The Bourne Legacy
Another franchise film, another chance to piss off legion of franchise fans. Oh, how I love my job!
Also up now at Channel 24.
Also up now at Channel 24.
What it's about
Aaron Cross
(Jeremy Renner) is a deep-undercover agent who, as a result of the
actions of Jason Bourne in the previous three films, suddenly finds
himself the target of the very agency he once served.
What we thought
Bourne Legacy –
or, as it may just as easily be called, Bourne Free, Bourne Without
or Seriously Where the Hell is Bourne – is one of the weirdest
franchise films ever released cinematically. We've had plenty of
spin-offs before (Elektra, The Chronicles of Riddick) but they tend
to, well, spin off in their own directions and have little to do with
forwarding the plot of the originals. We've even seen spin-offs that
have just about nothing to do at all with their originating films (the excruciating America Pie: Presents series) and tend to go
straight to DVD or video.
What we have with
Bourne Legacy is a franchise film that is simultaneously a follow-up,
a spin-off and a holding pattern that seems designed purely to keep
the franchise within the public consciousness until they can get Matt
Damon to return to the role of Jason Bourne himself. The result is a
film that seems designed to appeal to no one at all.
Bourne fans will
need to check out Bourne Legacy for its almost entirely disconnected
sub-plots that are specifically included to inch the overall Bourne
story forward a few relatively vital inches. Sadly, while they're
grasping at these few bits of new information, they will also have to
deal with a whole a-plot that is at best background detail, at worst
a very pale rip-off of the original trilogy.
As a jumping-on
point for new viewers though, it's even more fatally misjudged.
Non-Bourne fans are presumably going to go into the new film hoping
for a self-contained story that they can enjoy independently of the
rest of the series. It's not an unreasonable expectation. The Bourne
Legacy has been promoted as an entirely new chapter with a new star
and a new story that may share the same world with the original
trilogy but, since The Bourne Ultimatum was seen as such a perfect
conclusion for Bourne's story, was sure to be allowed to stand on its
own.
The end product is
less of an accessible new direction and more a hopelessly convoluted
mess that has neither a proper beginning, nor a satisfying end. There
is a lot of dry spy-speak devoted almost entirely to events that
happened in the original trilogy or, when they do get round to this
film's threadbare plot itself, it is still talked about in the
context of what happened in the Bourne films that actually featured
Jason Bourne.
On the plus side,
the fact that the plot of this film is so incredibly simplistic does
mean that it is at least comprehensible in a general sense. That
doesn't make it particularly compelling and it doesn't stop the
endless references to the previous films from grating but “super
spy gets hunted by former employers” is at least understandable.
It's also the same plot as the endlessly superior Haywire, but it has
enough trouble keeping up with its own predecessors that, at this
point, it would be churlish to do anything but let it slide.
It's also
undoubtedly true though that The Bourne Legacy is at least solidly
put together on a purely technical level. It's well shot and
adequately acted, though Renner is no where near as good in his role
as Matt Damon was in his – even if its not entirely his fault.
Writer/ director Tony Gilroy whose experience as writer on the other
Bourne films and as director on the rather remarkable Michael Clayton
does know how to put together some solidly suspenseful action scenes.
What Gilroy is
significantly less successful with this time though – and this is
especially strange considering how much this wasn't a problem in
Michael Clayton – is in evoking any real emotion to go along with
the frankly overly-technical spy stuff. That the storytelling in The
Bourne Legacy is weak is bad enough, but there really is no forgiving
how thoroughly lacking it is in any real human emotion.
Take a look
through the entirety of Gilroy's writing filmography and you see
countless examples of films that at least tried to work off real
human emotion and identifiable, often complex characters. Well, not
so much in Armageddon, of course, but we'll just blame that on
Michael Bay and leave it at that. Otherwise, whether its Michael
Clayton, State of Play or The Devil's Advocate, he always came at
these genre pieces with a fair amount of heart.
Similarly, the
original Bourne trilogy's tendency to have stern-looking people in
grey suits walking into rooms explaining the spy-jargon-heavy plots
to each other was countered by the identity crisis of its titular
protagonist. Even the inclusion of the typically wonderful Rachel
Weisz to act as the film's human perspective never stops the Bourne
Legacy from being cold, dreary and uninvolving.
It may not be
entirely without redeeming features but with its total lack of heart,
its reliance on previous movies and a non-ending to beat all
non-endings, The Bourne Legacy is sure to leave all but the most
forgiving of action-thriller fans bitterly disappointed. Just as well
we have a new Bond film around the corner to hopefully set things
right again.
Comments
Post a Comment