Friday, August 10, 2012

The Bourne Redundancy

Let me start by saying this is the third movie this summer that has really let me down.  Along with Savages and Total Recall, this movie failed to reach my expectations.  I'll cover what was good about The Bourne Legacy, what was bad about it, and then I'll conclude with my rating.


While this movie was a disappointment, I have to say, there were a lot of great things about this film.  First and foremost, the action was spectacular.  A combination of artistic cinematography, graceful and intentional editing, and well-paced choreography made for some stellar action scenes.  The Bourne movies are well known for their great fast-paced, quick-cut action scenes, and this film does not fail to continue that style.  I would dare to say that the action alone in this film warrants a viewing.  One scene in particular caught my eye.  It was a scene where a doctor shoots up the lab he is working in.  This was a very terrifying scene, even for a PG-13 rating.  It felt very realistic and although it was a dark scene, it was very well done.  A more subtle element I liked about this film was the continuation of the water theme.  Every Bourne film starts with a water theme, and they continued this into the fourth film.  It helps connect the films in a way and I really liked that.  I also liked the cast of Edward Norton, although I wish I would have seen more of his character.  Rachel Weisz's performance was good, although I greatly disliked her character.  All her character did was scream, yell, and beg for Aaron to save her in several points in the film.  I was indifferent about Jeremy Renner.  I liked him as an action star, but I don't think he or anyone else for that matter should be taking the place of Matt Damon.  


Other than the action scenes, this film lacked many of the elements that made the first three Bourne films so good, specifically the pacing.  This movie was EXTREMELY slow for a Bourne film.  There was probably 15 minutes of solid action in this movie, and I expected more from a Bourne movie, whether Matt Damon starred or not.  The trailer gave away most of the good parts of the film, which is probably why I was so disappointed.  Also, for whatever reason, Matt Damon's character was repeatedly brought up throughout the film.  If we're not going to see him on screen, there's no reason to bring him up.  Every mention of Jason Bourne made me think about how cheap the writers were being trying to transition from one actor to the other.  Another complaint I had was how awkwardly the movie ended.  Immediately after an intense motorcycle chase, we are suddenly on a boat in the ocean with Aaron and Marta, and they escape, more or less, away from everything.  It seemed like there were some loose ends that needed to be tied up, rather than jumping straight from the climax of the film to the end.  That was a very jarring way to end the film and left me with a bad feeling walking out of the theater, which is something good filmmakers never do.


The latest Bourne film is more of a redundancy than a legacy.  I'm not saying that Matt Damon's absence from this film is the reason it wasn't very good, but it's hard to watch a movie of this caliber with a well-established star without having him in the back of your mind.  It is easily the weakest of the Bourne films, however, I would recommend giving it a watch solely based on the fact that the action scenes were great.


MY RATING:

3 out of 5

-Kevin A. Millward





No comments:

Post a Comment