O Legado Bourne

If a franchise is as successful as the Bourne franchise is/was, it is inevitable that there will be a follow up. Even if everyone was saying that the series was always meant to be trilogy. If you can overcome that fact and are able not to hold a grudge against the producers or anyone else involved in the making of this, you might be able to enjoy a fairly decent action thriller.

Jeremy Renner is the man when it comes to casting action roles of late. After his performance in "Hurt Locker" he did rise pretty fast. If the Avengers were incomplete, he might have gotten a bigger role in that one too. You can see why he is such a wanted man (no pun intended) in this movie too. Rachel Weisz has not that much to do, but her performance does give the movie another gravitas. The action scenes are superb, but we expected that (especially if we watched the trailer). Nice hints to the original movies too. Before you cry out, watch it is what I'm trying to say.

Thanks to the 2 heroes, I give a good mark though the script was a labyrinth of complications between different US National Security Services and their different projects more or less secret, some of them more secret within secrets because untellable, unacceptable. And when one of those has to disappear, lots of dead people it means. Here is the story of another run-for-his-life hero, Jeremy Renner! He surprised me this actor. He blows the screen from his very first appearance until the last. And Mrs Weisz, the co-runner-for-her-life does well too as an evolving character, a woman scientist who goes from naive close to stupid terrified victim to a full grown resilient survivor, doing very well with Mr Renner. Wow they are good! They SAVE the movie Let's hope there will be a sequel with these two but with a MUCH IMPROVED script, please. I declare myself a fan for Mr Renner (Please forgive my probably curious use of English, my second language...)

"The Bourne Legacy" is prequel/sequel/spin-off/reboot of the Bourne Series. Yes, I know; there aren't many pre-se-reboot-spinoffs out there.

In "Legacy", Jason Bourne is sidelined for Aaron Cross (Jeremy Renner), another spy in the Bourne universe. Though, Cross is a product of "Outcome", a program that gave the agent pills called "chems" that improved their intelligence and physique. Yet, in Langley, Eric Byer (Edward Norton), an operations director, decides to "cut the program", which is spy language for "kill everyone involved". Cross teams up with scientist Dr. Marta Shearing (Rachel Weisz) as they head to the Phillipines to get the chems, while every operative with a finger and a gun is on their trail.

"The Bourne Legacy" has garnered very mixed reviews; some really like it, some really hate it, some are in-betweeners. I am one who really liked it. Comparing "Legacy" to the originals, more specifically "Ultimatum", is like comparing "Batman Returns" to "The Dark Knight". A good movie to a fantastic one.

If "Legacy" was a regular spy movie with no connection to Bourne, it would definitely be in higher regard. But, as it has the "Bourne" name associated with it, certain things were expected: 1. Insane non-stop action. 2. Insane non-stop action. 3. More action.

"Legacy" is extremely dialogue driven. About 3/4 of this movie is dialogue. And the dialogue is very technical, and very scientific, and it flies way over some people's heads. The previous Bourne films were not filled with this technical jargon.

The performances, though, are very good. Renner and Weisz are absolutely perfect in their roles. Renner perfectly captures the manhunting super agent with ease. He's a natural action hero, and one of my favorite actors. Though Edward Norton is devilishly underused. His character merely sits behind a screen and barks orders.

The Verdict: When you go into "Legacy", don't expect insane non-stop action. Yes, when the action happens, it is really awesome. But this is a dialogue-driven spy movie with lots of high-vocabulary dialogue. I really enjoy dialogue-driven films, and this film does entertain. A-

First film without Matt Damon and the Jason Bourne character. The movie turned out well and this is thanks to co-writer and director Tony Gilroy (who worked on all three previous films in the series) and Jeremy Renner, perfectly cast in the lead. The results are not flawless but good enough to provide the sort of action and storytelling that Bourne fans expect. Jeremy Renner has earned his way to this high-profile part, doing a great job since his performance in The Hurt Locker. He has the required physicality to make his character — a highly-trained, genetically enhanced undercover agent — totally believable. Furthermore he's perfectly matched with leading lady Rachel Weisz, also credible as a research doctor becoming a pawn and bail at the same time. On balance and on the whole the movie works, though a bit to long. To sum up I was entertained and I'm more than grateful for that.

Now that the dust has settled and the fifth Bourne film (and Damon's return to the role) has come and gone, and after having re-watched this after seeing Jason Bourne (2016), I can safely say that this is still the fourth best Bourne flick, and a very solid action movie in its own right.

The main reason this is stronger than the fifth one: Tony Gilroy.

He wrote the original film trilogy. He understands the universe of the films, he understands this type of character. He did NOT write Jason Bourne (2016), which was the first and only one in the franchise that wasn't penned by him, and it showed. That movie was much less intelligent and gripping than Bourne 1-3, and this one.

This isn't perfect or as great as the first three. The main problem is that the plot for this installment feels slight. This is literally a throwaway concept (Renner's character and the organization he is a part of are basically being cast under the rug here by the evil US government, and that's the angle). Renner is essentially just reacting to the events in the previous films. It's not quite a sequel because it's actually happening concurrently with the trilogy. Which is a unique touch, I guess, but it destroys any true sense of importance into the proceedings, especially since you hear nothing about the events of Legacy in Jason Bourne (2016). So while this is a fun, well-made film, it inevitably feels inconsequential when you take the entire series into account.

I thought the lack of Damon would be a weakness but it's actually not; Renner is a solid actor, even quite excellent in some roles, and even if he doesn't have the sheer charisma/star power of Damon, he brings his own sense of tough smarts and cool wit to the film, and he does a really good job of communicating the same sense of constantly-three-steps-ahead that Bourne himself did. Renner has that same natural air of intelligence as Damon, but in a grittier fashion, and Tony Gilroy knows how to utilize it.

Rachel Weisz doesn't have a whole lot to do but she has her plucky moments and at least plays a heroine with some intelligence, and who isn't simply a love interest for the protagonist. I actually think Gilroy handled that part well.

Here's hoping that if they make another Bourne installment, Tony Gilroy comes back as the writer. And I would gladly see Renner continue this role, but it probably will never happen.