Jason Bourne

That Greengrass made a remake of the 'best of' moments from the past doesn't bother me. It bothers me that he did it in the worst possible way, perhaps having Universal using F&F dramaturgists because Jason Bourne is one long action scene lacking any semblance of a meaningful plot. Last time, Gilroy delivered a simple but striking story based on the ambiguous past of an agent with amnesia. This time, it’s a primitive plot with the cheapest overlaps (Snowden, social networks), relegating the protagonist to a field of uninteresting and unnecessary figures who simply happen to pass through scenes, and yet we know that everything will be resolved in an effective way, without any frills or embellishments. This was supposed to keep us, the fans, who were a bit hesitant about the meaningfulness of the sequel, in our seats and massaging the first signal for two hours. But this is wherein the film ultimately loses the most. Yes, Greengrass keeps serving up epic action outpourings, but what's the point of them when Ackroyd, unlike Wood, doesn't know how to work the shaky cam? Those half-second shots, which the viewer processed somewhere in the depths of his brain and only with a slight delay appreciated their informational value, don't work this time. As a whole, they lack the flexibility and momentum that the head of the second staff, Dan Bradley, added last time. The result is desperate and predictable... and boring. Quite possibly because Bourne isn't being pursued by a crucial pursuer this time, and the intoxication of his tactical evasion, where he's a step or two ahead of the pursuer, is there. The aging Tommy and the pretty naive girl Alicia are both not up to the task, and Cassel seems to have dropped out of a 1990s B-movie (some of the flashbacks should be punishable). In short, I didn't leave the movie theater this year more pissed off. (29.07.2016)

As if Jason Bourneʼs stories had become routine. And not only his stories but also the action. And on top of it all, the action starts to have some balls only at the end of the movie, at the moment that is unBourne-like set in the USA. However, it is true that I am quite critical of the movie. On the other hand, I think that the first and second installments had at least some story while this one is only a series of escape – find – kill. Even though the Paul Greengrass’ filmmaking craft is still pretty on point. I just need something enlivening and Alicia Vikander isn’t going to salvage it, because you get exactly what you would expect from her in a spy thriller. Nothing more, nothing less. (25.12.2016)

A proven director? Yes. A star from previous episodes? Yeah. Excited fans? After a not-so-good spin-off, they're just itching for a rematch. Perfect conditions for a hit. Perfect conditions for a good movie, but there is one thing they must not screw up, the story. And unfortunately Jason Bourne’s, the story grinds and quite a lot. I haven't read the script, so I won't say that it's bad, but the fact remains that the return of an agent who can't even rely on his own memory didn't turn out as I'd hoped. Matt Damon is still in form and the Greengrass action doesn't get old. The action scenes are properly long and build up nicely, transitioning seamlessly from silent stalking on the city streets to uncompromising chases. Just the way we like it. It's good to watch until someone starts talking. In fact, the film's plot is so trite and so B-movie that you might forgive it for Dolph Lundgren, but not for a thriller that aspires to be the thriller of the year. (16.05.2017)

The only reason Bourne continues is that he can't quit, and that the fans didn't want him to quit. Greengrass did not find the ideal motivation, and the film unexpectedly often works with the motif of chance or a somewhat desired twist. Not even the promised overlap is the brightest - it's more a bunch of obvious motifs (whenever Snowden is said aloud in a movie, a kitten dies). But Jason is still an interesting character, and the dilemma of whether it's better to adopt an artificial identity or to be someone I don't quite know is still cool. And the humanoid GPS Greengrass still finds delightful patterns in chaos. It's not at the level of the last two episodes of the trilogy, but it's still a pure techno thriller pleasure that only Paul can do. BTW, Alicia is great again and offers a dignified virtual counterpart to the contact killer Jason. His offensive stampede won't bore me. The adrenaline that I miss in the cinema is still here. (28.07.2016)

Decent and magnificent in terms of craftsmanship, albeit ridiculously naive and dull (the current commentary is late by a few years), an action techno thriller trying to remark The Bourne Ultimatum too faithfully (and above all unsuccessfully) to its own detriment. It's not a bad movie in any way (except for the script, Gilroy is noticeably missing), it's just an unworthy and useless Bourne movie. (28.07.2016)

A continuation I had resisted and wished for a long time that it would never happen, because the original trilogy works as a perfect action-spy diamond that doesn't need further polishing. And as The Bourne Legacy has already shown, continuing from elsewhere is not the best idea. Nevertheless, here we are and as expected, it reminds me so much of Paul Greengrass's previous contributions that it almost feels like a quote. I see the myth in specific scenes or twists, and the plot paraphrases The Bourne Ultimatum, and before all the flashbacks and assumptions settle in, I didn't have a very light feeling, especially when one of the targets is the surprisingly terrible Tommy Lee Jones. But it's still there in Matt Damon's bulldog face, and even though the action this time already slightly steps out of its established boundaries and flirts with (by previous standards) a surprising lack of realism, the physicality and uncompromising nature of it still raise my adrenaline level so much that it stayed high the whole way home from the cinema. Along with Nicky's return, the unreadable Heather, and the incomparable atmosphere, it is indeed an unnecessary digging into something already resolved, but the personal subplot ultimately fulfills its purpose perfectly. 75% (28.07.2016)

When the series about the tough guy with gaps in his memory grew with a fourth installment, I decided to ignore it in the movie theater, even though I consider myself a Bourne fan. The third movie hinted that the conspiratorial world of the secret services of the United States and their manipulation of the human psyche is evolving in a way that I don't like. What the third movie suggested, the fourth confirmed completely. The form remained and what fans liked about the Bourne series, namely adrenaline overdose, dynamics, and handheld camera, can reliably be found here. Even Matt Damon confirms that he continues to visit the gym intensively. The problem, however, is the content. Greengrass clearly holds the opinion that it is enough for the film to be wildly thrilling, not giving the viewer time to breathe, and God forbid, start thinking about the plot, motivations, and actions of his characters. In that case, the viewer would quickly realize that the quality of the screenplay has fallen somewhere to the bottom of the ocean abyss. A lot of action stupidity has been filmed over the years, and this movie fits right into that category. It is a pity because poor Jason did not deserve such an ending... Overall impression: 40%. (06.01.2020)

If you come back with something that was once a phenomenon, you won’t please everybody. Jason Bourne doesn’t have nearly as good a story as the previous two parts of the memory jigsaw, but it is still among the best of movies of this genre. The main role in this picture belongs more to Alicia Vikander than to man from the title with the Damonic face, but that is quite refreshing. If she hadn’t let herself down a little toward the end, brighter tomorrows might have awaited us in this series. That would be just dandy… Tommy Lee Jones is a little subdued, he can act better, but he looks really tired. Cassel is unexploited, just a well-known villain’s face. I was surprised by some decisions made by the screenwriters, the story sometimes seems like superfluous stuffing that simply moves the action from one place of interest to another. Athens super, Berlin and London we’ve seen before. Vegas is really over the top, but I preferred the car chase from Supremacy for being more down to earth. To tell the truth, I didn’t need to see this episode. Ending to the trilogy by saying “it’s all your own fault" was quite powerful and resounded in me. But it also works when, right at the beginning, we see our battered hero, and we have an idea that his evolution in the movie might still be interesting, but we just haven’t got there yet. This is just a bridge. Next time, leave Bourne to agree to the offer and send him against Renner. (29.07.2016)

The purest and most classic action film of the four-part series, which once again expertly mixes elements of hi-tech espionage and typically thriller-like, escalating plots, including an over-the-top finale where a police car dismembers dozens of cars in Las Vegas. All that was missing was a bald John Malkovich with an plane and we could have had Con Air 2. Apart from that, the film is not without quite a lot of scripted filler, a somewhat artificial plot and a rather visible aspect of coincidences. On the other hand, it's still the camera-volatile and uncompromising Paul Greengrass, in whose rendition all those CIA spy tricks are terribly entertaining, engrossing and hard to tear yourself away from. Alicia Vikander and Vincent Cassel are also refreshing change. The trilogy is phenomenal and consistent, with the fourth part following close behind. Still exceptional filmmaking, though. (31.07.2016)

It's not really a return to Bourn(e)s roots, it's more of a new offshoot, which fortunately isn't as ordinary as people say it is. Bourne play an interesting role here of an involuntary puppet, whose strings are pulled by many people, and I'm glad that there was still a story to tell about him, and especially that Paul Greengrass is telling it again. Thanks to him and, of course, thanks to Matt Damon, amazing things are happening in movie theatres again - like the London chase or the final car chase (I probably won't see better on the big screen this year).___P.S. The Bourne Legacy, which was useless four years ago, now seems to be even more useless.___P.P.S. Unfortunately, Kateřina Hámová and her subtitles traditionally full of mistakes did not disappoint. Like when one character says, "Put everything on the table..." but the subtitles read "Everything's on the table." Or when the computer command "Run" according to the subtitles does not mean "launch" the program, but "browse". (06.08.2016)

What I sincerely admire about this series is how it evolves in narrative and meaning with each instalment. Admittedly, the fourth part is an amalgamation of the previously innovative approaches of Supremacy and Ultimatum, and it does take a lot from them in terms of pure story, but it's still filmmaking so masterful and utterly climactic that I found myself repeatedly falling into ecstasy throughout and wishing it lasted at least half an hour more. Bourne is no longer the one who always shapes situations for the benefit of his intentions; rather, he’s more or less involuntarily driven by circumstances and serves as a rope on a motivational soil where other characters plant their personal preferences and intentions. If he forms the bottom of the pyramid of old characters, the imaginary top is occupied by the spineless CIA director Tommy Lee Jones, who in turn unites the characters and creates motivational dysfunctions (a beautiful scene where he communicates simultaneously with Vikander, who tries to make a deal with Bourne, and Cassel, who is supposed to eliminate him). Once again, it’s impossible not to purr in delight at the perfect construction of the plot, which thanks to a) the classic flashbacks, which become increasingly obvious as they progress, and b) the complete awareness of the viewer, which it achieves by gradually (successively) unfolding simultaneous events – it satisfies the audience, both familiar and unfamiliar with Bourne's past, and also the incredibly effective work with internal parallelisms – the characters are constantly converging in parallel, establishing a tremendous dynamic of movement (and justifying the often-criticized shaky camerawork or lightning cross-cutting), and the parallels between Damon and Cassel can be seen not only in their pursuit, but also in the variations of similar shots that suggest their differences (Bourne always hesitates considerably before looking at himself in the mirror when he kills someone, Cassel looks at himself after a murder without the slightest hesitation). Greengrass was apparently chosen by God to convey Bourne's world, and he took on his mission with downright divine directorial genius. I wouldn’t mind at least two more episodes. 95% (18.10.2016)

The fourth in a row (or fifth, for that matter) and it’s always the same recipe, over and over. And always to be continued… Amazing. I’m afraid this action series has never been close to my heart. (26.04.2018)

The new Bourne had a great cast – both Alicia Vikander and Vincent Cassel are actors I always like to see. But the plot was underwhelming. It felt like watching a rerun made up of the three previous installments. I didn't come across anything new. The CIA is after Jason again, they kill the woman helping him again, Jason gets angry, et cetera, et cetera. Plus, given the open ending, we can expect six more sequels, whose plot I can already envision, so the only thing left to know is the setting. I think Antarctica and hiding among the glaciers might put a fresh spin on things. (12.01.2017)

A massive downswing compared to Damon's original trilogy. Action scenes are still well made, meaning above-average, and the movie might have looked interesting on paper, but the result? A completely nonsensical story in which no one speaks, and when they do, you’d prefer them not to. Bored Damon let himself be talked into this by Universal's argument that if the franchise is to be milked dry, they’d better make it count. Tommy Lee Jones and Alicia Vikander are two of my favorite actors, but quite frankly, neither of them fits their role, and I don’t think much of their background and motivations. I know a lot of people before me have already mentioned this, but the plot is just lousy. The danger of unsecured privacy on social networks, Snowden - cheap, naive and mediocre. Mediocrity certainly does not agree with Bourne. (18.11.2016)