ViewGuide

Created Sep 12, 2012 06:58PM PST • Edited Oct 02, 2012 05:50PM PST

1. Quality

2. Summary

   OK 2.5

   The first Bourne-less Bourne sequel felt more like a slog than a thrilling chase. Then its climax felt like a pause, which it is … for the next episode. So after more than two hours of frenetic activity, it wasn’t clear the movie was actually over. Some legacy.

   Let’s stipulate that most reviews of The Bourne Legacy are very positive, including from the estimable BrianSez, whose taste is often in-line with mine. To each their own however. I kept waiting for the movie to tickle, to thrill or to show me something new. When it didn’t and then fizzled at the end, I felt let down.

   Not a good legacy for this recasting of the Bourne saga, especially with Jeremy Renner locked in for a Matt Damon like run in the sequels, which are inevitable given this first Cross needing less than a month to hit $100 million in box office.

   Not to worry, the sophomore Cross – Double Cross? – should be better given the low bar that is its legacy.

4. Acting

   Good 3.0

   Jeremy Renner is plenty adequate as a pharmaceutically enhanced agent, even if he lacks Matt Damon’s star power. Like Damon’s Jason Bourne, Renner’s Aaron Cross is a humorless and oddly perfunctory übermensh, meaning the quality of the movie is entirely dependent on the action and tricks he performs.

   Rachel Weisz was the best performer in the movie as his sidekick. Every scene she was in was compelling, in no small part because of her charisma, even in a role where she was often the hunted one.

   Edward Norton’s soulless asshole lacked gravitas. Notwithstanding his heavyweight acting rep, Norton failed to deliver the kind of heavyweight credibility the role demanded and the movie required.

   A heavyweight cast of supporting players mostly fade into the chaos.

   • Zeljko Ivanek is the exception, an always distinctive actor, here as a troubled technician.
   • Scott Glenn as a mucky-muck with a bad haircut. Same with David Strathairn, minus the bad ’do.
   • Stacy Keach and Albert Finney as even bigger mucky-mucks.
   • Oscar Isaac was in there somewhere. It’s a testament to the muddle of this movie that this distinctive actor didn’t stand out.

5. Male Stars Good 3.0

6. Female Stars Very Good 3.5

7. Female Costars OK 2.5

8. Male Costars OK 2.5

10. Film

    OK 2.5

    Most of the chase scenes were chaotic, with precious few tickles. One cool thing: sliding a motorcycle down a stair-rail like a skateboard.

    Other problems include several set-ups that weren’t paid off, including what the hero agent would look like if his pharmaceutical enhancements wore off. Great films make set-ups to pay them off, not forget them.

11. Direction OK 2.5

12. Play Barely OK 2.0

13. Music OK 2.5

14. Visuals OK 2.5
15. Content

16. Edge

    Risqué 2.3

    The movie revels in a parade of horribles, including a workplace mass shooting. If only it paid off in thrills.

17. Sex Innocent 1.0

18. Violence Brutal 3.4

19. Rudeness Profane 2.6

21. Reality

    Supernatural 3.3

    Aside from the biologically enhanced mumbo-jumbo and now we’re in Alaska and then we’re in Maryland physical discontinuities, the movie assumes a deep seated rot in the American defense establishment. This has been true with all the Bourne movies, but was particularly egregious in Legacy. It postulates that fratricide on a mass scale is palatable to our commanders, standard practice even. Really?

22. Circumstantial Supernatural 3.3

23. Biological Supernatural 3.9

24. Physical Surreal 2.6