Nope it was their office, that's why the CIA called and asked for her codeword.
Indeed.
As for the Bill O'Reilly item, the only thing that is worth discussing is how many people still listen to that madman. I sincerely hope he gets what is coming to him.
Just got back from seeing this. Yeah, Bourne is pretty much the best movie trilogy there is. I like how so many things circle back to the first film, whilst the plot is a nice run on from the second film. My only problem is that whilst I'd love for there to be a 4th film, they've pretty much wrapped everything up so well that I'd like it if they left it as it is.
I'm not a big Bourne fan and saw the film on a date. It's good but not my kind of genre. The whole government conspiracy thing is so very 1990s.
Yeah, I mean the idea of a government breaking the law, spying on it's own citizens without oversight, kidnapping and killing foreign nationals and calling it national security etc is so crazy in todays world I'm surprised it has any resonance at all.
JacobkoshGamble a stamp.I can show you how to be a real man!Moderatormod
edited August 2007
Rook: pwnage
I just saw it last night and loved it, but I'm in the camp that thinks it should end here. "Leave 'em wanting more" is an adage for a reason. The whole film is a giant third act - it worked because the filmmakers got to hit the ground running rather than try to introduce a new raft of characters and situations. A fourth movie would suffer in comparison because it'd have to start essentially from zero all over again; or not "zero", but like a Bond movie where we know the hero but everything else - the new villain, new setting, etc. - has to be laid out for us.
I'm not a big Bourne fan and saw the film on a date. It's good but not my kind of genre. The whole government conspiracy thing is so very 1990s.
Yeah, I mean the idea of a government breaking the law, spying on it's own citizens without oversight, kidnapping and killing foreign nationals and calling it national security etc is so crazy in todays world I'm surprised it has any resonance at all.
Duh, we see it everyday on the news so why go see it on the big screen? People do like going to a movie to escape you know. ;-)
I'm not a big Bourne fan and saw the film on a date. It's good but not my kind of genre. The whole government conspiracy thing is so very 1990s.
What's wrong with the 90s?
Besides Bill Clinton, America Online, and the Macarena?? Nothing, I actually liked the 90s. I'm just saying US government conspiracy films (X-Files, Murder at 1600, Absolute Power, Clear and Present Danger, Conspiracy Theory, & etc) was very a popular Hollywood fad in the 1990s.
I was very pleased with the movie. My favorite part:
At the end - We see bourne's body floating in the river. The newcaster: "No body was found." Nicki smiles faintly, bourne begins to swim, and that awesome remix of extreme ways begins to play.
HE DROVE OFF THE ROOF! WHAT?! SIR HE DROVE OFF THE ROOF
I could see a fourth movie if they did "Bourne: Punisher." All motivation for anyone coming after him has pretty much been removed. However, he'd make a good vigilante. Specifically, I could see him shutting down corrupt government black ops organizations. *shrug*
It'd be a hard sell, especially since it'd hit theaters long after Bush-Cheney have left office.
Like we know for sure that future administrations won't continue similar programs? I highly doubt illegal activities by the government will cease once Bush is gotten out of the way. But this isn't the politics thread so I'll shut my mouth.
I was very pleased with the movie. My favorite part:
At the end - We see bourne's body floating in the river. The newcaster: "No body was found." Nicki smiles faintly, bourne begins to swim, and that awesome remix of extreme ways begins to play.
I Enjoyed every minute of this movie. I especially enjoyed the obvious homage to Star Trek, with the inclusion of borg nano-probes that constantly repair bourne through the movie.
The movie shows most of the CIA as incompitant, that's not anti-american... just accurate.
That was fantastic (just came out two days ago in Australia). I'm a big fan of the whole trilogy, and I hope it stays as a trilogy. Matt Damon's gone on record as saying he doesn't believe that there is any further motivation for the character that won't feel contrived for the purpose of Hollywood moneymaking and has no wish to return to the character, which I respect him even more for.
The fight scenes were exceptional. The entire audience in my screening mirrored
Nicky's reaction after Desh was put down. I also really loved the small details like how he ended up repeating back Clive Owen's words to the New York asset. There are sometimes movies with two sequels that are just called a trilogy, and then there are trilogies which really work together as a start, middle and end, and this is one of them.
If there was to be any revisitation to the Bourne universe, I'd feel it'd have to be with another protagonist with his own set of motivations. Let David Webb rest.
I love the way that these films really make you feel like you're right there, with Bourne, following the action while fighting your own battle with palsy.
I loved the film just like the others, but I was kinda unsatisfied with the final reveal of Bourne's past. It was a little weak. Also, I am hopeless at watching these things without wondering about the most inane shit. "Oh man, what if that reporter hadn't been wearing a jacket? What if there was a long queue at the pre-paid phone store? Your little scheme woulda been fucked then Bourne."
Ah, but I think you have to take into account that he would have adapted to the situation. It's not that he's planned out this meticulous route and all these actions weeks in advance. He arrives at a location, assesses all the opportunities and then chooses the most appropriate course of action. If anything he is a master at adapting to changing circumstances and uses opportunities they present themselves in everything from combat to maneuvering around the train station.
He woulda been fucked if that guy hadn't had deep jacket pockets. Bourne is too much of a badarse to tap a guy on the shoulder and say "here, take this phone and pretend you didn't just see me".
I don't know if the 4th book was mentioned in the beginning, but I saw a lot of random guesses if there was ever a 4th movie. I'd figured they'd just follow Bourne Legacy, and apparently there's a 5th book as well??
I don't know if the 4th book was mentioned in the beginning, but I saw a lot of random guesses if there was ever a 4th movie. I'd figured they'd just follow Bourne Legacy, and apparently there's a 5th book as well??
The movies are loosely based on the premise of the first book, nothing more. The titles are the same, but that's just because they make good movie titles too.
If you read the fourth and fifth books (or even just the synopses of said) you will see that they provide very little in the way of entry point into making more movies.
I started reading the fourth book but I gave up halfway through. It just... wasn't good. At all. I flipped to the end to see what the plot twist was that I had pretty much already figured out:
olol rival assassin is Jason's son
Which I thought was a pretty dumb retcon on Eric Van Lustbader's part, and then I took it back to the library.
Yeah, apologies, wiki said Ultimatum was based "loosely," I didn't realize how loose they were referring to. Glancing over the article, I think the only similarity is they use the same character Bourne.
Posts
pleasepaypreacher.net
Indeed.
As for the Bill O'Reilly item, the only thing that is worth discussing is how many people still listen to that madman. I sincerely hope he gets what is coming to him.
pleasepaypreacher.net
Yeah, I mean the idea of a government breaking the law, spying on it's own citizens without oversight, kidnapping and killing foreign nationals and calling it national security etc is so crazy in todays world I'm surprised it has any resonance at all.
I just saw it last night and loved it, but I'm in the camp that thinks it should end here. "Leave 'em wanting more" is an adage for a reason. The whole film is a giant third act - it worked because the filmmakers got to hit the ground running rather than try to introduce a new raft of characters and situations. A fourth movie would suffer in comparison because it'd have to start essentially from zero all over again; or not "zero", but like a Bond movie where we know the hero but everything else - the new villain, new setting, etc. - has to be laid out for us.
Duh, we see it everyday on the news so why go see it on the big screen? People do like going to a movie to escape you know. ;-)
Besides Bill Clinton, America Online, and the Macarena?? Nothing, I actually liked the 90s. I'm just saying US government conspiracy films (X-Files, Murder at 1600, Absolute Power, Clear and Present Danger, Conspiracy Theory, & etc) was very a popular Hollywood fad in the 1990s.
Like we know for sure that future administrations won't continue similar programs? I highly doubt illegal activities by the government will cease once Bush is gotten out of the way. But this isn't the politics thread so I'll shut my mouth.
"It gets easier"
Seeya!
Really? I liked the remix more.
The movie shows most of the CIA as incompitant, that's not anti-american... just accurate.
The fight scenes were exceptional. The entire audience in my screening mirrored
If there was to be any revisitation to the Bourne universe, I'd feel it'd have to be with another protagonist with his own set of motivations. Let David Webb rest.
I loved the film just like the others, but I was kinda unsatisfied with the final reveal of Bourne's past. It was a little weak. Also, I am hopeless at watching these things without wondering about the most inane shit. "Oh man, what if that reporter hadn't been wearing a jacket? What if there was a long queue at the pre-paid phone store? Your little scheme woulda been fucked then Bourne."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Bourne_Legacy
Did the American cut not have him looking like he had a rolled ankle, twisted knee, cracked ribs and a fair section of his neck scraped to hell?
The movies are loosely based on the premise of the first book, nothing more. The titles are the same, but that's just because they make good movie titles too.
If you read the fourth and fifth books (or even just the synopses of said) you will see that they provide very little in the way of entry point into making more movies.
Which I thought was a pretty dumb retcon on Eric Van Lustbader's part, and then I took it back to the library.