The Bourne Identity

I have just finished watching this Movie and felt very complelled to come and write a review on here.

Where to start??! A good compliament of "The Bourne Identity" is simply that the 3 hours went by very quickly, never dragged on. It would have been perfect I imagine when first screened, over two evenings and the end of the first part is an excellent cliff hanger!

I loved the way clues, plot pieces unraveled as the Movie went along. The micro chip... finding out Bourne's name?... various clues forced out of people...

Richard Chamberlain, was good, likeable. He tackled the role very well and was, in the most part, very sucessful. Jaclyn Smith, I suppose, was the reason I watched this Movie. I am a fan of hers, initially from Charlie's Angels of course, and this was the 8th Movie featuring her I have collected. Because it's the most recent one I have seen I would be inclined to say it is my favourite but I honestly think it is! Far too often her Movies are family dramas and this is a Spy Thriller!! Yay! Marie (Jaclyn's character) develops a great deal through the Movie, her preconceptions alter, she falls in love, she becomes stronger.

I get the impression the 2002 version won't spend as much time focussing on the relationship between Bourne and Marie but I think that is just as important as the action. I certainly imagine the action scenes are better. There are no major complaints I can make about the action in this 1988 version except perhaps the "fat villain" may not have been very good at it, not too convincing. To mention one other slight down side to the film (there must be + and -) the opening scene didn't look great, of the ship, looked a bit model-ly.

But that is simply because there was no huge budget, afterall it is a TV Movie, and an excellent one at that! A good cast, Paris was an inspired choice for the main location of the movie and overall this is a Movie with a fantastic plot and main cast.

"The Bourne Identity" (1988) is a faithful recreation of Robert Ludlum's book about an amnesiac slowly (in a very long book) discovering who he is. The supporting cast is dotted with veterans that make the movie come to life during their brief parts: Denholm Elliott, Anthony Quayle, Peter Vaughan, James Faulkner.

The stars strain to carry the movie. Jaclyn Smith is immensely watchable, though her range is limited. Richard Chamberlain is a fine actor, but, perhaps because of insufficient rehearsal time or because he was never able to find a character who didn't know who he was, he comes off with the range of Bill Bixby, though that keeps him from burying Smith. In the end, Chamberlain may be much too nice for the character, but he's a likable actor and she's a likable actress and they make a pretty pair.

Because it was originally a two-part television drama, the 1988 "Bourne" has sufficient time to let the story unfold, as well as to build the unlikely relationship between Chamberlain's character and Smith's. It also gives the supporting characters flesh out their meager parts. After a slam-bang first hour, the movie settles into a more leisurely pace (that occasionally drags), that builds again into an exciting final hour.

The possible overplotting, as well as the outright absurdities (such as the truth of Treadstone 21) are squarely to be laid at Ludlum's door. And though it's quite faithful to Ludlum, the setting of the climax makes this movie version far more poignant than Ludlum himself was capable of.

"The Bourne Identity" has the technology of '80s television, so newcomers shouldn't expect contemporary sensibilities. It may not be as exciting as the remake, but it has a solid storyline.

I didn't expect too much from a TV mini-series based on an adventure novel, which was later made into a big budget action film.

I had not enjoyed the 2002 version of The Bourne Identity with Matt Damon, but this one was gripping from the first frame. I read a lot of the reviews and posts here as I always do to compare reactions, and found people were praising some elements, and criticizing others. Here is how it affected me.

Primarily it was a story about a man's search for his identity, and Chamberlain, never known as the greatest actor in the world, was very believable and effective. Jaclyn Smith was just adequate in her role and she is definitely one of the worst actresses they could have chosen, but one can't have everything. She makes good eye candy. The movie's other characters played pivotal roles and delivered excellent characterizations. Notably Denholm Elliott as the doctor.

The story was a fast moving adventure, which was almost Hitchcockian, the story of one bewildered man with villains trying to kill him, and a random pretty girl he abducts to help him (also echoes of the Redford movie Three Days of the Condor), and the extensive scenery of Paris was beautiful. Except for the obvious pauses where commercials used to be, this looks like a real movie and not a TV series. It doesn't look cheaply made. They obviously took pride in this production.

But to me the most surprising thing of all was the human element, the complex emotions in the amnesiac's story. Richard Chamberlain delivered them far above what one would expect from him, or from a TV movie. Yet this movie is all but forgotten since the theatre versions were made. I think that Hitchcock, if he had been alive to make this picture, would himself have chosen Chamberlain as he was very much like the James Stewart "everyman" who raced against time to solve the mystery of his amnesia.

There are a few places where key scenes from the past are shown briefly and never explained (apparently a sequel was planned, which would explain them), and yet I was able to fill in a likely explanation, from my own imagination. This is the mark of good film making.

There were no fantastic special effects or avant garde techniques. It was straightforward story telling.

I am easily bored, highly critical, and so because I loved this, I am very surprised and had to post about it, in case it might help someone decide to go ahead and see it. Yes, it is well worth it and highly enjoyable. It hails from another era (where the story was more important than the chases and effects).

I am glad it is still available in video, and if I find it in DVD I will buy it because it was a movie I would like to see again. I still think about it - and went to the library to get the book the next day - and that rarely happens with an action movie of this type.

Since the release of the 2003 theatrical version starring Matt Damon, this mini series version of "The Bourne Identity" has been much maligned, primarily by people who have never seen it. While it is a little dumbed down from Ludlum's book, and has some soap opera elements inherent to being a Richard Chamberlain mini series, it's also infinitely more faithful to the book than the Damon version, and considerably less dumbed down. If you want to see some great action scenes, check out the movie. If you want a good story, try the mini series (or even better, read the book).

Filmed in Europe, the story is based on a classic Robert Ludlum novel. This made for TV movie is better than the average TV fare. Originally a two part mini-series, it tends to have some periods where it drags with too much interplay between the stars but it still contains the usual amount of Ludlum action, suspense and his keen senss of scenery. Richard Chamberlain and Jaclyn Smith are supported by a fine European cast which includes Anthony Quayle and Denholm Elliott. Well worth your time. A collectors movie.