# An Osage HOME THEATER SHACK Review of...JACK RYAN: SHADOW RECRUIT (Blu-ray; Paramount/Skydance)



## Osage_Winter (Apr 8, 2010)

[img]http://www.minastv.com/static/minastv/images/new_release/jack-ryan-shadow-recruit-blu-ray-cover-69.jpg[/img]*Releasing/Participating Studio(s): Paramount/Skydance
Disc/Transfer Information: Region A; 50GB Blu-ray Disc 1080p High Definition 2.39:1 (Original Aspect Ratio: 2.39:1)
Video Codec: MPEG-4 AVC
Rating: PG-13
Running Time: 106 Minutes
Tested Audio Track: English DTS-HD Master Audio 7.1 (Played back on 5.1 configuration)
Director: Kenneth Branagh
Starring Cast: Chris Pine, Keria Knightley, Kevin Costner, Kenneth Branagh, Nonso Anozie, Colm Feore


THE TOM CLANCY THRILLER IS REBORN.


PLOT ANALYSIS:*

Ahhhh…the great Tom Clancy film adaptations from his beloved CIA/spy novels. Two stand out to me over the years as my personal favorites, and which I own on DVD: _Hunt for Red October_ and _Clear and Present Danger_. The last Clancy-inspired film I think I saw was _The Sum of All Fears_, but I didn’t quite care for it (perhaps it was Affleck in the role of Jack Ryan) nor did I like _Patriot Games_, which saw Harrison Ford return the role he so perfectly played in _Clear and Present Danger_. What’s interesting about these films based on Clancy’s books is how the different directors keep changing up who plays Jack Ryan, much like what we see with the James Bond-inspired motion pictures; did Alec Baldwin work in _Red October?_ Yes. Did Ford work in _Danger?_ Yes. It’s not every day you can say that a bevy of actors are playing one character depending on what a script calls for – and based on the time frame the book the films are modeled after are in – and that it’s actually working well. We’ve seen these discrepancies with the Batman films, from Tim Burton’s 1989 original to the latest “real world-grounded” Chris Nolan entries – it’s clear not everyone likes everyone picked to play the caped crusader. When Affleck dons the cowl and cape next, the reactions should be very interesting on fan sites to say the least.

That being said, I was more than intrigued when I saw the trailers for _Jack Ryan: Shadow Recruit_, depicting a younger Doctor Ryan (played here by Chris Pine, who I think is a talented actor so long as he’s NOT wearing a Starfleet uniform and pretending he’s anyone’s Captain Kirk) and suggesting the character had an entire life before the events we have come to know in the aforementioned films. A Jack Ryan prequel story? Well, Hollywood pulled this off – with varying success – with the _Exorcist_ prequels, the _Star Wars_ prequels and even a _Wizard of Oz_ prequel…so why not? What’s most interesting about Kenneth Branagh’s _Shadow Recruit_ is the way in which it cleverly ties together elements from other Clancy story-based films which fans will pick up on (or should; I did) to weave it into the Ryan character’s history – for example: There is a moment in the beginning of the film when the young Jack Ryan goes down in a helicopter crash after taking enemy fire above Afghanistan in a post-9/11 mission, ultimately injuring him to the point he must learn to walk again from the confines of an army special hospital. This ties in to what Fred Thompson’s character talks about in _Hunt for Red October_ when he’s discussing Ryan’s injury with an admiral aboard an aircraft carrier; however, what’s odd is that the events depicted in _Hunt for Red October_ are supposed to take place circa 1991, when the film came out, so how could Thompson’s character in that be talking about Ryan’s accident which Branagh’s film suggests takes place after September 11, 2001? It didn’t happen yet, according to my math…unless I’m overthinking this.

There are also some attempts in this prequel story to explain why Ryan is deathly afraid of flying and ends up not being able to deal with mid-air turbulence; after the helicopter experience, it seems his feelings towards “flying things” have been tweaked a bit. But aside from these discrepancies, _Shadow Recruit_ had so much potential, yet it ended up feeling somewhat disappointing at the end. Much like _A Good Day to Die Hard_ or even _Air Force One_, the plot has to do with Russian baddies looking to do some bad stuff to America, and these guys are willing to go to their deaths to complete the mission. In short, ex-Marine Jack Ryan finishes his doctorate in analysis work on behest of Kevin Costner’s “recruiter” character after he recovers from his helicopter crash injuries and is sent to work in a New York bank secretly monitoring the financial activities of global terror networks and the like. He uncovers a plot set into motion by a Russian corporation to collapse the U.S. economy via a terrorist strike (sound familiar?) after he’s sent to Moscow by his bosses under the guise of a “routine audit.” Much of this is borrowed heavily from other films and the whole “they wanna blow up New York City” thing is really getting long in the tooth now; the last portion of the film has Ryan chasing the Russian’s son around Manhattan trying to stop him from blowing a truck full of explosives. This has been done and done and done already…and it has even happened in real life several times, counting the two bombings on the World Trade Center.

Be that as it may, _Shadow Recruit_ starts off with much promise, as we meet a young Jack Ryan (Pine; is it this guy’s forte to play younger versions of iconic characters a la James Kirk in _Star Trek?_) who is a Marine and flying into a mission with his fellow soldiers. When the chopper takes enemy fire and goes down, he’s badly injured but his therapy at the hands of Cathy Muller (the lovely Keria Knightley of _Pirates of the Caribbean_ fame) gets him on his feet and walking again – and wins fair lady’s heart, as the two of them become boyfriend and girlfriend and begin living together (couldn’t see that coming). Before he’s fully recovered, Ryan gets a visit from Thomas Harper (Costner), a mysterious recruiter type who offers the young ex-Marine an opportunity to do secret operative-type work for his country…even though on his last mission he barely came back alive. In a certain kind of way, Harper doesn’t really give Ryan a choice in the matter; he believes in the kid and needs immediate help with the intel they’re working on.

Ryan is convinced to finish his doctorate (hence the “Doctor Ryan” references in later films) by Harper, which leads him to a job at a New York City-based “financial firm” that is really a covert office for Harper’s team to monitor the financial behavior of worldwide terror networks and such. Ryan intercepts some strange goings-on at one company in Russia, and ends up piecing together the fact that this company is planning something major against the U.S. Meanwhile, girlfriend Cathy begins to get feelings that Jack is cheating on her based on his mysterious work life, which is necessary due to his working directly with the C.I.A. When he’s asked to go to Moscow to further investigate this problem he’s working on, she’s even more suspicious and wants to meet him in Paris when he’s done with his “assignment.” The term “psycho girlfriend” comes to mind when you see Knightley’s character in this.

Ryan, under the guise of a “routine audit,” pays Viktor Cherevin (director Kenneth Branagh) a visit, the man who is apparently head of this conglomerate they’re investigating. The cold, intimidating Cherevin knows there’s something dangerous about the calculating Ryan, based on one standoff of a conversation they have in the Russian’s office. Things get more complicated when Cathy shows up at Jack’s hotel room to confront him about her feelings that he’s being dishonest with her in the relationship. When Jack is forced into telling her that he in fact works for the C.I.A., she is immediately involved in this plot involving the Russians and some kind of attack on America via financial outlets. Instead of trying to get Cathy out of the country to secure her safety, Harper and Ryan decide to avoid bringing attention to themselves and dress Ryan’s fiancé up in a stunning black above-the-knee ensemble with high heels and a fetching makeup job to distract Cherevin at dinner that night…this is all after they learn the Russian creep has a “thing” for married women. Of course, Cathy’s job at the dinner table is to distract Cherevin long enough by coming on to him so that Jack can infiltrate his office, steal the data he’s got and get it back to Harper and the C.I.A. Sounds easy, right?

Well, before he knows it Doctor Ryan has an angry Russian criminal mastermind and his henchman on his tail after Cherevin discovers who Ryan is and that he has stolen his data that includes all the plans to collapse the U.S. market and then attack via a terrorist bombing. What’s worse, back in the U.S. the FBI and other agencies are tracking Cherevin’s son in Michigan who is the organization’s contact in the States for carrying out this bombing they’re planning; he manages to get a van, disguised as a New York City Police Department vehicle, loaded with the explosives into lower Manhattan with the plan being to blow it underground. The action shifts from Ryan in a daring chase in Moscow as he tries desperately to save the now-kidnapped Cathy from the grips of the psycho Cherevin to New York, where Ryan arrives to attempt to stop Cherevin’s kid from blowing the van. 

While taut and exciting in many areas, _Shadow Recruit_ just didn’t quite blow my skirt up; it had a great deal of promise, and that’s what makes it so frustrating to admit that it wasn’t all that great at the end of the day. Much of the material here has been seen and done before, and while it felt like part of the Tom Clancy-inspired family of films in certain ways, in many others it didn’t. Kevin Costner, in what seemed like a wasted role, was better in this than he was in _3 Days to Kill_ but he still didn’t make much of an impression here…he’s basically background window dressing to Chris Pine’s Jack Ryan character. Pine, meanwhile, was okay in the lead but he’s still no Matt Damon in _Bourne_, know what I mean? As a rental, this was decent…I don’t think it’s a must-buy. 

[img]http://cdn3-www.craveonline.com/assets/uploads/2013/12/jack-ryan-shadow-recruit.jpg[/img]*VIDEO QUALITY ANALYSIS: HOW DID THE DISC LOOK?*

Surprisingly, Paramount – which typically has churned out some stellar high definition transfers in the past – didn’t really grace _Jack Ryan: Shadow Recruit_ with much of anything to grade this title as “fantastic” in the video department. Much of the film is bathed in a DVD-like softness which I found curious, save for a handful of outdoor brightly-lit daytime sequences, and this ran rampant through most of the running time. Whether a stylistic decision on Branagh’s behalf or an issue with the compression is at fault here, I am not 100-percent certain – but it’s clear many of the character-on-character shots and even many facial close ups were rendered too soft. 

A good portion of the film is bathed in a sepia/gold-like tinge, and this translated well on the 2.39:1 widescreen encode; likewise for skin tones and general color. Raw detail was an issue because of this inherent softness I mentioned in the visuals, so facial highlights were somewhat obscured and shadowed as if there was a silky veil of Vaseline smeared on the image. While serviceable, this was far from a reference video transfer. 






















[img] http://cdn.hitfix.com/photos/4861073/Jack_Ryan_Shadow_Recruit_review.jpg[/img]*AUDIO QUALITY ANALYSIS: HOW DID THE DISC SOUND?*

Running as a “dumbed down” 5.1 mix on my system, _Jack Ryan: Shadow Recruit_’s 7.1 DTS-HD Master Audio soundtrack in English suffered from the same problems other 7.1 mixes I’ve tested on recent Blu-ray releases from Paramount: That somewhat stuffy, blanketed, low-mastered vibe that required a great deal of volume goosing to really heat up and fill my room. Dialogue was again a bit low and hushed in the mix, while the entire track seemed mastered at way too low a level…in the plus column, though, there is a moment in the beginning of the film during the attack on Ryan’s helicopter that was accompanied by loud, aggressive, all-channel-encompassing effects that really shook the room. After that, it seemed like the whole track got quieter and quieter as the running time went on. 

This wasn’t a bad track per se – it just seemed more in line with what I found on _World War Z_, _Captain America_ and some other titles from Sony like _White House Down_ and _Olympus Has Fallen_. There were a few moments of deep LFE drop and rumbling but nothing that concussively recurred or sustained; likewise, the surround activity was lean for most of the film save for when action setpieces heated up and involved the rear soundstage more in what was transpiring onscreen – bullet ricochets, screeching getaway cars, environmental fill Foley, etc. 

I expected a bit more out of this title sound-wise. 

























[img]https://encrypted-tbn1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSRF3Qi69haAz_157Sb5q614CKKGqosR4B3S_0mnpd_JofCthaC[/img] *FINAL THOUGHTS:* 

This was an interesting entry into the Tom Clancy-inspired film “franchise” that has a loyal fan following the world over. It was a commendable effort as a prequel story by Kenneth “_Thor_” Branagh and Chris Pine isn’t bad in the lead…but much of it feels done already, as if they fused elements from _Bourne Identity_ and _Good Day to Die Hard_ and perhaps a handful of other thrillers involving Russian bad guys to create a feasible plot for the Jack Ryan character to take on. It didn’t seem, at the end, very memorable to me…but I can definitely recommend a rental.


----------



## B- one (Jan 13, 2013)

Hey I just bought this one! At least it was only $14.99 and I'm easy to please . Thanks for the review O. Did you do a review of Lone Survivor, or plan to?


----------



## Mike Edwards (Mar 10, 2011)

I'm honestly really surprised on your findings of the video and audio in many ways. both of them were literally FLAWLESS on both my systems (especially the video). well, besides the volume level. it was mastered almost 5 db's lower than the standard level for most tracks, but that's easily solved with turning the volume know. but other than that I'm absolutely convinced that your experience with the audio has to do with the way the onkyo 605 folds in the 7.1 to 5.1 conversion. I had many of the same issues with 7.1 tracks that you did until I upgraded my receiver. My yamaha and pioneers don't suffer from that but I always had to tweak settings in my receiver (especially the lfe channel and surrounds) when I used my 605...

as for the movie, agree with you. it was decent movie, but would have been better if it wasn't associated with Jack Ryan. they did too much of a 007 meets Bourne with the character instead of keeping to Clancy's character of the books (and original movies)... it was just "vanilla"


----------



## Osage_Winter (Apr 8, 2010)

B- one said:


> Hey I just bought this one! At least it was only $14.99 and I'm easy to please . Thanks for the review O. Did you do a review of Lone Survivor, or plan to?


Hey Bran,

Thanks for your comments. Yes, Lone Survivor is on my list of titles to be reviewed but one of my editors are backed up in sending orders out so it's going to be like the first week of July that I see it...sorry.


----------



## Osage_Winter (Apr 8, 2010)

Mike Edwards said:


> I'm honestly really surprised on your findings of the video and audio in many ways. both of them were literally FLAWLESS on both my systems (especially the video). well, besides the volume level. it was mastered almost 5 db's lower than the standard level for most tracks, but that's easily solved with turning the volume know.


Indeed; I knew there was a mastering issue...I can just sense these problems. 



> but other than that I'm absolutely convinced that your experience with the audio has to do with the way the onkyo 605 folds in the 7.1 to 5.1 conversion.


I am becoming more and more convinced that this is the case, myself...



> I had many of the same issues with 7.1 tracks that you did until I upgraded my receiver. My yamaha and pioneers don't suffer from that but I always had to tweak settings in my receiver (especially the lfe channel and surrounds) when I used my 605...


I don't like to make channel changes on the fly and would rather report what I find the way my system is without any additional tweaking. 



> as for the movie, agree with you. it was decent movie, but would have been better if it wasn't associated with Jack Ryan. they did too much of a 007 meets Bourne with the character instead of keeping to Clancy's character of the books (and original movies)... it was just "vanilla"


Totally agreed. :T


----------



## primetimeguy (Jun 3, 2006)

Are you running Audyssey and the movie curve on your 605? Maybe it has to do with Paramount remastering for the home but I find many of their movies sound better with the flat /Music curve which doesn't have midrange compensation or the high freq rolloff.


----------



## Mike Edwards (Mar 10, 2011)

Osage_Winter said:


> Indeed; I knew there was a mastering issue...I can just sense these problems.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


on no, I don't either. at least not for the reviews. I was just saying that if I wanted a fuller LFE track and more competent surrounds then I had to adjust them. my buddy and I had near identical setups since we built our speakers together and our subs and bought the same projector (at the time) so we'd watch movies at each other's houses all the times, our one difference is that he bought an 809 instead of my 605 and we could compare and his experience and mine could be very different on the 7.1 tracks and our only difference was the receivers. I was sold when I upgraded to my Yammy though and could directly a/b the two receivers etc.


----------



## Osage_Winter (Apr 8, 2010)

primetimeguy said:


> Are you running Audyssey and the movie curve on your 605? Maybe it has to do with Paramount remastering for the home but I find many of their movies sound better with the flat /Music curve which doesn't have midrange compensation or the high freq rolloff.


No, no Audyssey implementation engaged. I'm hearing the track(s) essentially "as intended."


----------



## Savjac (Apr 17, 2008)

I really enjoyed this movie, but i have to admit upfront that i have not read the Clancy books, not one, so I am not able to compare how well this movie tracks with his writing. Held on its own, this was a good film and a fun film that took awhile to get started but once movie, it held on to the end.
Sonically and Visually, this BR was a stunner, I mean stunner that may be used as a demo in the future for those willing to withstand the sonic battering.


----------



## Osage_Winter (Apr 8, 2010)

Some nips and tucks made to review; thank you.


----------



## ericzim (Jun 24, 2012)

Osage, good review. Mike is right about the Onk folding up on the 7.1 to 5.1. I have been telling you for some time now that 7.1 on action movies needs those extra channels to sound "right". Even the 7.1 HDMA can dumb down to DTS ES or Matrix 6.1. That tells me that producers and audio engineers dont want their 7.1 creations to be misrepresented on a 5.1 setup. I think its time to sit down with your wife and explain to her why you need to upgrade to modern technology and get that 7.1 Onkyo. Last years models can be found at very reasonable prices. Once I get settled with all I have to do right now I will be upgrading to a true 7.2 system so I have better control of the low end.


----------



## Savjac (Apr 17, 2008)

ericzim said:


> Osage, good review. Mike is right about the Onk folding up on the 7.1 to 5.1. I have been telling you for some time now that 7.1 on action movies needs those extra channels to sound "right". Even the 7.1 HDMA can dumb down to DTS ES or Matrix 6.1. That tells me that producers and audio engineers dont want their 7.1 creations to be misrepresented on a 5.1 setup. I think its time to sit down with your wife and explain to her why you need to upgrade to modern technology and get that 7.1 Onkyo. Last years models can be found at very reasonable prices. Once I get settled with all I have to do right now I will be upgrading to a true 7.2 system so I have better control of the low end.



Interesting information eric. I see you mention that 7.1 can dumb down to es or matrix on the onkyo. That would be sad indeed, I have gone back and forth on my processor and on 5.1 it still shows the proper readings so maybe some of the earlier models do not have the software to properly handle 7.1 tracks off the discs ??

Just wondering.


----------



## ericzim (Jun 24, 2012)

Savjac said:


> Interesting information eric. I see you medb vantagention that 7.1 can dumb down to es or matrix on the onkyo. That would be sad indeed, I have gone back and forth on my processor and on 5.1 it still shows the proper readings so maybe some of the earlier models do not have the software to properly handle 7.1 tracks off the discs ??
> 
> Just wondering.


What I should have mentioned about the DTS track is ES and Matrix are core tracks for legacy HDMI systems like my old Onk HT-R550. 
Your system would still need to be at minimum a 6.1 to take advantage of the DTS ES or Matrix like my old Onkyo, there would be no need to decode an es or Matrix dts track if there are only 5.1 channels available for amplification. A few bd titles I can think of off the top of my head are the Wolverine and Super 8. The Wolverine is matrix and Super 8 is es discreet. If a balanced 5.1 track isn't provided as an option than the 7.1 movie will imo not sound quite right or lacking something as Osage has pointed out several times on his movie reviews.


----------



## Osage_Winter (Apr 8, 2010)

ericzim said:


> Osage, good review. Mike is right about the Onk folding up on the 7.1 to 5.1. I have been telling you for some time now that 7.1 on action movies needs those extra channels to sound "right". Even the 7.1 HDMA can dumb down to DTS ES or Matrix 6.1. That tells me that producers and audio engineers dont want their 7.1 creations to be misrepresented on a 5.1 setup. I think its time to sit down with your wife and explain to her why you need to upgrade to modern technology and get that 7.1 Onkyo. Last years models can be found at very reasonable prices. Once I get settled with all I have to do right now I will be upgrading to a true 7.2 system so I have better control of the low end.


Eric,

I have accepted that this is what seems to be happening with 7.1 mixes folded down into 5.1 playback algorithms; however, I don't have to upgrade to a 7.1 AVR to accomplish this, as my current model is 7.1-capable. The wiring behind my entertainment center is already in place to add the extra two surround back channels in the ceiling, I just have to have them moved into certain appropriate cutouts for proper positioning, and that is going to take some work by a handyman, contractor, etc. :T

Oh, and thank you for reading and the kind words about the review...


----------



## Osage_Winter (Apr 8, 2010)

ericzim said:


> What I should have mentioned about the DTS track is ES and Matrix are core tracks for legacy HDMI systems like my old Onk HT-R550.
> Your system would still need to be at minimum a 6.1 to take advantage of the DTS ES or Matrix like my old Onkyo, there would be no need to decode an es or Matrix dts track if there are only 5.1 channels available for amplification. A few bd titles I can think of off the top of my head are the Wolverine and Super 8. The Wolverine is matrix and Super 8 is es discreet. If a balanced 5.1 track isn't provided as an option than the 7.1 movie will imo not sound quite right or lacking something as Osage has pointed out several times on his movie reviews.


Indeed; my old Onkyo TX-SR600 was a leading "pioneer" of the discrete/matrixing DTS-ES/Dolby EX phenomenon that many DVD title releases attempted to take advantage of -- _Gladiator Signature Selection, The Haunting (1999) Signature Selection, The Exorcist: The Version You've Never Seen_ et al -- which would ultimately allow for a back surround channel to broaden the soundstage from 5.1 to 6.1 either via borrowed matrix techniques or in discrete form, depending on the DVD's preparation...

As for the "not quite right-sounding" 7.1 tracks on Blu-rays played back via 5.1 and how I have commented on them, I think we've come to the realization that there is indeed something going on here that's "dumbing down" the audio algorithms and hence delivery -- other titles this has happened with and that have bothered me, off the top of my head, include _Captain America: The First Avenger_ (Paramount, DTS-HD Master Audio 7.1), _Thor_ (Paramount, DTS-HD Master Audio 7.1), _World War Z_ (Paramount, DTS-HD Master Audio 7.1), _Avengers_ (Paramount/Disney, DTS-HD Master Audio 7.1) and...hmmmm....I know there were more...:rant: lddude:


----------

