Date: August 3Location: Boynton Muvico Premiere
Salty watched the kids and we paid $2 extra per ticket to watch Jason Bourne in the "Premiere" theater, meaning we got free popcorn, a 21-and-over crowd and assigned seats. I can't stress enough the beauty of the assigned seats, exactly where we wanted them in a brand-new, huge theater. We walked in 10 minutes before the movie with no worries. This is the way to go. And the movie was awesome. I'm so glad we watched the first two Bourne films this week in preparation for the third, because there are a lot of tie-ins here that would have been harder to catch. In particular, there's a chronological overlap that's just brilliantly conceived and executed. I hope this is the last film in the series -- in its own way, this is as finely realized a trilogy as the Lord of the Rings or Star Wars films, and miles better than the Matrix and Pirates series. A minor quibble... the handheld cam is occasionally too much, as it is in Greengrass' other films. But overall his direction is a huge asset, lending an immediacy and intense realism that sets these films apart from other action hero fare.
3 comments:
Obviously, having read your blog entry, we disagree on the brilliance of the film. We, unfortunately, sat in a hot packed theater (though our seats were well positioned), so that may have had some effect. And we didn't re-watch the films. But, with both of those disclaimers, my opinion was that this was a good, not great, film. Certainly, the directing was top notch but this film thin on plot and ultimately the action became far less "thinking man" and far more Die Hard-esque. I LOVED the first 1/3 or this movie--the train station/reporter scene was brilliant. But then the film wavered. The whole middle action scenes with the girl in peril was, to me, a giant waste of time--that's the 20 minutes that should have been cut or trimmed. It became even more if a waste of time when you never really care about or see that woman again, save for some shot of her in a far cafe looking on. Certainly she was not worth of that type of prolonged action sequence to get one thug asset who was chasing her. Similarly, I was less than satisfied with the fact that Bourne never gets to even talk to Daniels and again, tied in with the prolonged action sequence to save the girl, I found all that part unfulfilling. Then you get to New York---which was better than the middle third, but not nearly as good or interesting as the first third. Of course, here is where previews suck because knowing Bourne gets into the CIA office really sucks the wind out of that scene. And, meanwhile, from a plot standpoint, it is I think absurd that the CIA deputy director would all of a sudden feel the compelling need to "go mobile" and clear him and the entire CIA dept out of its offices, all so he can be sitting in some car somewhere to see and do exactly what? All of that was a rather absurd plot contrivance for the payoff of the call scene (we'd be talking face to face), but, again, that fell flat since we knew it was coming anyway. Then...you get into an absurd car chase scene courtesy of Die Hard..Glad to see holding a seatbelt on the way crashing down can save you from a broken back, but come on already! I can accept this kinda stuff in Die Hard (though barely), but I want my Bourne action scenes to be smarter. I want more of the train station, less car crap. Which takes us to the interesting last scene with Nazi-esque CIA dude. That was interesting enough I suppose and the ending was relatively satisfying.
So, overall I give this flick a solid B -- not NEARLY the film the first Bourne was, and, since I can barely recall the 2nd, I won't make that comparison.
Anyway, my rave is done.
My first thought is that you must have really disliked The Namesake! And it's funny how much you defended Sipder-Man 3, yet it's just a single spot above this one. I guess it's all relative.
I don't really expect you guys to love these films because they're the quintessential action movies, and that's a genre you're just not into.
I think knocking the Bourne films for being weak on plot is like knocking Zodiac for not having enough laughs. These aren't "plot" movies. They all fit essentially the same mold -- some cat and mouse, a fistfight, a car chase and a big reveal about Bourne's past. The three films combined contain the full arc of his character, which is why I think it's such a great trilogy.
I disagree that Nicky wasn't an important character. She was in all three films, worked closely with him in his past, and apparently (we learn here) had a romantic involvement as well. Also, she's the only person in the world who's actually helping him at that point.
I do agree about the car chases, and I feel the same way about the car chases in the other two films. They're the least interesting kind of action, even when done well.
HEY! I just saw that Clay's e-mail to us wound up a comment on his blog as well, so I want to clarify here as I did at the time. I don't like to be lumped in as "you guys." :-) I happen to love the Jason Bourne character and I think Paul Greengrass is a fabulous director. That said, to me this film had one thrilling sequence, followed by a lot of great action. A solid time at the movies.
Post a Comment