The Bourne Ultimatum

UffDa

UffDa

Gold Member
Joined
Sep 11, 1999
Messages
42,596
This my review of The Bourne Ultimatum. It is safe to read. It's not a "spoiler".;)

My wife and I saw The Bourne Ultimatum yesterday afternoon. We actually wanted to see Harry Potter, but the movie had started by the time we got there. I must be one of the few who didn’t care that much for it.

Mostly, it was about a bunch of nasty CIA people who wanted to kill Bourne and a lot of unrealistic super-hero action. Maybe I’m just getting jaded in my old age. Much of the dialog involved mumbling which I couldn’t understand and when I turned to my wife to ask what was said, she was asleep. ( BTW, the sound at this theater is fine)

As I said, I am in the minority in my opinion of this movie. I have no complaint about the acting. The cast is first class. It has been rated as high as 9/10 and 94% on Rotten Tomatoes, so, if you like this sort of thing, go see it.
 
It's the first movie the wife and I have seen since the last Lord of the Rings. Went to the early show, 2:45. It was sold old. A lot cheers and "oh ya's" in the crowd through out. I am a big fan. The trilogy got me started reading as a teen. This one was the weakest of the three mostly because of the ending and it fewer "gotcha's".

I didn't care for the politcs, but one must remember the Treadstone/Blackbriar programs were bastardized by those at the top to get rich. I believe in black ops but this team was using its "assets", unbeknownst to them, to kill for profit. Assets are the trigger guys.

If you liked the first ones, you'll like this one. Filmed unfortunately more like the 2nd one, but a good use of a babysitter in my book. I also had a good time talking about afterwards over a couple pints.

Bourne was the original John Clark, Mitch Rapp, Jack Bauer.

tjg
 
I saw it yesterday. Bourne Rocks!

But, if you haven't seen the others, rent them before you go and see Ultimatum because it really does assume that you have the context and know who the characters are. Unlike many sequels, Ultimatum makes no attempt to bring the uninitated into the story. And the fact that it doesn't is perfect. Just as Jason Bourne suddenly drops onto the grid, we are suddenly dropped into the middle of this ongoing story and jerked into Bourne's world with all of the effect of grabbing a passing, racing freight train. And a racing freight train is what Bourne is and what this movie is too.

The whole movie is summed up in one line from the movie itself: "That's Jason Bourne!"

I've always thought when watching the others that it's a bit silly that the woman has to alter her appearance, cut her hair, etc., but Bourne makes no attempt at a disguise. But, I realized in this one that Bourne doesn't have to because Bourne is invisible. No, it's not some superpower. He just knows instinctively how to move and where to move in such a way that his opposition doesn't see him. If you're not going to let the opposition see you, then you don't need to be disguised. This is entirely capsulated when he tells the reporter, "Tie your shoe, NOW!" just as the surveilance guys are about to look in his direction; for that instant, the reporter was Jason Bourne, invisible without being disguised. That's Jason Bourne.
 
pinetree said:
Bourne was the original John Clark, Mitch Rapp, Jack Bauer.
Click to expand...

im a big fan of the bourne series, but original or not, no one beats Mitch Rapp ;)

im looking forward to seeing this film.
 
I have to say I like the first one the best. The stories are great just dint like the shaky camera in the 2nd and 3rd (which are not that bad on TV)…Over all it Kicked Ass
 
Yeah, the shakey camera and the constant camera cuts -- never the same angle for more than two seconds -- does get a bit dizzying.

The first one is, I think, the best because everything and everyone is new. We're exploring a whole new world, not going back to someplace we've already been.

BTW, Robert Ludlum who wrote the books (and many other great books) is a knife collector.

Matt Damon who plays Bourne is also a knife collector. He's also a serious and long-term student of Filipino-style martial arts at the Inosanto Acadamy. The other actors whom he fights hand-to-hand are also Inosanto students. And the fights are choreographed by Jeff Imada, the legendayr stuntman and fight director who is also a knife collector and also a long-term student of Dan Inosanto. And that's what makes the hand-to-hand fights in these films so awesome.
 
Thanks for the info...it was intense to say the least
There were a couple times I looked at my wife and asked if she thought it was a bit shaky...She looked a little Green at times
 
I just can't stand Paul Greengrass films - I reckon the story should always come first. You know, show don't tell. With Greengrass you are left in no doubt that you are seeing a film made by an avant garde, cutting edge, sylist who WONT KEEP THE BLOODY CAMERA STILL!!. Jerky camera - the last resort of ex-music video makers who don't understand narrative and how to build tension.

I loved the first Bourne film and I love the story - but I'm not looking forward to the third Bourne. The second one became irritating by halfway through and I was dissapointed to hear that Greengrass scored the directing gig again for the third one (in case you can't already tell)
 
Mr.LaBella said:
Matt Damon is nothing but Ben Affleck's sidekick, isnt he? Annnnd Ben Affleck stinks too. SO, in summation Matt Damon MUST stink worse as he is delegated to the sidekick role ala "The Deker".


Digg it?
Click to expand...

Posted elsewhere but just as poignant!
 
Wish I'd known it was out. I'd have gone to see it last night.
I've probably read The Bourne Identity at least a dozen times, and the other two several times each.
The movies have so completely destroyed the Bourne story that I have to try to forget the books to enjoy the movies at all.
I'm sure I'll buy The Bourne Ultimatum on DVD, just like I did the first two, regardless.
These books are really too detailed and complex for a movie to hope to capture. I'd like to see Tom Clancy's Without Remorse on film. That could make a killer movie, IMO.
 
OwenM said:
Wish I'd known it was out. I'd have gone to see it last night.
I've probably read The Bourne Identity at least a dozen times, and the other two several times each.
The movies have so completely destroyed the Bourne story that I have to try to forget the books to enjoy the movies at all.
I'm sure I'll buy The Bourne Ultimatum on DVD, just like I did the first two, regardless.
These books are really too detailed and complex for a movie to hope to capture. I'd like to see Tom Clancy's Without Remorse on film. That could make a killer movie, IMO.
Click to expand...

Was Jason Bourne Vasily Talenikov's opposte number from the Materese' Circle?
 
I know the Matarese Circle is one of Ludlum's most highly acclaimed books, at least based on rave reviews I've seen, etc. but I honestly don't remember anything about it except the title. The Bourne trilogy are the only Ludlums that really grabbed me, except the Road to Gandolfo, and the Road to Omaha.
I'll have to read it again...
 
Anyhow, I geuss I can take solice in that I was able to enjoy the books and then turn around and enjoy an entirely different story with the same character in both of them.
 
One thing, the girl in the movie tries to pitch in during a fight. I give her credit for trying, but darn, carry a knife if your not going to carry a gun. Or, grab something with some weight.
 
I think everbody's pretty much hit the nail on the head with this one so far, from Chuck on down. On the plus side, Damon's acting was once again perfectly suited to the role (and I'm sorry, but anyone who thinks Ben Affleck is anywhere even near to being in the same league with Matt Damon when it comes to acting, is in immediate and urgent need of a cat scan ;) ). On the down side, I agree that the shaky camera gimmick was way overdone. I'm also getting a bit tired of the notion that the CIA can deploy 50 agents and at least one super-human uber-assassin to any location within any major city on the planet inside of 90 seconds and on a moment's notice.

And on a more serious note, I sensed a bit more heavyhandedness in this film with respect to the political undertones. Unlike the first two movies, I got the distinct impression from this one that the "bunch of nasty CIA people", as they've been described here, are meant to be an allegory to how the moveon.org types perceive our current Presidential administration. If I had to hear one more deadly serious Deputy Director of the CIA breathlessy rasp out through gritted teeth, "Dammit, Pamela, don't you understand, we have to kill scores of innocent Americans because if we don't, the bad guys win". Oy vey. But we had better get used to it. As the theater's coming attractions reel made clear, Meryl Streep and her merry band of Hollywood social activists will be offering up a steady diet of such crap over the course of the next year.
 
Well I will find comfort in the shaky scenes when I see this movie, but for strictly selfish reasons. For you see, the ex-wife can not tolerate movies shot in that style. I will be smiling the whole way through. :D
 
Bronco said:
I'm also getting a bit tired of the notion that the CIA can deploy 50 agents and at least one super-human uber-assassin to any location within any major city on the planet inside of 90 seconds and on a moment's notice.
Click to expand...


And don't forget that top, senior CIA spymasters always read extremely classified documents upon which their careers -- yeah, their lives -- depend on keeping secret while sitting at their desks in their offices with their backs turned to wall-of-glass windows looking out to the public where anyone with a bit of optics can read over their shoulders; that's how they do it, you know. ;)
 
Gollnick said:
And don't forget that top, senior CIA spymasters always read extremely classified documents upon which their careers -- yeah, their lives -- depend on keeping secret while sitting at their desks in their offices with their backs turned to wall-of-glass windows looking out to the public where anyone with a bit of optics can read over their shoulders; that's how they do it, you know. ;)
Click to expand...

Precisely. Although it certainly doesn't hurt when your "bit of optics" is a cigar sized monocular featuring both 75x zoom and awesome image stabilization technology. In fact, that may have been the only time in the movie when the camera wasn't shaking. LOL. :D

(BTW, I fully understand that critiques such as this are the reason why my sisters-in-law won't watch movies with me anymore ;) .)
 
I went to see this POS movie yesterday.
The local paper had a review that gave it 2 stars. The reviewer was generous, IMO.
The fight scenes sucked, the story line was weak, realism nonexistent, the chase scenes were unoriginal, the acting was mediocre at best, a couple of the physics defying stunts made me feel like I was watching a cartoon, and then right at the end, when you don't think it can get any worse(and half an hour after some of the people had walked out of the theater) there's this scene where the camera switches back and forth from Bourne to a guy he's holding a gun on...the guy he's holding a Glock on, oops a Sig on, no that's a Glock, Sig again, wait there's the Glock being "cocked" for the 43rd time, and then, surprise of surprises, back to the Sig. There were previous discrepancies, but this scene was like a bad joke...like it was so obvious that you'd think that they had to have done it intentionally.
I don't tend to be overly critical of movies, but this one was really pathetic. What a disappointing waste of both time and money.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top