Stout
Hold onto the ball, Murray!
Yeah, this will probably be the last movie of the series. Just trying to milk a little more money out of what is a dead franchise.
The Bourne Legacy
- Thread starter Brian in Mesa
- Start date
azsportsfan01
Registered
Kinda surprised they chose Renner. He is already taking over the Mission Impossible franchise. Two franchises like this seems like an awful lot for one guy.
That movie sucked with Jim Carrey and whats his face.. and the Mask.. Matter fact.. Anything with Jim Carrey sucks donkey balls..
- Joined
- Jul 20, 2004
- Posts
- 8,942
- Reaction score
- 405
So they're saying it's a movie in the same universe as the other three, called The Bourne Legacy, but without Jason Bourne. This makes no sense!
Dr. Jones
Has No Time For Love
- Joined
- Nov 2, 2004
- Posts
- 27,667
- Reaction score
- 16,526
Edward Norton is in this.
This movie looks a lot better than I thought it would be.
Check out the trailer! http://trailers.apple.com/trailers/universal/thebournelegacy/
This movie looks a lot better than I thought it would be.
Check out the trailer! http://trailers.apple.com/trailers/universal/thebournelegacy/
Stout
Hold onto the ball, Murray!
No thanks.
No Nicky Parsons?
Divide Et Impera
Registered User
It could work. Renner's face is not angular enough, imo, to pull of the high-action spy character, but I think I'd give it a shot....
It looks to be pretty high energy. Even though Matt Damon will always be the franchise, I am willing to have an "in-theatre" look at this.
In the previews, they seem to have endowed the lead character with some sort of super powers. Please tell me they didn't over do it on that....
OP
OP
The Bourne Legacy
Release Date: August 10, 2012
Studio: Universal Pictures
Director: Tony Gilroy
Screenwriter: Tony Gilroy, Dan Gilroy
Genre: Action, Thriller
MPAA Rating: PG-13 (for violence and action sequences)
Website: TheBourneLegacy.net
Starring: Jeremy Renner, Rachel Weisz, Edward Norton, Albert Finney, Joan Allen, Scott Glenn, Stacy Keach, Oscar Isaac
Plot Summary: The narrative architect behind the "Bourne" film series, Tony Gilroy, takes the helm in the next chapter of the hugely popular espionage franchise that has earned almost $1 billion at the global box office: "The Bourne Legacy." The writer/director expands the "Bourne" universe created by Robert Ludlum with an original story that introduces us to a new hero (Jeremy Renner) whose life-or-death stakes have been triggered by the events of the first three films.
For "The Bourne Legacy," Renner joins fellow series newcomers Rachel Weisz, Edward Norton, Stacy Keach and Oscar Isaac, while franchise veterans Albert Finney, Joan Allen, David Strathairn and Scott Glenn reprise their roles.
Release Date: August 10, 2012
Studio: Universal Pictures
Director: Tony Gilroy
Screenwriter: Tony Gilroy, Dan Gilroy
Genre: Action, Thriller
MPAA Rating: PG-13 (for violence and action sequences)
Website: TheBourneLegacy.net
Starring: Jeremy Renner, Rachel Weisz, Edward Norton, Albert Finney, Joan Allen, Scott Glenn, Stacy Keach, Oscar Isaac
Plot Summary: The narrative architect behind the "Bourne" film series, Tony Gilroy, takes the helm in the next chapter of the hugely popular espionage franchise that has earned almost $1 billion at the global box office: "The Bourne Legacy." The writer/director expands the "Bourne" universe created by Robert Ludlum with an original story that introduces us to a new hero (Jeremy Renner) whose life-or-death stakes have been triggered by the events of the first three films.
For "The Bourne Legacy," Renner joins fellow series newcomers Rachel Weisz, Edward Norton, Stacy Keach and Oscar Isaac, while franchise veterans Albert Finney, Joan Allen, David Strathairn and Scott Glenn reprise their roles.
You must be registered for see images attach
Not at all
Chaplin
Better off silent
Review I wrote for my movie review site:
THE BOURNE LEGACY
The 4th film of an already good trilogy is a tall order. Especially when the director and star of said trilogy is nowhere to be seen in this production.
What we have with The Bourne Legacy is two seemingly seperate films. You have the film that attempts to continue the story seen in the trilogy, and a brand new offshoot surrounding another of the drug-enhanced super soldiers.
In order to follow that first of the two movies, it might do well to view The Bourne Ultimatum. It is absolutely a must to have seen at least that last film, if not the whole trilogy, otherwise a good third of the film will make no sense at all. I have seen the whole trilogy, but haven't seen the third film in quite some time, and I had some issues following things surrounding "Treadstone" and "Blackbriar". Characters from the previous films do appear, but only for fleeting moments and usually with huge gaps, thanks to the second piece of the film.
That piece is about Aaron Cross, an agent that seems to be an exact duplicate of Jason Bourne, except in this case, he knows who he is and what he does. He spends the entire movie trying to track down drugs that allow him to operate with enhanced strength and intelligence. That's it.
The problem is that these two halves of The Bourne Legacy whole, only vaguely fit together. Cross simply seems like an excuse to have action sequences amidst all the political and military conspiracy stuff.
Now don't get me wrong, those action sequences are exhilirating, but a little long. There really are only 3 of these sequences, one in Alaska, one in the back roads of Virginia and the last in the crowded streets of Manila, the Philippines. The final sequence ends spectacularly, but it takes a really long time to get to that point.
The cast is uniformly great, especially Renner, Rachel Weisz as the helpful scientist, and Edward Norton as the government agent who will stop at nothing to find Cross and bring him in--effectively destroying the original program that led to the Bourne mess in the earlier films.
Bourne himself is always present, always mentioned, but it seemed to be only to remind the audience that, yes, this is a Bourne movie! We see pictures of Bourne and everyone talks about him. It's certainly anticlimactic that he doesn't actually appear on screen after being the center of everything.
Finally, the ending also is so abrupt that I didn't even realize the film was over until I started hearing the pulsating strings of Moby's Extreme Ways, remixed yet again over the end credits. Not only was it an unsatisfying ending that most certainly leads to a fifth film, but it felt like the entire movie had no ending at all. Even the 3rd and final action set piece didn't feel like an epic ending.
All in all, it was an incomplete film that had some moments and was technically great. Cinematography was actually better than the previous film (no Blair Witch shakiness) and the acting was still of the highest quality. But it's hard to whole-heartedly recommend the film, and I definitely can't recommend it if you haven't seen the previous films.
THE BOURNE LEGACY
The 4th film of an already good trilogy is a tall order. Especially when the director and star of said trilogy is nowhere to be seen in this production.
What we have with The Bourne Legacy is two seemingly seperate films. You have the film that attempts to continue the story seen in the trilogy, and a brand new offshoot surrounding another of the drug-enhanced super soldiers.
In order to follow that first of the two movies, it might do well to view The Bourne Ultimatum. It is absolutely a must to have seen at least that last film, if not the whole trilogy, otherwise a good third of the film will make no sense at all. I have seen the whole trilogy, but haven't seen the third film in quite some time, and I had some issues following things surrounding "Treadstone" and "Blackbriar". Characters from the previous films do appear, but only for fleeting moments and usually with huge gaps, thanks to the second piece of the film.
That piece is about Aaron Cross, an agent that seems to be an exact duplicate of Jason Bourne, except in this case, he knows who he is and what he does. He spends the entire movie trying to track down drugs that allow him to operate with enhanced strength and intelligence. That's it.
The problem is that these two halves of The Bourne Legacy whole, only vaguely fit together. Cross simply seems like an excuse to have action sequences amidst all the political and military conspiracy stuff.
Now don't get me wrong, those action sequences are exhilirating, but a little long. There really are only 3 of these sequences, one in Alaska, one in the back roads of Virginia and the last in the crowded streets of Manila, the Philippines. The final sequence ends spectacularly, but it takes a really long time to get to that point.
The cast is uniformly great, especially Renner, Rachel Weisz as the helpful scientist, and Edward Norton as the government agent who will stop at nothing to find Cross and bring him in--effectively destroying the original program that led to the Bourne mess in the earlier films.
Bourne himself is always present, always mentioned, but it seemed to be only to remind the audience that, yes, this is a Bourne movie! We see pictures of Bourne and everyone talks about him. It's certainly anticlimactic that he doesn't actually appear on screen after being the center of everything.
Finally, the ending also is so abrupt that I didn't even realize the film was over until I started hearing the pulsating strings of Moby's Extreme Ways, remixed yet again over the end credits. Not only was it an unsatisfying ending that most certainly leads to a fifth film, but it felt like the entire movie had no ending at all. Even the 3rd and final action set piece didn't feel like an epic ending.
All in all, it was an incomplete film that had some moments and was technically great. Cinematography was actually better than the previous film (no Blair Witch shakiness) and the acting was still of the highest quality. But it's hard to whole-heartedly recommend the film, and I definitely can't recommend it if you haven't seen the previous films.
Dr. Jones
Has No Time For Love
- Joined
- Nov 2, 2004
- Posts
- 27,667
- Reaction score
- 16,526
Whats the address to your website Chap?
Chaplin
Better off silent
For now, it's just a Facebook Fan Page at the moment. Have a website designed, but having trouble getting it built.
Here's Looking at Films, Kid
Passepartout
July 4th Fireworks
It was really a great film. Matt is the original! But Jeremy R is a great actor as well!
Stout
Hold onto the ball, Murray!
This was a wholly underwhelming film, and I'm sorry to have broken my vow not to see it. It was too much of a mish-mash, a jumble of the original trilogy (as Chap said, mostly the last one), back story, and setup. I think they made a huge mistake by not really making this a stand-alone movie. It was far too long for what it was--a simple placeholder that did nothing but set the plate for sequels. And, what is worse, they didn't even TRY to make it anything more.
The climax, with Renner infecting himself with the virus, he and Weisz eluding the police and killing the assassin introduced entirely too late into the movie, and hopping on a fishing vessel, was simply terrible.
Gah!!! Once again, DITTO and DITTO, sir!
I'll assume there will be sequels, so hopefully they can get beyond the melding of the new and old movies and just do their own thing. The film was in-TENSE, in spots... loved that. But as Shane and others have pointed out the ending was a, "what? Huh?" kind of ending.
p.s. I didn't think much of the way they handled Pamela Landy....
