Film Review: Jason Bourne (2016)
- Jayne Balke
- Aug 1, 2016
- 3 min read
Yesterday I treated my parents to go see Jason Bourne at the Blue Room Cinebar (a cheaper but somewhat nicer version of Gold Class); (a) Because it's my Dad's favourite film saga, and (b) Because Matt Damon, of course.
The Plus Side First
Let me begin by stating that Matt Damon will always be Matt Damon and therefore always be brilliant to watch. He falls so naturally into character that occasionally, it's difficult to separate him from Bourne. He retains his usual stoic demeanour throughout the film; saving his emotions for those moments when they deliver the most impact. Damon succeeds in grasping the audience with an iron fist - demanding their undivided attention when he's on-screen. You gotta love him, whatever role he's playing.
Tommy Lee Jones was a welcome addition to this film. He was perfectly cast as "Robert Dewey", the current (and obviously corrupt) director of the CIA. With those sly smiles and shady side glances, he easily matched the likes of Chris Cooper, Brian Cox and Albert Finney. Alicia Vikander also did a commendable job in this film, although I did wonder if her facial expressions would ever change from "Don't screw with me" to something more lighthearted.
It's Treadstone... Again
As a fan of the original trilogy, I loved the concept of Treadstone and how Bourne's history slowly filtered into the open as the series progressed. The tale was delivered in such a way that it lured you in, and each revelation was a hook to the chest as you grappled to understand what it meant for Jason as a person. In this film, writer and director Paul Greengrass decided to regurgitate the Treadstone story, however it lacked the effect felt within previous films. This time, the incriminating files led to a certain character's demise, and the reasoning behind these revelations fizzled out. It was as if the writers tried to highlight the importance of obtaining these files for future film plots, then erased them before they could be of much use. It was disappointing, to say the least.
Much Of The Same, & Then Some
One thing the original films did well was creating three tales which were able to stand on their own, despite containing similar story arcs. I personally felt that, while Jason Bourne had an intriguing side plot-line, it wasn't enough to warrant 2 hours' worth of fighting, firing and car chasing. Don't get me wrong, the action was impressive - stunt actors, prop teams and special effects gurus should be proud of what they achieved in this film. It was gritty, fast-paced and fierce. The tension that's typical of this series remained present throughout, largely in part due to the jolted camera work that is also expected in this saga. My main issue with this film was its weak plot-lines, and that was Jason Bourne's biggest detriment.
Final Thoughts
Friends, I am sorry to say that - on the whole - I was disappointed with the newest chapter in Jason Bourne's history. While the cinematography, musical score and special effects captured the essence of the Bourne universe, the flimsy (and slightly boring) plot lines failed to bring this film to its full potential. The acting was superb, I'll give it that, and the casting was on point for Jones, Julia Stiles and Vincent Cassel in particular. It probably didn't help that I had substantially high expectations for this film. If it was a once-off, stand-alone story then I might have felt differently. As it was however, I wouldn't bother with seeing this film again - and THAT in itself tells me how I felt about Jason Bourne.
Worth The Watch?
Should you see it though? I think if you're a fan of the series, most definitely. If nothing else, you can relish in the goodness that is Matt Damon and enjoy the thrills that accompany epic speed chases and wild, intense fights. I can only hope the next instalment (as I'm sure there will be another) is worthy of the 'Bourne' name. Until then, I will continue re-watching the original three for MY Matt Damon kicks.
Comments