Viewed: DVD rental
Release Date: December 10, 2007
writer: Tony Gilroy, Scott Z. Burns & George Nolfi
director: Paul Greengrass
Much has been said about this Bourne movie's use of "shaky cam", but honestly, shrink it down to TV letterbox and it really doesn't matter, it's a completely different viewing experience than in the theatres. GIven the fact that the DVD release of previous two installments of the trilogy have outperformed their box-office appearance, I can see how the studios wouldn't have been concerned about the shaky cam's affect on the cinematic audience. What I guess they hadn't anticipated was the reception to the film would be so huge and thus the shaky cam blow-back equally so. Anyway, point made, moving on.
The Bourne series of films based upon the novels and characters of Robert Ludlum have been surprising in their continued quality, their intensity, and frankly, their simplicity. The first movie was the most complex of the three as it required the most set up, establishing the character, his amnesia, his mystery and his pursuers. The groundwork laid, the next two movies were able to dispense with establishing much more and unravel the mystery further, concluding with the third. The momentum of the action and espionage elements propel these films forward, but they're also smart enough to layer some characterization in there, enough to establish Bourne as a modern spy-film legend, ranking right beneath James Bond and well above Jack Ryan in notoriety and brand in very quick order.
Release Date: December 10, 2007
writer: Tony Gilroy, Scott Z. Burns & George Nolfi
director: Paul Greengrass
Much has been said about this Bourne movie's use of "shaky cam", but honestly, shrink it down to TV letterbox and it really doesn't matter, it's a completely different viewing experience than in the theatres. GIven the fact that the DVD release of previous two installments of the trilogy have outperformed their box-office appearance, I can see how the studios wouldn't have been concerned about the shaky cam's affect on the cinematic audience. What I guess they hadn't anticipated was the reception to the film would be so huge and thus the shaky cam blow-back equally so. Anyway, point made, moving on.
The Bourne series of films based upon the novels and characters of Robert Ludlum have been surprising in their continued quality, their intensity, and frankly, their simplicity. The first movie was the most complex of the three as it required the most set up, establishing the character, his amnesia, his mystery and his pursuers. The groundwork laid, the next two movies were able to dispense with establishing much more and unravel the mystery further, concluding with the third. The momentum of the action and espionage elements propel these films forward, but they're also smart enough to layer some characterization in there, enough to establish Bourne as a modern spy-film legend, ranking right beneath James Bond and well above Jack Ryan in notoriety and brand in very quick order.
The films are crafted with such an arrow-straight focus that there's no time for deviations. Each of the films start with an objective in mind, and work effortlessly to reach that conclusion. In this case, two movies later, Jason Bourne has started having flashbacks to times he doesn't otherwise remember, mostly involving the experimental training that took away his identity and turned him into a super spy. Having been pursued for years, having found love and had it taken away from him, having enacted his revenge, he's now out to rest, to let go of his Bourne identity and search for a little peace. But until he's caught or killed, the government won't cease tracking him. The CIA has a secret to which Bourne is the only key not in their control that can open it. Since he won't come back, they're out to get him, and to silence anything relating to him or the program he was involved in.
The Deputy Director of the CIA, Noah Vosen (David Strathairn), has been given special powers by the government to act first in any situation he deems a threat to national security (some interesting, if slight, poking at the post-9-11 NSA mentality). When a series of stories about Bourne surface in the Guardian newspaper in the UK, they unknowingly threaten to expose some secrets only few government officials know about. As such, the reporter and his source become target number one and two. Bourne, however, also seeking the reporter's source, brings himself into the equation, quickly surpassing them as prime target. With Bourne involved, so too comes Pamela Landy, brought in by Vosen as the expert on tracking him. Landy however has a distaste for Vosen's methods and smells something rotten and subverts their actions.
Ultimately, Bourne finds the answers he seeks and achieves the victory, however hollow, he's desired since the beginning of the first film. The film closes out the character's story arc quite well, meaning there's not much left to this aspect of his character to explore, but there's no doubt more, and different, stories that could be drafted if the studios wish to dip into the well again.
Cudos to Matt Damon for carrying this character through these films as a relentless machine, but not an invulnerable one. There's a fragility to both his body and mind that make him sympathetic and a skilled actor like Damon was a necessity beyond just muscles and choreography (Jason Statham, for instance, couldn't have pulled this off). That said, Damon also handles the burlier side of the character well too. I've always referred to him as "punchy" meaning he's got the stature and physique of a brawler, and looks like he's better suited for up close and personal combat than that of the guns-blazing sort. He's been well trained for his fight sequences, and despite the fact that Greengrass rarely gives you much of a clean perspective of his capabilities you know they're there.
Greengrass' camerawork keeps you at the line of sight with the various characters in this film. His over-the-shoulder perspective puts the audience in the thick of the action, the drama, the tense ops rooms situation and everything in between. There's rarely anything resembling a crane shot or wide shot, it's close ups and point of view shots, really involving the audience in everything that's going on. It's not the most appealing of techniques as a viewer, but in terms of investing someone into the story it's very effective.
My wife always says about the Bourne films that she enjoys them but promptly forgets about them after viewing, and it's an appropriate statement. Although each film in the series builds upon the others, they remain self-contained, and thus each a satisfying whole that doesn't require much further thought or any "what's gonna happen next" speculation. They're the Chinese food cliché of cinema, you can stuff your face with it, but an hour later you're hungry again. The Bourne Ultimatum, like its predecessors, is incredibly well put together, and it certainly scratches an action itch nicely, but it's still disposable cinema.
Rating: 3.5/5
The Deputy Director of the CIA, Noah Vosen (David Strathairn), has been given special powers by the government to act first in any situation he deems a threat to national security (some interesting, if slight, poking at the post-9-11 NSA mentality). When a series of stories about Bourne surface in the Guardian newspaper in the UK, they unknowingly threaten to expose some secrets only few government officials know about. As such, the reporter and his source become target number one and two. Bourne, however, also seeking the reporter's source, brings himself into the equation, quickly surpassing them as prime target. With Bourne involved, so too comes Pamela Landy, brought in by Vosen as the expert on tracking him. Landy however has a distaste for Vosen's methods and smells something rotten and subverts their actions.
Ultimately, Bourne finds the answers he seeks and achieves the victory, however hollow, he's desired since the beginning of the first film. The film closes out the character's story arc quite well, meaning there's not much left to this aspect of his character to explore, but there's no doubt more, and different, stories that could be drafted if the studios wish to dip into the well again.
Cudos to Matt Damon for carrying this character through these films as a relentless machine, but not an invulnerable one. There's a fragility to both his body and mind that make him sympathetic and a skilled actor like Damon was a necessity beyond just muscles and choreography (Jason Statham, for instance, couldn't have pulled this off). That said, Damon also handles the burlier side of the character well too. I've always referred to him as "punchy" meaning he's got the stature and physique of a brawler, and looks like he's better suited for up close and personal combat than that of the guns-blazing sort. He's been well trained for his fight sequences, and despite the fact that Greengrass rarely gives you much of a clean perspective of his capabilities you know they're there.
Greengrass' camerawork keeps you at the line of sight with the various characters in this film. His over-the-shoulder perspective puts the audience in the thick of the action, the drama, the tense ops rooms situation and everything in between. There's rarely anything resembling a crane shot or wide shot, it's close ups and point of view shots, really involving the audience in everything that's going on. It's not the most appealing of techniques as a viewer, but in terms of investing someone into the story it's very effective.
My wife always says about the Bourne films that she enjoys them but promptly forgets about them after viewing, and it's an appropriate statement. Although each film in the series builds upon the others, they remain self-contained, and thus each a satisfying whole that doesn't require much further thought or any "what's gonna happen next" speculation. They're the Chinese food cliché of cinema, you can stuff your face with it, but an hour later you're hungry again. The Bourne Ultimatum, like its predecessors, is incredibly well put together, and it certainly scratches an action itch nicely, but it's still disposable cinema.
Rating: 3.5/5