Jason Bourne? What a lazy title
for a series' fifth movie! Don't the producers know how a Bourne
movie is supposed to be titled? It's supposed to be “Bourne” and
then another word, not the main character's name. You guys passed up
the chance to name it “Bourne Again”. The opportunity was right
there, and oddly enough it would have been a fitting title since it
alludes to how copy-and-paste this film's plot feels as well as to
how superfluous it is to the series overall. But is it worth seeing?
Uuuuugh!!
And the award for Worst Cinematography
Ever goes to Jason Bourne. The series' trademark rapid-cutting
and the overly shaky camera is back with a vengeance and it makes
most of the movie aesthetically offensive and unwatchable. It makes
Fast and Furious 3: Tokyo Drift look like freakin' Birdman.
I'm serious, I sat in the front row for this thing and I felt a bit
sick by the end. This incoherent style of editing totally ruins the
action scenes, and when it's time for a vehicle chase scene, just
forget it. You won't be able to tell who's in which car, where
they're going, and where they are in relation to each other. The
camerawork is so bad that it can even screw around with the
audience's perception of important plot points. SPOILER ALERT, when
it gets to the point where my two companions and I couldn't tell how
the last bad guy died, you know you done f***ed up something bad. You
know, I actually kind of feel sorry for the guy who has to edit this
stuff together. He has to take what's probably some really cool and
elaborate action sequences and chop them up into lightning-quick
montages of incomprehensible crap. This movie had the potential to be
awesome, but it was smothered by the director's overbearing style. I
know I'm going on and on about the same problem, but it really is a
huge obstacle to enjoying this film.
You'd think that since this is Matt
Damon's return to a beloved series that's been semi-dormant since
2007 (if you don't count the black sheep of the franchise, Legacy)
that they'd maybe try something new or change up the formula a bit.
But no, it's the same plot as all the others. A shady high-ranking
CIA dude who's at risk of being publicly exposed tries to hide
evidence of his wrongdoing by sending an assassin to go kill off his
former agent, Bourne who tries forming an uneasy partnership with a
female agent on the inside. It has a lot of other Bourne movie
conventions as well: Bourne remembering stuff from his past, going to
Germany, people constantly saying the word “asset”, and shots of
computer screens (at least the camera holds still long enough to see
them). It's a by-the-numbers plot. The most I can say is that the
relationship between Bourne and the bad guy assassin – played by
Vincent Cassel – is more interesting than the other films.
At least the acting is pretty good.
Matt Damon is good as usual. Unfortunately, his character is starting to get pretty uninteresting. Despite her supermodel looks, Alicia
Vikander plays her role as a CIAgent convincingly and with an air of
professionalism. It's too bad that her American accent isn't very
good.
Overall, Jason Bourne is a
semi-competently made film. It isn't horrible, but it sure pissed me
off. If you're an addict for hardcore Bourne-ography then this will
probably satisfy you. But if you're like me and you actually like to
see the movies you watch then for the love of Pete, stay away!
Run for your lives! After all, what is the point of an action movie
in which you cannot see the action?
Grade: two out of five.
No comments:
Post a Comment