Bourne 3

[june]

Hello All,

WE really enjoyed the third part of the Bourne series. At first I wasn't feeling the preview but the wife wanted to see it. 2hrs of entertainment, you will not be disappointed.

[Joey_V]

Good to know! Will definitely check it out!

Joey

[George Bellefontaine]

I'll be adding it to my Bourne collection.

[Audiophiliac]

Yes it was a fantastic film! One of the few and far between series where every movie was excellent. This was the last in the series, right? If so, they ended it perfectly IMHO. If not, it was an open enough ending that they could squeeze another one in.

[Lex]

Great, I'll probably wait for the HD-DVD to add to my other two. I actually just got the first Identity film last week on HD, for some reason Supremacy came out first. Go figure... Of course, I had both on regular DVD, but....HD rocks for the best films.

D

[greenhorn]

Bourne 3

I was disappointed with the third. I felt it was not smart, there was little character development - no interesting new chartacters, it turned things into just an action movie. The first 2 were smart, had interesting twists, you learned and then cared about the characters and there was some action. With 3 there was mostly only action. I easily tired of the over the shoulder camera angles, enough with the close ups, the frequent conversations that were actually two people making statements back and forth. Also, CAN SOME ONE STILL THE CAMERA PLEASE. There is no reason for that degree of jiggle camera effect. The Pamela Landy character seemed very flat as did most of the other characters. I thought the first 2 were very very good, this one not.

[Gremal]

I agree with greenhorn. The camera work was abysmal. If you're going to choreograph a fight scene, show the frikkin fight. The jumpy, claustrophobic, hand-held, post-produced crap just isn't cutting it. I often felt like I was watching a stitched together series of takes from several failed stunt attempts.

I don't mind a plain old action movie, but the message of the film was preachy, annoying and wrong. The basic message was "don't sign up to serve the US, because you will lose your soul". Why does Hollywood need to actively campaign against the US and consistently make our own people the bad guys? I'm so damn sick of a Dick Cheney type of US powermonger being the evil bastard behind all manner of twisted plots. Don't we have enough problems and don't our young people going into the military and intelligence agencies face enough challenges without hollywood actively promoting a stigma against them?

My favorite line in the movie was when Bourne was talking to the journalist who was so clueless that he seemed to have a deathwish. "This is real life, not a newspaper article. Do you understand?" No. journalists don't understand, and neither does Hollywood. More specifically, neither do these film makers who really should know better. Without young men putting it all on the line for this country there would be no hollywood and there would be no free press. One gets the impression these pseudo-intellectual film-makers never stop and think about that.

The first two Bourne films managed to stay fast paced and action packed without demonizing the US.

[Alloroc]

This was one great movie. The action top notch and I really felt that the camerawork really made the tension burst with life and presented the 'first person' mayhem of a fight sequence feel truly fierce.

Now I get that people can be put off by Greengrass's documentary-like style - some people say it made them feel ill. To others (me) it's totally immersive. If you ever get a chance to view 'Bloody Sunday', you really do feel the power of what happened. United was the same albeit in a more confined space - but the tension was gut bursting.

With regard to the comments regarding the 'demonization of the US'. There's so much that one could say to answer your questions but rules here prevent it (do the rules prevent the questions?) - and rightly so (don't mention the 'R' word ). I should point out for context that the story was based on a novel published in 1986 but with a more contemprary twist - the CIA obviously a core theme to Ludlums original as well as the movie.

Anyhow, apply the logic to Bourne and you may as well apply it to many, many action movies and TV shows. The following come to mind; Almost any Grisham or Clancy flick, 'The Good Shepard', Apocalypse Now, Wag the Dog, Mission Impossible, '24', and even the The 'A' Team and 'Meet the Fockers'! The list is endless.

It's entertainment, that's all and that's all we're here for.

[Ovation]

I was disappointed with the third. I felt it was not smart, there was little character development - no interesting new chartacters, it turned things into just an action movie. The first 2 were smart, had interesting twists, you learned and then cared about the characters and there was some action. With 3 there was mostly only action. I easily tired of the over the shoulder camera angles, enough with the close ups, the frequent conversations that were actually two people making statements back and forth. Also, CAN SOME ONE STILL THE CAMERA PLEASE. There is no reason for that degree of jiggle camera effect. The Pamela Landy character seemed very flat as did most of the other characters. I thought the first 2 were very very good, this one not.

This reflects much of my reaction to the film as well (though I didn't mind the camera work quite so much. It could have been a little less jittery in spots, but that, to me, was a minor issue). I didn't find it a bad film, just not up to par with the other two. There is a fine line between too much exposition (assumes your audience is dumb) and not enough (assumes facts not in evidence). The film could have used another 30 mins or so--for character development, plot exposition and pauses--not more action. The first two films did not simply provide an adrenaline rush, but it seemed as if this film was too wrapped up in the rush.

A good film when compared to a lot of other action movies out there, but only a fair film when compared to its predecessors. I'll probably add it to the other two in my collection, but it will probably get less "air time".

[Fred333]

I was kinda let down too. I thought the franchise has slowly gone down hill since the first one. I did the like the plot of the second one though, it was a great contrast to the action. I really hope they develop the other two books and go back to their roots.

[Kemp]

I really enjoyed it, came back home and watched the first two again. I hope there will be more

[Sarahbee]

I really liked how it ended... and I too hope they will come out with another.. any word if that is going to happen?