| Author |
 Topic  |
|
BaftaBaby 
"Always entranced by cinema."
|
 Posted - 08/15/2007 : 23:33:43
|
Got to see a satellite-beamed reportage of the Leicester Square premiere which was distributed live to about 5 Odeons around the country tonight. So-so interviews with some of the stars and Greengrass. Best non-participant interview was with Stephen Fry who rapped exquisitely about Matt Damon's teeth ... hey, you had to be there. Everyone in the audience was in stitches.
Then we got the film.
Yup ... go see it! All the big-bad-boy action you crave -- though a tad too long and too many chases of all description for my taste. Bit of a waste of Julia Stiles who promises much more. But Damon wears the skin of Bourne and lends such intelligence to the character. Joan Allen -- given far too little in the script -- is so good she portrays every moment of the transition from loyal CIA puppy to the big penny drop.
Though the spotlight's definitely on big-time ACTION, all the interesting convolution breathes between the lines.
The intrigue ... possible spoiler coming:
of the finale tantalizes with the possibility of Bourne Goes Fourth. Let's see!
|
Edited by - BaftaBaby on 08/16/2007 08:28:28 |
|
|
thefoxboy
"Four your eyes only."
|
Posted - 08/16/2007 : 00:52:29
|
Really hanging out to see this one, can't wait. Might have to give up one of my weekly Poker nights to see it.  |
Edited by - thefoxboy on 08/16/2007 00:53:19 |
 |
|
|
rockfsh 
"Laugh, Love, Cheer"
|
Posted - 08/16/2007 : 01:44:55
|
This is the best action thiller of the year but it does have plot holes, most of which zip by so fast that they are hardly noticed. I was annoyed by the scene where he gives away his location (for laughs...(not a spoiler because I saw it in a preview)).
Isn't your final sentence a spoiler, Bafta? |
Edited by - rockfsh on 08/16/2007 01:52:08 |
|
|
|
BaftaBaby
"Always entranced by cinema."
|
Posted - 08/16/2007 : 08:27:27
|
quote:
Originally posted by rockfsh
This is the best action thiller of the year but it does have plot holes, most of which zip by so fast that they are hardly noticed. I was annoyed by the scene where he gives away his location (for laughs...(not a spoiler because I saw it in a preview)).
Isn't your final sentence a spoiler, Bafta?
Oops - just occurred to me this reply might be a spoiler, too! ...
Well, it does say 'possibility' and 'let's see' ... and I'd heard countless times this one is the last one ... but I'll put the sentence in beige.
Thanks, Rfsh!
Didn't you just love the editing ... I think that will be nominated among other things.
|
Edited by - BaftaBaby on 08/16/2007 08:30:07 |
|
|
|
rockfsh
"Laugh, Love, Cheer"
|
Posted - 08/16/2007 : 16:50:10
|
quote:
Didn't you just love the editing ... I think that will be nominated among other things.
Use of a hand held camera was excellent. It added to the action/disorientation. The fights were also appropriately messy. You are right that the female roles were "light". |
|
|
|
turrell 
"Ohhhh Ohhhh Ohhhh Ohhhh "
|
Posted - 08/16/2007 : 18:58:07
|
I really liked this movie. I did think the plot holes were a bit troubling - but this is a roller coaster ride not an art piece although artfully executed.
I thought the steady cam use was good, but would have preferred a little bit pulled back so that we could see some of the fight. The action scenes were incredible, could have enjoyed the fight scenes more if we were able to see what was going on (just a little - I know this was a choice, but I think it was overdone).
Joan Allen was good but under used. Julia Stiles was barely there and her character's choices were less than plausible - but again this movie is not about plausibility.
This is like the other Bournes a great action movie with cool agents and clever plot twists.
One note - man is Matt Damon looking suddenly much older and puffier. (I could say the same about me, but between work and fwfr, I don't have the time to get into as good of shape as he does). At first I thoought this was a choice - after all he has been on the run for years from the CIA and faced death routinely - who wouldn't start to look a bit like Keith Richards. But then they had flashbacks to before he became Jason Bourne super CIA hit man and he still looked uncharacteristically older and puffier. |
Edited by - turrell on 08/16/2007 18:58:25 |
|
|
|
MisterBadIdea 
"PLZ GET MILK, KTHXBYE"
|
Posted - 08/16/2007 : 22:38:58
|
quote:
Julia Stiles was barely there and her character's choices were less than plausible
I wouldn't say her actions are implausible as much as her motivations are vague. They were clearly hinting at some backstory -- as well as implying that some unh-unh-jumpin'-scrumpin' had gone on between them -- but the specifics were never given.
My favorite shot in the movie is Bourne's face going red as he strains to strangle an assassin to death.
This movie's really interesting when you compare it to Casino Royale. The basic message of Casino Royale was that Bond was destined to be a killer/male slut and nothing else -- couldn't be anything else, can't teach a hammer to love nails. The Bourne Ultimatum argues that, yes, you can teach a hammer to love nails. And that's why it's The Bourne Ultimatum and not Casino Royale that's the real crowd-pleaser of the two: It's so optimistic. |
|
|
|
Beanmimo
"August review site"
|
Posted - 08/20/2007 : 09:40:06
|
The pace was kept tantalisimgly fast, the two big plot devices of the Bourne movies were played with just that grounded side of hyper reality.
Highly recommended. |
|
|
|
Whippersnapper. 
"A fourword thinking guy."
|
Posted - 09/05/2007 : 11:37:12
|
Saw this last night. Nothing very surprising - in fact almost everything very predictable - but exciting. A fitting finale to the trilogy but I wouldn't want to see a fourth unless there can actually be some plot and character development. It was a shame Jason couldn't have developed a little touch of the wit we know Matt is capable of.
I agree that Joan Allen was very (very) good, but I don't know what more Julia Stiles promised - maybe the use of a second expression on her face at some point during the film? Well, call this a spoiler if you like, but it didn't happen.
I think the film is pretty much a must for those who liked the first two Bournes but don't expect to be challenged by it.
|
|
|
|
Rovark 
"Luck-pushing, rule-bending, chance-taking reviewer"
|
Posted - 09/05/2007 : 20:37:36
|
The plot's wafer thin and the inconsistancies enormous.
Spoiler example
The CIA's most wanted walks into their HQ to do a bit of safe cracking. Without even a disguise or vague explanation of how.
That said, you don't have time to worry about these things, the action just doesn't stop for breath, kinda like Damon. I'd definately recommend this as a good old actioner, just park your brain in neutral and enjoy the ride. |
|
|
|
silly 
"That rabbit's DYNAMITE."
|
Posted - 09/05/2007 : 21:56:23
|
Speaking of action.
And I won't defend the CIA, but that building wasn't nearly as secure as the one with the giant laser-guarded air vents in Mission Improbable.
|
|
|
|
Beanmimo
"August review site"
|
Posted - 09/06/2007 : 09:18:35
|
Rovark, I promised my self I wouldn't get into this discussion...promises...promises.
But if he has managed to track his trackers and evade people in so many obsscure ways why aren't we just allowed to presume he is able to commit your spoiler with ease? |
|
|
|
BaftaBaby
"Always entranced by cinema."
|
Posted - 09/06/2007 : 09:36:28
|
quote:
Originally posted by Beanmimo
Rovark, I promised my self I wouldn't get into this discussion...promises...promises.
But if he has managed to track his trackers and evade people in so many obsscure ways why aren't we just allowed to presume he is able to commit your spoiler with ease?
My two cents: 
Yeah. It's not a primer in the hows of top-level spying. Apart from supplying the requisite action goodies Greengrass & Co. concentrate here on the effects of the actual job on human reason and emotion. That's why Joan Allen's character is so important - and why it should have been extended. It's what Julia Stiles' character has been grappling with and what Bourne himself struggles with from moment-to-moment.
In a way, it's a coming of age film - except the age isn't of the teen variety. These are the elements that people mean when they describe the Bourne thing as intelligent. It may not always have the [or any] answers, but it is asking the questions.
As are we all, whether we know it or not.
|
|
|
|
Rovark
"Luck-pushing, rule-bending, chance-taking reviewer"
|
Posted - 09/06/2007 : 17:40:56
|
quote:
Originally posted by Beanmimo
Rovark, I promised my self I wouldn't get into this discussion...promises...promises.
But if he has managed to track his trackers and evade people in so many obsscure ways why aren't we just allowed to presume he is able to commit your spoiler with ease?
I know, but it's just that having been to various Crown courts and New Scotland Yard a couple of times, the security is phenominal and NSY is just a cop shop. This one in particular grated with me, but I'm sure there's a whole bunch of others I could cite.
As I said, it's not like I even fretted about this example. This is the kind of film you just sit back and enjoy the ride. Most of the inconsistancies don't even occur to you until it's all over, the sheer pace of the action just sweeps you along. |
|
|
|
Whippersnapper.
"A fourword thinking guy."
|
Posted - 09/06/2007 : 18:40:34
|
I think Baffy is trying to make the point that the film is pretty much psychologically consistent - the inconsistencies are largely plot devices.
Is that right, Baffs? 
|
|
|
|
BaftaBaby
"Always entranced by cinema."
|
Posted - 09/07/2007 : 09:37:23
|
quote:
Originally posted by Whippersnapper
I think Baffy is trying to make the point that the film is pretty much psychologically consistent - the inconsistencies are largely plot devices.
Is that right, Baffs?
I guess, if you want to nutshell it. I was trying to draw a distinction between different approaches to action thrillers.
I really think this is a fundamental distinction in many contemporary films so, for those who are interested - here's my take:
There are those, like Die Hard 4.0 which - though they pretend a wider vision - have no raison d'etre other than to supply mechanisms which jump you from one action scene to another. Any attempt to deal with the complexity of characterization are almost irrelevant. The whole point is the action - and that's perfectly valid. To pretend otherwise is why I'd call that film pretentious.
Bourne, on the other hand - although it delivers in action terms - is founded on an exploration of the human psyche. Its literary origins are structured with the reader as Bourne's shadow, finding out with him who he might be and how that might or might not change him. The films engage because they've understood that, and their scripts have from the start tantalized with the unfolding of character. On some level we're responding to the question: I wonder how I'd feel/act in those circumstances.
Those aren't the questions stimulated by pure action thrillers.
I'm not being judgmental. Each film must stand on its own as measured in its own terms.
I am saying I believe that so long as there's sufficient intellectual and character 'meat' within an action thriller, the examination of every crumb of continuity or unasked/unanswered questions seems superfluous. The answers [for example of precisely how Bourne gained admission to this or that office] don't actually help the story. We've seen sufficient evidence that he's capable of such a thing that we can accept in good faith he's able to do it.
Compare this with a film I saw last night called Death Sentence. It raises really interesting questions about the effects of a vigilante mindset. But, because it really doesn't explore the complexity of human behaviour, it takes unacceptable shortcuts, so that you're left feeling who cares, and you start examining logical inconsistencies such as how come an ordinary family man who works as an insurance actuary can with no training instantly become a highly proficient fighter and shooter, fueled only by rage. Despite the expected excellent acting from Kevin Bacon and John Goodman and much of the support cast - this script has invented potentially interesting story elements to serve the action.
Bourne more successfully dovetails the two, so any plot anomalies or questioned details lose their importance.
|
Edited by - BaftaBaby on 09/07/2007 09:38:40 |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
Bourne Ultimatum
