The Bourne Ultimatum

[UN Spacy]

BRAND new trailer is out today.

http://movies.yahoo.com/feature/thebourneultimatum.html

[eugimon]

yeah, I'm a fan of the series and I'm looking forward to this one.

[Scream Man]

the books are better. and since the movie to book relationship has no similarities outside the name of the main character, im not as impressed wioth the films. They're ok, but they could have been so much better.

[Skullsixx]

Not showing too much new stuff.... but still looks bad-ass!!!

[eugimon]

the books are better. and since the movie to book relationship has no similarities outside the name of the main character, im not as impressed wioth the films. They're ok, but they could have been so much better.

books are always better.

well, almost. I belive the movie version of high fidelity is superiour to the book.

[Sumdumgai]

Looking interesting at least. I prefer Fight Club the movie, to the book. Although I can't remember much of the book, I just remember liking the movie better.

[eugimon]

Looking interesting at least. I prefer Fight Club the movie, to the book. Although I can't remember much of the book, I just remember liking the movie better.

agreed, I think the book gave away the twist to early

[Veritas]

Looks good. I've never gotten around to reading the books, but the movies have been pretty good so far, so i'm hoping the last one hits the mark as well.

[Graham]

Actually, I never really liked the books as Robert Ludlum knew squat about firearms and his books were riddled with technical accuracies. One howler has always stuck in my mind, when he describes: "the distinctive curved magazine of the Uzi". Sorry, Uzi's have straight magazines. If you are going to write about something, at least do some reasearch, don't just pull the info out of your ass!

Graham

[eugimon]

that's what was distinctive about the curve.

[CoryHolmes]

The first book was a really good read, but the later sequels just don't work for me. Though I'm thrilled by the fact that one of the main characters is Canadian

As far as the movies go, I preferred Identity to Supremecy. I didn't enjoy the action scenes in Supremecy very much, the camera shots were too quickly cut and unstable to really see what was happening.

[Veritas]

The first book was a really good read, but the later sequels just don't work for me. Though I'm thrilled by the fact that one of the main characters is Canadian

As far as the movies go, I preferred Identity to Supremecy. I didn't enjoy the action scenes in Supremecy very much, the camera shots were too quickly cut and unstable to really see what was happening.

They had different directors right? It's too bad that alot of good movies that have sequels can't or won't retain the same director that worked on the original film.

MI:2 comes to mind.

[Vermillion21]

I finally watched this last night on DVD - awesome movie!! A+++!!! The action sequences were spectacular and I love how they integrated the ending of the second film into this one. Great sequel and it ended the trilogy very well. Highly recommend it.

@Veritas - I actually thought MI:2 was good .... amazing action IMHO.

[Briareos]

Yeah, this movie doesn't miss a beat and keeps your suspense up. But a few things have been bothering me.

How does Jason infiltrate the CIA HQ to get to the safe? Wouldn't the CIA think of putting up some security at the doors?

Another question.. Why would the any Intelligence agency put a safe in view from a window? Couldn't they even tinted the windows?

[Vermillion21]

Like most movies - it requires a certain suspension of disbelief from the audience.

[baronv]

Like most movies - it requires a certain suspension of disbelief from the audience.

True, and once you get past it I thought this movie was great. Non-stop action for real. You get maybe a 4- minutes of down time and then it's off to another non-stop action piece. The Bourne vs. Moroccon operative fight in the apartment was the best of the series. The next James Bond film will have to ramp up it's action quota to match the Ultimatum's scenes.

[eugimon]

Yeah, this movie doesn't miss a beat and keeps your suspense up. But a few things have been bothering me.

How does Jason infiltrate the CIA HQ to get to the safe? Wouldn't the CIA think of putting up some security at the doors?

Another question.. Why would the any Intelligence agency put a safe in view from a window? Couldn't they even tinted the windows?

really? For me it was when he jumps through panes of window glass and doesn't come out on the other side as hamburger. it's still great fun though.

[Noyhauser]

the only problem with ultimatum's "tie in" with the supremacy was that the NY phone scene are in completely different seasons... but yeah, its pretty cool nonetheless.

[CoryHolmes]

Just finished this film and I can easily say it was the worst of the three. It still has the wonky camera work that I despise (one of the big reasons I can't stand Battlestar Galactica). The fight scenes weren't nearly as enjoyable and there was a whole bunch of fortunate happinstance that helped Jason along the way. Also, is it just me or did they speed up some footage in the final New York chase scene? That's a major no-no.

Edited January 3, 2008 by CoryHolmes

[sqidd]

Worth the cost of the DVD, but nothig to throw a party over.

[Vermillion21]

Of the many 'part 3' sequel movies from the 2007 summer, I thought this one was the best over Spidey, Pirates, & Shrek.

[CoryHolmes]

Of the many 'part 3' sequel movies from the 2007 summer, I thought this one was the best over Spidey, Pirates, & Shrek.

Pirates 3 sucked. Spidey 2 sucked so badly I can't bring myself to watch #3. And I haven't seen any of Shrek. Maybe Hollywood just needs to stop making threequels.

[myk]

Don't bother with 'Spider 3-it's the type of movie that has you embarrassed for having even sat down to watch it. As for Bourne, I couldn't sit through it as I found it so boring. I'd explain why, but I'm afraid I'd fall asleep at the keyboard...

Edited January 5, 2008 by myk

[Vermillion21]

The fight scenes in Bourne 3 were pretty impressive IMHO.

[CoryHolmes]

The fight scenes in Bourne 3 were pretty impressive IMHO.

I hate how the fights in Bourne 3 were jitter-cam to the max. I hate, hate, hate that style of shooting. Ultra-fast cuts, blurry focus, poor-framing... I hated it in Batman Begins, I hated it in Bourne 2, and I hate it in Bourne 3. I really loathed how they put in extra-jitters when Bourne was having a nice, calm discussion.

I loved how they filmed Bourne 1, with a steady camera. To my eye, it shows just how calm he is in a crisis, like his escape from the American Embassy. The jitter is the wrong choice for a film like this.

Pirates 3, SM 3, Matrix 3... they all did what I hate: the first films in those series were close enough to reality to be "believable". But for the sequels it's like someone decided that there needed to be more explosions, more mind-twisting, more magic, etc.

[Vermillion21]

Pirates 3, SM 3, Matrix 3... they all did what I hate: the first films in those series were close enough to reality to be "believable". But for the sequels it's like someone decided that there needed to be more explosions, more mind-twisting, more magic, etc.

You can thank the "clever" Hollywood entertainment executives for that .....

[eugimon]

I hate how the fights in Bourne 3 were jitter-cam to the max. I hate, hate, hate that style of shooting. Ultra-fast cuts, blurry focus, poor-framing... I hated it in Batman Begins, I hated it in Bourne 2, and I hate it in Bourne 3. I really loathed how they put in extra-jitters when Bourne was having a nice, calm discussion.

I loved how they filmed Bourne 1, with a steady camera. To my eye, it shows just how calm he is in a crisis, like his escape from the American Embassy. The jitter is the wrong choice for a film like this.

Pirates 3, SM 3, Matrix 3... they all did what I hate: the first films in those series were close enough to reality to be "believable". But for the sequels it's like someone decided that there needed to be more explosions, more mind-twisting, more magic, etc.

I don't know what you're talking about. I just re-watched the trilogy and when bourne is having a "nice, calm discussion" the camera is very steady. The camera's movement corresponds to the emotional state of the subject on hand. During the opening sequence of Bourne Supremecy, the camera is everywhere, showing landy's nervousness. When Bourne is fighting, the camera moves around but in the immediate aftermath, the camera slows down.

Bourne is also not the same character in the two sequels as he is in the first movie. There he's fully in treadstone mode and is almost a machine for the whole movie except for a few key moments. In the next two movies, bourne is very much haunted by his memories and he's disturbed by what they reveal about him. That energy is conveyed through the camera work when/while Bourne is reliving those memories and coming to terms with who and what he is. If you watch the end of bourne supremecy where Bourne confesses to the daughter, when bourne is talking, the camera is pretty still, but when it switches to the daughter, the camera moves around more - reacting to her much more emotional state.

It's fine if you don't like the camera work, but to say that it is pointless is just plain wrong. The camera work is deliberate and it always makes sense when you compare it to the emotional level of what is on screen.

[Vermillion21]

It's fine if you don't like the camera work, but to say that it is pointless is just plain wrong. The camera work is deliberate and it always makes sense when you compare it to the emotional level of what is on screen.

Thanks eugimon. I never even thought of it that way ....