Howling Commando AT the Movies - a review
Finally saw the third Bourne movie. Glad I didn't go to the movies to see it.
Throughly, completely enjoyed the first two.
This one a negative snoozer for me. Heres why:
1:The producers went hog wild with the "shaky camera" concept. Purposely moving the camera like it was a documentary. Well, way beyond an occassional shake in a documentary, these shakes were not natural ones, but steady, made-made shakes.
2: We know know the character Bourne by now. There was nothing left for Bourne to do but walk around in his serious, little tight-arms, Bourne walk. No depth, no introspection. But plenty of Bourne walking with a back pack. This KILLS the whole infectious concept of the first two movies. We enjoyed seeing Bourne grit and gird his way through all this. We attached. We sympathized. Basically the first two were his first person narratives with side shots of other characters.
3: Here is the master spy of the world. He is hunted by all other master spies. He "Bourne-walks" through the hottest, tightest nets surrounding the most survieled buildings and spy zones....escapes from throngs of the enemy with tons of close circuit cameras, with not freaken' disguise one. Not one. Not even a damn hat! Bourne face. Bourne hairdo. Bourne walk. This suspended reality in a film banking on some modicum of reality.
4: The fights are blurry shaky messes. I can't barely make out or see a single thing. (like the new Batman movie.) BUT! There is one moment where time stands still and the Bourne gets a wrist lock on someone. The blurry, shaky universe STOPS! FREEZE FRAME on the wristlock. The bad guy body flips out of it. This si the big trick of the movie? I have heard folks say that they loves what Bourne did in a fight scene with a book. I tried to make it out. I saw soemthign that looked like a book. Did he hold the book up gainst the guy's face and punch the book? Dissipating the force of the punch? Did he hit the guy's throat with the side of the book? If so I couldn't tell. No fair replaying the film in slow motion to see! Movies aren't or shouldn't be made to have to freeze and rewind to see what the hell happened.
I first saw this indiscernible fight scene style in the movie League of Extraordinary Gentleman. There were wild fights but you couldn't see a damn thing of what was going one.
There is more reality fighting in an old Wild, Wild West / Robert Conrad TV show than this and in many modern movies. Feeling the punch involves the audience. Not being able to see the punch means not feeling the punch. Instead of becoming involved in the action, you wonder why you are becoming nauseous in your seat? Damns swirling, shaky cameras!
Next Bourne (and Matt Damon seems to be shaking his head no...wisely) will be the CIA has a terrible plot going on and whats-her-name has to find and recruit Bourne to quell it. She'll appeal to his better nature and blah-blah-blah. THAT has to be the next movie. Wanna bet?
Okay, does anyone remember the Bourne 3 movie plot? The story line left me the day after I saw it. But, you still remember Goldfinger's plot don't cha? AND that was made in 1963. Hell, I remember the plot of each Austin Power's movie! But Bourne 3's plot immediately escaped me.
Speaking of Goldfinger...The new James Bond movies captured this Bourne 1 and Bourne 2 intensity. It had to, just to keep pace with the market. (Craig even has that little serious, stiff arm, tough-guy, fast Bourne-walk, doesn't he) They would be very wise for the Bonds not fall into the Bourne 3 trap of losing the better, winning and appealing aspects of Bourne 1 and 2.
Bond?
Batman?
That's another subject.
Sincerely and for the better ment of action movies...
Your Howling Commando Movie Reviewer,
Hock
Author
Topic: The Bourne Ultimate? A HC Review (Read 668 times)