Jason Bourne

SPOILER-FREE MOVIE REVIEW

Let us all pretend that The Bourne Legacy never happened.

Jason Bourne is the fifth instalment under the "Bourne" series and the fourth to star Matt Damon as the amnesic title character synonymous with gritty, realistic, no-nonsense action.

Boy was it good to see Matt Damon kick some serious ass again.

I'll go straight into the movie as I have a Suicide Squad review to do and between the two, I think it's obvious as to which one is the bigger movie (sorry, Matt).

Picking up in the present day, nine years after the events of The Bourne Ultimatum (2007), Jason Bourne is in hiding in Greece, laying low and boxing to earn his pennies.

After a familiar face in Nicky Parsons (Julia Stiles) pops up with some intel, however, Bourne's quiet life suddenly isn't so quiet anymore.

I won't lie to you, I was really pumped for this movie because it just had everything going for it.

From uniting Damon with director of the last two films of the original Bourne trilogy, Paul Greengrass, to the just seeing the former kick ass again, this movie was certainly not that "unnecessary" sequel many have labelled it as.

Story-wise, I felt that this movie's was one worth telling and one worth another instalment, and all the more so because it involves Bourne and not some weird spinoff character that nobody cares about like Aaron Cross in The Bourne Legacy.

Was it as compelling or as gripping as any of the films in the original trilogy? No. Was it not good then? No.

What you get with the story is what you'd come to expect from a movie from the series.

It follows a similar format to the originals by having that deceptive person in a high-ranking position, to having plenty of surveillance pieces where many CCTV cameras are utilised to track people down. It all becomes rather generic and repetitive at times.

In the film's defence, however, we've not seen this kind of stuff for many years so I guess it's fine despite the dynamic feeling rehashed and unoriginal.

I particularly liked how the characters of Jason Bourne, Heather Lee (Alicia Vikander), Robert Dewey (Tommy Lee Jones) and the Asset (Vincent Cassel) were written.

For Bourne, I liked how he didn't have many lines throughout the whole movie. He just stalks around quietly and his character is developed through actions rather than verbal exposition.

Matt Damon once again excels in the role, and I think it's safe to say that he and the character are truly one.

Nobody else does gritty and no-nonsense like Damon, and his performance was excellent.

There's also an excellent arc I noticed in terms of character traits between Bourne and the Asset, where one leaves a trail of dead bodies as he goes along while the other doesn't. It really showed the morality of the characters as to whether they'd rather kill or spare the lives of victims. Nice themes of right and wrong there.

I thought Alicia Vikander's character of Heather Lee was very interesting, and she could totally hold her own against the big guns in the CIA who are all played by men (yay for female empowerment!).

She played the character with a nice layered manner in which you think she's a by-the-books person initially but as she goes along, her naivety begins to show as she tries to be too clever with her decisions every now and then.

Good on her for her performance, and mark my words guys, she is the next big thing in Hollywood. Hope to see more from the Oscar-winning actress in the near future.

As for the character of Robert Dewey, he's pretty much the "generic bad old man".

Now that sounds rather negative doesn't it? But by casting Tommy Lee Jones in the role, they had an actor who plays the "generic bad old man" role very very well.

Sure, his plot becomes predictable and we have all seen this a million times before, but as an antagonist, he gets the job done.

What I liked about how his character was written, however, was that the writers knew that he was that generic character type, and didn't try anything too clever by attempting to make him "different".

An exact case in point would be Christoph Waltz's Blofeld in SPECTRE (2015) whom the writers tried so hard to make "different" from the stereotypical "puller-of-strings"-type villain, only to end up making his character's motivations and traits seem rather silly in the end.

By sticking to the tried and tested formula, it works for Jason Bourne. Just that a little fresh touches here and there wouldn't have hurt.

On to the pacing of the movie, and it was pretty darn intense for the majority of the film with different action sequences not being too far away from each other and expository scenes being limited to a number which was just enough to keep the audience informed of what was going on without being too thick or dry.

The film does however take just a little bit too long to get going.

I'd say the opening 15-20 minutes were filled with excessive globetrotting and too much set-up for subplots which unfold later on.

If they had cut it down and just develop the subplots as the movie went along, I'm certain the film would be faster-paced and easier to watch.

For the action, well, it was pretty darn spectacular.

Standout scenes include a fist fight in an apartment in Berlin, an incredible vehicular chase through Las Vegas and a smattering of others, but my favourite of the lot had to be the amazing riot scene in Greece.

My goodness, that scene left me astounded for all the work that went into it.

From the sheer number of extras that had to be involved to the logistics and location planning, my word I was amazed. What a scene, and it was shot pretty well too with the appropriate use of a variety of shaky cam shots, sweeping aerial wide shots and steady EDGE vehicle shots.

Speaking of shots, I had quite a number of qualms with the manner in which the movie was photographed.

Yes, I get that mad shaky cam is Paul Greengrass' directing style, but there's just too much in this one.

At times, the film felt as if it was filmed by a monkey leaping from tree to tree. It was that shaky and that all-over-the-place.

Even expository scenes where characters are interacting with each other aren't steadily filmed. I don't think any Steadicam was used at all.

Continuing on the topic of the film's action, I liked all the fight scenes very much.

Everything was so raw and so gritty, and none of them felt choreographed (although they obviously had to be). It wasn't anything like those horrid lightsaber battles in the Star Wars prequels where fights felt more like dancing. It's exactly what the Bourne films are known for and I'm very glad that tradition continues here.

The liked the music by John Powell and David Buckley which was very suspenseful and accompanied the high-octane action very well. There's a common theme which is a bit repetitive as it's played in pretty much every scene, but other than that, it was a solid soundtrack.

All in all, Jason Bourne was a thrilling and enjoyable action movie which didn't feel as if it was forced into production for profits' sake.

It was a proper follow-up to the original trilogy and I was left on the edge of my seat throughout a lot of the movie.

Sure, the movie does give off a "we've seen this all before" vibe, but it's still a solid piece of entertainment and a quality action thriller.

Do catch it if you have the time! It's certainly worth the watch.

7/10.

Comments