The Bourne Legacy

September 1, 2012


The Bourne Legacy
"There was never just one."
★★

The narrative architect behind the "Bourne" film series, Tony Gilroy, takes the helm in the next chapter of the hugely popular espionage franchise that has earned almost $1 billion at the global box office: "The Bourne Legacy." The writer/director expands the "Bourne" universe created by Robert Ludlum with an original story that introduces us to a new hero (Jeremy Renner) whose life-or-death stakes have been triggered by the events of the first three films.
............................................

Hollywood has been making tons of reboot movies; some of them come better, but more of them come worse. That's the stake screenwriter of the past Bourne's trilogy, Tony Gilroy, trying to take by making a reboot of Bourne without Matt Damon and Paul Greengrass. The question is : what does it take to make a Bourne movie without Jason Bourne himself?


The formula is pretty much the same : hand-to-hand combat, breaking bones, shooting gun, impossibly well-done mission and of course running from whatever-or-whoever-behind. But the thing is, it'll never be a Bourne movie though the story is pretty much related to the all three Bourne installments and a lot of 'Bourne' mentioned in the movie.


I honestly have no idea what is it in the beginning; I don't give a single fuck about the confusing-long-totally boring conversations. There're plot holes everywhere; I am rather confused in the beginning, then gain my Bourne-thrill in the middle (especially the lab-shooting scene, Aaron encountered with wolf, the icy cold Alaska, and of course the epic fight in Marta's wreckage house), then I lose interest when Aaron and Marta goes to Manila and things start to get messy and confusing that lead to a big question mark at the end. Aaron's final confrontation is easy; it's like "WTF, that was it?!" I'm losing the main purpose here. Was it all just about Norton's will to kill Renner (which came out as an epic failure; who knows Norton will be that damn stupid and powerless over Renner's slippery smooth moves?), or was it just the urgency of Renner in terms of I-need-those-green-and-blue-pills-or-else. Or was it all just about parkour and saving the girl, playing a little spy-thing? WHAT WAS IT, really?


I personally think that Jeremy Renner represents a better-looking special agent than Damon did as Bourne; Renner somehow has the grizzled looking charm, convincing moves, tough-as-nail mind, minus the pretty face and indeed is more talkative. But again people, he isn't Jason Bourne, Damon is. I still am not used by the Bourne-Aaron thing nor judge on who-overcomes-who. Jason Bourne is Jason Bourne, Aaron Cross is Aaron Cross, that's just it. But if you're asking who deals better; I think Jason Bourne is, he's far more memorable. I'm not saying that Renner is no good; in fact he's quite unforgettable. He does a great job portraying Aaron. So does Rachel Weisz; she nails the role of the smartass PhD Marta Shearing. And have I told you about how itchy my mind goes over Edward Norton; I mean, seriously Byer, catch the damn guy!


Bottom line, I'm not that into this movie. I still can't get over the first three installments and I don't think Gilroy really pulls it better than Greengrass, as well as Renner over Damon. It's not a Bourne movie, though the words "Bourne" itself still on the poster. It's a fun to watch; a long-fun. Do I recommend you to watch this? It's all on you. It really is not that bad, but then again, it's not a Bourne movie, it's the legacy.




Terrence Ward: "You think that Jason Bourne was the whole story? Sorry, there's a lot more going on here."

............................................





Lisensi Creative Commons
JUNEBUG by Aleena Deandra is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-No Derivative Works 3.0 International License.
Based on a work at www.aleena-deandra.com.
Permissions beyond the scope of this license may be available at www.aleena-deandra.com
Copyright Ⓒ Junebug. All rights reserved. Design by Fearne.