Jack Reacher: Never Back Down (2016)

Betty Nelson71 said:It was a great movie; the two hours just flew by. I think they did a nice job integrating the younger character into the plot. And honestly, Thomas still knows how to deliver some solid action scenes.
The only thing that felt a bit off to me was how he travels around hitchhiking with nothing but a jacket and no bag.
Maybe the book explains why he doesn't bother with a car.

Jack Reacher... I mean, Tom Cruise is a beast. When he walks into a room, everything just stops, and all you hear is people whispering, "Oh my God, that's Jack Reacher." Besides, I've never seen a tiger walking through the woods carrying a suitcase or driving a sedan. I guess those questions might be a little silly.

Betty Nelson71 said:Maybe the book actually explains why he doesn't even own a car...

The guy basically owns nothing—he just moves from city to city flying under the radar. He didn't even carry a debit card in the early stuff, though he starts using them in the more recent novels because getting cash through those old-school checks just isn't cutting it anymore 😁 The writer cleared all that up in an interview once.

I’m actually feeling pretty good about this one, honestly, I'm super satisfied with how they handled this new Jack Ryan installment. 👍

Don't get me wrong, it doesn't quite hit the heights of the first one, but as a sequel? It totally works, and even if you viewed it as its own standalone flick, it'd still hold up just fine.

briskhound2 said:He doesn't own anything, just moves from town to town staying off the grid. He didn't even carry a debit card before, but he uses them in the recent books because getting paid by check isn't really an option anymore. 😁 The writer cleared all that up in an interview.

Thanks. Did they mention why he’s so hellbent on staying under the radar?

Betty Nelson71 said:Thanks, but did they actually explain why he’s so hell-bent on staying under the radar?

Not really... It's just how his life works. Kind of gives off those old Western vibes—like a lone rider drifting from town to town, just stumbling headfirst into trouble wherever he lands...

The movie was alright. A few scenes felt like total filler, though. That part where he gets cornered by three or four guys in a warehouse, then the bit where he tosses his phone and the guy just stares up at the sky looking for it... felt cheap. And that final scene with him and the sniper? Not my thing. Honestly, the first one was better, but yeah, it’s worth a watch if you have the time.

briskhound2 said:Nothing specific. He just lives like that. Kinda feels like some old Western trope—a lonely drifter moving from town to town, just stumbling into trouble everywhere he goes.

Thanks for the reply. Honestly, the first part didn't really grab me. Couldn't even stay focused enough to remember what actually happened.

It’s a pretty solid action flick—doesn't exactly insult your intelligence, though it obviously isn't going to touch the original...

I honestly can't wrap my head around why they decided to adapt the seventh book in the series first. Wouldn't it have made more sense to follow the chronological order, allowing us to actually get to know Jack gradually? Besides, the first book, Killing Flor, is such a standout; wouldn't they have had much richer material to work with for a better film if they had just started there?

Quote : The Great Duck

Morgan Rodriguez57 said:Decent action flick. It doesn't insult your intelligence too much, though obviously, it’s nowhere near the original.

That's about it.

Quote : The Great Duck

Joshua Kern said:I honestly don't get why they jumped straight to the seventh book for the adaptation. It feels so off. Shouldn't they have gone in order? You need that time to actually get to know Jack first. Plus, let’s be real—that first book, *Killing Flor*, is incredible. They could've had so much better material for a movie if they just stuck to the timeline.

Once they saw Bond, they decided to follow suit. 😁 Man, history just keeps repeating itself. It’s happening all over again with American Assassin.
Even the Jack Ryan series had stuff like this happen. At least in that case, they actually stuck to the first two books for the first two movies.

Morgan Brown4 said:And now we’re seeing the exact same thing happen with American Assassin.

How? Simple—American mercenary is actually the first book in the series.

Joshua Kern said:I just don't get why they chose to adapt the seventh book in the series first. It would've made way more sense to follow the chronological order so we could actually get to know Jack properly... plus, the first book (Killing Flor) is top-tier stuff, so they really could've had much better material for a movie.

The real issue is that the writer is backtracking now, too. "The Affair" takes place before Killing Flor—it's that last case right before he leaves the service—and then we've got night school where Jack is still active duty. That's the headache with these long-running series... they jump all over the timeline, especially when they drag on for years and the writer is just looking to squeeze out a few more bucks...

briskhound2 said:How? American Assassin is actually the first book in the series.

Actually, the first one, transfer of Power, came out back in 1999.
AA didn't hit shelves until 2010.

Morgan Brown4 said:The first book, transfer of Power, was released back in 1999.
American Assassin came out later, in 2010.

Since that first novel shares so much DNA with the plot of fall of Olympus, isn't it easy to see why they haven't turned it into a movie yet?

Joshua Kern said:The plot really brings to mind Pad Olympic, so maybe that’s why they haven't turned it into a movie...

Well, Pad Olympic is basically an indirect adaptation anyway. I actually read this short interview where the author mentioned that filing a lawsuit would just be a waste of everyone's time.

Morgan Brown4 said:The first book, transfer of Power, came out in 1999.
AA dropped in 2010.

No clue, honestly. I guess at least our translators follow some kind of order...