seen the original Spanish film "Abre los ojos" that this more or less is an exact remake of, and amusingly, it contains the same lovely Penelope Cruz in her role as Sofia Serrano. The lead character David Aames is played by Tom Cruise, not someone I particularly like neither in "real life" nor in this film, but he does a good job in this film, and that is after all what counts. His role as a lucky rich boy with no responsibility and who's "all about fun", in his own words, represents my complete opposite, that being so, he quickly finds himself forced to recognize that "there are consequences in life".

Aames falls completely in love with a girl that his lonely best friend brings to Aames' own birthday party (some friend, huh?). Jason Lee does an excellent role with his character Brian Shelby. The happiness ends suddenly though, after Aames lack of responsibility comes back around to him the morning after and he ends up emotionally and physically crippled afterwards. Cameron Diaz plays the character of the slut stalker of Aames, and no fault of Diaz, her character is completely horrible, an awful person.

Without revealing the end and the entire plot for those of you out there who strangely have not seen this marvellous film yet, I would just like to recommend this beyond words. Even though the upper layer of the film seems very "decadent" and "shallow", it really is about (in my view) the greatest thing of all, the search for knowledge and experience. Add the beautiful Penelope Cruz and a really existentialist theme throughout, which I'm sure everyone who thinks for him or herself can relate to (is the world real or merely an illusion?), and you've got yourself one of my favourite films. The end scene is simply sublime, with what probably is the best song in the world, Sigur Ros' divine "Njosnavellin".

Watch it!

This movie is a love story with some sci-fi elements awkwardly thrown in, but there are some moments of good acting and dialogue that make it worth watching.

All the reviewers who said that this is a movie you love or hate,and I really hated it. It was long, boring, and I just didn't connect with any of the characters. I would have turned it off long before it was over, but I was watching it with other people. The only thing remotely good is Camron Diaz, I guess I did like one character after all. Stay away unless you feel you just have to, and if you hate it, you can jump into our ship!

A film which makes an attempt to pattern itself on the fantasy vs. reality films that had become popular at the turn of the new millennium - David Fichner's "Fight Club" and M. Night Shamalan's "Sixth Sense" both from 1999, Christopher Nolan's "Momento" from 2000, and David Lynch's "Mulholland Drive" released the following year (all of which don't surpass the reigning king of this genre when Terry Gilliam released his 1985 masterpiece "Brazil") - by no means fails in this respect since I found it both entertaining and intriguing for the most part, but is noticeably long and certainly may confuse the average '2hr-max-movie-goer'. Penelope Cruz and Cameron Diaz both stand out playing their respective, 'good gal/bad gal roles and Jason Lee is quite appealing as the best friend of our dashing lead Tom Cruise. Yet Cruise may be viewed as stretching this performance given the physical challenges that are demanded. I hesitate to reveal these challenges to those that have not seen the picture as they are indeed the focal point of the plot. Many good things like the witty Cameron Crowe retrospective soundtrack that is weaved into clever culture references and tributes which are indeed enjoyable and even necessary to solve the riddle presented in 'what's is going on?' scenario of the main character's pressing dilemma which may not be easy to access with a single viewing. But still the ride can be entertaining as Tom runs away and into trouble as he often does in quasi-action films that are laced with mystery and intrigue like Sydney Pollack's 1993 "The Firm", Brian De Palma's 1996 "Mission Impossible" and even the more cerebrally dark, "Eyes Wide Shut" from Stanley Kubrick. As noted by many educated critics as well as the tasteless tabloids Mr. Cruise may be biting off more than he can chew as he dives into the land of independent production. I applaud Tom for his efforts and are rooting for his success yet do believe that his choice for future roles should include a return to comedic territory as a deviation/diversion to selecting elaborate/complicated efforts which could be prove too risky and result in a poor reception at the box office.

Original, fun, with a sad unconventional ending. A definite love it or hate it movie. Makes you appreciate what you have rather than taking everything for granted as David Ames does. If you "don't get it" at first, watch it again. If you watched it once and hated it...don't bother.

For many years this has been one of my favourite films. The very film itself is very "Faustian", in it's theoretically never ending quest for love, experience and knowledge. It also has a much darker side to it, reminding me somewhat of another absolutely wonderful dark film; "The Jacket", with a touch of "Donnie Darko". I've seen the original Spanish film "Abre los ojos" that this more or less is an exact remake of, and amusingly, it contains the same lovely Penelope Cruz in her role as Sofia Serrano. The lead character David Aames is played by Tom Cruise, not someone I particularly like neither in "real life" nor in this film, but he does a good job in this film, and that is after all what counts. His role as a lucky rich boy with no responsibility and who's "all about fun", in his own words, represents my complete opposite, that being so, he quickly finds himself forced to recognize that "there are consequences in life".

Aames falls completely in love with a girl that his lonely best friend brings to Aames' own birthday party (some friend, huh?). Jason Lee does an excellent role with his character Brian Shelby. The happiness ends suddenly though, after Aames lack of responsibility comes back around to him the morning after and he ends up emotionally and physically crippled afterwards. Cameron Diaz plays the character of the slut stalker of Aames, and no fault of Diaz, her character is completely horrible, an awful person.

Without revealing the end and the entire plot for those of you out there who strangely have not seen this marvellous film yet, I would just like to recommend this beyond words. Even though the upper layer of the film seems very "decadent" and "shallow", it really is about (in my view) the greatest thing of all, the search for knowledge and experience. Add the beautiful Penelope Cruz and a really existentialist theme throughout, which I'm sure everyone who thinks for him or herself can relate to (is the world real or merely an illusion?), and you've got yourself one of my favourite films. The end scene is simply sublime, with what probably is the best song in the world, Sigur Ros' divine "Njosnavellin".

Watch it!

This movie is a love story with some sci-fi elements awkwardly thrown in, but there are some moments of good acting and dialogue that make it worth watching.

All the reviewers who said that this is a movie you love or hate,and I really hated it. It was long, boring, and I just didn't connect with any of the characters. I would have turned it off long before it was over, but I was watching it with other people. The only thing remotely good is Camron Diaz, I guess I did like one character after all. Stay away unless you feel you just have to, and if you hate it, you can jump into our ship!

A film which makes an attempt to pattern itself on the fantasy vs. reality films that had become popular at the turn of the new millennium - David Fichner's "Fight Club" and M. Night Shamalan's "Sixth Sense" both from 1999, Christopher Nolan's "Momento" from 2000, and David Lynch's "Mulholland Drive" released the following year (all of which don't surpass the reigning king of this genre when Terry Gilliam released his 1985 masterpiece "Brazil") - by no means fails in this respect since I found it both entertaining and intriguing for the most part, but is noticeably long and certainly may confuse the average '2hr-max-movie-goer'. Penelope Cruz and Cameron Diaz both stand out playing their respective, 'good gal/bad gal roles and Jason Lee is quite appealing as the best friend of our dashing lead Tom Cruise. Yet Cruise may be viewed as stretching this performance given the physical challenges that are demanded. I hesitate to reveal these challenges to those that have not seen the picture as they are indeed the focal point of the plot. Many good things like the witty Cameron Crowe retrospective soundtrack that is weaved into clever culture references and tributes which are indeed enjoyable and even necessary to solve the riddle presented in 'what's is going on?' scenario of the main character's pressing dilemma which may not be easy to access with a single viewing. But still the ride can be entertaining as Tom runs away and into trouble as he often does in quasi-action films that are laced with mystery and intrigue like Sydney Pollack's 1993 "The Firm", Brian De Palma's 1996 "Mission Impossible" and even the more cerebrally dark, "Eyes Wide Shut" from Stanley Kubrick. As noted by many educated critics as well as the tasteless tabloids Mr. Cruise may be biting off more than he can chew as he dives into the land of independent production. I applaud Tom for his efforts and are rooting for his success yet do believe that his choice for future roles should include a return to comedic territory as a deviation/diversion to selecting elaborate/complicated efforts which could be prove too risky and result in a poor reception at the box office.

I enjoyed this movie very much a guy name Jamie Kennedy that is known as B-Rad as Brad been acting like he is a gangsta... not a bad movie... most of the parts I laughed but it worth my time enjoy watching comedy movies like this one... also I know an actor who played small part in this movie his name was Terry Crews known as 8 Ball he played in White Chicks

When young B-Rad's dad, a local politician is trying to boost his career the last thing he wants is his son, wannabe rapper B-Rad showing up and ruining his pep rally with his rap lyrics and funky friends. When B-Rad's antics nearly cost him the election, a close advisor suggests staging a fake kidnap to scare him into embracing his own culture. He hires two black actors (humorously portrayed by Anthony Anderson and Taye Diggs)who pose as thugs and kidnap B-Rad with unexpected consequences.

This was a really funny film. I thought Jamie Kennedy did an excellent job with his portrayal of young Brad, and I thought the scenes with the Psychiatrist and the Korean store clerks were funny. 4 stars!

This comity is just as funny on the small screen as on the movie screen. I would recommend it to a friend.

This is a great movie to, watch, lots of hilarious scenes as well. Dont forget the directors commentary as well.

The movie is on double sided DVD so u have to be extra careful when handling.

Ok, I must admit, this definitely isn't a brain teaser and it's not even anything you remotely have to think about to get.

I bought this DVD for my son along with a few others that he wanted for his birthday and I couldn't believe I was actually cracking up laughing at this movie. It's very funny! It's one of those movies you roll your eyes at and only watch because your child wants you to watch with them and then you find yourself starting to enjoy it yourself and you look at each other and laugh.

This movie is a lot of fun and has great comedic value. You might even catch yourself sayin' Wazzzup...after it's over. lol I'm glad it was a movie my family could share and one we all could enjoy.

Even in this new era of Russian and American friendship
into which this film came, there are still atomic bombs on both sides.
Technically the handling of people in the bomb area in this film is very wrong : at the hospital and on the streets.
Everyone is taught that the ashes from the bomb are as deadly as the bomb itself. No one was doing decontaminations here.
The brinkmanship here was classic and the Jack Ryan as good as ever.
Tom Clancy is a very good spy/ suspense writer, he just doesn't seem to know that much about atomic bombs.

Other reviews already written go into specifics about the film. So let me just add my two cents. The movie is awful. It is not anywhere in the same league as the other Tom Clancy novel films. It's boring, poorly paced, not true to the book, cliche, and all together lacking any depth or originality. I never felt on the edge of my seat or worried about any of the characters. The actors are excellent in other films (esp. Morgan Freeman) but in this film cardboard cut outs. Don't waste your time.

I enjoyed the first hour or so of this film, but then it turned into a replay of War Games. The last 30-40 minutes jumped around and were so rushed that all that remained was the predictable outcome.

This film could have been a good one. It came out after 9/11 but before Iraq, at the time of Afghanistan. It is about the "final" confrontation between the USA and Russia. A nuclear terrorist attack is organized in Baltimore so that the USA may believe it comes from the Russians and may start the procedure leading to a full out nuclear war. From the very start the theory that is illustrated here is that terror in the world is organized by the Israeli secret services with the help of some western autonomous adventurers and with the complicity of the hard liners in the Russian and Ukrainian armies. Then the whole story is difficult to believe because of the total lack of real believable hard facts. The American president appears as quite manipulated by his own military personnel and his State and Defense Secretaries, without speaking of the CIA. The Russian president appears just as much manipulated but with maybe a little bit more nerve. The whole plot fails because a small CIA intellectual agent manages to speak to the Russian president directly via the red telephone and make him take the decision to halt his alert, a decision that the US president immediately imitates. How can we believe that. The Weapons of Mass Destruction are quoted in some remote small sentence somewhere unimportant but the propaganda is clear. The various actors of this plot are then eliminated one after the other in the most radical way possible. That's a shame in a way because the film is rather well made and acted but it is obvious war propaganda that supports the theory pretending the world is being manipulated if not controlled by the Israelis, a resurgence of sorts of the old hitlerian anti-semitism of old. I guess some believe that good old hate-theories can always be revived in a way or another, with a little bit of upgrading if necessary.

Dr Jacques COULARDEAU, University Paris Dauphine, University Paris 1 Pantheon Sorbonne & University Versailles Saint Quentin en Yvelines

Nobody writes military thrillers like Tom Clancy. A handful of the movies made from his novels are worthy of the original manuscript. "Hunt for Red October" is my key example.

If I had to sum up the problems for "The Sum of All Fears", I'd first mention acting. I really like Ben Affleck, but he simply doesn't define the role like either Alec Baldwin or Harrison Ford. Perhaps if he were cast in an earlier portion of Jack Ryan's life, he might have worked, but Affleck simply lacks the authority and competence inherent in Ford's manner--and being a MUCH younger man following Ford just seems out of sync.

This was also one of the rare roles where I saw Morgan Freeman as Morgan Freeman. Usually, he transports me to the place and time he's inhabiting in the character--not in this film.

The plot is interesting--but nowhere near as well done as the book. Just read the book. It's available here on Amazon and well worth the price.

Even in this new era of Russian and American friendship
into which this film came, there are still atomic bombs on both sides.
Technically the handling of people in the bomb area in this film is very wrong : at the hospital and on the streets.
Everyone is taught that the ashes from the bomb are as deadly as the bomb itself. No one was doing decontaminations here.
The brinkmanship here was classic and the Jack Ryan as good as ever.
Tom Clancy is a very good spy/ suspense writer, he just doesn't seem to know that much about atomic bombs.

Other reviews already written go into specifics about the film. So let me just add my two cents. The movie is awful. It is not anywhere in the same league as the other Tom Clancy novel films. It's boring, poorly paced, not true to the book, cliche, and all together lacking any depth or originality. I never felt on the edge of my seat or worried about any of the characters. The actors are excellent in other films (esp. Morgan Freeman) but in this film cardboard cut outs. Don't waste your time.

I enjoyed the first hour or so of this film, but then it turned into a replay of War Games. The last 30-40 minutes jumped around and were so rushed that all that remained was the predictable outcome.

This film could have been a good one. It came out after 9/11 but before Iraq, at the time of Afghanistan. It is about the "final" confrontation between the USA and Russia. A nuclear terrorist attack is organized in Baltimore so that the USA may believe it comes from the Russians and may start the procedure leading to a full out nuclear war. From the very start the theory that is illustrated here is that terror in the world is organized by the Israeli secret services with the help of some western autonomous adventurers and with the complicity of the hard liners in the Russian and Ukrainian armies. Then the whole story is difficult to believe because of the total lack of real believable hard facts. The American president appears as quite manipulated by his own military personnel and his State and Defense Secretaries, without speaking of the CIA. The Russian president appears just as much manipulated but with maybe a little bit more nerve. The whole plot fails because a small CIA intellectual agent manages to speak to the Russian president directly via the red telephone and make him take the decision to halt his alert, a decision that the US president immediately imitates. How can we believe that. The Weapons of Mass Destruction are quoted in some remote small sentence somewhere unimportant but the propaganda is clear. The various actors of this plot are then eliminated one after the other in the most radical way possible. That's a shame in a way because the film is rather well made and acted but it is obvious war propaganda that supports the theory pretending the world is being manipulated if not controlled by the Israelis, a resurgence of sorts of the old hitlerian anti-semitism of old. I guess some believe that good old hate-theories can always be revived in a way or another, with a little bit of upgrading if necessary.

Dr Jacques COULARDEAU, University Paris Dauphine, University Paris 1 Pantheon Sorbonne & University Versailles Saint Quentin en Yvelines

Nobody writes military thrillers like Tom Clancy. A handful of the movies made from his novels are worthy of the original manuscript. "Hunt for Red October" is my key example.

If I had to sum up the problems for "The Sum of All Fears", I'd first mention acting. I really like Ben Affleck, but he simply doesn't define the role like either Alec Baldwin or Harrison Ford. Perhaps if he were cast in an earlier portion of Jack Ryan's life, he might have worked, but Affleck simply lacks the authority and competence inherent in Ford's manner--and being a MUCH younger man following Ford just seems out of sync.

This was also one of the rare roles where I saw Morgan Freeman as Morgan Freeman. Usually, he transports me to the place and time he's inhabiting in the character--not in this film.

The plot is interesting--but nowhere near as well done as the book. Just read the book. It's available here on Amazon and well worth the price.