Disagree
Disagree
They were all pants.
"Matt Damon is.... Generic Invincible 21st Century Super Spy/Soldier. Matt Damon cannot be hurt. Matt Damon cannot be outflanked. Matt Damon cannot be captured. Matt Damon does not make even so much as a single mistake, or miss a single shot, because he is... Jason Bourne, a god made mortal."
It's how Bond would be without Roger Moore's charm, Connery's suave or Dalton's remorse.
Jason Bourne has no personality at all. And of course, "Maaahtt Day-man".
You are wrong
They were all pants.
"Matt Damon is.... Generic Invincible 21st Century Super Spy/Soldier. Matt Damon cannot be hurt. Matt Damon cannot be outflanked. Matt Damon cannot be captured. Matt Damon does not make even so much as a single mistake, or miss a single shot, because he is... Jason Bourne, a god made mortal."
It's how Bond would be without Roger Moore's charm, Connery's suave or Dalton's remorse.
Jason Bourne has no personality at all. And of course, "Maaahtt Day-man".
Good , can't stand Renner.
Prequel or sequel?
from what i've seen sequels.
which makes sense with using the original actors and them being linked together in the legacy film, i'd find it stupid if with both of those thing that they'd go prequel for either/both, but its hollywood so don't hold me to that.
LOL, reboot with original actors and a different timeline due to time travel... that'll be next!
On a serious note, this is great news. Loved the first three Bourne films.
Elaborate?
Well ok.
You state that Bourne has no personality, well that's kind of obvious because for most of the story he doesn't know who the hell he is. The movement of the story from one place to another to advance the arc and learn a little extra about himself and his history is genuinely interesting.
The action pieces are in no way perfect, the rapid cut 'showing barely anything' style doesn't really add anything for me but equally doesn't take anything away. However Bourne does come across as being genuinely hard but also as someone struggling with who he was / is.
Bond however, who you compared directly to, is just Gov't backed gigolo with no actual story, history or motivation. Its just a guy with some tech staving off the next global apocalypse for reasons we know not why.
All bonds films basically consist of blowing something up, then smashing a pastie, blow something else up, smash another pastie, blow something bigger up, smash yet more pastie, roll credits.
Quoted for truthiness. I used to like the Bond films when I was a kid, but when I grew up I realised it was the same generic carp over and over and Bond is basically Superman. The Daniel Craig ones make him like a Terminator, he just comes off as a total psycho killer with no emotions or charm.
The Bourne films are much more grounded and they did things to humanise him more, like him getting injured and limping to that Russian girl's flat at the end to tell confess what he did. Even watching him climb down from the US embassy was such a great scene since it seemed like something someone could actually do, rather than in an action film where he would just jump down and be "saved by the snow".