The Bourne Legacy's impact on Skyfall

2456

Comments

  • DaltonCraig007DaltonCraig007 They say, "Evil prevails when good men fail to act." What they ought to say is, "Evil prevails."
    Posts: 15,696
    Lead role for Bourne Legacy offered to... Jeremy Renner.

    Only step left is for Renner to accept the role.

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/film/2011/apr/22/bourne-legacy-lead-jeremy-renner?CMP=twt_fd
  • edited April 2011 Posts: 161
    "Reports suggest it will be another brainwashed operative on the run from those who trained him. There will be a new covert government programme to replace Treadstone, Bourne having brought that organisation to its knees at the denouement of the last film."

    Wow, doesn't that sound terribly interesting...
  • Samuel001Samuel001 Moderator
    edited April 2011 Posts: 13,352
    I hope this works for Renner's sake. If he takes the offer that is.

    Production is due to begin in September.
  • M_BaljeM_Balje Amsterdam, Netherlands
    edited April 2011 Posts: 4,478
    Sjure there whant competion with James Bond with this choose. He looks like a litle bit on Daniel Craig on some pictures. For example this picture from S.W.A.T.T. A sony movie from almost 8 years a go..

    http://www.imdb.com/media/rm3762329856/ch0010676

    40 years old now, 2 years younger Brosnan started in Goldeneye.

    If there is one thing to worried about it be Kathryn Bigelow directed a Bourne movie earlier then Bond can take her. Her K-19: The Widowmaker mabey be a example for a Bond movie in Ge/TSWLM style, The Hurt Locker can be a reasen to take her for Bourne. I haven't seen both movies, i based this on the trailers. I buy that K19 movie last year in the first place to see or she is something for Bond. From earlier experience we know we the audince don't accept it if a directer trade another franchise in specialy Bond see Tamahori and Triple X Next Level.

    But iam intrest, in specialy if there make some inprovements:

    - One extra action scene
    - Some humor.
    - One extra dialogue scene. Find a middle way. From the last one there be to easy, with the second one to dificult.
    - Working a litle bit more on full story. The second movie be better in this.
    - 5-10 minutes longer. Credits after for the second movie starts after 1h38minutes and with number 3 after 1h41 minutes. Make it 1h48 minutes. Include credits that mean 1h.57minutes. This is Pall/R2/DVD Time.

    Keep up the good work with the contunetie with The Bourne Identity, locations, music and sound & cinematopgraphy.

    A actres i also have in mind who i like to see in a new Bourne movie: Jennifer Lothrop (Fantastic Four) http://www.imdb.com/name/nm1293475/


  • LudsLuds MIA
    Posts: 1,986
    Well being pals with Affleck & Damon served him well, Renner's gonna be in a very popular flick series, it' s a good career move for him.
  • SharkShark Banned
    Posts: 348
    Quoting NicNac: Yes, I do see your point DC, but I also believe that the Prods refuse to be complacent.
    ... yet they keep Purvis & Wade and David Arnold.

    One of the downsides of running EON like a family. Sometimes, new blood is needed.
  • Posts: 1,092
    DC007, stop being so asinine and juevenile. It doesn't suit you. You're better than that. You know it is impossible for them to make Bond movies in the same fashion as something like Saw. And you know exactly what I mean by "they don't make movies the same way" b/c they don't. Spewing out some stats of another unrelated franchise doesn't prove a thing.

    I know you are young and that it inflates your ego (young men do this all the time, myself included when I was your age) to think you are right all the time but it serves no purpose here.
  • NicNacNicNac Administrator, Moderator
    Posts: 7,572
    Quoting Shark: yet they keep Purvis & Wade and David Arnold.

    One of the downsides
    of running EON like a family. Sometimes, new blood is needed.
    True enough, although I meant that they will alter the direction the films are heading in if they think the future BO appeal will be dented. The writers and the composer have not had a severe detrimental impact on the films' success. The style of film including broad humour, the amount of action etc, does.

    Quoting The_Reaper: You know it is impossible for them to make Bond movies in the same fashion as
    something like Saw. And you know exactly what I mean by "they don't make movies
    the same way" b/c they don't. Spewing out some stats of another unrelated
    franchise doesn't prove a thing.

    Couldn't agree more. The Saw movies are a modern equivelent of the old Basil Rathbone Sherlock Holmes movies. Quick, cheap, and easy to churn out. Police Acadamy was similar. The Bonds and the Bournes are different animals.

    The annual Bond event was over by the time GF came out (after that the gap between GF and TB was actually 18 months). They couldn't keep up the 12 month gap after 1964, never mind 2012.
  • M_BaljeM_Balje Amsterdam, Netherlands
    edited May 2011 Posts: 4,478
    Robert Elswit confirmd to be the cinematographer for Bourne too. The TMND cinematographer who already be confirmd working on Mi4 is now confirmd in a update of the imdb page of Bourne 4 also. Elswit working earlier with Tony Gilroy the directer of Bourne 4 for Michael Clayton & Duplicity.

    Also Molly Hughes is confirmd as supervising art director, she working earlier as Art Director for the last 3 Harry Potter movies. Steve E. Andrews is confirmd as First assistent directer and working earlier at The Tourist & The Talented Mr Ripley.
  • edited June 2011 Posts: 2,115
    <<The annual Bond event was over by the time GF came out (after that the gap between GF and TB was actually 18 months). They couldn't keep up the 12 month gap after 1964, never mind 2012. >>

    Goldfinger was released in the U.K, in September 1964 and in the U.S. in December 1964. Thunderball was released in December 1965.

    The gap between Thunderball and You Only Live Twice was more like 18 months.

    The last time the series released in consecutive years was Live And Let Die and The Man With the Golden Gun, though that was more like 18 months (LALD out in the summer of 1973, TMWTGG at Christmas 1974).
  • edited June 2011 Posts: 4,622
    MR was influenced not only by Star Wars but also by one of the biggest blockbusters of 1978, Superman:The Movie, as we see in the pts with Bond "flying".
    I do think also that the corny humour in Star Wars was also exported to the final two Bond movies of the 70's. The first two Rog films weren't quite the laughfests that his two late 70's efforts were.
  • Posts: 269
    After the Bourne Trilogy, I don't think Jason Bourne has anything new to offer. Three films, three times the same paranoiac story, only supported by awesome action scenes, Greengrass's style and the cold interpretation of Matt Damon. With Damon and Greengrass not returning, there are 2 options :
    - Or the Bourne Legacy is but a remake of the 3 others with again the same story and new action scenes ---} no danger, nothing new to bring, Bourne makes some Bourne action and that's it. The "hero looking for who he is" is already an old fashioned cliché. No danger to Bond who reinvents himself since C.R., and will again in Bond 23
    - Or the Bourne Legacy takes a real new approach on the story, with new ideas, new aesthetic, gives Bourne new concerns (something else as "my memory" and "the corrupted CIA"). ---} Bourne comes closer to Bond, as an international spy who destroys everything, (and i guess a little smoother). Then, he becomes a real challenge for Bond, hunting on the same ground.

    I guess the influence on Bond 23 would be that, taking the Bourne release into account, they accentuate the bondification of the Craig Era, and differentiate itself from what it borrowed to the Bourne's aesthetic. Now that Bond is back again (after 2 films), I think its time to bring back a Bondian Bond on the screen, that comes closer to the clichés of the saga.
    I really loved the 2 last Bond, but since 2008, I've travelled quiet a lot, and most people I met are still critical about QOS. Even if they can appreciate the good points of Bond 22, they still find that Craig and the last Bond films are not bondian enough and can't feature Craig as a reliable Bond.

    I guess if Bond 23 doesn't come closer to the saga standards, Bond will be seen as a British Bourne, and Bourne will have the upper hand. But if Bond 23 is successfully done, than people will at last see that Bourne has nothing else to bring and doesn't deserve more than a 4th movie.

    Still, I'm very curious to see which approach the Bourne legacy can take, and how they manage to do a film without the main actor and the usual director. The Bond's saga had the same problem after Connery left, and I wonder if it would be possible for Bourne's films to really achieve a lasting saga (even if I don't really believe in it and i don't support this idea)
  • DaltonCraig007DaltonCraig007 They say, "Evil prevails when good men fail to act." What they ought to say is, "Evil prevails."
    edited June 2011 Posts: 15,696
    Ytterbium... Jason Bourne doesn't appear in Bourne Legacy. It's neither a reboot or prequel, but a 'spin-off' with a totally new lead character.
  • Posts: 269
    Well... I'm sorry i spoke too fast. I guess that if the Bourne saga goes in the spin off, it doesn't make much of a threat for James Bond, except if the new hero and its personality features a real challenge for the James Bond's character. Anyway, I still think Bond 23 should differentiate itself from the Bourne aesthetic by bringing typical bondian element such as class and dialogue. I don't think either that the plot of the Bourne's legacy can compete with the Bond's one. Bond is much about saving the world from bad guys. Bourne movies are more about corrupted government and institutions. not really the Bond area. Furthermore, the world of Bourne espionage is 70% numeric with computers, satellites and so on (the rest being chasing). Espionage in Bond movies is much more diversified. If the production of Bond 23 is clever, they will come up with a plot original enough that proposes something else than the paranoiac chases of the Bourne Universe and corrupted spies.
  • Posts: 3
    I think Bourne influenced Bond in a good way. Made it more modern. However I have a problem when you start to copy fast cut editing just because it looked good in Bourne bc I am 21 years old and still can't figure out what is going on in the fights
  • Posts: 4,762
    I really resent the Bourne series' influence on the Bond series. QOS was poisoned by Bourne, and the end result has left us unsatisfied so far. I hope that the directors will steer clear of Bourne-ish themes for Bond 23.
  • I think Bourne influenced Bond in a good way. Made it more modern. However I have a problem when you start to copy fast cut editing just because it looked good in Bourne bc I am 21 years old and still can't figure out what is going on in the fights
    I also think that Bourne influenced bond in a good way, with the style (as in modern), i liked the fast-cut editing, makes it feel more up-close and personal, rough and menasing, though didn't feel like i was watching bond, more of a 'new' action guy.

    I wouldn't mind it if they carried this sort of style onto the next film, it would seem strange seeing a Bond film that stood-out from the rest in a modern way, but then took a step back-in time to a more traditional tone. I could cope with the fast edititng, as i (to be honest) like that style, though maybe make it more understanding.
  • Posts: 669
    I've heard about this new film. All I know is that Jeremy Renner is gonna star. I just don't get it, how they are calling it a Bourne film along with his name in the title, and he's (Jason Bourne) is completely absent from the film? I know they're making it like a sidequel (not sequel nor prequel), but if it is a sidequel or spin-off, they should just mention his name in the film, not name the title after him. Just like Jenna Elfman said in Looney Tunes: back in action,"How can we make a Bugs Bunny move without Bugs Bunny?"
  • Samuel001Samuel001 Moderator
    Posts: 13,352
    The first marketing poster has been released. It's just a mock-up as filming doesn't begin until around September.

    image
  • DaltonCraig007DaltonCraig007 They say, "Evil prevails when good men fail to act." What they ought to say is, "Evil prevails."
    edited June 2011 Posts: 15,696
    :-)) I love how "BOURNE" is written in big, fat, bold, capital letters right in the middle of the poster... and he's not even IN the film !! Bad marketing - they should put more emphasis on Renner than an absent Bourne...
  • Samuel001Samuel001 Moderator
    edited June 2011 Posts: 13,352
    I've heard about this new film. All I know is that Jeremy Renner is gonna star. I just don't get it, how they are calling it a Bourne film along with his name in the title, and he's (Jason Bourne) is completely absent from the film? I know they're making it like a sidequel (not sequel nor prequel), but if it is a sidequel or spin-off, they should just mention his name in the film, not name the title after him. Just like Jenna Elfman said in Looney Tunes: back in action,"How can we make a Bugs Bunny move without Bugs Bunny?"
    Renner's character will be hunted down by Treadstone, the same organisation that Bourne was, with the events of the first the first three films leading into this one. Renner's character himself may be trying to track down Jason Bourne and find out information about him and he's known to many people, hence the title, The Bourne Legacy.

    Also, Universal feel and are very sure the Bourne name will sell and that's it's a top franchise.

    Will name alone be enough? We'll find out next year.
  • DaltonCraig007DaltonCraig007 They say, "Evil prevails when good men fail to act." What they ought to say is, "Evil prevails."
    edited June 2011 Posts: 15,696
    @Samuel001 You know the general audience will feel lost when they'll see Bourne isn't in "Bourne Legacy"... They need it to be really simple and explained.
  • Samuel001Samuel001 Moderator
    Posts: 13,352
    @Samuel001 You know the general audience will feel lost when they'll see Bourne isn't in "Bourne Legacy"... They need it to be really simple and explained.
    Indeed. Though I think Tony Gilroy is already good enough with doing that.

    I'm excited to see what the outcome of this is.
  • DaltonCraig007DaltonCraig007 They say, "Evil prevails when good men fail to act." What they ought to say is, "Evil prevails."
    Posts: 15,696
    I agree, @Samuel001... But I honestly think it is bad marketing to not put more emphasis on Renner than on Bourne that isn't in the film... It will confuse audiences.
  • Samuel001Samuel001 Moderator
    Posts: 13,352
    I agree, @Samuel001... But I honestly think it is bad marketing to not put more emphasis on Renner than on Bourne that isn't in the film... It will confuse audiences.
    It is but don't forget the only reason this project is going forward is because Universal are very sure the Bourne name will sell and that's it's a top franchise.

    Next year we'll see if they are right...
  • DaltonCraig007DaltonCraig007 They say, "Evil prevails when good men fail to act." What they ought to say is, "Evil prevails."
    Posts: 15,696
    True @Samuel001. Universal if the only studio with no major franchise... So they are betting on Bourne.
  • Samuel001Samuel001 Moderator
    edited June 2011 Posts: 13,352
    True @Samuel001. Universal if the only studio with no major franchise... So they are betting on Bourne.
    The Fast and the Furious is doing pretty well for them. The sixth film is on it's way.
  • edited June 2011 Posts: 669
    The funny thing is... the film is named after Bounre but there is no Bourne in the film.
  • Posts: 669
    And uh, I hate when the screen starts shaking for dramatic emotion while I watch the film. Bourne has brought that crap to the filming media. He destroyed the spy genre in the films.

    Has anyone read "The Bourne Pottery-Class" yet? the "lost" Bourne film?
  • Samuel001Samuel001 Moderator
    Posts: 13,352
    The funny thing is... the film is named after Bounre but there is no Bourne in the film.
    True but I've tried to explain the reasoning behind the title further up the page.
    And uh, I hate when the screen starts shaking for dramatic emotion while I watch the film. Bourne has brought that crap to the filming media. He destroyed the spy genre in the films.
    Only if you let it get to your series of films. ;-) I wouldn't say it has "destroyed the spy genre" - yet.
Sign In or Register to comment.