[Inkblot]

Originally Posted by lala

Well the consensus so far seems to be that it isn't a 'terrible' movie, but it isn't any good either. Far less action than advertised...

I can't understand why anyone would say that. Saw it this morning and it's got loads of action. OK, the first section, where Renner spends most of his time looking enigmatic and stern, does a great job of putting you off the film. But once the action starts the film shifts gear and stays at a frantic pitch until... well, the end. It's clearly a try-out for Renner as an action hero, and he turns out to be a likeable lead when he stops looking enigmatic and stern. Weisz is great, Norton does the obnoxious/ruthless thing well and the rest of the cast are fine (hats off to the impeccable Zeljko Ivanek for putting his sinister stamp on one of the minor characters).

The film looks good, the locations are interesting, the photography is clean and steady, the dialogue is clear and easy to follow - in some ways it's the opposite of a modern action film. It's not a five star film but it's worth seeing on the big screen.

[jaimesw]

Poor very poor.

Just back from seeing it. As a stanalone film 5/10. Compared to the other 3 films, 1/10

[Motthus]

I saw The Bourne Legacy this morning and it's not as terrible as people have made out but it's just very average.I thought both Renner and Weisz were good in their roles but they were let down by a poor script with some characters who I wondered why they were there!

However the actions scenes were good and it is worth a watch but don't expect much it!

It looks like it has already made a lot of money as its already number 1 in the US box office so we may get another film.I just hope they learn from the mistakes of this film!

[Stansfield]

Originally Posted by Inspiration

Being a big fan of the franchise I was never that happy with the idea of this movie being made. In a way I'm sort of glad it isn't becoming a box office hit because that may well leave the door open for a Matt Damon/Greengrass return at some point. Had this movie done well I doubt that would have been possible. I just hope they've not trashed the franchise all together. I felt there was at least one more movie in it for Matt Damon.. I'd still like to see them make one.

They have, big time, and to add insult to injury...they used the Moby music at the end.

Originally Posted by jaimesw

Poor very poor.

Just back from seeing it. As a stanalone film 5/10. Compared to the other 3 films, 1/10

1/10.....I wouldn't even give that....0/10 for me.

I didn't care for any of the characters whatsoever unlike the Bourne 'trilogy'...with Jason, Marie, Conklin, Abbott, The Professor {first film}...I could go on, they all had something there you wanted to know more about, this film, there was nothing, no heart, empty.
Producers were just trying to ride on the back of the three films, and they failed, big time.

[jaimesw]

Originally Posted by Stansfield

They have, big time, and to add insult to injury...they used the Moby music at the end.

1/10.....I wouldn't even give that....0/10 for me.

I didn't care for any of the characters whatsoever unlike the Bourne 'trilogy'...with Jason, Marie, Conklin, Abbott, The Professor {first film}...I could go on, they all had something there you wanted to know more about, this film, there was nothing, no heart, empty.
Producers were just trying to ride on the back of the three films, and they failed, big time.

I was being kind giving it a 1/10 I agree with everything you say.

I love the Bourne films and this one ruined the name!

[DariaM]

Irrespective of the subjective opinion of critics, I will watch the movie anyway - irrespective of the absense of Matt Damon (who it is rumoured will be returning for Bourne 5).

On an aside issue, the supporting cast (such as Joan Allen, Edward Norton, Albert Finney) will probably offer a better than average experience.

[Anika Hanson]

Just got back from seeing it. Thought it was very good.Nice continuation of the story. Took some getting used to the bourne character not being in it. I expect more films to continue with the story.

[wildphantom!]

You would think with writing the previous three films Gilroy would do a good job writing and directing Legacy. I have yet to see it, but the script is getting a hammering.

[Wulfster]

Saw it today.

My review of the film in one word = "Meh"

It wasn't hideously terrible but it wasn't Bourne ...

I think somebody mentioned earlier in the thread, that you could remove all references to Bourne and the previous clandestine goverment agencies, change the title, and it wouldn't hurt the narrative at all ...
I've got to agree with that.
The "old" Bourne cast cameos add absolutely nothing to the story (except maybe lay foundations for the sequel).

I have three big problems with the film as it stands, which I'll have to put in spoilers.

1) The ending

Spoiler

Pretty much nothing is resolved at the end. Ed Norton's character has had no direct interaction with Cross. We don't know what plans Cross has. We don't know what happens to Pam Landy. After a couple of hours, it just feels abrupt and unsatisfying

2) The "chems" and Cross compared to Bourne

Spoiler

Sorry to go all X-Factor, but the main drive of the Bourne Trilogy was that we were on a "journey" with him. We learnt more about him as he did, and we could empathise with him. Everything was driven by his need for redemption and knowledge. With Cross we know pretty much what he's about, and (if I've got this right) his main objective was to get more medication, so he didn't become a thick git!! I know I'm making it more simple and he originally thought that the "chems" were integral to his health, but that turned out not to be the case and he travelled to Manila so that he could continue to be a logistical genius, and not struggle with the 12-times table! Hardly enthralling is it?

3) The worst problem

Spoiler

NOT ENOUGH PAM LANDY!!

However, I will say that the final cycle chase is cool, Weisz is cute and tough, and at least they ended the film with Moby's "Extreme Ways" again!!

Other than that. Disappointing.

[Stansfield]

Originally Posted by Wulfster

However, I will say that the final cycle chase is cool, Weisz is cute and tough, and at least they ended the film with Moby's "Extreme Ways" again!!

Other than that. Disappointing.

Cycle Chase; missed that one....

Rachel Weisz; cute yes, but totally wrong for the part and the accent.....what was it.

[Wulfster]

Originally Posted by Stansfield

Cycle Chase; missed that one....

Rachel Weisz; cute yes, but totally wrong for the part and the accent.....what was it.

Rooftop and Motorbike chase then ...

Actually, they should have had Bradley Wiggins as the bad guy, and done some nutty cycling across Manila. That would have been awesome!

Not sure about the accent. You're right though, it doesn't seem to belong anywhere really...

[Inkblot]

Originally Posted by wildphantom!

You would think with writing the previous three films Gilroy would do a good job writing and directing Legacy. I have yet to see it, but the script is getting a hammering.

In terms of dialogue I thought it was OK, and as I said before I was pleased that the sound was good and clear so it was easy to follow what they were saying. Also I thought the dialogue was quite witty and found myself chuckling whilst most of the audience was silent. Not sure why, do audiences not expect a sense of humour from a Bourne film?

[schilltastic41]

The heck with some of the unfavourable reviews... I am going to see this Bourne film and come back here to tell the members of this thread that the movie was great.

[rumpleteazer]

I'm planning to see this at some point. I've not seen the first 3 movies (I don't like Matt Damon as a rule), I don't know if that will be an advantage or disadvantage when forming an opinion of the movie, we will have to see

[Shreya9]

Will this one make sense if you haven't seen any of the others?

[Stansfield]

Originally Posted by Inkblot

In terms of dialogue I thought it was OK, and as I said before I was pleased that the sound was good and clear so it was easy to follow what they were saying. Also I thought the dialogue was quite witty and found myself chuckling whilst most of the audience was silent. Not sure why, do audiences not expect a sense of humour from a Bourne film?

a Bourne film in name only....



What if I can't find her?
It's easy. She's standing right next to you.

[Straker]

Originally Posted by Motthus

It looks like it has already made a lot of money as its already number 1 in the US box office.....

Inevitable as it’s coasting on the audience and critical acclaim of Damon’s trilogy. This cynical cash-in won’t stay there though.

[Stansfield]

Originally Posted by Straker

Inevitable as it’s coasting on the audience and critical acclaim of Damon’s trilogy. This cynical cash-in won’t stay there though.

Yes, I was fooled into see 'this' Legacy film.

[DubDub]

its proper shite. went to see it based on the Bourne trilogy - should've watched Dark night again instead !! dont waste yer time\!

[The Sack]

Just got back from watching this and after avoiding reading this thread I'll now contribute.

Massively disappointing.

[starsailor]

I really wanted to like this film. Big fan of the first set of Bourne films.

If I was being generous then id give it 4/10. No more than that. There are good bits about the film. Jeremy Renner is a likeable actor, and it's good having an 'action' hero which isn't some pretty boy.vBut in this film he's not a patch on Matt Damon.

Spoiler

But the film was a mess and a muddle. It suffered from far, far too much set up at the beginning, then a typical chase scene with nothing being resolved at the end

Ed Norton was just stock 'bad CIA guy killing his own side'. We've already had three films of this..and it felt like a watered down insipid version of the others.

[Glengavel]

Originally Posted by Stansfield

Yes, I was fooled into see 'this' Legacy film.

Who's fooling who? Anyone with even a vague awareness of what's going on in the media would know that Matt Damon's not in it.

[MissDexter]

Originally Posted by starsailor

I really wanted to like this film. Big fan of the first set of Bourne films.

If I was being generous then id give it 4/10. No more than that. There are good bits about the film. Jeremy Renner is a likeable actor, and it's good having an 'action' hero which isn't some pretty boy.vBut in this film he's not a patch on Matt Damon.

Spoiler

But the film was a mess and a muddle. It suffered from far, far too much set up at the beginning, then a typical chase scene with nothing being resolved at the end

Ed Norton was just stock 'bad CIA guy killing his own side'. We've already had three films of this..and it felt like a watered down insipid version of the others.

Surely you could've used a Spoiler tag for that sentence for those of us haven't seen it!!!

[Inkblot]

Originally Posted by MissDexter

Surely you could've used a Spoiler tag for that sentence for those of us haven't seen it!!!

Nothing in that post really needed spoiler tags. To be honest, you could pretty much describe the whole film and not need spoiler tags. It's a modern spy thriller - you know what's going to happen. However...

I think there are several very good twists in the film. If you're determined not to like it you'll probably say "I saw that coming" but I didn't.

[Mark A]

Jonathan Kim appears to like it and he normally gives quite thoughtful reviews.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uALLhKtOtBw&feature=plcp

Regards

Mark