4 of 23 people found the following review helpful
Why do they make films like this?,
This review is from: The Bourne Legacy [DVD] (DVD)
The success of the "Bourne" series is something that baffles me - each film effectively being a chase movie where the dialogue is ridiculous and the endless action ultimately becomes repetitive and numbingly dull. It was staggering to see the franchise resurrected and even Matt Damon had the good sense not to become involved in this turkey. This latest edition seemed to take an age to get going although it became almost immediately obvious the way that the story was going to develop. Once the pace started to pick up the film improved and whilst the brief motorbike chase at the end livened things up, the conclusion was a damp squib.
I'm amazed that films like this ever get made. The script and the film making were all to formula and if, like me, you consider film making to be a serious art form, it is a sad indictment of the American film industry that they can churn out dross like this so readily and fail to create anything with even a modicum of originality. As an action film, it was also surprisingly low key and lacked any excitement or tension whatsoever. To put it simply, the Bourne franchise is effectively a crime against "proper" film making churned out for an audience inacapble of understadning that they are being fleeced by th cynical Hollywood machinery.
I would have to state that this was not my usual choice of film but the consensus afterwards that this was extremely poor indeed. Whilst I have no issues with spy / action films, the recent James Bond "Skyfall" illustrates that it is possible to make good films in this oeuvre that do not insult the viewer as this dross does. Probably the most pointless film of 2012.
Sort: Oldest first | Newest first
Showing 1-3 of 3 posts in this discussion
Initial post: 20 Nov 2012 08:35:33 GMT
P. Johnson says:
Your review is simply your critique of the current state of the American film industry. Your opinion about proper film making is perhaps contradicted with the notion that Skyfall is some sort of shining light.
Posted on 21 Nov 2012 20:33:25 GMT
If you didn't like the previous Bourne films why did you bother to see this one? Surely you didn't think that after three "repetitive and numbingly dull" (to quote you) efforts, that you would like the fourth?
I haven't seen this film yet, but I thought that the previous Bourne films were great; not cerebral or serious, but exciting and good entertainment. I see film as an art form which is flexible and limited only by the creativity of those who use it to express their ideas, therefore it can be serious or silly, profound or profane and sometimes all of those things or none.
In reply to an earlier post on 23 Nov 2012 17:18:17 GMT
Ian Thumwood says:
Not my choice of film but I was disappointed a just how unoriginal this film was. In my opinion, it was made simply to cash in of the boc office success of the previous films in the franchise which are effectively all the same film anyway. I don't think this film was exciting or particularly entertaining and whilst I can appreciate more commerical offerings if they are made with flair and a creative mind, this film had no other purpose other than to make a fast and easy buck. Surely this is contrary to what all decent cinema should be about. Film making by numbers of the worst kind.
‹ Previous 1 Next ›