I vote that this will be the best since the first Bourne film.
Looks great fun and I'll definitely be giving it a viewing but I'm still unimpressed that they are using the Bourne name just to sell it.
Well, it seems like they're using some of the characters from the first three films to tie it in with the OT.
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.
I am unfamiliar with the timeline of this film or the books, so why isn't Matt Damon in it?
Just from watching the trailer, it would appear to me that this takes place after the first three movies, focused on a completely different character in the "program"
I never saw the first 3... Are they good?
Stacy Keach is still getting work?! Wow. Good for him!
I could have sworn that I heard Chris Coopers voice...wasn't he killed in the first film??
Looks like it might be decent. I'll rent it most likely.
Very cool. Looks like it still directly ties in to the previous films, especially the third one. Now one of these days I want to watch the trilogy again to familiarize myself with all the previous characters.
Just saw that the hope is to team up Damon and Renner in the next itteration of Bourne.
I'd love to see that!
THE BOURNE LEGACY Sequel May Team Jeremy Renner with Matt Damon
What I read about Damon was that he said he'd do it only if Paul Greengrass directed it. They started pre-production and Greengrass walked off the set so Damon followed him.
I think it's going to be a good movie... but I'm not so sure that it's going to be a Bourne. Either they're going to introduce another man with the codename "Jason Bourne," which is going to anger me, or have another assassin who goes rogue (which doesn't make a lot of sense since Treadstone was shut down and everyone was killed by either the CIA or Bourne). I think it can still be a good movie, Renner is a great actor, but I'm not sure if I'm going to give it Bourne status just yet.
It'd be interesting if a new guy is "Jason Bourne," given the article that, I think, Cracked.com posted about cool movie theories -- that being that James Bond is actually a code name, and is passed down from agent to agent over time. I could EASILY see "Jason Bourne" going that route and the producers saying "Damn, how come we never thought of that? Oh well. Let's steal it!"
I'm a little miffed they're using the success of the Bourne films to market this one, but I have to admit, it looks really good. Looking forward to seeing it!
I think its nice to see the film take a whole new direction with getting a new main character so I am interested to see how these new films start playing out.
Since this existing thread didn't have many pages of pre-release discussion, we will continue the post-release discussion along with spoilers here in the same thread.
I really liked it. It doesn't have Bourne in it but it's his Legacy, it's a different agent in a different program. And the story goes along the repercussions that the actions of Jason Bourne did upon other agents under similar programs.
From my understanding and viewing of the movie this film is happening at the same time as the third movie. I say this because they use part of Ultimatum and say that Bourne is in the USA hence they need to clean out all the other operations like Bourne was in. So while some people hunt Bourne in the USA, others have to wipe clean the other operatives, enter Renner.
All in all I really liked it, gives the view of another along side Bourne. I'm glad Damon wasn't in it or it wouldn't be his Legacy. And I don't think they should do a sequel of this. It should end, since that's what a Legacy should be, an ending point. Bourne is out of the game and free and so is Renner. Sure it would be sweet to see them kicking bad guys all over the place but I think it would take away from the storyline.
As for the books, I've read a few and the movies/books are completly seperate. I like the movies way better!
Long read I know but in a nutshell. Legacy = Good movie and good addition to the Bourne franchise.
I saw it earlier today while my parents went to see The Dark Knight Rises (which I am honestly not interested in watching at all). Honestly, I enjoyed it and thought it was a good movie. It wasn't as great as the first film, but it's pretty decent.
I not only like the tie-in moments (such as hearing about the events of Supremacy and Ultimatum), but the thing that I like is the fact that we see the end result of Pamela Landy's attempt to expose Treadstone and Black Briar, only for it to backfire against her (basically, the old saying "no good deed shall go unpunished" made real). Honestly, from what I know, the film deviates from the book (which features Jason Bourne prominently). However, according to Wikipedia, Tony Gilroy hasn't ruled out the possibility for Damon to return as Bourne for a future installment, which would be an interesting thing to have the new guy working with Bourne.
i was quite suprised when the movie ended where it did. I was expecting an epic fight with a toaster, book or rolled up diaper turned lethal weapon - which never happens... or was the wolf the epic bourne signature choreographed fight?
also wasn't exactly happy with the way they turned the story into science fiction, a la universal soldier... if the current story trend continues, i half expect to see a xenomorph turn up in another super secret experimental division.
on the other hand, i thought the lab shooting scene was terrifying... but that could just be due to recent events...
Last edited by neosporing; Aug 11, 2012 at 6:52 PM.
Yeah, about half way through the film I thought "Oh, so he's a replicant looking for more life. She just does eyes . . ." except, that means we spend over an hour with him looking for blue pills.
I thought the story was really weak, and all the scenes with Edward Norton were just rapid fire nonsense that really didn't matter to what was happening with Cross. They were always two steps behind him, and they never knew anything more than the audience did. So, when the audience already knows what an entire cast of a film is just figuring out, that is ineffective storytelling 101.
Now, I should confess that I really dislike all the Bourne films. I am predisposed to disliking films that cut from people standing around in a computer control room talking about a scene I just watched unfold.
This film just...bad
I liked how it opened, happening before and during the first three films
I liked how it also shows us the fallout of tread stone and black brier being exposed.
And when dude crashes his motorcycle at the end of the chase that was the highlight of this entire film.
but despite all those excellent moments
The thing that almost made me walk out of this film was the whole virus thing
it takes a virus to make these guys faster and smarter then a normal solider
when all it took for Bourne was extensive brainwashing and special forces training to make him a believable bad ass.
and to make matters worse Renner acts like a junkie needing his next hit through out the majority of the film.
And the ending that sudden ending with no resolution to anything we just witnessed well that was just the cherry on top of the sunday.
God I had such high hopes for this film. Renner was a good choice but the execution over all just fell short of even my lowest expectations.
Am I just venting over my disappointment...probably. but when I wake up from a peaceful nights sleep later today will I still feel it was just a lackluster movie...definitely
Last edited by ItalianNinja86; Aug 12, 2012 at 1:59 AM.
However, I don't think the virus makes him faster or smarter, but it upped his immune system to allow for temporary increase in his healing processes and allows for his body to act normal despite his injuries (as there was the examination scene flashback where the doctor was examining his hand, which the dialogue revealed that there had been a wound on one of his hands that had healed up quickly. And he appeared to be acting normal after being shot in the leg and losing a lot of blood in the final chase, at least until the very end where he seemed to be zoned out due to the lack of blood). Honestly, that would make sense, as you have a normal soldier who ends up being injured and has to stop to patch up his wounds, only for them to continue to bother him days to weeks later, and with the virus, a soldier would have to find a place to hole up and allow for his body to heal naturally anywhere between hours to a couple of days. That's actually a better advantage than any of Jason Bourne's abilities (as we've seen him nearly get caught by police in The Bourne Ultimatum while he was patching up his injuries he sustained from the car wreck in The Bourne Supremacy. In fact, for an alternate ending to Supremacy, Jason Bourne, after visiting the girl, actually passed out from blood loss and was caught by the CIA and was in a hospital for a few days healing from his injuries when Landy comes to visit him and to offer him a chance to "come back"). Basically, a combat cocktail with a healing factor on steroids.
At least that's what I picked up from it. I could very well be wrong.
Last edited by CB2001; Aug 12, 2012 at 2:52 AM.