Jason Bourne

The Bourne franchise started with "The Bourne Identity" back in 2002, continued with "The Bourne Supremacy" in 2004 followed by "The Bourne Ultimatum" in 2007. I do not consider "The Bourne Legacy"(2012) part of this franchise because Matt Damon didn't take part in it and because it has much lower quality in script and filming. "The Bourne Identity"was one of the best action movies I had seen at the time and it really made an impression on me. The sequels were almost as good as the original, although they didn't have the same vibe. I will not go into details about this year's film since I don't want to spoil your fun. If you enjoyed the previous "Bourne" movies you will find "Jason Bourne" at least entertaining.

About the 2016 movie "Jason Bourne", it is an American movie directed by Paul Greengrass(director of "The Bourne Supremacy" and "The Bourne Ultimatum")based on a script by Greengrass and Cristopher Rouse, it had a budget of $120.000.000 which definitely paid off in the movie quality. The movie has a solid cast(Matt Damon, Tommy Lee Jones, Alicia Vikander), good plot, not so good script, no cliché lines, great action/visual effects, it has common sense and it does not defy logic like most action movies do. "Jason Bourne" definitely lives up to the expectations. In this movie we have Jason Bourne knowing who he actually is, cured of amnesia, and battling an even larger enemy than before. There are car chases, well choreographed fight scenes,shootouts,explosions and everything else you would want from an action movie. Even though we are used to seeing Jason Bourne being chased by a government agency we still love it. Unfortunately, this movie has a weak script and plot holes, it is far from the quality of the "Bourne" trilogy. "Jason Bourne" still is one of the best movies released this year and I would confidently give it a 8.0/10.

I have watched over 1200 movies and this one is for sure a good one. I advise you to go watch "Jason Bourne", you sure will enjoy it!

This review may be altered by the fact that I am a "Bourne" fan.

You can really tell that they were grasping at straws in this one, the first Damon installment in the Bourne series for 9 years. The plot is thin at best, and added elements for surprise's sake feel silly when they come out of the blue, or predictable when they don't. That said, the acting all around is solid, except for maybe Alicia Vikander, whose character as a whole seemed like it was just tacked on to mirror Julia Stiles' from previous movies. They really do follow the Bourne formula here: one major hand to hand scene, one major chase scene, and, yes, shaky-cam. It wasn't as bad in Ultimatum (2007) as it was in the first two and not necessarily in this one either, but the dang lighting on sets was horrid and what made it worse was that literally every action scene took place at night. The major chase at the end, too, but at least it had some really cool moments in better lighting.

The bad: this (final?) edition of the Bourne series is an inferior mashup of all the ingredients found in the much better original first movie.

They are using the exact same story, same situations, same music, same plot turns etc... I was contineously wondering when the "new" movie would start? It wouldnt though. This movie is simply nothing else but a100% COPY PASTE operation from older material. Bummer.

Surely not terribly bad as a movie on itself, but certainly the worst (or one of the worst) Bourne edition ever, because it is missing good creative writing. It is missing spark. It is missing real suspense.

Not any good at all? The leading actors (Tommy Lee Jones, Vincent Cassel and Alicia Vikander) all deliver solid acting performances. It is THEY who prevent this movie from becoming a dud.

The chase sequences are great as well. There are only 2 of them, which are both quite thrilling to watch though. So it's not all bad for sure...hence the 6 stars...

Many of the old fans have been yearning for a sequel for years...me included, but you cant always get what you want... because you cant always revive the glorious past.

Better watch the very first Bourne movie instead and you'll be surprised how strong that movie still stands till this very day!

The original Bourne trilogy of Identity, Supremacy and Ultimatum were brilliant displays in effective storytelling and great action. Jason Bourne, however, isn't quite as proficient in both of those areas. On the one hand, it's action-packed to the brim, and provides for a hugely entertaining watch, but on the other, it's a disappointment as far as bringing yet another intriguing and truly thrilling mystery to life is concerned.

Let's start on the bright side, however, with the action. Paul Greengrass does yet another sterling job at directing some hugely exciting action sequences (including a thrilling chase in Athens that harks back to Ultimatum's Tangier chase), and in tandem with yet another excellent performance by Matt Damon as Jason Bourne himself, the action is definitely the best part of this film.

Where the story lacks, Jason Bourne more often than not gives you some insane action to revel at. Sure, it's not the work of storytelling geniuses, but if you're the sort of person who can turn their brain off for two hours and watch wall-to-wall action and explosions, then this film will have you in dreamland. It's not a Michael Bay movie, and Greengrass' style lends a lot to making more vibrant action sequences, but there's no doubt that fans of big action will love this film.

On the whole, I did enjoy this film, and I was able to recognise its flaws and just watch it as a big blockbuster. However, I can't escape feeling disappointed at the film's total failure to tell as intriguing a story as the first three films in the series.

The enthralling mysteries and gradual revelations about Jason Bourne's past were what really separated this series from any other spy thriller. In this movie, however, everything felt a lot more generic, with a much bigger emphasis on action than clever storytelling and patient, gradual character and plot development. Unfortunately, it's that that makes Jason Bourne look pale in comparison to the original trilogy, and those who are expecting yet another engrossing and intelligent thriller will certainly be disappointed.

That said, there are bright moments in the story too. It's not a horrifically dull film, and there are a few details that relate right the way back to The Bourne Identity. What's more is that Matt Damon, Alicia Vikander and Tommy Lee Jones all put in very strong performances to add a degree of gravitas to what is in truth a very clichéd and repetitive story, which was good to see.

Overall, I am disappointed by Jason Bourne, in that it doesn't manage to tell such an enthralling and intelligent mystery as the series' original trilogy, but its top-quality action and strong directing and performances still allowed me to have a lot of fun for two hours.

Actually reviews are not supposed to be based on wishful thinking.

Nonetheless for those members who gave this a high rating more out of frustration than anything else, I do feel your pain.

The original Bourne trilogy was not merely good, it was superb. As a top reviewer here with some 1200 reviews under my belt I said more than once that the original was the best spy trilogy I had ever seen and I am unashamed of the fact that I have seen each film in that series four or five times since original release. They are an adrenaline rush, the perfect mix of story, form, and effect.

Even 2012's Bourne Legacy -- a feature where it was ever so clear that Damon had been offered a fortune just to walk-on and smile at the camera, but refused anyway -- was a solid movie, great script, held the attention, and Renner did a great job.

However, now that I have seen Jason Bourne 2016, I cannot help but wish that Damon had agreed to participate in Legacy, rather than be lured back 4 years later for a part he clearly no longer likes, in a production he would rather not be in.

I tend toward "purist" reviews, that is to say, I don't really care WHY a film was made as much as I do about how entertaining is it to watch ...?

(That said, I have to "assume" that Damon broke his vow and came back simply for the cash. And Greengrass agreed to take hold of the camera one more time only if he could get a writing credit too. Ugh!)

So, speaking of entertainment, there is almost none in this movie. The script is a mess. Written by the director for the clear purpose of showcasing his action and camera-work skills, there is no attempt to build connection from the top.

The script is so bad that even viewers in love with the original trilogy -- like this one -- have to keep reminding themselves who Bourne is supposed to be, and what is supposed to motivate him.

(Not to mention major plot holes here and there. Am I the only one who noticed that the most WANTED MAN IN America attempted to enter customs under his own name with no advance certainty that the computer would be "fixed" in time? Remember, from the second film in the series, this is a man who "never guesses and never makes mistakes." Other than accepting to do this film, that is.)

A good film makes the viewer feel good. The scientists call it endorphin production. This 120 minute endless chase, from the top of the movie to the ending, merely produces a caffeine buzz and sets your nerves on edge. Yes, Greengrass can use this production in his own personal highlight reel to showcase his moving camera skills. But his writing skills? Not so much.

Tommy Lee Jones delivers possibly the most superficial performance of his excellent career and the money he was offered cannot begin to make up for the indignity of the closeups.

Newcomer Alicia Vikander acquits herself well. Then again, she is a newbie with a whole string of good movies ahead of her, career-wise, whereas the actors in this film seemed more interested in taking the money ... and running.

---------------ADDENDUM NOV 2017-------------

If you are curious to see the kind of film that JASON BOURNE (2016) should have been in a perfect world -- or a parallel universe, or whatever -- than have a quick peek at ATOMIC BLONDE 2017. Presumably when you read this review in the far future, you can snag it on streaming media or DVD or possibly even beamed directly into your cortex. Theron, for the first 2/3 of the film, is the Bourne of old. She is an agent with a mission and a purpose and a predisposition for removing obstacles from her path with the same ease a gardener pulls weeds from a flower bed. And the script is intelligent and purposeful. Yes, she has more estrogen than the Bourne we are used to (well, a LOT more, actually) but, other than that tiny discrepancy, ATOMIC BLONDE is more a Bourne sequel than this soppy entry.

---- ((Designated "IMDb Top Reviewer." Please check out my list "167+ Nearly-Perfect Movies (with the occasional Anime or TV miniseries) you can/should see again and again (1932 to the present))