the follow up and third movie are ok... but the first movie is the only stand out film. i noticed the original director went from director to producer after the first movie. that may have something to do with it.
first movie had an amazing story, good characters, perfect ending. after that they just became a standard action flick but at a slightly better level. it's a shame they didn't just stop with the first one.
110 percent agreed with OP.
Identity (8/10) is much better than it's vastly overrated sequels especially the 3rd film which is currently #156 in Top250 as that's nothing special. (i liked the 3rd film better than 2nd but considering how praised the 3rd one is it's definitely overrated)
i think some of the problem with the 2nd/3rd is a lot of the action sequences are dulled down a little from that 'shaky cam' stuff or maybe editing to quick from scene to scene during action sequences etc. but either way something is missing from the 2nd/3rd Bourne films.
so personally i think the sequels should have a average rating of no more than the high 6's.
p.s. but for the record... Matt Damon's best films are clearly... Good Will Hunting/Rounders (both a 9/10) and 'The Departed' (9/10+) if you want to count that but he's not the clear star in The Departed like he is in the other two i listed.
but since people like to compare Bourne to Bond... none of the Bourne films can touch Casino Royale (2006 which is a 9/10.
---
My Vote History ... http://www.imdb.com/mymovies/list?l=11026826
---
[deleted]
Yeah, Identity is the best in my opinion. I think it was more of a pace issue with the sequels and the shaky cam is just a cop out for some people really.
shareI preferred the first but the other two weren't that bad. Ultimatum was a great conclusion to the series. Supremacy was awesome and had a great story in it. All three Bourne movies are good enough to stand on their own.
"I am the ultimate badass, you do not wanna `*beep*` wit' me!" Hudson in Aliens.
The departed is one of Matt's most underwhelming performances. I think you need to check your facts.
share
OP, you are right.
not only was the story worse in 2 and 3 but the camera work was horrible. i cant even watch those.
-----------------------------------
"Where.... can I put my ash?"
I've watched all 3 of the Bourne movies (only once each), and they all seemed to be equal. I never noticed an annoying "shaky cam style" in the 2nd and 3rd one, but now that everyone's mentioned it, I probably will.
shareThey are all good movies, it's why this trilogy is so respected.
Greengrass haters are the only people who don't like the sequels, he is maybe the only director to do the shake came as well done as he does.
Look at quantum of solace, that movie did it poorly and the film overall just didn't work because of the camerawork.
Greengrass is able to get a high level of energy from almost every scene he shoots and it's very kinetic, like how John Woo gives energy with over the top gun fights.
It's the way Greengrass likes to shoot and it works for him, he even got a best director nom for united 93 because of how good he is at doing this.
It is not easy to do it right and he is the master, I love that the sequels are differen't because it keeps them from trying to copy indentity and what made it so good.
randyhndrsn, I think you've hit the nail on the head. I hate shaky cam as much as anyone, but I'd call the style in the last two Bourne movies an agitated camera rather than a shaky one. (The worst example of a gratuitously shaky camera I ever saw was The Hurt Locker.)
I wouldn't like to see this "kinetic" shooting and editing in every movie, but it certainly works in these two movies (which I've just watched for the second time), and is part of what makes them what they are. Also, they have fairly strong narrative lines and a more coherent plot than your average Bond movie, for example, so it's not correct to say that they're made up of nothing but action scenes.
damn, i just watched the first (identity) as was suprised that i hadnt watched such a well regarded trilogy by now, first time i saw this was tonight, i wasnt overly enamoured with it, maybe partly due to the seemingly glowing reviews, it was not bad but just a bit underwhelming
and was assuming that 2 and 3 somehow built on this and improved and expanded the story, making, as an overview, the trilogy something more grandeur, but reading this i am seeing people saying identity is the best, doh!
oh well, will definitely watch the others, maybe its a marmite trilogy, who knows
_________
H is pronounced Aitch NOT Haitch !
Identity is easily the best of the 3 imo. Great ending, there was no need to continue.
shareI like the first one the most but I'm glad they didn't stop after that. Maybe if the director hadn't changed they would be better though.
I don't like that shaky camera work or whatever you want to call it. One post says agitated I believe.
I rather see the guys act than the camera. That may seem boring but I like to watch the people, stunts, fights, etc. not some split-seconds of it. I'm getting seasick watching this.
The trilogy is good, I stayed with it because I was interested in the character of course. Spoiler question:
Is Marie getting killed that soon in part two in the book as well? I am aware that the character was quite different.
"Don't you dare bad-mouth Star Wars, that was all accurate!"
Terry Hoitz, The Other Guys
I enjoyed the entire trilogy overall, but seriously I can just never forget that scene in the first movie when they activated all the assets. That was just so damn cool.
shareHave to say Bourne Identity is a pretty brilliant film.
share