Friday, February 08, 2013

Jeff reviews The Bourne Legacy

This weekend Val and I popped The Bourne Legacy into our DVD player, but we didn't watch it for the two hours and 14 minutes that it is supposed to run. Shortly after the one-hour mark we skipped ahead to the final 20 minutes.

As a huge fan of the original Bourne trilogy I was severely disappointed in this Matt Damon-less addition.

The first half is a mishmash of audience confusion, and by "audience" I mean "me and Val sitting on the couch ocassionally saying 'what is going on?' and trying to convince ourselves that it would get better any minute."

It takes forever to get to the stuff we want, which is Jeremy Renner, a.k.a. Not Bourne, and Rachel Weisz on the run, fighting for their lives and Renner kicking butt.

Renner, though, spends the first hour wrestling wolves in Alaska while Ed Norton talks technical and political mumbo jumbo jargon that is completely unnecessary when compared to the importance of our hero driving fast, shooting straight and beating the snot out of a guy using a mitten and an unsharpened pencil.

Events take place as the same time as The Bourne Ultimatum, which just reminds us that Damon's movie is a lot better and we should be watching it instead.

It's really not the fault of either Renner or Weisz. They do just fine, what with Renner having to be angry while shouting "what about the chems!" over and over again, and Weisz is great at pushing out tears and the worry face while running through Third World streets.

And if they star in another Bourne, I would give it another try now that the characters have been fleshed out. To the producers, though, I just ask that you ramp up the action and keep down the confusing mumbo jumbo, mmkay?

No comments: