Born again without Bourne ... but why?
MOVIE REVIEWREVIEWED BY MAREE FIELD
The Bourne Legacy. Starring Jeremy Renner, Edward Norton, Rachel Weisz; directed by Tony Gilroy
A fourth Bourne film without Matt Damon in the title role was always going to be a tricky prospect to pull off.
Over the course of three films, Damon made the character his own and, without Damon heading up the latest instalment, the question was . . . why?
Why make a fourth Bourne movie with no Jason Bourne? Why not just reboot the franchise, like all the cool kids are doing?
To be honest, the film itself doesn't really seem to answer any of those questions.
It's patchy, the story threads out so thin in places it nearly disappears, and the action sequences add up to little more than sort of laughable cliches.
It's the kind of movie that makes you ask: "But why is so-and-so in this?"
In this case the question could be applied to Renner, who takes the lead role as Bourne-like agent Aaron Cross, and Edward Norton, whose character heads some kind of shady agency that's deep in the experiments being performed on the agents . . . I'm confused all over again.
Renner is fine. He's done his time in movies like Ghost Protocol and The Avengers, and can certainly carry a movie on his own, but it just shouldn't have been this movie.
I left the theatre feeling somewhat exhausted, confused and irritated.
There is a good movie in there somewhere - a fairly straightforward spy thriller.
But, instead, we get a messy, slightly too-long confused spy movie with talented actors basically wasting their time.
- The Southland Times