Great thread - been waiting on this for a while! Gonna do some damage this long weekend
*** TOM CLANCY'S JACK RYAN ***
72,196 Views |
468 Replies |
Last: 2 yr ago by jeffk
Just finished the first episode. I thought it was pretty good even if there are a lot of changes to the characters from the books. The setting is so different there can't be any direct comparison but Jack clearly isn't as far along in his timeline here as he was in the first Jack Ryan books. It does make me wonder how many of the key moments from that backstory they are going to try and work in somehow.
Nothing bad to say about the casting really. Not sure about the girl playing Cathy but I buy Krasinski in the role.
Nothing bad to say about the casting really. Not sure about the girl playing Cathy but I buy Krasinski in the role.
Had very high hopes for this, but I just finished the first episode and I'm very disappointed (may be a result of me expecting a lot but oh well). Felt too much like the run of the mill 24 type series. I'll still likely continue through a few more episodes though.
On a separate note I wish for once the Muslim antagonist in a show would hate America because of their religious values, not because we performed some travesty against them in the past. Not trying to turn this into the politics board but it would allow more time for the actual story in the show and would likely be more accurate.
On a separate note I wish for once the Muslim antagonist in a show would hate America because of their religious values, not because we performed some travesty against them in the past. Not trying to turn this into the politics board but it would allow more time for the actual story in the show and would likely be more accurate.
Can someone who has not read the books and watched the show weigh in? Seems all the negative reviews have been people upset that it's not like the books.
No material on this site is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. See full Medical Disclaimer.
I'm liking it overall so far (4 episodes in). However, I think I expected way too much. I understand the character changes but the acting is a little rough. I do like that the "bad guys" aren't the stereotypical ISIS-like (well, at least so far. Haven't figured out their motive, yet). Agreed with the comment - Cornish just isn't a Cathy.
Dr. Not Yet Dr. Ag said:
Can someone who has not read the books and watched the show weigh in? Seems all the negative reviews have been people upset that it's not like the books.
I've only seen the other movies and I'm hooked three episodes in. Yah, there's some character tweeks, but this is what 30+ years after it was originally done. They had to adapt some.
It's not just a two hour movie, there's going to need to be more character development for this long of a series.
The nothing can deviate fan boys are obvious in the thread so far.
I'll always give Krasinski the benefit of the chance. His work has earned it.
I really like him in the role and Wendell Pierce is always nails in his role.
I really like him in the role and Wendell Pierce is always nails in his role.
Can someone explain what happened in episode 3 with that husband/wife and military guy? I was so confused what happened and why it was included
FightinTexasAg15 said:
Can someone explain what happened in episode 3 with that husband/wife and military guy? I was so confused what happened and why it was included
I haven't finished the season, but I'm further along that three. As it progresses and you see what's going on with him more, it will fill in some of the gaps and I think you'll get where it's going pretty quickly.
That said, here's some spoiler thoughts for that storyline for me so far- I think the storyline is pretty crappy, in that you don't really see that it's the guilt over the disconnect of being a drone pilot and not flying an plane in a combat zone until later. So there's some confusion on if he's feeling the weight of watching and killing people in HD or just general unhappiness. And when he goes on his walkabout of sorts to Syria of all ****ing places, I rolled my eyes pretty hard at that. I get feeling of grief and how it weighs on you, especially if you kill someone who wasn't really a target, but I feel they were really pushing it with drone dude.
jabberwalkie09 said:FightinTexasAg15 said:
Can someone explain what happened in episode 3 with that husband/wife and military guy? I was so confused what happened and why it was included
I haven't finished the season, but I'm further along that three. As it progresses and you see what's going on with him more, it will fill in some of the gaps and I think you'll get where it's going pretty quickly.
That said, here's some spoiler thoughts for that storyline for me so far- I think the storyline is pretty crappy, in that you don't really see that it's the guilt over the disconnect of being a drone pilot and not flying an plane in a combat zone until later. So there's some confusion on if he's feeling the weight of watching and killing people in HD or just general unhappiness. And when he goes on his walkabout of sorts to Syria of all ****ing places, I rolled my eyes pretty hard at that. I get feeling of grief and how it weighs on you, especially if you kill someone who wasn't really a target, but I feel they were really pushing it with drone dude.
This and the comment the French lady had about "how can you work for the CIA knowing what the done" is an obvious dig at the government for what I assume are personal opinions of the writers.
AgLA06 said:Dr. Not Yet Dr. Ag said:
Can someone who has not read the books and watched the show weigh in? Seems all the negative reviews have been people upset that it's not like the books.
The nothing can deviate fan boys are obvious in the thread so far.
Ok, first this comment is really unnecessary. It comes across as an insult. You can express your opinion without taking a shot at book readers.
Secondly, none of the changes the show made enhanced those characters at all. It was change for the sake of change that did NOTHING to make the series better.
I've kind of settled on the changes being made as the personal opinions of the writers. I finished the season, and while I enjoyed it there's a few things that bugged me.
Alex Berenson, The author of the John Wells books (Not very popular but really good books about a deep undercover CIA OP), is saying the series is a direct plagiarism of his book, "The Prisoner" Basically saying they stole it from him.
I have read "The Prisoner" but haven't started Jack Ryan yet so I can't give my two cents yet. Just posting because Berenson posted that on his twitter and facebook.
I have read "The Prisoner" but haven't started Jack Ryan yet so I can't give my two cents yet. Just posting because Berenson posted that on his twitter and facebook.
AgMarauder04 said:AgLA06 said:Dr. Not Yet Dr. Ag said:
Can someone who has not read the books and watched the show weigh in? Seems all the negative reviews have been people upset that it's not like the books.
The nothing can deviate fan boys are obvious in the thread so far.
Ok, first this comment is really unnecessary. It comes across as an insult. You can express your opinion without taking a shot at book readers.
Secondly, none of the changes the show made enhanced those characters at all. It was change for the sake of change that did NOTHING to make the series better.
It might be a little harsh, but that doesn't mean it isn't inaccurate. Look at the majority of the complaints so far.
They are mostly arguments that changing characters is a problem and it doesn't make them better. Not a single one says it's detrimental. That's a fan boy argument. It was also a response to that specific question to that line of thinking.
The change doesn't bug me. It's the fact that they were pointless changes.
I watched the first two episodes last night and thought it was very good. Sounds like many of you are being very critical but everybody looks at shows differently. If you like it keep watching it, if you don't then don't. It ain't rocket science.
Which always seems to be the norm. I don't ever compare books to movies because they are never going to match up. I thought it was really good through episode two. I'll be watching the rest of it soon.Dr. Not Yet Dr. Ag said:
Can someone who has not read the books and watched the show weigh in? Seems all the negative reviews have been people upset that it's not like the books.
I thought it was really good. Never read the books, but I agree with chang Greer's character. Or maybe I'm just biased because while Wendell Pierce did a great job, nobody beats James Earl Jones.Dr. Not Yet Dr. Ag said:
Can someone who has not read the books and watched the show weigh in? Seems all the negative reviews have been people upset that it's not like the books.
I watched the pilot last night and thought it was pretty bad, it felt like a really bad attempt at Homeland. With the money Amazon has they could have done much better. I haven't read any of the books but I would think they are better because of how good most of the movies with Jack Ryan are. Plus, can we not get a new enemy to deal with? America vs Muslim country X is tired.
Just finished episode 4. I've read all the books and loving it so far. Greer being a Muslim seems like a SJW thing, but it's not going to ruin it for me unless they go the Homeland route and make him a bad guy. Hoping for some John Clark. Maybe in season 2.
I spent the day in bed on Friday after minor surgery and binged the entire series: I really enjoyed it, thought Krasinski was good (maybe not great.) Bunk Moreland was super. Basic plotline familiar but well executed. I suspect they did this on purpose to establish a foothold with viewers then move on to other venues/locales/political milieu in future seasons. Personally, I'm loving how they've set us up for Season 2!
No material on this site is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. See full Medical Disclaimer.
I really liked season 1.
Only thing that bugged me was Kranski acting like he's thinking by darting his eyes back and forth.
I was bugged a little by Abbie Cornish's American accent but then remembered her topless scene and forgave her.
Only thing that bugged me was Kranski acting like he's thinking by darting his eyes back and forth.
I was bugged a little by Abbie Cornish's American accent but then remembered her topless scene and forgave her.
Wife and I binge watched all Friday evening. Overall thought first season was good. I've read maybe 5 or 6 of the Jack Ryan books and thought did ok on his character.
Really didn't get the drone side story at all. Added nothing to plot. Seemed only purpose was a political statement by someone. The way it played out could only be from someone's idealistic brain that goes well outside rational thought.
Really didn't get the drone side story at all. Added nothing to plot. Seemed only purpose was a political statement by someone. The way it played out could only be from someone's idealistic brain that goes well outside rational thought.
It wasn't America vs Muslim country X. It was America vs a Muslim extremist group.Max Power said:
I watched the pilot last night and thought it was pretty bad, it felt like a really bad attempt at Homeland. With the money Amazon has they could have done much better. I haven't read any of the books but I would think they are better because of how good most of the movies with Jack Ryan are. Plus, can we not get a new enemy to deal with? America vs Muslim country X is tired.
Clavell said:
Wife and I binge watched all Friday evening. Overall thought first season was good. I've read maybe 5 or 6 of the Jack Ryan books and thought did ok on his character.
(I forget, how do you do hidden text? Wanted to add a comment.)
[ sp ] words [ /sp ] with no spaces
I just finished binge watching all 8 episodes.
Absolutely phenomenal show. Greer had so many unexpected badass moments.
Absolutely phenomenal show. Greer had so many unexpected badass moments.
I've read a handful of Clancy books and I enjoyed the hell out of this show. Didn't like Cornish at first, but she grew on me.
We watched it all over the weekend. Mostly a replacement level show to us, not great, not bad, had its moments.
But man, what was up with that whole drone pilot night at the casino storyline? That was bizarre and didn't seem to serve any purpose at all.
But man, what was up with that whole drone pilot night at the casino storyline? That was bizarre and didn't seem to serve any purpose at all.
bobinator said:
We watched it all over the weekend. Mostly a replacement level show to us, not great, not bad, had its moments.
But man, what was up with that whole drone pilot night at the casino storyline? That was bizarre and didn't seem to serve any purpose at all.
Agreed. Thought they would have a flashback to show what happened, but never did. That whole thing was a waste of time, except showing him winning the money to give to the boy.
It was a BS storyline to show the military making poor innocent soldiers and airmen murdering against their will. Big mean America.
Just like the French woman's comment about how can Ryan work for his government "knowing what they've done"
Or the random carpet bomb of some Lebanon village.
Just like the French woman's comment about how can Ryan work for his government "knowing what they've done"
Or the random carpet bomb of some Lebanon village.
I'm not even talking about his actual story. It didn't have anything to do with the central plot, but whatever.
I just mean the actual few scenes involving the casino and the couple he met there. All of that was super weird.
I thought maybe they were some kind of agents, and they had some sort of system rigged up where they'd find someone vulnerable (like a depressed soldier...) and make it so they won and then they'd blackmail them or take advantage or something... But nope... it was just all super weird for no reason.
I just mean the actual few scenes involving the casino and the couple he met there. All of that was super weird.
I thought maybe they were some kind of agents, and they had some sort of system rigged up where they'd find someone vulnerable (like a depressed soldier...) and make it so they won and then they'd blackmail them or take advantage or something... But nope... it was just all super weird for no reason.
bobinator said:
I'm not even talking about his actual story. It didn't have anything to do with the central plot, but whatever.
I just mean the actual few scenes involving the casino and the couple he met there. All of that was super weird.
I thought maybe they were some kind of agents, and they had some sort of system rigged up where they'd find someone vulnerable (like a depressed soldier...) and make it so they won and then they'd blackmail them or take advantage or something... But nope... it was just all super weird for no reason.
I was thinking it was something like that too. Or they were con men who rigged the game or something. It was just weird.
Aggie_Boomin 21 said:
Had very high hopes for this, but I just finished the first episode and I'm very disappointed (may be a result of me expecting a lot but oh well). Felt too much like the run of the mill 24 type series. I'll still likely continue through a few more episodes though.
On a separate note I wish for once the Muslim antagonist in a show would hate America because of their religious values, not because we performed some travesty against them in the past. Not trying to turn this into the politics board but it would allow more time for the actual story in the show and would likely be more accurate.
No. Because from a storytelling standpoint you as a viewer are more likely to enjoy the show more if you can sympathize with the villain at least a little bit. It's why all the great villains in the past have some characteristic you understand. Thanos, Gus Fring, Hell, even the Joker had a point to their madness.
Is the "I'm fighting Americans because they were bad in the past," theme tired? Sure, but it's a better story than just having an evil guy in a turban with no emotional reasoning for his actions other than his religion tells him he has to kill Americans. Whether it's true or not.
Champ Bailey said:Aggie_Boomin 21 said:
Had very high hopes for this, but I just finished the first episode and I'm very disappointed (may be a result of me expecting a lot but oh well). Felt too much like the run of the mill 24 type series. I'll still likely continue through a few more episodes though.
On a separate note I wish for once the Muslim antagonist in a show would hate America because of their religious values, not because we performed some travesty against them in the past. Not trying to turn this into the politics board but it would allow more time for the actual story in the show and would likely be more accurate.
No. Because from a storytelling standpoint you as a viewer are more likely to enjoy the show more if you can sympathize with the villain at least a little bit. It's why all the great villains in the past have some characteristic you understand. Thanos, Gus Fring, Hell, even the Joker had a point to their madness.
Is the "I'm fighting Americans because they were bad in the past," theme tired? Sure, but it's a better story than just having an evil guy in a turban with no emotional reasoning for his actions other than his religion tells him he has to kill Americans. Whether it's true or not.
Gonna have to strongly disagree with you on this one. The greatest fictional villains imo out of every movie I've ever seen are Heath Ledger's Joker and Hans Landa in Inglorious Basterds. Neither of those characters garnered any sympathy from the audience, and neither were carrying out their actions as a result of being wronged (at least neither were doing his in an obvious way).
Also no offense but your list of "all the great villains" sucks
I don't know how you're going to have the head of a muslim terrorist organization without some kind of anti-America origin story. Sure their interpretations of religion are part of it, but the US involvement in the Middle East (and our involvement in global policy) is the actual real-life origin story of modern extremist groups.
I'm not sure how you're going to create a believable fictional terrorist leader without that part.
Just from a plot mechanics standpoint "this bad thing happened" is a lot easier than showing someone gradually over time becoming more radicalized against the west unless you spend like the entire first season just doing that.
I'm not sure how you're going to create a believable fictional terrorist leader without that part.
Just from a plot mechanics standpoint "this bad thing happened" is a lot easier than showing someone gradually over time becoming more radicalized against the west unless you spend like the entire first season just doing that.
Featured Stories
See All
11:09
7h ago
4.4k
Troublesome C-minus showing gets A&M dominated by Oklahoma
by Olin Buchanan
1:30
10m ago
110
Rylan Griffen ready to refocus as the Aggies eye the Big Dance
by Luke Evangelist
5 Thoughts: #11 Oklahoma 83, #6 Texas A&M 63 (SEC Tournament)
by Luke Evangelist
17:06
23h ago
2.5k
6:50
18h ago
873
Adversity adds fuel for Ariel Kowalewski as SEC play begins
by Kay Naegeli
Ag Natural
Hasn't the committee reminded us over and that conference tournament games mean nothi
in Billy Liucci's TexAgs Premium
11