tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-36879283.post6385718056076490125..comments2024-03-20T01:16:08.502-07:00Comments on Double O Section: Matt Damon's Still Grumpy About BourneTannerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03910873055922510145noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-36879283.post-79519671884397975042012-11-04T11:25:47.574-08:002012-11-04T11:25:47.574-08:00I agree, T-Bone, that Gilroy seems much more inter...I agree, T-Bone, that Gilroy seems much more interested in the CIA-as-bad-guys route, which simply doesn't hold as much interest for me personally. With The Bourne Legacy, they had the chance to get away from that, to go a whole different route with a whole different agent and show a Treadstone operative who was actually working for the US government and not trying to escape their kill squads. But instead Gilroy stuck to his tried and true themes, and we were left with a pale retread of what had already come, bolstering Simes' comment that the series may have run its course at three. I'd agree to the extent that the series as GILROY positioned it, about a man being chased by the agency that created him, ran its course there. But I still think the secret to elongating the franchise's cinematic lifespan is in going a different direction, turning back to the books, and turning AWAY fro the CIA-as-bad-guys stuff that Gilroy seems to love so much. That probably means turning away from Gilroy, too, since he seems unwilling to change course and doesn't get the books. <br /><br />It's kind of funny that Universal took one of the only Ludlum books in which the government agencies WEREN'T really bad guys and turned them into such! He's got a lot of thrillers about shadow government conspiracies and intelligence agencies run amock, but in the Bourne books, Treadstone is presented as IRRESPONSIBLE but not EVIL.Tannerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03910873055922510145noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-36879283.post-34900417054128615812012-11-04T04:16:58.661-08:002012-11-04T04:16:58.661-08:00I agree that there is still the potential to revis...I agree that there is still the potential to revisit the material from the original Bourne Identity book, with some modern-day equivalent of Carlos the Jackal. However, I think the most fundamental way that the Gilroy movies departed from the Ludlum books was not just in the story content, but also in the underlying themes. <br /><br />The movies are based around the theme of government as sinister, corrupted, and over-reaching. The CIA higher-ups are the real bad guys in all of the movies. Frankly, I think that the movies have drawn from that well of anti-government paranoia one or two times too many. <br /><br />In the books, in contrast, the real bad guy is an external threat (Carlos), who has an elaborate network of support. U.S. law enforcement (if I'm remembering correctly) is perhaps a hindrance to Bourne, but is not inherently evil. <br /><br />My guess is that in the post-9/11, post-Patriot-Act world, the "sinister government" theme really resonated with Gilroy (and maybe Damon and Greengrass). <br /><br />I am not sure if Gilroy would be interested in making a major shift in the underlying theme in order to do more movies,which unfortunately is what I think would be necessary if the books were ever to get revived for further films.T-Bonenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-36879283.post-2655420279281168842012-11-04T03:19:14.020-08:002012-11-04T03:19:14.020-08:00I'm not Matt Damon's biggest fan, but I th...I'm not Matt Damon's biggest fan, but I think he's probably right about the Bourne films.<br /><br />Two was ok. Three was pushing it a bit. And they should have stopped it there - ie: no Jeremy Renner follow up!<br /><br />I always think poorly of 'stars' who dump on the films that have done very well for them (ie made them very rich), and Damon comes into this category.<br /><br />I mean, we're never likely to see him winning awards for Shakespearian plays or anything, are we?Simeshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02008134625754600284noreply@blogger.com