Jason Bourne (2002 - present)

1111214161743

Comments

  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 I've missed you all.
    Posts: 28,416
    timmer wrote:
    Shark wrote:
    Samuel001 wrote:
    Do you like the first one, The Bourne Identity, @Shark?

    I did. It was the best of the Bourne trilogy, thanks to a more human screenplay, Franka Potente, Chris Cooper/Brian Cox, John Powell's best score and Doug Liman's clean and unobtrusive direction.
    Not to mention also, that Identity was heavily based on the actual Ludlum story of the same name. The two follow-ups were way off reservation though and bore little resemblance to the original stories - ie lets just blow away the wife ( which Ludlum did not do) and go off in our own crazy direction.

    Actually, Lustbader's story.
  • edited August 2013 Posts: 4,622
    Not to mention also, that Identity was heavily based on the actual Ludlum story of the same name. The two follow-ups were way off reservation though and bore little resemblance to the original stories - ie lets just blow away the wife ( which Ludlum did not do) and go off in our own crazy direction.

    No no no, Damon's Identity was based on Ludlum's original '80s novel.
    It's the same story albeit with a few tweeks, transposed a couple of decades forward.
    None of EVL's work has made it into the films. Legacy the film was not based at all on EVL's print Legacy.

  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 I've missed you all.
    Posts: 28,416
    timmer wrote:
    timmer wrote:
    Shark wrote:
    Samuel001 wrote:
    Do you like the first one, The Bourne Identity, @Shark?

    I did. It was the best of the Bourne trilogy, thanks to a more human screenplay, Franka Potente, Chris Cooper/Brian Cox, John Powell's best score and Doug Liman's clean and unobtrusive direction.
    Not to mention also, that Identity was heavily based on the actual Ludlum story of the same name. The two follow-ups were way off reservation though and bore little resemblance to the original stories - ie lets just blow away the wife ( which Ludlum did not do) and go off in our own crazy direction.

    Actually, Lustbader's story.
    No, Identity was based on Ludlum's original. None of EVL's work has made it into the films.

    Sorry, for some reason I thought you were referring to The Bourne Legacy, as that is a Lustbader Bourne novel title. My apologies!
  • Posts: 4,622
    [Sorry, for some reason I thought you were referring to The Bourne Legacy, as that is a Lustbader Bourne novel title. My apologies!
    Its easy to get confused when the titles all sound the same. ;)

  • Posts: 7,650
    timmer wrote:
    timmer wrote:
    Shark wrote:
    Samuel001 wrote:
    Do you like the first one, The Bourne Identity, @Shark?

    I did. It was the best of the Bourne trilogy, thanks to a more human screenplay, Franka Potente, Chris Cooper/Brian Cox, John Powell's best score and Doug Liman's clean and unobtrusive direction.
    Not to mention also, that Identity was heavily based on the actual Ludlum story of the same name. The two follow-ups were way off reservation though and bore little resemblance to the original stories - ie lets just blow away the wife ( which Ludlum did not do) and go off in our own crazy direction.

    Actually, Lustbader's story.
    No, Identity was based on Ludlum's original. None of EVL's work has made it into the films.

    Sorry, for some reason I thought you were referring to The Bourne Legacy, as that is a Lustbader Bourne novel title. My apologies!

    The title indeed but the Bourne legacy with Renner is better than the book by EvL, and I should know as I spend money on a few of teh books.

    With Evl I always felt cheated that his Ninja books were never made into major movie.
  • Posts: 13,331
    How about using unused material from the original novels of Ludlum?
  • Posts: 7,650
    Ludovico wrote:
    How about using unused material from the original novels of Ludlum?

    Have you actually read them?

    Both are sequels on identity one concerning the return/revenge of Carlos on Bourne/Webb and his family and the other one being Bourne's return to his beginning in the far east and Webb once more returning to the guise of Jason Bourne because he is being manipulated into again. (which is actually the overall theme of the movie series)
  • Posts: 13,331
    SaintMark wrote:
    Ludovico wrote:
    How about using unused material from the original novels of Ludlum?

    Have you actually read them?

    Both are sequels on identity one concerning the return/revenge of Carlos on Bourne/Webb and his family and the other one being Bourne's return to his beginning in the far east and Webb once more returning to the guise of Jason Bourne because he is being manipulated into again. (which is actually the overall theme of the movie series)

    I haven't read them but I'm familiar with the adaptation with Richard Chamberlain. The terrorist hunt angle could be used, I think.
  • Posts: 7,650
    Ludovico wrote:
    SaintMark wrote:
    Ludovico wrote:
    How about using unused material from the original novels of Ludlum?

    Have you actually read them?

    Both are sequels on identity one concerning the return/revenge of Carlos on Bourne/Webb and his family and the other one being Bourne's return to his beginning in the far east and Webb once more returning to the guise of Jason Bourne because he is being manipulated into again. (which is actually the overall theme of the movie series)

    I haven't read them but I'm familiar with the adaptation with Richard Chamberlain. The terrorist hunt angle could be used, I think.

    The adaptation of Chamberlain is as close as you get to Ludlums source novel. And young Jaclyn Smith (of Charlies angels) is always a source of joy for weary eyes.

  • Posts: 13,331
    I always thought they could reuse elements of the original. My issue with the trilogy is that it was a circular conflict,,CIA against rogue agent, mainly.
  • SharkShark Banned
    edited August 2013 Posts: 348
    Shark wrote:
    They should either get Damon back or recast Bourne. It's his series and although I liked Legacy I have no interest in a sequel

    They should make it a whole new stand alone adventure separate from the other films. No more running from the CIA, no more Treadstone, just the Bourne character.

    They need to do something different now if the series wants to carry on for a good few years.

    I agree. Is there really any desire out there for another Aaron Cross film?

    Not really, but I'd rather that than another Damon borefest.

    Yeah because Legacy was thrill a minute wasn't it?

    Unbelievable.

    I was referring to Damon's comatose acting.


  • Posts: 8,805
    I dislike Damon so would preffer to focus on Renner and his character of Aaron Cross
  • TheWizardOfIceTheWizardOfIce 'One of the Internet's more toxic individuals'
    edited August 2013 Posts: 9,117
    Risico007 wrote:
    I dislike Damon so would preffer to focus on Renner and his character of Aaron Cross

    What sort of idiotic logic is this?

    Like saying 'I dont like Lazenby so after OHMSS lets get rid of that Bond character and do a Felix Leiter spin off instead.'

    Albert R Broccoli & Harry Saltzman Present
    Norman Burton as
    Ian Flemings Felix Leiter in
    Diamonds Are Forever

    Not sure we'd have made it to 50 years with you running EON.
  • Posts: 8,805
    hey I didn't create Bourne Legacy Personally I would have created a spring off film and called it as such.

    As it stands I haven't seen the trilogy and due to my disdain of Matt Damon I don't think I ever will.
  • SharkShark Banned
    Posts: 348
    Spring off film? Is that like a spring roll?
  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 I've missed you all.
    Posts: 28,416
    Risico007 wrote:
    hey I didn't create Bourne Legacy Personally I would have created a spring off film and called it as such.

    As it stands I haven't seen the trilogy and due to my disdain of Matt Damon I don't think I ever will.

    You can't judge the film or Damon for that matter if you haven't even bothered to see the trilogy. That doesn't make any logical sense, mate.
  • TheWizardOfIceTheWizardOfIce 'One of the Internet's more toxic individuals'
    Posts: 9,117
    Risico007 wrote:
    hey I didn't create Bourne Legacy Personally I would have created a spring off film and called it as such.

    As it stands I haven't seen the trilogy and due to my disdain of Matt Damon I don't think I ever will.

    You can't judge the film or Damon for that matter if you haven't even bothered to see the trilogy. That doesn't make any logical sense, mate.

    Some people really are beyond belief: 'What a pile of shit that film was. What was that? Have I seen it? Don't need to mate - I just know.'

    Kind of like a fundamentalist Christian Barry Norman.

  • Posts: 8,805
    Ok I hate Damon in other films I say the bourne trilogy isn't my thing and yet that is some how bad?

    Fine next time they are on tv I will watch them and if I still hate Damon's acting as I do in every other film he has been in then may I say I prefer Renner?
  • TheWizardOfIceTheWizardOfIce 'One of the Internet's more toxic individuals'
    edited August 2013 Posts: 9,117
    Risico007 wrote:
    Ok I hate Damon in other films I say the bourne trilogy isn't my thing and yet that is some how bad?

    Fine next time they are on tv I will watch them and if I still hate Damon's acting as I do in every other film he has been in then may I say I prefer Renner?

    So you'd rather watch Renner in a crap film than Damon in 3 very good ones?

    Because Legacy to the first 3 Bournes is what Crystal Skull is to the first 3 Indys. Each to his own I suppose but pretty twisted logic if you ask me.
  • DragonpolDragonpol Writer @ http://thebondologistblog.blogspot.com
    Posts: 14,964
    Risico007 wrote:
    hey I didn't create Bourne Legacy Personally I would have created a spring off film and called it as such.

    As it stands I haven't seen the trilogy and due to my disdain of Matt Damon I don't think I ever will.

    You can't judge the film or Damon for that matter if you haven't even bothered to see the trilogy. That doesn't make any logical sense, mate.

    Some people really are beyond belief: 'What a pile of shit that film was. What was that? Have I seen it? Don't need to mate - I just know.'

    Kind of like a fundamentalist Christian Barry Norman.

    Exactly, don't let the fact you haven't seen the blinking thing stand in the way of a good review. A bit like Malcolm Muggeridge's polemic against the James Bond novels in The Observer in 1965 when he'd only read one: Goldfinger!
  • DragonpolDragonpol Writer @ http://thebondologistblog.blogspot.com
    Posts: 14,964
    Risico007 wrote:
    Ok I hate Damon in other films I say the bourne trilogy isn't my thing and yet that is some how bad?

    Fine next time they are on tv I will watch them and if I still hate Damon's acting as I do in every other film he has been in then may I say I prefer Renner?

    So you'd rather watch Renner in a crap film than Damon in 3 very good ones?

    Because Legacy to the first 3 Bournes is what Crystal Skull is to the first 3 Indys. Each to his own I suppose but pretty twisted logic if you ask me.

    Agreed on that, too, Ice.
  • Posts: 13,331
    To be fair, I did not see Legacy, but do not see the point of a Bourne movie without Bourne.
  • TheWizardOfIceTheWizardOfIce 'One of the Internet's more toxic individuals'
    Posts: 9,117
    Dragonpol wrote:
    Risico007 wrote:
    hey I didn't create Bourne Legacy Personally I would have created a spring off film and called it as such.

    As it stands I haven't seen the trilogy and due to my disdain of Matt Damon I don't think I ever will.

    You can't judge the film or Damon for that matter if you haven't even bothered to see the trilogy. That doesn't make any logical sense, mate.

    Some people really are beyond belief: 'What a pile of shit that film was. What was that? Have I seen it? Don't need to mate - I just know.'

    Kind of like a fundamentalist Christian Barry Norman.

    Exactly, don't let the fact you haven't seen the blinking thing stand in the way of a good review. A bit like Malcolm Muggeridge's polemic against the James Bond novels in The Observer in 1965 when he'd only read one: Goldfinger!

    Or Mary Whitehouse types who write to the Mail to 'ban this filth'! although they freely admit they didnt watch it.

  • @Risico007 I wasn't a fan of Damon, same as you, until I saw Identity. He really surprised me and he's actually quite badass in them.

    Watch the first 3. Legacy (while I enjoyed it), is a pile of sh*t in comparison.
  • Posts: 7,650
    Dragonpol wrote:
    Risico007 wrote:
    hey I didn't create Bourne Legacy Personally I would have created a spring off film and called it as such.

    As it stands I haven't seen the trilogy and due to my disdain of Matt Damon I don't think I ever will.

    You can't judge the film or Damon for that matter if you haven't even bothered to see the trilogy. That doesn't make any logical sense, mate.

    Some people really are beyond belief: 'What a pile of shit that film was. What was that? Have I seen it? Don't need to mate - I just know.'

    Kind of like a fundamentalist Christian Barry Norman.

    Exactly, don't let the fact you haven't seen the blinking thing stand in the way of a good review. A bit like Malcolm Muggeridge's polemic against the James Bond novels in The Observer in 1965 when he'd only read one: Goldfinger!

    At least he read one novel, which is better than none at all.

  • Posts: 8,805
    Ok out of curiosity if I dislike Damon's acting in the first one and feel the film is just ok do I have to watch all 3?

    I just don't get the sudden need of people to say hey you hate Matt Damon in everything he has been in That you have seen I bet you will love him in the bourne trilogy????? Why did he magically get less annoying for only 3 films?
  • MrBondMrBond Station S
    edited August 2013 Posts: 2,044
    I agree with @Risico007 i can't stand Damon at all (The Departed would be the exception where he's okay) and the Bourne trilogy is just not my cup of tea. I can't stand them at all even though i've tried to watch them many times.
  • Posts: 13,331
    A movie has to be judged at its intrinsic value. Damon might not be your cup of tea, but that means nothing about the quality of the movie.
  • doubleoegodoubleoego #LightWork
    Posts: 11,090
    Seriously, all this hate for an actor is enough to put you off watching some pretty damn good films? Lazenby isn't particularly liked especially by some Hardcore, die hard Connery fundamentalist extremists and even some of them took the time to not only watch OHMSS but to acknowledge it as a great movie.
  • edited August 2013 Posts: 6,396
    I'm not a big fan of DiCaprio but, boy, did I really enjoy The Departed and Inception. To make a comment like "The Bourne Trilogy isn't my thing" without actually bothering to watch the films is utterly ludicrous.
Sign In or Register to comment.