Jonathan Last says that, even in the wake of September 11, Hollywood remains too PC to make real contemporary war movies, and that "The Sum Of All Fears" is a disastrous proof of his thesis.

When we can't depict terrorists as Muslims in a movie, the terrorists have won.

Joel Siegel loved it. For what it's worth.

I'll probably go see it at some point. But Alec Baldwin (I know, sorry) will always be my favorite Jack Ryan, I think...

Baldwin? Pah! Seeing him stuck trying to act on the same set as James Earl Jones and Sean Connery was like watching a Cub Scout soapbox derby entrant trying to run NASCAR. Almost as bad as Keanu Reeves trying to hold down the same set as Pacino in 'Devil's Advocate'...

Rush said he liked it too... And Clancy had a big hand in making. In all fairness it was in the can before 9-11.

People much outside won't likely get this but lately I've been inspired to utter at random, "If we allow Hollywood to become its own city doesn't that mean the terrorists have won?"

Hollywood becoming its own city? Why not its own planet?

The reasons I'm not inclined to see it are:

1) changing the terrorists to homegrown neo-Nazis. Not that I disagree with the change as such, but I read an interview with one of the producers who was full of smug self congratulation for having the foresight to sidestep that thorny, potentially divisive portrayal (I mean, Islamic terrorists? What would Reuters think?). So if the point is to be PC rather than present a good story, screw 'em.

2) by this time in the Jack Ryan story arc, Ryan is a very senior member of the CIA (Deputy Director). Harrison Ford is just about the right age for where Ryan should be now - so why replace the character with that kid Affleck? And besides, Affleck may be the currently reigning pretty boy, but compared to Ford he's a lightweight (heck, compared to Baldwin he's a lightweight, which puts poor Ben in the same class as helium).

"When we can't depict terrorists as Muslims in a movie, the terrorists have won."

How come?