![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
|
| MCB Reviews It MCB Reviews it! Have a review of a new gun, or old gun you just tried? New Mask or Gear? Let us know what you think. |
![]() |
| | LinkBack | Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| | #1 (permalink) |
| Seasoned Member Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: Southgate, MI |
Saw this movie the other day and I was very pleased with the final movie in the triolgy. If you aren't familiar with the series Jason Bourne, real name revield in the movie, decided to quit being a killer for the US Gov't after he failed to do so when he was assassinating a foregin minister and saw the man's children there. I digres, This movie is a non-stop heart pounding action movie. The fight scenes are great and make you sit on the edge of your seat. If you are a fan of the other 2 then you will enjoy this one as well. It ties up the story nicely and explains lots of the past and clarifies why Bourne's life is the way it is. It leaves you unable to predict what is next, unlike some movies. It is a cool movie and raps up the series very nicely and leaves a posibility of a 4th by the way it ends, but probably not since this is the last book. If you were a fan of the series before it is a MUST see. If you are unfamiliar with them it is still a great movie but will leave you a little confused since it plays off the other two. Go See It!!! ![]() |
| | |
| | #2 (permalink) |
| Active Member Join Date: Jun 2007 |
I didn't really like it all too much. The action scenes sucked because the director thought it would be cool to shake around the cameras violently so you couldn't even see what was going on. I have seen this type of directing in other movies and hate it every time, but it was really out of hand in this movie. It started to make me nauseous at one point.
|
| | |
| | #3 (permalink) | |
| Seasoned Member |
I have only seen the first movie and was so horribly disappointed in it that I have refused and still refuse to see the second or third. As someone who has taken the time to actually read the amazing books by Robert Ludlum that these movies are (loosely) based on I have to say that the movies sorely lacking. Hollywood has always had issues with remaining true to the source materials for their stories but even after only having seen the previews for this most recent disaster I must say that this was definitely one of the worst cases I know of.
__________________ Fuzz ![]() Quote:
FEEDBACK (MCB) FEEDBACK#2 (AO) | |
| | |
| | #4 (permalink) |
| Valeyard: Porn Not War! |
Books are always better then Movies.
|
| | |
| | #5 (permalink) |
| Damage Inc Lord |
I've read all three books by Robert Ludlum. The first movie is somewhat like the book, the second and third movies have the same name as the books and some dude called Jason Bourne. Other than that there's nothing in common. I'm a fan of the movies but I too think the shaky camera work was grossly over done. Other than that it was an awesome movie. |
| | |
| | #7 (permalink) |
| Seasoned Member Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: Southgate, MI |
I do agree it was very shaky camera work. The reason for them not being like the book is b/c consumerism wants to be thrilled and wooed at the movies not actually have to consider whats going on, but was expolsion was cool or not.
|
| | |
| | #8 (permalink) |
| Active Member Join Date: Apr 2007 |
I enjoyed it. Didn't find the shaky camera to be nearly as bad as you guys make them out to be. I've yet to check out the books, but I'll probably have to. I've personally never understood why people hate movies because they aren't the book. If you go in expecting it to be the exact same as the book, you'll be disappointed. Just forget about the book, and try and enjoy the movie. They'll never be the same, as most people have a hard enough time sitting through a 2 and a half hour movie. |
| | |
| | #9 (permalink) |
| Active Member Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Canada |
I actually had my friend walk out of the movie he was getting so nauseous from the camera perspective. How many back of the head shots can one movie have? Well, I think a new standard has been achieved! It was like they gave a chimp a handy-cam and then fed him mind-altering drugs. Poor Chimp. Most of the really cool action is lost because you can't see it or else see it so quickly you are not really sure if you saw something or not. The shaky cam thing can be interesting if used selectively - this was wanton abuse of a good story. So much for character development... We see this one as a loss. Kev Last edited by Kevin Barr; 08-13-2007 at 11:46 AM. Reason: my bloody spelling... |
| | |
![]() |
|
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|