Directed by:
Paul GreengrassCinematography:
Barry AckroydCast:
Matt Damon, Tommy Lee Jones, Alicia Vikander, Vincent Cassel, Julia Stiles, Riz Ahmed, Ato Essandoh, Scott Shepherd, Bill Camp, Vinzenz Kiefer, Gregg Henry (more)VOD (3)
Plots(1)
Matt Damon returns to his most iconic role in Jason Bourne. Paul Greengrass, the director of The Bourne Supremacy and The Bourne Ultimatum, once again joins Damon for the next chapter of Universal Pictures' Bourne franchise, which finds the CIA's most lethal former operative drawn out of the shadows. (Universal Pictures US)
Videos (38)
Reviews (15)
The weakest Bourne and perhaps the biggest disappointment of the year. A lot of people complain about the weaker story, but I wouldn't mind it so much in the action genre, but it is so unbelievably bland, everybody is constantly dealing with something (from the past, present, future) and you don't really know what you're walking into and that's problem number one: grabbing attention and pulling you into the plot. I thought I would at least enjoy the actors and the action and unfortunately I was wrong there too. Matt Damon looks tired the whole movie and like he doesn't really enjoy the role, Tommy Lee Jones is an old dog and could be done with acting, he has nothing to offer, Vincent Cassel as the main bad guy is only in the movie for maybe 25 minutes, especially at the end, we don't learn his name and the only thing he says in the film is “Copy That”, a disappointment. The only bright spot is the beautiful and bright Alicia Vikander, who in two years has moved into the female acting elite. The action is a big stumbling block, too. On the one hand it is woefully short. two major action sequences and about three short ones, of which only the ending was worth mentioning, with a fabulous car chase and a decent final fight, otherwise everything else is cluttered, choppy, very unexciting and bloodless. Taking into account that I was bored for most of the film, because there can be no question of suspense and fast pace, I came out with one of the weakest cinema visits of the year. Unfortunately, this is a travesty that doesn't even offer a twist. 45%
()
A continuation I had resisted and wished for a long time that it would never happen, because the original trilogy works as a perfect action-spy diamond that doesn't need further polishing. And as The Bourne Legacy has already shown, continuing from elsewhere is not the best idea. Nevertheless, here we are and as expected, it reminds me so much of Paul Greengrass's previous contributions that it almost feels like a quote. I see the myth in specific scenes or twists, and the plot paraphrases The Bourne Ultimatum, and before all the flashbacks and assumptions settle in, I didn't have a very light feeling, especially when one of the targets is the surprisingly terrible Tommy Lee Jones. But it's still there in Matt Damon's bulldog face, and even though the action this time already slightly steps out of its established boundaries and flirts with (by previous standards) a surprising lack of realism, the physicality and uncompromising nature of it still raise my adrenaline level so much that it stayed high the whole way home from the cinema. Along with Nicky's return, the unreadable Heather, and the incomparable atmosphere, it is indeed an unnecessary digging into something already resolved, but the personal subplot ultimately fulfills its purpose perfectly. 75%
()
If you come back with something that was once a phenomenon, you won’t please everybody. Jason Bourne doesn’t have nearly as good a story as the previous two parts of the memory jigsaw, but it is still among the best of movies of this genre. The main role in this picture belongs more to Alicia Vikander than to man from the title with the Damonic face, but that is quite refreshing. If she hadn’t let herself down a little toward the end, brighter tomorrows might have awaited us in this series. That would be just dandy… Tommy Lee Jones is a little subdued, he can act better, but he looks really tired. Cassel is unexploited, just a well-known villain’s face. I was surprised by some decisions made by the screenwriters, the story sometimes seems like superfluous stuffing that simply moves the action from one place of interest to another. Athens super, Berlin and London we’ve seen before. Vegas is really over the top, but I preferred the car chase from Supremacy for being more down to earth. To tell the truth, I didn’t need to see this episode. Ending to the trilogy by saying “it’s all your own fault" was quite powerful and resounded in me. But it also works when, right at the beginning, we see our battered hero, and we have an idea that his evolution in the movie might still be interesting, but we just haven’t got there yet. This is just a bridge. Next time, leave Bourne to agree to the offer and send him against Renner.
()
The purest and most classic action film of the four-part series, which once again expertly mixes elements of hi-tech espionage and typically thriller-like, escalating plots, including an over-the-top finale where a police car dismembers dozens of cars in Las Vegas. All that was missing was a bald John Malkovich with an plane and we could have had Con Air 2. Apart from that, the film is not without quite a lot of scripted filler, a somewhat artificial plot and a rather visible aspect of coincidences. On the other hand, it's still the camera-volatile and uncompromising Paul Greengrass, in whose rendition all those CIA spy tricks are terribly entertaining, engrossing and hard to tear yourself away from. Alicia Vikander and Vincent Cassel are also refreshing change. The trilogy is phenomenal and consistent, with the fourth part following close behind. Still exceptional filmmaking, though.
()
That Greengrass made a remake of the 'best of' moments from the past doesn't bother me. It bothers me that he did it in the worst possible way, perhaps having Universal using F&F dramaturgists because Jason Bourne is one long action scene lacking any semblance of a meaningful plot. Last time, Gilroy delivered a simple but striking story based on the ambiguous past of an agent with amnesia. This time, it’s a primitive plot with the cheapest overlaps (Snowden, social networks), relegating the protagonist to a field of uninteresting and unnecessary figures who simply happen to pass through scenes, and yet we know that everything will be resolved in an effective way, without any frills or embellishments. This was supposed to keep us, the fans, who were a bit hesitant about the meaningfulness of the sequel, in our seats and massaging the first signal for two hours. But this is wherein the film ultimately loses the most. Yes, Greengrass keeps serving up epic action outpourings, but what's the point of them when Ackroyd, unlike Wood, doesn't know how to work the shaky cam? Those half-second shots, which the viewer processed somewhere in the depths of his brain and only with a slight delay appreciated their informational value, don't work this time. As a whole, they lack the flexibility and momentum that the head of the second staff, Dan Bradley, added last time. The result is desperate and predictable... and boring. Quite possibly because Bourne isn't being pursued by a crucial pursuer this time, and the intoxication of his tactical evasion, where he's a step or two ahead of the pursuer, is there. The aging Tommy and the pretty naive girl Alicia are both not up to the task, and Cassel seems to have dropped out of a 1990s B-movie (some of the flashbacks should be punishable). In short, I didn't leave the movie theater this year more pissed off.
()
Ads