Jason Bourne Review

You ever see a bad James Bond movie? Well, Jason Bourne (no the movie about the character, not the character himself, I know, it is a pretty silly title) is, at heart, a bad James Bond movie; the two even share the same initials! But not in the way "Moonraker" was bad; this is not over-the-top or in any way a fun film. It is plodding, confusing, and downright boring.

The action, which there is a lot of, is shot and edited in a "shaky cam" manner, from what I read a trademark of the director, you know the one, where the camera tosses around with quick cuts. It is designed to provoke a sense of immersion and uneasiness, but the only uneasiness was in my stomach- this is a 123 minute long film pieces together like a music video, only without a catchy soundtrack.

There is a scene early one, where Bourne meets up with a girl only important to the first half of the movie, in Athens, taking cover behind a violent protest against the government. Amidst the plot are shots of the police trying to control a fierce crowd of dissidents, and this is the only portion of the film where the shaky cam works; it makes each scene feel more chaotic and unpredictable. That sort of camera work is not necessary during slow conversations meant to move the muddy narrative along.

But the root of the film's problems is its story; its the fifth in the franchise and obviously is a continuation of the same story. That is fine. But for a long time, I had no idea what was going on, as the movie is not interested in making sure the casual movie-goer has any clue what the plot is. It cares about die-hard fans while alienating any new ones, but eventually you should figure things out. I did, but there is nothing at stake here. Jason Bourne is still, over a decade later, trying to figure out his past, but why should we care? He is a completely ridiculous, unrealistic person, a character who is far from the everyday man James Bond or Indiana Jones sometimes can be. He is a superhero without a cape, and Matt Damon's portrayal seems to be based on Daniel Craig's rendition of 007, only without any of his innate flair or charm. He mulls from one scene to the next, sparsely speaking and plainly looking at his supporting cast or the camera, like a male model but with more clothing on. Someone get Mr. Damon a cup of coffee or something, he is half asleep here.

The movie opens finding Bourne off-the-radar, competing in fights and destroying his opponents. This is to explain how he can take down every henchmen with one blow. But the climax of the film pits Jason against an assassin, called the "Asset," played by Vincent Cassel. They fight, and fight for a long time. Unlike every other person in the movie, this Asset does not go down in one punch, despite his rather slim and lanky demeanor. Somehow, across multiple countries, there is only one person who can take more than one of Bourne's punches.

There is also a subplot concerning CIA director Robert Dewey, played by the always affable Tommy Lee Jones, and some nebulous tech company and the government's secret surveillance on the public. It is a vague attempt on the people's problem today with internet security and their identity and all of that jazz, but this film is called "Jason Bourne," not "Robert Dewey," and little is done to explain or document this side story. There is no tension here; perhaps it is the film's exiguous dialogue, or its nauseating cinematography, or Mr. Jones' completely disinterested and disinteresting performance. He just gives orders, stands in place, sometimes walking, and- oh, once he sits down. Maybe twice.