½*/**** Image A+ Sound A Extras B-
starring Jeremy Renner, Rachel Weisz, Edward Norton, Stacy Keach
screenplay by Tony Gilroy & Dan Gilroy
directed by Tony Gilroy
by Walter Chaw By the end of Tony Gilroy's unbearably long and talky The Bourne Legacy, one is left feeling as though the film hasn't even started yet. Nothing happens in it, and the only thing it inspires is anticipation: it's all first act; all supplementary material; all self-importance and hot air. Jason Bourne (Matt Damon) sits this one out while another similar soldier, Aaron Cross (Jeremy Renner), occupies a space parallel to the first three films, climbing mountains, Grey-ing wolves, and saving hot virologist Dr. Marta (Rachel Weisz) from the clutches of our evil government so that she can infect him with a virus that makes him smart. This leads to a moment, inevitable, where Cross suggests that losing 12 points off his artificially-inflated IQ would result in some personal "Flowers for Algernon" apocalypse where 12 points would probably result in him forgetting his phone number at worst. It also leads to a series of incoherent flashbacks that fit in perfectly with Gilroy's impossible-to-follow action sequences; if you're just going to turn a camera on and throw it out a window, why bother trying to set it up? For those keeping score, there are more spinning Lazy Susan shots here than in Transformers: Asshole. You've been warned.
|
There's nothing more to the story than Aaron wanting to stay smart and the CIA--with head-spook/analyst Byer (Ed Norton, thisclose to swallowing himself whole like some Ouroborosian worm) in the lead--wanting to see him dead. Why they want him and his buddies dead isn't exactly clear, particularly if we remember the activation of other agents to catch Jason in the previous films, and hardly explained away by the appearance in this one of some genetic superfreak (Louis Ozawa Changchein)--the Kraken released and summarily dispatched in the most disappointing climax of the year. Shot in extreme close-up with no sense of space or consequence, none of the action in the picture is comprehensible. None of the exposition is comprehensible, either, alternating as it does between megalomaniacal paranoia and bad smart/dumb science-speak that drones on and on. If not for the peculiar ability of Weisz to lend pathos to a phone-book reading, I would have dropped off any number of times.
Her wounded, desperate quality, in fact, fuels the film's only affecting set-piece: a workplace shooting that feels too near to recent events in the United States, startling for its cleanness and brutality. It's an interesting thing when the most stimulating scene of violence in a Bourne movie doesn't include the star or do much to advance the narrative, though Gilroy tries to disguise this with reams of punishing technobabble. Whenever Cross isn't jumping around on cliffs or buildings, in fact, The Bourne Legacy is running lines on shaky-cam that we're supposed to care about as much as the characters do. (If you do happen to give a shit about a 1.5% increase in mitochondrial stimulation, man, have I got the movie for you.) A centrepiece sequence in which our intelligence community tracks Cross and Marta from a burning house to an airport to Manila is the quintessence of the picture's tediousness, demonstrating that Gilroy's fine so long as someone else is directing and, obviously, reshaping his screenplays.
What worked about the Bourne saga until now was Damon's everyman surprise to discover that he's maybe a replicant, implanted with memories and superhuman in many ways. His quest begins as existential and ends as fatalistic; something about the idea that the quest for God always ends in an acceptance of chaos really appeals to me. What kills The Bourne Legacy, beyond its complete technical failure, is that its hero doesn't wonder what he is (he's Martin Riggs) and wants to keep being what he is while avoiding the U.S. military-industrial complex and maybe gaining an extremely attractive doctor girlfriend in the process. Manila is portrayed as a sweaty throng, Bethesda is portrayed as a frigid wasteland, and the action is so genuinely godawful that you begin to dread the next bout. It's abusive, actually--movie-by-sledgehammer, and the bulk of it is spent in a fugue state wondering whether Jason Bourne is going to make a cameo and whether Paddy Considine came back to recreate his walking-on-a-street scene from the second sequel or they cobbled this crap together from outtakes like a Jim Wynorski flick. The Bourne Legacy is a real shame--not merely the worst entry in a series I've liked until now, but also one of the worst movies of the year.
THE BLU-RAY DISC
Universal shepherds The Bourne Legacy
to Blu-ray in a fantastic 2.40:1, 1080p presentation. Robert Elswit shot the
picture mostly in 35mm (some of the action was easier to capture digitally),
and the image on this disc has a pronounced but tight and razor-sharp grain
structure, as well as a steely but not egregiously artificial palette. Fine
detail is impressive, even to this veteran Blu-ray hound, and dynamic range is
above reproach. The attendant 7.1 DTS-HD MA track, downmixed to 5.1 by mine and
presumably most receivers, similarly wows, especially--for me,
personally--during the workplace shooting, throughout which an alarm trills in the
rear right channel while gunshots go splat in the subwoofer, piercing the
dialogue vacuum like a knife in a Casaba melon. Voices lack consistent volume, but the
mix as presented strikes a nice balance between realism and big audio dynamite.
Also on board is a feature-length group commentary from co-writer/director Tony Gilroy, co-writer Dan Gilroy, editor John Gilroy (yep, they're brothers), Elswit, second-unit director Dan Bradley, and production designer Kevin Thompson. Their conversation is "forensic" in nature, a post-mortem speculating on the ultimate result of creative decisions made much earlier in a different frame of mind. I have to say, I was left gobsmacked by the revelation that everything outside the numerous windows of Marta's home in the film was computer-generated. This may be the most seamless greenscreening I've ever seen. Gilroys Tony and Dan rejoin Elswit for optional commentary over three deleted scenes that Tony insists we think of as canon. That doesn't mean much until we get to Albert Finney's death, incidentally merely the latest example of Tony's penchant for having nameless black-hats untraceably dispose of whistleblowers in the middle of the night. Creepy. But, hey, more Finney!
Additionally find multiple short featurettes, starting with the disposable "Re-Bourne" (6 mins., HD). Really only the tech-oriented ones are worth the effort; consider Tony's assertion that the casting of Aaron Cross was critical in "Enter Aaron Cross" (7 mins., HD), for instance: No shit, Sherlock. Likewise critical: that there was film in the camera. "Crossing Continents: Legacy on Location" (8 mins., HD) is mostly about shooting in Manila, which was chosen over Saigon because it's more "Bourne-ish" (Tony's words) and because its frequent use as a Vietnam stand-in meant there was already a movie-industry infrastructure in place. (Here, for a change, the city played itself, in all its poverty-stricken glory.) "Man vs. Wolf"(5 mins., HD) reveals the trickery behind Cross's wolf encounter, while "Wolf Sequence Test" (2 mins., HD) is a crude but riveting animatic of the sequence in question. One wolf was trained so well that what registers on film as Renner wrestling the beast is actually the wolf and his trainer frolicking in the snow.
"Moving Targets: Aaron and Marta" (6 mins.) has Weisz making her character's relationship with Renner's sound a lot more interesting than it is, though she's not technically wrong to call it "really bizarre, slightly perverse, and totally unique." Here we see that the production was known on set as "Marcher," I guess to throw looky-loos off the scent. Lastly, "Capturing Chaos: The Motorbike Chase" (8 mins.) functions as a salute to Bradley, who's shown directing Louis Ozawa Changchien (Larx-03) in terms of beats. It was Bradley who conceived the motorbike skidding down the railing, described in the script as simply a "cool-as-fuck gag" to be determined later. The piece ably demonstrates the advantages of a second-unit (dedicated time and resources, a veteran's expertise), making it something of an antidote to Christopher Nolan's DIY propaganda.
HiDef trailers for Death Race 3: Inferno, Ted, Hit & Run, "Transformers the Ride," "Grimm" Season 1, End of Watch, and Dead in Tombstone cue up on startup along with an anti-smoking PSA. DVD, Digital, and Ultraviolet copies of The Bourne Legacy are bundled with the BD.
It wasn't a drop of 12 IQ points that terrified 'new Bourne'; it was the loss of his artificially-inflated IQ and sensory reflexes. The 12 IQ points figure quoted in the film was the amount that Aaron was lacking from the minimum baseline required for entry to the augmentation program (yet he somehow got in). After augmentation, he has attained some new, presumably vastly superior cognitive level.
I agree wholeheartedly on the review of this disappointing film. I was so excited for a new Bourne film, and despite replacing the star and director, I felt with Tony Gilroy and Jeremy Renner, the film appeared to be in good hands. Renner was pretty good...
Gilroy, unfortunately, is a wild man at the reigns of this film. The first 30 minutes is a confusing mess, introducing dozens of new characters without any explanation as to who they are (including the hero!). The Bourne Identity didn't explain Matt Damon's character because the film was taking us with Jason Bourne through his amnesia. There is no excuse to how this film opens up as if it's a direct sequel to Bourne Ultimatum despite an entirely new hero and mostly new characters.
It's also lazily scripted. Aaron is the product of the brand new, even better super soldier program called Outcome, presumably better than both Treadstone and Blackbriar, despite the fact that Outcome operatives need to take two separate pills every couple of days. The reason they need to take these pills, of course, is that it's the major driving force of the plot. Ugh.
Posted by: jiffylube1024 | January 21, 2013 at 02:18 AM
Wow, I’ve read some mixed reviews on The Bourne Legacy, but this one really makes the movie sound terrible. Since I’ve been a fan of the franchise for years I’m hoping I’ll agree with my DISH coworker who really liked it. In fact, I already own all the other Bourne movies on Blu-Ray, so I’m tempted to just go out and buy it. I try to resist buying movies I haven’t seen though (especially when they’re getting reviews like this one). All that that type of ‘blind buying’ has gotten me is two full shelves of discs I’ll never watch again. And with them running $15-$30 a piece I don’t even want to know what that adds up to. After realizing that, I decided to change my habits and these days I use DISH’s Blockbuster @Home to rent all my movies before I buy them. With Blockbuster @Home I get thousands of titles streamed to my TV and PC but best of all I get over 100,000 titles by mail. So not only is it really convenient, but it saves me a lot of money on movies like the Bourne Legacy that I’d probably regret buying.
Posted by: Nosgoth1979 | January 8, 2013 at 03:41 PM
It doesn't sound like you thought much of the film. However, I'll reserve judgement until after I've seen it ;-)
Quite frankly, I have big expectations of this installment of the series. Whenever I see Jeremy in a movie he always does well and he's believable.
He's so believable that I would probably have a hard time adjusting to him in any other type of role for at least a minute. He's very physical and takes well to playing a role that involves action.
Posted by: Diane@mozy | December 28, 2012 at 01:24 PM
Well, I think Stephanie and Walter have said all that needs to be said. IMHO, the bottom line is, if you don't care about the characters, or what is happening on screen, the film is a failure. So it is with The Bourne Legacy.
Posted by: Simon Fallaha | August 27, 2012 at 07:34 AM
Walter, you got the IQ thing wrong. Aaron's IQ was 11 points lower than Army's minimum allowed when he joined up. Aaron claims his recruiter fudged the numbers to meet his quota. So going off the pills would have sent him back to that first level.
Posted by: theclar | August 17, 2012 at 12:55 PM
Danowen: what I remember from the first films was the buildup to the reveal that Bourne was once a man with a desire to serve who had been completely broken down and built back up in order to be controlled. He gave up his identity for the "greater good", only to discover he gave up his conscience and humanity as well. He was an artificial construct that sought to regain his own soul. It was a meaningful trilogy, I don't see where else it had to go, really.
Posted by: Stephanie | August 11, 2012 at 01:22 PM
Yeah, Weisz and Renner were all that tempted me. Sounds like a sequel made to keep the franchise going (Indiana Jones, anyone?) rather than having anything interesting to say or show.
Posted by: Stephanie | August 11, 2012 at 01:09 PM
Wait a minute, you know the rules: if you complain about the vocabulary, you need to list the words that had you rushing to dictionary.com.
Also - bashing this piece of shit that basically no one cares about for the sake of traffic is pretty stupid when a bad review of The Dark Knight Rises would have brought like 10million hits (and 10,000 death threats) in the first five hours.
Posted by: Paul G. | August 10, 2012 at 03:09 PM
"So it's either you didn't see much movie this year or you're that type that churn out words/review just to be controversial. Just sayin'."
Of course, it just *couldn't* be that Walter just didn't like the movie, amirite?
Also, is there anything that makes you ignore someone's opinion faster than when they criticize a writer for using "smart" words? And "highfaluting" made me giggle uncontrollably.
Posted by: corym | August 10, 2012 at 02:43 PM
"Was half-looking forward to this one on the basis of Renner's participation....damn."
Strike the "half" from that sentence and you have my thoughts on this film exactly. Renner comes across like a younger Daniel Craig, someone you can't help but enjoy watching. Add Rachel Weisz (interestingly, Mrs. Craig), Albert Finney and Tony Gilroy and you'd think you couldn't go wrong... Sigh. I'll see it for myself anyway soon and let you know what I think.
Posted by: Simon Fallaha | August 10, 2012 at 02:21 PM
You have some remarks in your review that can be used to describe your review as well.
"...bad smart/dumb science-speak that drones on and on..." for your use of highfaluting words to mask your simple logic is what you called "..all self-importance and hot-air" but nothing else.
I agree it's the weakest in the series but to actually call it "one of the worst movies of the year" is both exaggerated and baseless.
I can name 20 movies that are worse that this one. So it's either you didn't see much movie this year or you're that type that churn out words/review just to be controversial. Just sayin'.
Posted by: Trish | August 10, 2012 at 08:49 AM
Was half-looking forward to this one on the basis of Renner's participation....damn.
Posted by: Justin B-H | August 10, 2012 at 07:53 AM
"but also one of the worst movies of the year."
Awww someone wants desperately attention.
Posted by: Jay | August 9, 2012 at 07:30 PM
The Bourne franchise is an odd one for me. I've seen and enjoyed the previous three films, but have very little memory of them or any residual feelings. I think I remain confused that they've managed to produce FOUR films from an idea that barely justified two. Shame this one isn't a worthy sequel, however, as I buy into the idea of Jeremy Renner as an action star more than Matt Damon.
Posted by: Danowen79 | August 9, 2012 at 01:53 PM