First watch and then read my bullshit afterwards if you so choose:
Well that was surprisingly legit. On paper The Bourne Legacy seemed like a potentially heinous idea, even though Jeremy Renner is terrific (albeit unproven as a lead) and Tony Gilroy’s a badass. There was always the fear that it’d be akin to that 80’s and 90’s dilemma where they tried to milk a few last dollars from a franchise before it petered out. This looks like new vitality and the fact David Strathairn, Albert Finney and Joan Allen are back does so much to instill confidence and authenticity. Add Edward Norton and Stacey Keach (the ol’ American History X two-step) and it’s damn near unmissable. I love being wrong.
8 comments
Looks good. Of course isn’t Rachel Weisz in this? Suprised she is not in the preview.
Not proven as a lead? The Hurt Locker proves different.
If they’re going with a new lead, I almost think it’d be better if they went with a new cast entirely… establish this film as a completely separate reality. The juxtaposition of old and new cast members feels awkward… like having the same Jonah Jameson and Aunt May in the new Spider-man movie. Just my two cents…
“There never was just one”…news item for this trailer…
🙂
Your two cents are barely worth a half cent. The new Spider-Man is a different universe from the Raimi movies, so yeah, it’d be weird with the same Jonah…However, this new Bourne movie is living in the same place as the previous three. Renner is not playing Bourne, whereas Garfield is playing Parker. I hate your two cents so much.
I don’t think the “Spider-Man” comparison works. That’s a reboot, and “The Bourne Legacy” is a spin-off. The continuity and reality of the Matt Damon movies are intact. Renner isn’t playing Jason Bourne.
Anger issues, much?
Angry? Yes. Correct? Yes. Actually watching the fucking trailer might have prevented this hilariously shitty analogy.
Comments are shown as archived from the original site; new comments are closed.