MovieChat Forums > The Bourne Legacy (2012) Discussion > The Ending

The Ending

posted 11 years ago by Derek117
15 replies | jump to latest

I've read several (but certainly NOT all) of the thread topics, and couldn't find one that speaks directly to the ending. So, I'm starting one.

Seems to me that the movie ending is "incomplete." I've watched the movie several times, and tried to decide why I dislike it. And the ending is where I keep landing. The SuperVillain on the bike is maybe not dead. Pam Landy is still in hot water--facing the U.S. Congress, in a tight frame. The Ed Norton/Stacy Keach villains are still in charge. And, although still alive on the boat, Jeremy & Rachel don't seem like Winners.

So, after approximately 2 hours of movie, I have to ask myself "What's the point?" Yes, the action was staged very well, the wilderness scenes were very frightening (the wolves!), and I like Rachel a lot (Jeremy not so much)--but it still does not work for me.

[–] grey_outlaw 11 years ago

The one thing that remained fresh in my thought about this movie was the ending or the lack of. I saw this at the cinema when it came out and I have yet to see it again but it seems to me as if the film makers just ran out of memory to store more film. They stopped abruptly. The final fight scene and chase just seemed rushed. Perhaps the plan was to make a sequel but Renner's career got even better with the Marvel films that he put this series on the back burner.

-'Human intelligence' is an oxymoron-

[–] tiger01 10 years ago

I think you have the right of it. Renner's career seemed to take off even more after this film and I think they originally wanted to film a sequel but never got the opportunity, as yet. The way it ended (on a downer kind of) with the "bad" higher-ups skating on any responsibility and having a brand new "Blackbriar"-type program (assets without the empathy) up and running was definitely a cynical commentary on big goverment in my opinion. I can see if they wanted to setup a sequel, like you mentioned, but even as a stand-alone movie (with Aaron Cross finally free to live his life) it can work even if it doesn't necessarily "settle" anything.

The thing that left me with a bad taste in my mouth is that all the stuff uncovered by Jason Bourne in the previous films in an effort to expose the CIA basically came to nothing and Pamela Landy's career was totally ruined instead of being recognized for doing the right thing and exposing the corruption and murders.

The only thing I disagree with (by the OP) is that the Thai agent guy on the bike is almost certainly dead, enhancements or no. He wiped out going like 40-50mph on his motorbike, with no helmet, and I'd be surprised if he didn't break his neck the way he wiped out. It is not like the guy is a Terminator machine or something, haha.

[–] niks_foonts 10 years ago

The villain should definitely be dead. Give his wounds and the speed he was traveling, the guy should be gone. The problem with this film is that it ends without a hook for what can happen. Essentially there is no reason why Aaron and Marta would want to expose what was happening with Outcome. The only reason they would do anything is if Byer keeps coming after them which is what is likely going to happen. Unfortunately that's just a retread of exactly what happened in the first three Bourne films, except this would be with Aaron and Marta instead of Bourne. There's nothing new for them to do creatively.

Unfortunately, the way this film screwed up Bourne Ultimatum makes Jason Bourne a character that is very much in play. His entire mission in Ultimatum was to expose the CIA and Treadstone/Blackbriar because of what they did to him and how they killed Marie. It seemed that he had succeeded in Ultimatum but Legacy ruined that which means that they would still be pursuing Jason and he would still be trying to bring the CIA down. I don't see how the series can continue to move forward in a creative way without bringing Matt Damon back into the fold as Bourne. I honestly don't see why they needed to screw up Ultimatum's ending. They could have had the CIA's Treadstone/Blackbriar operations exposed and Bourne's mission succeeded with Byer finding some way to keep other programs like Outcome away from exposure. That way they could have finally allowed Bourne to disappear for good and come up with a new set of circumstances for Aaron without continuously Harking back to Bourne. Unfortunately this movie made it clear that they aren't yet confident enough to separate Aaron Cross's story from Bourne given how often his name was mentioned and how important he was made in the story even without being in it. The movie also made it almost necessary for Bourne to come back because the situation with the CIA and Pam Landy makes his story incomplete.

[–] goju_ukot 10 years ago

The film ends without a real ending for the reasons stated: more films. And they are currently working on the next film with Cross returning. At this time the film is scheduled for a July 2016 release.

[–] mikko-sandt 10 years ago

Definitely a very abrupt ending. When the music started to play I thought it was a weird choice because it sounded like an ending music, then I realized (before the camera started to zoom out) that this is the ending! Basically nothing was resolved.

[–] Derek117 10 years ago

It has been announced that Matt Damon is returning (with Greengrass directing) in another Bourne movie. Renner will not be in the movie, and the idea "seems" to be that Damon's film will have its own storyline separate from anything that happened in the Renner film. That leaves the door open for Renner--if and when he is available--to continue his own Bourne series. But, as I said in my original post, I'm NOT impressed with Renner as an Action Star. So, IMO, Dampn's Bourne series is the only one worth watching.

[–] bohar06-1 9 years ago

Terrible ending,great start,Xbox game story middle.

The trekking over the mountain and "fight" with the predator was well done.

Hello,Mister sniper sir!!-Riggs

I count six shots n*****!!
I count two guns n*****

[–] dave626 9 years ago

Apparently you all never watched the Bourne Identity with Matt Damon. Same ending. Sailing off into the sunset. This was to be the set up for a new trilogy because Damon didn't come back for this one, nor was he expected to come back for the next or it was be a team up. As it is, Damon decided he wanted another one and Renner's Cross got pushed aside. Remains to be seen if he will be mentioned in the next film.

"He came home." - Dr. Sam Loomis from the original HalloweeN

[–] spacemanspiff00 9 years ago

I think you are the one who never watched the Bourne Identity. Because it is NOT the same ending.

[–] Kunovega 9 years ago

All the Bourne movies end with him just escaping.

The world results of his actions are never fully explored.

That point is driven home with Legacy where the congressional hearings are just starting as Treadstone goes public

This is the catalyst for Outcome being shut down and the whole reason we watch outcome-5 spend the movie escaping

We also find out that other programs which were better hidden (Like LARX) are still up and running

The legacy of Treadstone isn't over

[–] shatteredx 9 years ago

Agree with OP. Abrupt anticlimax. Really ruined the movie for me.

The beginning of the flick had promise. There were a few good action sequences. A great ending could've saved this movie, but alas...

[–] denise1234 9 years ago

What ending? 

It just stopped...

"A distant ship, smoke on the horizon. You are only coming through in waves."

[–] Kunovega 9 years ago

Whether the "supervillian on a bike" is dead doesn't mean anything.

He was LARX-3 which implies there are others in the LARX program.

So far only Treadstone (which Bourne was a part of) and Outcome (this movie is all about outcome-5) were shut down and each has only one surviving member.

Outcome was shut down because Treadstone was going public and could be linked.

Other secret programs (like LARX) may still exist (and it's mentioned) but they were still hidden and kept running.

But realize, none of the Bourne films gave an ending either. Not really.

As we see in Legacy the hearings are only just starting, this information is just going public and the mess that Bourne created is far from over.

[–] Piston_Smash 8 years ago

Just came to this board, hence the late response to the thread.
I don't see that the ending is inappropriate. The story arc of this film is that Outcome is shut down but Cross survives. We see how Cross manages to outwit those trying to teminate him. Consequently, once Cross and Marta have seen off LARX 3 and are on the boat sailing into the sunset this portion of the Cross tale is complete. Clearly, the unresolved issues to do with the CIA and senior spooks is to permit further films to continue the Cross story in the same way the Bourne franchise does with the Jason Bourne character.
There's always a danger that we see film as being primarily motivated by artistic decisions when the actual motivation is profit. The film's producers invest millions in anticipation of a return of more millions. Tailoring a script to easily permit, and to sow the seeds for, multiple sequels seems to be a good business decision as well as artistically justifiable.
The ending of Legacy, therefore, makes it clear that the story we have just watched is simply the start of a possible longer story about the Cross character. He is still an Outcome loose end, he is still 'the pursued' and his pursuers remain in place.
I'd certainly be interested in a sequel and, having watched the film a couple of times, I don't really understand all the negativity aimed at it.

[–] 8 years ago

[deleted]