In Review: The Bourne Legacy

The Gist

There is a great drag at the beginning of the Bourne Legacy, and a poor narrative, but everything improves and eventually pays off, leading to one chase scene after another. There might be some narrative flaws and items that beg explanation until after the credits roll, but those aside, Bourne Legacy is a movie that works.

The Good

• Jeremy Renner
• Great action pieces

The Bad

• Annoyingly slow and seemingly paltry narrative in the beginning
• The resolution may seem like a bit of a fizzle in the end
• There is the gaping plot hole of using Larx-03 somewhere in the movie

*** Spoilers Begin Here ***

Synopsis

After Jason Bourne exposes Operation Blackbriar and Treadstone Project (both of which I have no idea what they are about), the CIA decides to kill off every Operation Outcome subjects to keep their black ops secret from leaking out of proportion. Desperate to survive this wipeout and retain his enhanced physique, Outcome subject Aaron Cross journeys across the globe to make his enhancements permanent and escape into a peaceful life.

It's More Fun in The Philippines

I think the main draw of Bourne Legacy from where I live (Manila) is how Hollywood portrays the Philippines. Everywhere else, I doubt this is the case. We Filipinos always take pride when our countrymen, our country, or anything Filipino is exposed via international media. Likewise, we take it badly, too, if something is portrayed poorly. I am, however, more curious as to how Manila got into the story. For me, the proper portrayal would be the logical use of Manila within the movie. If it actually makes sense to have used Manila instead of, say, Bangkok or Tirana or New Delhi. And, well, it did make sense. The Philippines is one of the growing economies, and unlike China, has better English speakers and comparatively cheap manual labor for drug companies to put up offices in it. And while the chase scenes were good, my problem with them was that Manila traffic is poorly portrayed. If anything, you can't really do a proper daylight chase scene here as, God would know, the traffic in Manila is perhaps one of the worst in the world.

Hitman Re-Bourne

Bourne Legacy starts slow, and if you, like me, have not seen the previous movies, the first 30 minutes or so will get you lost and disinterested--the starting narrative is clumsy and fails to engage, which can easily lose audiences. But as soon as you've managed to piece the puzzle together at about 30 minutes of setup, it would make sense and it will quickly pick up from there. There are some items that will never be explained like why there is an Outcome operative living in the mountains and why he sends out items via a small auto-pilot plane and those for me are annoying given that they don't really feel like items that can be explored on to the next installment, shall there be one.

Some would blame the clumsy directing, particularly of the first part, to Tony Gilroy, who used to pen the Bourne series before graduating as the director in its first installment, but I don't think the direction was that bad. It just took time to pick itself up. And sadly, not everyone can be as patient as I am.

Jeremy Renner, as always, worked well--not a surprise. Weisz was relatively good. She may not be as large as Renner in this flick, but she worked her part and her scenes well. Was she believable as a doctor? I'm not sure she was given the proper scenes, but she was believable as someone passionate with what she does, and someone passionate to keep breathing. Norton is menacing, but not enough for you to hate him. You'd like Renner, but you won't hate Norton enough because you know Renner will always outsmart him and the perils for both him and Weisz are something that don't really pose any threat.

The chase sequences, albeit truly fictional, are great and exhilarating. Actually, majority of the movie is comprised of chase sequences, with the FBI getting to them as close as they could in Manila. And I have to give it to the producers of this film for shooting that scene in the middle of a sweltering Manila summer.

Then comes my biggest concern with the movie: Larx-03, who was explained as a brainwashed, emotionless, enhanced killer. He flies all the way from Bangkok to go after Aaron Cross on the surprisingly un-busy Manila streets. In a sense, Larx-03 can be excused for not being terminated unlike the other Outcome agents because he is brainwashed. But how about the doctors who attend to him? Or his records, those can be traced by the FBI even if they're remotely linked with the other projects. If Norton's team can do brainwashing, couldn't they have simply brainwashed their Outcome agents rather than killing them and dumping already expensive medical research that have proven results already? And also, why kill the doctors, too? Couldn't they have been simply secured and held against their will somewhere safe? Why the complete whitewash while leaving a Thai speck somewhere in the fabric? The inclusion of Larx-03 to me is the biggest downer to this film; he felt like an unnecessary cornstarch made to thicken the plot, nothing but a nameless instrument.

The ending, though my friends bemoan it, sees Renner and Weisz escaping into the open sea aboard a motor boat into the Palawan sea and the gorgeous beach, this my friends, is impossible given that a motor boat cannot travel all the way from Manila to Palawan without stopping for gas.

My verdict:

Plot holes aside, I felt the Bourne Legacy was a good film, full adrenaline and great chase sequences. Might not be completely logical, but is interesting in its own right. A passing mark of 3.75/5 stars.

Movies I am Excited for this 2012

Life of Pi (November)
Directed by: Ang Lee
Stars: Suraj Sharma, Gerard Depardieu, Tobey Maguire (as Yann Martel???)
Why: I haven't seen an Ang Lee movie in a long while. And it's a bit exciting to know that Ang Lee is directing one of my favorite books. I am also curious as to how Ang Lee is going to approach this book as the book tells Pi's (the main character's) story in two versions. With Ang Lee's track record of making good films, I think this film is in good hands. Just wondering: why the curious casting of Maguire as Yann Martel, the author?

The Great Gatsby (December)
Directed by: Baz Luhrman
Stars: Leonardo DiCaprio, Carrie Mulligan
Why: The earlier adaptation of this film was kind of a bust, amid the good material. Now here comes Luhrman trying his hands on an adaptation. He may not be as prolific as his contemporaries, but when he does make a film, it explodes with color and imagery--something he is known for and something that the material may need--being essentially a period piece. Mulligan and DiCaprio are well-regarded actors who are meticulous with the projects they pick. Seems like a winning combination to me.

The Perks of Being a Wallflower (September)
Directed by: Stephen Chbosky (The very guy who wrote the novel this was adapted from)
Stars: Logan Lerman, Emma Watson
Why: Mmmmmm, looks like a teen movie to me, but wait! The producers of this movie is the same people that brought Juno to life. So this might be good. Plus, Emma Watson. It's her first major effort outside the Harry Potter franchise, so it's interesting to see how this one works for her. Just curious how the director would work this out as this is his directorial debut, and his previous effort, the screenplay to Rent, didn't really work well for the critics

Taken 2 (October)
Directed by: Olivier Megaton
Stars: Liam Neeson, Maggie Grace, Famke Janssen
Why: It's a sequel to Taken, that's why. As much of a popcorn movie the first one was, it was a popcorn movie that worked. Heck, I'd take it any day over Ghost Protocol. The original TAKEN film has suspense, action, and thrills that hopefully is also present in this movie. Liam Neeson sure was kickass the first time around, and I know how cheesy those lines sound in real life, and how improbable those stunts are, but heck, it was entertaining. And hopefully, Megaton does well. His track record is a bit iffy. Remember the flop Hitman and the critic-displeasing Transporter 3? Those are among his directorial credits.

Gangster Squad (September) 
Directed by: Ruben Fleischer
Stars: Ryan Gosling, Sean Penn, Josh Brolin, Emma Stone
Why: Zombieland director returns for gangster film. Warner Bros. went gung-ho on this film only to have it delayed due to cut and reshoot a pivotal scene that's reminiscent of the Colorado shooting. Having Emma Stone and Gosling involved in this project and pairing them up for a second time (first time was the Carell-starrer Crazy Stupid Love) seems a bad idea to me, but can't complain since that's Emma Stone and Gosling. Sean Penn and Josh Brolin further cements the cast into a big movie status, so with all those investments, this movie should be great. Brolin and Gosling have good track record in choosing roles (except perhaps for Brolin's Jonah Hex, blech), so this is possibly a good film. Also, a gangster pic directed by someone who made a comedy of a zombie apocalypse film? Yes, please.
Update: Release date has been moved to January 2013 to reshoot the said scene.


Trouble with the Curve (October)
Directed by: Robert Lorenz
Stars: Clint Eastwood, Amy Adams
Why: Last year, Brad Pitt surprised baseball and non-baseball fans with Moneyball, a sports movie that worked even for the most non-sports person you can ever know (i.e., me). And with the omission of Timberlake whose acting creds are, well, developing, I think this father-and-daughter movie about scouting talents for sports will be another Million Dollar Baby for Eastwood (though I hope it would have a less tragic ending). Robert Lorenz who has worked as a producer with Eastwood on some of his most critically acclaimed films, and has had a hand on being an assistant director, finally takes the seat from Eastwood and takes the directing matters to his own hands. It's interesting to see how this movie shapes up.

Wreck-it Ralph (November)
Directed by: Richard Moore
Animation
Why: Watch the trailer

Cloud Atlas (December)
Directed by: Lana Wachowski (debut) and Tom Twyker (Run Lola Run)
Stars: Tom Hanks, Halle Berry, Jim Sturgess, Hugo Weaving
Why: Its source material is one of the greatest books ever written and a half of the Wachowskis adapted it. Directors include Lana Wachowski and Run Lola Run director Tom Twyker--and while both are quite new to the directorial scene (in terms of international films for Twyker), it's interesting to see how the book translates to film and how 5 storylines are condensed into a 2 hour and something film. Twyker's adventurous Run Lola Run maybe an indication of how great this movie is going to be. And if the trailer is to be believed (mind you, it got me in tears), then this perhaps maybe one of the greatest movies made in this decade.