Deadline is reporting that this is official: Matt Damon will NOT be in The Bourne Legacy, number 4 in the franchise from writer/director Tony Gilroy.
Granted this is hardly surprising, as Universal and Gilroy began the new project without expecting him to return after hearing him say he wouldn’t if Paul Greengrass were not the director. Still, now that it’s official it’ll be interesting how they approach the marketing aspect of the completed film, sans Damon and Bourne. To get around the absence of their star Gilroy is saying he’s going to focus more on the Treadstone agency and the inner workings, while creating a new main character who is being called “another agent and probably a killer who went through experiences similar
to Bourne’s or the character played by Clive Owen in the original”.
That could be great, and Gilroy is excited about this angle so it’s safe to say he’ll do a good job with it. He’s also leaving room for a possible Matt Damon return via cameo or bit part in later movies – should there be any. By not recasting Jason Bourne he’s leaving the door wide open for Damon, should he reconsider in the future.
Head over to Deadline and read the great piece by Mike Fleming. It gives you a terrific idea of what Gilroy has in mind, as well as a bit of history as to how all of this transpired.
Thanks to Felix for the tip.
10 comments
Because changing focal characters midstream worked so well for… um… Son of the Mask? Evan Almighty? Teen Wolf Too? The Next Karate Kid? Is there any time when this kind of manuever HASN'T produced disastrous results?
MATT DAMON!
THIS POST HAS BEEN REMOVED
@ Doug – midstream? Bourne's entire story arch is over. They made 3 movies already.
#1: Yeah but the difference is, those movies sucked balls from the get go, and in addition, were sequels to movies that nobody asked for. I think the idea of a Bourne continuation is a fascinating one, and certainly Gilroy is a director with enough clout to not piss on what Greengrass and Liman brought to the seriesl.
Ressurect Karl Urban's badass char.
While I'm curious to see it, yeah, it never works. Reminds me of the Bionic Man/Woman or Hulk TV movies where they not only want to do a reunion thing but also try to launch a new series with younger folks out of them. You know, like how Ghostbusters 3 will suck, and Indy 4 did? 🙁
(Even more sidetrack laid: The Mask COULD have been a fun little franchise with different leads each time but they went the completely wrong way with it.)
Godfather 2 followed a different protagonist. So did Terminator 2. Never say never.
This sounds interesting. People don't really want another film where the government chases Bourne around exotic locales anyway…right?
@Sheepa. Not the best examples. Godfather 2 DID follow the same protagonist, just for half the movie, and Sarah Connor was still a major protagonist in the film. Plus, following John Connor in T2 was more organic, as the purpose of the first film was to make sure that he was born. It would be easy to believe that Cameron had T2 in mind the whole time he was making the first, it worked that well. Replacing the focal character of a franchise simply because the original actor doesn't want to do it anymore, its kinda hard to make that feel as organic.
Comments are shown as archived from the original site; new comments are closed.