User Reviews (781)

Add a Review

  • The original Bourne trilogy of Identity, Supremacy and Ultimatum were brilliant displays in effective storytelling and great action. Jason Bourne, however, isn't quite as proficient in both of those areas. On the one hand, it's action-packed to the brim, and provides for a hugely entertaining watch, but on the other, it's a disappointment as far as bringing yet another intriguing and truly thrilling mystery to life is concerned.

    Let's start on the bright side, however, with the action. Paul Greengrass does yet another sterling job at directing some hugely exciting action sequences (including a thrilling chase in Athens that harks back to Ultimatum's Tangier chase), and in tandem with yet another excellent performance by Matt Damon as Jason Bourne himself, the action is definitely the best part of this film.

    Where the story lacks, Jason Bourne more often than not gives you some insane action to revel at. Sure, it's not the work of storytelling geniuses, but if you're the sort of person who can turn their brain off for two hours and watch wall-to-wall action and explosions, then this film will have you in dreamland. It's not a Michael Bay movie, and Greengrass' style lends a lot to making more vibrant action sequences, but there's no doubt that fans of big action will love this film.

    On the whole, I did enjoy this film, and I was able to recognise its flaws and just watch it as a big blockbuster. However, I can't escape feeling disappointed at the film's total failure to tell as intriguing a story as the first three films in the series.

    The enthralling mysteries and gradual revelations about Jason Bourne's past were what really separated this series from any other spy thriller. In this movie, however, everything felt a lot more generic, with a much bigger emphasis on action than clever storytelling and patient, gradual character and plot development. Unfortunately, it's that that makes Jason Bourne look pale in comparison to the original trilogy, and those who are expecting yet another engrossing and intelligent thriller will certainly be disappointed.

    That said, there are bright moments in the story too. It's not a horrifically dull film, and there are a few details that relate right the way back to The Bourne Identity. What's more is that Matt Damon, Alicia Vikander and Tommy Lee Jones all put in very strong performances to add a degree of gravitas to what is in truth a very clichéd and repetitive story, which was good to see.

    Overall, I am disappointed by Jason Bourne, in that it doesn't manage to tell such an enthralling and intelligent mystery as the series' original trilogy, but its top-quality action and strong directing and performances still allowed me to have a lot of fun for two hours.
  • Actually reviews are not supposed to be based on wishful thinking.

    Nonetheless for those members who gave this a high rating more out of frustration than anything else, I do feel your pain.

    The original Bourne trilogy was not merely good, it was superb. As a top reviewer here with some 1200 reviews under my belt I said more than once that the original was the best spy trilogy I had ever seen and I am unashamed of the fact that I have seen each film in that series four or five times since original release. They are an adrenaline rush, the perfect mix of story, form, and effect.

    Even 2012's Bourne Legacy -- a feature where it was ever so clear that Damon had been offered a fortune just to walk-on and smile at the camera, but refused anyway -- was a solid movie, great script, held the attention, and Renner did a great job.

    However, now that I have seen Jason Bourne 2016, I cannot help but wish that Damon had agreed to participate in Legacy, rather than be lured back 4 years later for a part he clearly no longer likes, in a production he would rather not be in.

    I tend toward "purist" reviews, that is to say, I don't really care WHY a film was made as much as I do about how entertaining is it to watch ...?

    (That said, I have to "assume" that Damon broke his vow and came back simply for the cash. And Greengrass agreed to take hold of the camera one more time only if he could get a writing credit too. Ugh!)

    So, speaking of entertainment, there is almost none in this movie. The script is a mess. Written by the director for the clear purpose of showcasing his action and camera-work skills, there is no attempt to build connection from the top.

    The script is so bad that even viewers in love with the original trilogy -- like this one -- have to keep reminding themselves who Bourne is supposed to be, and what is supposed to motivate him.

    (Not to mention major plot holes here and there. Am I the only one who noticed that the most WANTED MAN IN America attempted to enter customs under his own name with no advance certainty that the computer would be "fixed" in time? Remember, from the second film in the series, this is a man who "never guesses and never makes mistakes." Other than accepting to do this film, that is.)

    A good film makes the viewer feel good. The scientists call it endorphin production. This 120 minute endless chase, from the top of the movie to the ending, merely produces a caffeine buzz and sets your nerves on edge. Yes, Greengrass can use this production in his own personal highlight reel to showcase his moving camera skills. But his writing skills? Not so much.

    Tommy Lee Jones delivers possibly the most superficial performance of his excellent career and the money he was offered cannot begin to make up for the indignity of the closeups.

    Newcomer Alicia Vikander acquits herself well. Then again, she is a newbie with a whole string of good movies ahead of her, career-wise, whereas the actors in this film seemed more interested in taking the money ... and running.

    ---------------ADDENDUM NOV 2017-------------

    If you are curious to see the kind of film that JASON BOURNE (2016) should have been in a perfect world -- or a parallel universe, or whatever -- than have a quick peek at ATOMIC BLONDE 2017. Presumably when you read this review in the far future, you can snag it on streaming media or DVD or possibly even beamed directly into your cortex. Theron, for the first 2/3 of the film, is the Bourne of old. She is an agent with a mission and a purpose and a predisposition for removing obstacles from her path with the same ease a gardener pulls weeds from a flower bed. And the script is intelligent and purposeful. Yes, she has more estrogen than the Bourne we are used to (well, a LOT more, actually) but, other than that tiny discrepancy, ATOMIC BLONDE is more a Bourne sequel than this soppy entry.

    ---- ((Designated "IMDb Top Reviewer." Please check out my list "167+ Nearly-Perfect Movies (with the occasional Anime or TV miniseries) you can/should see again and again (1932 to the present))
  • This was a big letdown, I'd had been looking foreword to it for ages too but for the most part this was boring, the story line was... nothing... a same ole Bourne is trying to find out about his past, people in an office looking at computers trying to find him. Just flat, predictable and redundant.

    Tommy Lee Jones, wow was he even present for filming? He was just going through the motions here and appeared to shoot most of his scenes from his living room as he's on his own, on the phone or seated at a desk, appearing grumpy (as per) and bored.

    Even the synopsis is dull "The CIA's most dangerous former operative is drawn out of hiding to uncover more explosive truths about his past." Meh.

    On the plus there are some decent fight scenes, car chases as expected, an exciting motorcycle chase and a great bad guy with Vincent Cassel but nothing stand out or special there, everyone is just going through the motions.

    Maybe I should give this another try, did I miss something?
  • Jason Bourne wants so hard to believe in its own supremacy, forces an ultimatum of thrills and spills, but ultimately lacks identity.

    The original trilogy still stands out as one of the most intelligent post-Cold War spy action thrillers and it mostly succeeded in being the last word in the genre. Its huge success and relevance also gave the Bond franchise a big wake-up call. Amnesia-assassin Bourne is the real thang!

    So 9 years later, Paul Greengrass and Matt Damon decided it is opportune time to inject a dose of Bourne-adrenaline and his extreme ways into us. The only problem is that instead of innovation and reinvention, it serves up last night's fried rice paradise. One shouldn't mess with paradise! Greengrass regurgitates out plot points from the three predecessors. From Operation Threadstone to Operation Blackbriar, we get yet another black-ops organisation called Ironhand that wants to stay hidden and will whack anyone to Kingdom Come to prevent its knowledge from getting out. It once again exploits Bourne's amnesia as he glimpses yet another piece of his jigsaw mind-puzzle. We get the same old CIA foggies uttering "Where's Bourne?" and everyone wearing pained expressions as Bourne evades everyone in Athens, Berlin, London and Las Vegas. We get yet again a woman who thinks she know best but Alicia Vikander has none of the gravitas of Joan Allen because she is too young to be convincing.

    The screenplay does offer up an promising post-Snowden scenario but it still feels a little too familiar. These issues aside the movie is still a pulsating ride. The pace is relentless and Damon's taciturn Bourne still represents a driving force of reckoning. The spycraft and action set-pieces ooze uber-coolness and you will want to see it again just to catch how they did it. However I have one major complaint - I absolutely abhor the schizophrenic editing and jumpy hand-held shots. The camera never stays still for more than two seconds for you to marvel at the fight choreography and the vehicle mayhem-chases. In my book, hand-held shots coupled with split-second cuts are the cheapest type of cheat codes in action thrillers. With these type of cinematic trickery anybody can be a martial arts exponent and a world-class spy. No class.

    This is a good dish of leftovers. It may harken you back to the days of the original trilogy but it never truly pushes the character to a new frontier re-examining his psychological state. In the end, a dish of leftovers will still serve its purpose, especially when you are famished.
  • You can really tell that they were grasping at straws in this one, the first Damon installment in the Bourne series for 9 years. The plot is thin at best, and added elements for surprise's sake feel silly when they come out of the blue, or predictable when they don't. That said, the acting all around is solid, except for maybe Alicia Vikander, whose character as a whole seemed like it was just tacked on to mirror Julia Stiles' from previous movies. They really do follow the Bourne formula here: one major hand to hand scene, one major chase scene, and, yes, shaky-cam. It wasn't as bad in Ultimatum (2007) as it was in the first two and not necessarily in this one either, but the dang lighting on sets was horrid and what made it worse was that literally every action scene took place at night. The major chase at the end, too, but at least it had some really cool moments in better lighting.
  • So I'm a big fan of the Bourne trilogy so I did have high expectations going into this one. Just quickly this film is a 6.5/10, but as halves aren't a thing I've rounded up one to 7. I will say off the bat that you could do with watching the other films right before this one, I hadn't seen them for a while so especially in the first half I felt really out the loop. Considering how long it was between the third film and this one (not to mention the Jeremy Renner one in the middle), I expected to be in the loop more.

    However, I did find it's a very good action film still. It had some really fun and exciting action scenes and it felt as high octane as you'd want a Bourne film to be. I did find it to be more of your run of the mill action movies and not your more in depth Bourne plots we know and love and that was one of the reasons I've opted for 6.5/10.

    Matt Damon does a great job of recapturing the Bourne character I have to say and really impressed me with how he brought it back so well.

    I do want to quickly mention that towards the end Jason is in a car crash, no joke you ain't surviving that! And yet he walks out relatively uninjured. That annoyed me a little bit I won't lie.

    So yeah, it's a good film and I enjoyed my time watching this one. But I just didn't have that edge that the trilogy films had. For me it's a 6.5/10.
  • Jason Bourne makes a welcome return in the self titled Jason Bourne, although this movie is not in the same league as The Bourne Identity (2002), The Bourne Supremacy (2004), and The Bourne Ultimatum (2007). The Bourne Legacy (2012) saw the movie go in another direction with Jeremy Renner in the lead instead of Matt Damon however this was met with disappointing results. Jason Bourne sees Matt Damon slip back into one of his famous roles albeit some time has since passed.

    Following the events of The Bourne Ultimatum which saw Jason Bourne slipping away after successfully exposing Operation Blackbriar, Jason Bourne (Matt Damon) lives off the grid and makes a living participating in illegal bare knuckle fighting rings. Bourne is still troubled by memories of his past as a CIA black ops operative. Meanwhile in Iceland, former CIA operative turned computer hacker Nicky Parsons (Julia Stiles) uncovers Bourne's recruitment into the Treadstone program and his father's role in the program while hacking into the CIA's mainframe systems to expose the CIA's black ops program. The intrusion is brought to the attention of the CIA's head of the Cyber Ops Division Heather Lee (Alicia Vikander), and CIA Director Robert Dewey (Tommy Lee Jones) who also seemingly has a shady agenda. When Nicky travels to Greece to find and inform Bourne, they find themselves hunted by CIA operatives, including a ruthless assassin known as the Asset (Vincent Cassel). Jason Bourne must revisit his old life and uncover another conspiracy which he thought was well and truly behind him.

    It was fantastic to see Paul Greengrass return to the director's chair to revisit the Bourne universe as well as Matt Damon making a welcome return as Jason Bourne, the role that added another string to his bow as an excellent actor. While I couldn't fault Matt Damon, it was like I was revisiting old ground with this movie. Tommy Lee Jones, Alicia Vikander, Julia Stiles, Riz Ahmed and Vincent Cassel round out the supporting cast just fine.

    While there's plenty of action sequences which are a staple for the Bourne series, Jason Bourne seems to focus on the action and I felt that the spirit of the original trilogy was missed with the intelligent story lines which made all three of the original movies very memorable when first released and to this day all three movies have earned a spot in my list of favourite movies of all time. Jason Bourne seemed to be like a popcorn movie to appeal to the audiences to who like to suspend their disbelief and enjoy the non-stop action.

    While I had a good time in the cinema watching Jason Bourne, I fear that another Jason Bourne movie may be one too many which could tarnish the fond memories of the original Bourne trilogy. Perhaps it may be time to leave Jason Bourne alone.

    7/10.
  • The basic story is good but plot holes are let down. The acting was actually quite good especially for Cassel, Damon and Vikander. Tommy Lee Jones did only so-so and politically correct character played by Essandoh was ridiculous and irritating. The action sequences, locations and fast story were riveting. Camera work, immersion and angles were excellent, especially since most of the shots had minimal CGI. I have to admit that the plot holes did not bothered me as much because it is fast pace movie. There are many reviewers that are complaining about the plot and rightfully so. I'm not sure why such big budget movie did't pay more attention to the movie plot. For Jason Bourne fans this movie will not disappoint. Director Greengrass scored really well on fast pace spy movie.
  • The bad: this latest (final?) edition of the Bourne series is an inferior mashup of all the ingredients found in the much better earlier editions.

    They are using the exact same story, same situations, same music, same plot turns etc... I was contineously wondering when the "new" movie would start? It wouldnt though. This movie is simply nothing else but an inferior 100% COPY PASTE operation from older material. Bummer.

    Surely not terribly bad as a movie on itself, but certainly the worst Bourne edition ever, because it is missing good creative writing. It is missing spark. It is missing real suspense. It is missing real character interaction.

    But many of the old fans probably wont mind. They have been yearning for a sequel for years...me included, but you cant always get what you want...

    Not any good at all? The chase sequences are great. There are only 2 of them, which are both quite thrilling to watch though. One at the very beginning, one at the very end. One can easily skip the rest in between...or take some caffeine pill, because it is quite hard to stay awake and exited in the middle part of this inferior copycat.
  • Lacklustre story line lacking intelligence, dialogue, and character development.

    I am a big fan of the franchise and my expectations may have been too high for this sequel. Was hoping for same kind of substance and kept waiting for something impressively unexpected, like previous. Legacy was a better film. Even fight scenes and car chases from all previous had a different "feel" than typical action films, but formula made these redundant and confusing, not fun like others. The predictable plot had me thinking, hoping for intelligent twist that did not happen. It's a good rental I suppose.
  • Well, it is not good as the trilogy... not bad either. I really enjoyed the comeback of Bourne in action and I also want squeals to be made.

    To me, if the trilogy deserves 10/10 this one deserves 9/10. If you are a Bourne+action film fan, Stop listening to the too much negative reviews and have a good time with Jason Bourne.

    I can't say this one is an action masterpiece like The Bourne Ultimatum, But it's a good one. My actual rating for this title is 8/10

    1 extra to welcome back Matt Damon in one of his finest character and I really want this to go on. Also, to counter the too much negative reviews.

    There is some camera shaking during action sequences and I'm okay with that. This made me feel those actions to be more real.
  • The Bourne franchise started with "The Bourne Identity" back in 2002, continued with "The Bourne Supremacy" in 2004 followed by "The Bourne Ultimatum" in 2007. I do not consider "The Bourne Legacy"(2012) part of this franchise because Matt Damon didn't take part in it and because it has much lower quality in script and filming. "The Bourne Identity"was one of the best action movies I had seen at the time and it really made an impression on me. The sequels were almost as good as the original, although they didn't have the same vibe. I will not go into details about this year's film since I don't want to spoil your fun. If you enjoyed the previous "Bourne" movies you will find "Jason Bourne" at least entertaining.

    About the 2016 movie "Jason Bourne", it is an American movie directed by Paul Greengrass(director of "The Bourne Supremacy" and "The Bourne Ultimatum")based on a script by Greengrass and Cristopher Rouse, it had a budget of $120.000.000 which definitely paid off in the movie quality. The movie has a solid cast(Matt Damon, Tommy Lee Jones, Alicia Vikander), good plot, not so good script, no cliché lines, great action/visual effects, it has common sense and it does not defy logic like most action movies do. "Jason Bourne" definitely lives up to the expectations. In this movie we have Jason Bourne knowing who he actually is, cured of amnesia, and battling an even larger enemy than before. There are car chases, well choreographed fight scenes,shootouts,explosions and everything else you would want from an action movie. Even though we are used to seeing Jason Bourne being chased by a government agency we still love it. Unfortunately, this movie has a weak script and plot holes, it is far from the quality of the "Bourne" trilogy. "Jason Bourne" still is one of the best movies released this year and I would confidently give it a 8.0/10.

    I have watched over 1200 movies and this one is for sure a good one. I advise you to go watch "Jason Bourne", you sure will enjoy it!

    This review may be altered by the fact that I am a "Bourne" fan.
  • Warning: Spoilers
    How do you make Bourne boring? The original film is probably one of my favourite films. This one however, I just found myself rolling my eyes every few minutes especially during the first 30 minutes. After about 1.5 hours I had given up and was just waiting for it to finish.

    When are these film makers going to stop it with the totally unbelievable computer hacking rubbish? In one scene they execute a program by typing "run predictive algorithm". In another scene, they spot someone on a surveillance camera and the female character actually says "enhance". Come on! How cliché. What is this, the 1980's??

    It isn't total and utter crap. It is as well made as the other Bourne films, except for that annoying, erratic fight scene camera work that seems to be in every action film at the moment, So you can't actually see what is going on. It has some OK action scenes but they do nothing to make it interesting. Nothing really happens. The plot is weak and the film is just plain boring. And I'm a fan of the trilogy! (Not the odd number 4 film which incidentally is better than this)

    Matt Damon is as good as he can be I suppose. Tommy Lee Jones, who I like as an actor, doesn't really bring anything to the film because his character is boring as well. I just can't help but feel they cashed in and made another one without really caring if it was any good or not as they knew everyone (me included) would go and watch it because all the others are so good!
  • Warning: Spoilers
    The last Borne entry is just OK. Summer entertainment movie, no more, no less. On the bad side: The script is pointless and tricky, Alicia Vikander sounds really like a bad actress and the fist fights are poorly staged. But the worst problem here is the direction: one gets really tired of that shaky camera. I watched the movie from the 5th row of the Multiplex (escaping form the pop'corn munchies) and 5 minutes into the movie I was feeling dizzy alright. I cannot imagine what could be the effect of watching it from the first or second row.

    Just two more objections: Can anyone tell me what car is Bourne driving in the final chase? I definitely want that brand, as it seems kind of unbreakable after all it goes through!! (even if it has a major drawback: air-bags don't seem to work at all). And the last one: Really??? Can a SWAT truck do that??? C'mon, guys!! You really stressed out my suspension of disbelief muscles with that!!!
  • This film is quite good to be honest.Despite many problems,and a regurgitated plot being one of them,I have found this film to be really enjoyable.Matt Damon returns in the titular role after 9 years,and this time he's embroiled in a cat and mouse game played out at international locations. The camera-work is quite blurry,and dizzying at times.The action scenes are the greatest pro,especially the car chase in Las Vegas.Damon delivers a good performance but Alicia Vikander steals the show.Tommy Lee Jones is good to see too,nice to see that he is undertaking action films even at such an old age.The locations were chosen quite wisely.

    On the downside,character development is kept to a minimum.There is a half-hearted attempt to tackle the timely topic of government surveillance versus citizen privacy.No scene lingers for more than 5 seconds.

    I give this film a 7.While it does not match up to the original trilogy,it succeeds as a fun time at the movies.
  • And then there were five. A trilogy that was superb, a fourth that was somewhat different but still intriguing and this one, where Matt Damon returned as Jason Bourne and Paul Greengrass as the director. When I was asked after the movie if I liked it, I really wanted to say that it was great. But it wasn't.

    It's certainly entertaining, a fast paced action movie and I love me some Alicia Vikander, but the plot was shallow, the action scenes started to look a lot like an overdone Michael Bay movie (which I clearly do not like) and I missed the intriguing past-recovery from the trilogy. This was merely an action blockbuster and missed the quality of the previous films with Matt Damon. It wasn't a necessary addition to the franchise and although it was made well, acting and production, the script is just not good enough for a Bourne movie.

    A thin 7 out of 10.
  • Warning: Spoilers
    Having loved the original three, in particular the first one, found Jason Bourne pretty disappointing.

    The Paul Greengrass films Ultimatum and Supremacy are great, but are very much built on the template that is set in the Bourne Identity. Minus the mystery of neither he or the audience knowing who he is, or the brilliant character of Marie, and the love story.

    SPOILERS

    So as with Ultimatum and Supremacy, we find a new even higher up boss we were previously unaware of, and Tommy Lee Jones is very good. Then we've got Nikki linking us back to the originals with the beginnings of a fascinating story of what she has used her CIA skills for relating to Snowden and online privacy. Then 15 minutes in, they kill Nikki. Wiping out any connection to the original trilogy, and what Bourne and Nikki's back story had been. Previously hinted at in Ultimatum.

    On top of that we see how upset Bourne is at her death, at the same time knowing that must be what, a thousandth of what he felt for Marie's death? Happening so early her death isn't even driving the narrative along.

    That leaves us with Bourne and a pile of characters we have just met, and don't care about, and a script that wouldn't be out of place on a Pierce Brosnan James Bond film. Yes there's lots of action, and shaky camera angles, but the fantastic car chase in the original film, is fantastic because of the charm of the beat up old mini in Paris. He's the anti-hero making do.

    There are other elements of the script that are odd.

    At the beginning he is involved in boxing. Other than to show Damon's physique, what was that about? Nothing else is given of his private life the last few years, and if he is staying hidden from sight, why stand out like that in front of so many people?

    The final scene, where they repeat the use of Moby's Extreme Ways to demonstrate someone being caught out by him, is very weak. Much like the rest of the plot.

    Overall an okay film by general standards, but not a patch on the original three, and a lack of understanding from the writers for what worked in the Bourne Identity. Character development, back story and charm.
  • zgalen19 November 2016
    I was not expecting much as the last movie wasn't really that good. However as a Bourne fan I was willing to give it a go and was pleasantly surprised. Bourne is always haunted by the past and trying to clear up loose ends so to speak and this is no different. As the movie progresses at a very fast pace this seems different more subtle in smoothness like perfectly aged wine. Action packed with a big brother is watching and moving under tone... This is not like the other Bourne movie in some ways so it seems fresh and reinvigorated. Excellent acting and plot, What more could you want? I hope that they do make another...
  • lmgaitan21 November 2016
    Jason Bourne (Matt Damon) is beginning to regain his memory, but that does not mean that now the most deadly agent of the CIA's elite corps knows everything. Twelve years have passed since the last time Bourne had to operate from the shadows. But what has happened since then? He still has many questions to answer. In the midst of a convulsive world, plagued by economic crisis, financial collapse and cyber-war, various secret organizations struggle to seize power.

    In that context of unprecedented instability Jason Bourne reappears unexpectedly. From a dark and tortured place, this peculiar agent will resume the search for answers about his past.

    Based on the characters created by Robert Ludlum, this fifth installment of the Bourne saga is directed by Paul Greengrass (Captain Phillips, Green Zone, Protected District, United 93), who also writes the script with Christopher Rouse, editor in charge of The Ultimatum Of Bourne (2007) and The myth of Bourne (2004), and the actor Matt Damon (Mars (The Martian), Behind the Candelabra, Promised Land). Damon returns to the saga of action films playing Jason Bourne, and Julia Stiles (The Silver Linings Playbook), Dexter, The Prophecy) also repeats her role in the franchise as Nicky Parsons. The new actors who join the star cast are Alicia Vikander, Anna Karenina, Tommy Lee Jones, and Vincent Cassel (My Love, The Tale of Tales).
  • Warning: Spoilers
    This movie made me want to leave after one hour, and kill myself after 2 hours. I am a huge Bourne fan I was very exited for Matt Damons return to the Bourne franchise. Also there was fresh face of Alicia Vikander and not so fresh face of Tommy Lee Jones and Vincent Cassel as the bad guy so what can go wrong? Well it turns out if you have a horrible script, plot that only a person who wears helmet indoors can consider exiting you are left with the biggest disappointment in the cinema this year.

    Spoiler alert everybody! Jason Bourne walks for 2 hours, sometimes he remembers things sometimes he doesn't - the end.

    So to conclude : Do not see this movie! I had to watch the trilogy the next morning just to get over the disappointment of the new Jason Bourne.
  • For an action thriller it's a very good film. Plot is solid. Characters are developed well. All actors play well. Personally, I was stuck to my seat. Albeit in some points I couldn't catch the routine, for example about the American passport. I didn't get how Jason or Heather managed to get the passport. Even considering some intervals that had slow pace, I don't understand why some people say it's a bad film. I think it's a good sequel to the original trilogy too. The only regret I have is that Nicky is dead and we won't see Julia Stiles anymore in the next Bourne films. The only reason I don't give it a 10 is that some sequences and characters can be omitted, while some necessary information are not given.
  • After "Legacy" it was, I believe, mandatory to change course... it was time for the "Bourne" franchise to get back on course and get some quality back. For this, they called back Paul Greengrass who, this time, ensures the direction and script. The film is not brilliant, however it manages to fulfill the expectations of the audience, although Greengrass has lost its freshness and intensity, offering us a listless and tiring effort.

    The script begins with Nicky Parsons' attempt to publicly expose various CIA operations. She contacts Jason Bourne, who tries to dissuade her from doing so. The CIA, however, was following in her wake, and it didn't take much for them to suspect Bourne's intentions and attitudes, and go back to hunting him, as they had done before. From there, what the film gives us is more than what we've seen in other films in the franchise. The script, however, seemed simpler and more direct in the way it presents itself, without the twists and subtleties that previous films sometimes had. Another thing that needs to be said: in this film, the tension and suspense are not as palpable as in previous films. That, in fact, is something I regret, it would have made the film work better.

    To the delight of many, and after his disappearance in the previous film, Matt Damon is back to the main role, one of the most important roles in his acting career. He is impeccable and perfectly at ease with the work and material. However, I've felt several times that the rest of the cast doesn't have the material or time to partner with him. Vincent Cassell, for example, is an excellent actor and is very good at this kind of characters, but his character is basic, merely a sketch, and the actor doesn't do much because he doesn't have much to do here. Tommy Lee Jones also has reasons not to miss this movie. Equally talented and competent for action characters (who doesn't remember his performance in "The Fugitive" a few decades ago?), he simply hasn't received decent material and his character is underdeveloped. Alicia Vikander appears just to give a feminine touch to a movie full of testosterone.

    On a technical level, this film manages to maintain the quality standards of previous films in this franchise. It features beautiful cinematography and satisfying camera work, despite a little overuse of the handheld, with those blurry images. It knew how to make the best use of the filming locations, carefully chosen, and the effects of light and shadow. The editing work leaves something to be desired, giving the film an uneven pace, with scenes that take too long for no apparent reason. As in other films in the franchise, the strong technical bet is the special, visual and sound effects used in the action scenes. Everything is done with great rigor and gives the film a pleasant feeling of realism.
  • Warning: Spoilers
    I've seen the other reviews of Jason Bourne and I am starting to question my own judgement, maybe I am too biased to write a review for this title. But I can't help it as I absolutely hated the movie. And I hated it after I had low expectations for the latest title, since I heard Tony Gilroy wasn't involved in the script.

    The story is atrocious, I realize that it is supposed to set the basics for another 15 Bourne movies, but the story is so bad that they decided to overcompensate for it with prolonged action scenes, which are just terrible. It reeks of desperation to watch nothing happens for so long periods, just throwing dust in the eyes of the viewers with effects and low quality action. I realize that this goes beyond Ludlum books, but Greengrass is pretty much willing to do anything to fill the movie, other than to continue with the traditions of the original Bourne series known for Ludlum's excellent story-telling and spy- craft realism.

    The fight scenes, they're just terrible. Too fast camera shifting, even more than previous Bourne series, leaves you thinking that those actors are good for nothing amateurs who can't act a fight scene, so you need to make sure the viewer never really sees it.

    I loved the first 3 movies, even liked the Bourne legacy, and I adore the books. But this movie is so bad, that it shouldn't be even put anywhere near them. The acting is good, the story is bad and the directing is just painful.

    And btw, when you're doing realism spy thrillers, don't make hacking look like a freaking Pokemon hunt. It's just pathetic and unbelievable. Go watch Mr. Robot and think again how hard would be to present the "hacking" with at least proper interfaces instead of embarrassing yourself.
  • garylcamp25 March 2017
    Warning: Spoilers
    Generally I liked this movie. It has a great cast and while not quite as good a performance as the 1st 3, Damon did OK. I liked the effort to tie together the other movies and the slight twist of the father being involved.

    But the camera work killed it for my wife and I. She got dizzy and I got an upset stomach. Tommy Lee Jones said it all in the interview. "The camera never stops moving". While this is the latest trend in film making, we hate it. I think this is cheap "in the face" action as you can not see anything clearly. I have to say it is clearly geared for the younger generation, which grew up on video games with the very fast scene switching constantly. I gave up games years ago because of the seasickness. Yes, I am a baby boomer. So since I am on the way out, I have to suffer the new trends as best I can.

    The movie is rated 6.7 at time of my review which is way below the 10/10/10 of the trilogy and even the 8 of the Legacy. It falls down in not being quite true to the spirit of the originals with very tight clear cut action. Giggling cameras and tight shots may be easier to make a good take, cheaply, but make for very poor action. Back up and hold the camera still and show us how skillful the scene unfolds. Watch Jackie Chan. I actually thought they got a different director and camera operator to make the movie, it was so different.

    The required car chase and multiple destruction is getting old but I guess it fits a little. One thing I could never understand in the trilogy is why Bourne never does much in the way of disguise. A baseball cap is the best we get. Simple paper wads in the mouth make the computer face recognition fail, as do glasses, lipstick, eyebrow pencil,etc. Very easy to acquire and apply and shows sophistication worthy of JB. It would have helped the movie at little cost.

    The updating to more modern computer era was good but not too well done in my book. My suspension of belief was nearly lost on the "prediction of escape route" scene. I could have lived with it if the rest of the movie was better. And too bad Nicky is dead.

    I gave the movie 6 out of 10, just barley above average, and I was very disappointed. I would have given it less but I like the trilogy+1, the cast, the relatively decent story and usually the director. The obvious last scene setting up for a new movie looked like a cheap ad. If they make it, I hope they go back to the old style. Lock down that stupid camera.
  • Warning: Spoilers
    After a long absence, and a rather forgettable fourth film, things get back on track with Matt Damon returning as the character these movies are *truly* about and who most people want to see (sorry, Renner). 'Identity' still remains my favourite of the entire franchise and I highly doubt it'll ever be surpassed. Unlike many, I wasn't as fussed on 'Supremacy', though both it and 'Ultimatum' were certainly better than 'Legacy'. While it's certainly good/a relief to have Damon back as Bourne, that doesn't automatically mean this film is 'great'. I'd say this one ranks somewhere in the middle. Matt Damon has always been likable in the role of Jason Bourne/David Webb. He's believably tough (his first 'fight' in this has him knock out a guy with one punch), selling the action scenes (he once again shows off Jason's proficiency for driving vehicles down lots of stairs), credible as this highly experienced/intelligent but tormented person, and I've always felt for the guy. I liked pretty much everything regarding the first film, the action, story, characters, relationships and especially the directing. A shame Doug Liman never returned as director of these films.

    I was really saddened/annoyed when the woman Jason had been through so much with and later formed a relationship with, Franka Potente's Marie, was unceremoniously disposed of in the film's first sequel. That made me like that film less. However, I was pleased that Julia Stiles' Nicky Parsons got more to do later on. As I'm sure people will have been spoiled for by now (seriously, don't read unless you WANT to be spoiled. Consider this fair warning), poor Nicky suffers a somewhat similar fate to Marie in this movie. I completely understand the outcry over this. I felt a similar way when Marie was only in a small part of 'Supremacy' at the beginning. It's a testament to Julia Stiles, that she's managed to take a character who hadn't much to do early on and made her so memorable/someone the audience formed an attachment with. Here she gets a 'badass' moment, looks out for Jason/helps him until the very end, and is part of the movie's first action scene, which is quite a memorable one. Like Marie, her demise in unexpected (well...unless you've read spoilers), a total gut-punch and a completely unfair way to go for such a likable character. Having said that, Jason was warned early in the series that everyone around him/associated with him would wind up dead, and Nicky's death cements this fact (as if Jason wasn't already aware after Marie). When so many films are tempted to bring popular characters back repeatedly/use them until they've outlived their welcome, there's something depressingly 'real' about this film's 'nobody's safe' statement. It's just a shame we lose the Jason/Nicky dynamic (and the chance for any answers to questions surrounding their history) in the process, as Damon and Stiles worked so well together.

    That's not to say that the new characters are a waste. Tommy Lee Jones is good, like Chris Cooper and Brian Cox were before him, though possibly doesn't have quite as interesting material to work with as they did. Oscar-winning actress Alicia Vikander plays a strong, intelligent, ambitious woman in CIA agent, Heather Lee. You think you know what sort of role she's fitting into (ie. taking over from Joan Allen's Pamela Landy), then later seems like an ally for Jason, buy she is in fact much *more* than that. She's crafty and can go toe-to-toe with those who are higher up than her, as well as Jason himself. I wouldn't mind seeing Heather Lee and her black plastic claw hair clip return if there's another movie. Vikander conveys SO much that's going on underneath with her character via looks/micro expressions and proves the film's biggest asset. Ironically, the character who's simply credited as 'Asset', played by go-to bad guy Vincent Cassel? Not so much. Sure, he looks dangerous, and there's some backstory given as to why he's so hell-bent on offing Jason, but for an assassin...he's rather sloppy/not very 'clean' about it. He's no Karl Urban, he's not even Clive Owen. He just simply shoots people all willy-nilly in public without any consequences. Like with Urban's character, I certainly wanted this guy dead by film's end, and his climactic fight with Jason is the movie's most memorable hand- to- hand action sequence.

    Speaking of, while the Paris chase in Marie's little red Mini Cooper coupled with the use of 'Ready Steady Go' on the soundtrack in The Bourne Identity remains my favourite, the car chase in this film does bring on the public destruction...and how! The amount of cars a SWAT vehicle plows through, flipping them into the air, is really something, as is the conclusion to the chase. Although, there doesn't feel like there's as many memorable action sequences as some of the previous films had, which may disappoint some people. The directing can get a bit too shaky at times (which it to be expected with Greengrass directing), but on the whole I was at least able to make out most things when they were focused upon, despite the constant zooming in/out. The film does feel relevant to today, with issues of privacy vs security, etc. While it may not seem as 'thrilling' as the first few films, nor as interesting, the movie's not a complete write-off. There's some intriguing stuff regarding Jason's father, though like with the other interesting elements, the movie doesn't seem to explore things enough. I quite liked the film's ending, and the use of the 'Extreme Ways' song once again was most welcome, but it's possibly time the franchise wrapped up. If this film's the last, then I'm cool with it.
An error has occured. Please try again.