For the
sake of not having to write the same intro a million
different ways throughout the rest of time, just know that
this column avoids the overly long and sometimes dull
process of full film reviews and instead opts to break
things down based on what I thought going in, what happened
while I was there and what I learned at the end of it all.
Thanks for reading!
The
Breakdown - The Bourne Legacy
The Impression:
Though I can’t say it bodes well for the increasingly
depressing state of modern big budget, the fourth film in
the Jason Bourne series averts some fears with the casting
of franchise hero Jeremy Renner and the presence of series
writer (and talented director in his own right) Tony Gilroy
behind the camera.
The Reality:
The Bourne Legacy is the starter gun for a race that’s
already been run, a strange, tempo-less sidestep for a
franchise that could’ve just been left alone. I love the
Jason Bourne series, love Doug Liman’s cold, action-packed
opener, and adore the two gritty, politico-actioneers that
Paul Greengrass helmed. There’s only one reason for The
Bourne Legacy - cold hard cash for all involved. The
film isn’t bad, not at all, it’s a well-filmed, decently
acted action flick that is leagues above most shit currently
floating in the old Hollywood pool, but there’s no reason
for its existence.
The Bourne of any Bourne film that has any real value
seemingly disappeared in the closing moments of The
Bourne Supremacy, this Bourne (Jeremy Renner’s edgy,
drugged-up Aaron Cross) is simply a sticky-tacked add on to
the universe, a cheap addition scotch-taped to the side of
the franchise. What adds another gawking layer of redundancy
though is that The Bourne Legacy is the exact same
film as The Bourne Identity just with different set
pieces and a new Jason Bourne. A secret agent is revealed,
targeted by the government that created him, and then hunted
down by another government created secret agent. There’s
some chase scenes, a new underwritten female character to
save from danger, and of course, the shadowy fingers of a
government agency slowly closing in on our hero. Not to say
that the Bourne films ever really stray from the formula,
without the finesse and bravado of Paul Greengrass, the
second two Bourne films could very well have been big-budget
rehashes of the first, but with a talented director behind
them they not only opened the world of Bourne, but did so
with propulsive action and beautiful character work.
Tony Gilroy just can’t bring it this go around, the film
limps along, establishing the same formula we’ve seen
before, but without the flash of the first film or the
hurtling energy of the second and third. Instead we’re given
Jeremy Renner’s pill-popping assassin, Rachel Weisz’s
cringing scientist, and a new cast of shadowy government
agents pulling the strings to do right by America - all
loosely sketched characters that we easily understand
because they’re basically echoes of every well written
character from the first three films. Maybe, Tony Gilroy is
doing exactly what he’s been told - flatten out the bumps
left over from the first films (while paying enormous,
irritating amounts of homage to them) while laying the
groundwork for another trio of hard-edged modern day spy
flicks. To some degree he succeeds, the audience is given a
new Bourne, and a new set of villains, and the loose ends
required to move forward, ever forward, with new films, but
the film is the cinematic equivalent of inertia. Everything
happens that we’d expect from a Bourne film, but, seemingly,
only because it’s supposed to. It feels like the late
Brosnan Bond films, where the generic formula of all things
Bond had been established and new directors were just
changing the locations, the Bond Girls and scene-chewing
villain. This wasn’t a good thing for Bond (see the
exceedingly popular reboot) and it won’t be a good thing for
the Bourne flicks. Bourne is beautiful because it isn’t
restrained by formula, only by the strength of it’s leading
man and the story backing him. Stick to the basics and these
films are going to get real tired, real fast. Or maybe, as
evidenced by the lackadaisical slog of The Bourne Legacy,
they already have.
The Lesson:
Instead of making new entries in to the Bourne series, lets
just make new, awesome entries in to the genre of spy. I
promise you, everyone will be happier.
-
-
Unless
otherwise expressly stated, all text in this blog and any
related pages, including the blog's archives, is licensed by
John Laird under a
Creative Commons License.
