The Bourne Ultimatum

The Bourne movies have started a revolution in the spy/espionage subgenre of action movies, and they have been followed by the recent reimagining of James Bond. I'm all for it, as the intelligence of the plot and grounded, yet still exciting nature of the action scenes is more compelling than more unbelievable, over-the-top stuff found in lesser movies.

The first two Bourne movies were very good. The second was a little more confusing (both in plot and film style), but still enjoyable. The third is a little closer to it than the first, being directed by the same guy, but is easier to follow and has some of the series' best moments. It's still pretty unrealistic, with convenient new flashes of memory when it serves the plot and an at times overly-resilient hero. How many car crashes can you really walk away from unscathed within a ten minute period? Despite this, it's more believable, because he does things a person might be able to do. He's perhaps too clever once in a while, but it's a lot more fun to see someone take down his pursuers with household items than high-tech super-gadgets. Well, super-gadgets are pretty cool, but that's just not Bourne's style. And in his escapes, he's not running around dodging bullets, he's skillfully blending into crowds and outwitting his pursuers. It's just as tense while remaining possible.

The plot wraps up the main story and questions that have been following Jason Bourne since the series began while allowing room for further sequels if they want to make them. Nothing about it is terribly surprising, it's pretty predictable amnesia/spy stuff. It succeeds because it's well executed, with some funny moments and action scenes that have a purpose, without being pointless flash. The hand-to-hand stuff is as good as ever, but I was slightly disappointed in the requisite car chase. It was less of a chase and more of a collision-fest. It was well done and still pretty cool, but I kind of missed the maneuvering and driving that was found earlier. I have to take a bit of an issue with Greengrass' direction. Apparently he's not very good at handling actors, although that's not something that really comes across in a good movie. It's even irrelevant, because you don't need much direction to be a CIA guy who gives orders to lackeys or mess up fools. What annoys me is his persistent use of a shaky camera throughout the movie. It doesn't really make sense in calm scenes, but it doesn't obscure things either. It becomes a problem with things get heavy, and it starts flailing all over the place, making exactly what's happening difficult to determine. It's just distracting. It doesn't hurt the movie too much, it just lessens it a bit. Maybe the Director of Photography is more directly responsible for specific poor shots, but a film is supposed to be a director's vision, and if he approved the final cut, then he's to blame.