RSS

Movie Review: “The Bourne Legacy”

I’ve been a fan of the “Bourne” espionage movie trilogy for a long time…both the original Robert Ludlum novels and the Matt Damon films loosely derived from the books. Even Eric Van Lustbader’s authorized sequels to Ludlum’s works – flimsier though they may be – are entertaining enough.

When I first heard the title of this fourth film installment, I expected it to be a direct adaptation of the Van Lustbader novel bearing the same name. The book, “The Bourne Legacy,” follows the ongoing adventures of a retired Jason Bourne as he fights to protect his family. I was naturally surprised to find that the “Bourne Legacy” film would center on a new character, Aaron Cross (Jeremy Renner, last seen as Hawkeye in “The Avengers”).

Overlapping with the conclusion of “The Bourne Ultimatum,” “Legacy” follows Cross’ battle to survive a top-to-bottom purge of the U.S. black ops program. With Jason Bourne’s story leaking out to the media, high-level coordinators plan to eradicated all incriminating loose ends.

But Cross is more than just a highly trained super-spy: he’s undergone genetic therapy designed to increase both stamina and intelligence. Dependent on a number of drugs to sustain his augmentations, Cross must locate a fresh supply of meds. Assisting him is Dr. Marta Shearing (Rachel Weisz), an innocent biochemist caught in the crossfire.

It’s a major change from the international espionage and intrigue of its predecessors – and unfortunately, the shift doesn’t work particularly well.

First, the good: if this film was anything other than a “Bourne” movie, it would’ve been pretty strong. The cinematography is well-executed, the acting is top-notch, and the action scenes (particularly a climactic car chase) are still the gold standard for their genre.

The drugs/sci-fi angle, however, feels jarringly out of place. The “Bourne” franchise has always been grounded in reality, and the idea of genetically enhanced warriors doesn’t fit well with that milieu. Since this conflict serves as the backbone of the film, it’s hard to separate these elements from the rest of the movie.

Essentially, “The Bourne Legacy” feels like it was first conceptualized as a standalone work…and only later fitted with the external trappings of a “Bourne” sequel. The ties to the original trilogy feel tenuous at best – particularly the eleventh-hour introduction of yet another covert government program. There’s no holistic integration of “Legacy” into the rest of the series, and it never really justifies its own existence. A fourth film, honestly, was never necessary.

Frustratingly, there seem to be some interesting elements beneath the surface of this film. The very idea of black ops programs raises a host of ethical issues – to what extent, for example, may moral principles be overridden by individuals acting in the service of the state – but these aren’t developed. It’s never quite clear what nefarious deeds are being suppressed…and, in turn, why the government is so desperate to eliminate Cross. This critical omission robs the film of much of its narrative heft.

Some relatively simple fixes could’ve gone a long way toward improving this movie. For starters, too much exposition is provided up front, which robs the audience of the joy of solving the mystery. A bit of reshuffling – moving some scenes around and expunging others entirely – could’ve created a tauter, more intense product. “The Bourne Legacy,” as it stands, doesn’t feel quite polished; I found myself wondering if it’d been pushed into an accelerated release by studio executives.

All that being said, however, this is still an entertaining summer movie. It’s nowhere near the excellence of its predecessors, but it’s a serviceable adventure with plenty of flair. The action is still great, the storyline is engaging enough, and there’s visual style to spare.

If only it hadn’t called itself a “Bourne” sequel…

VERDICT: 6.5/10
An unfortunately pedestrian fourth installment in an otherwise outstanding series.

Normalized Score: 2.4

 
1 Comment

Posted by on August 10, 2012 in Thrillers

 

Literature Commentary: Cloud Atlas

Most popular novels of today fall squarely into the category of “genre fiction.” romance, sci-fi, fantasy, historical – these and others are characterized by specific subsets of literary tropes, which often compromise innovation and artistry. I enjoy much genre fiction, but have often found it confining; the world of literature is perishing from a dearth of true visionaries.

Every so often, however, a truly majestic work of literary merit emerges. Award-winning author David Mitchell’s complex novel “Cloud Atlas” is one of these.

It is difficult to describe the sprawling plot of Mitchell’s opus. Six interconnected stories – each of which could’ve served as a full novel in its own right – form the canvas upon which Mitchell works. Each vignette is told through a different format, resulting in a vibrant and unpredictable tableau.

#1: Journal – late 1800s: Adam Ewing, a classical academic, explores the South Pacific islands aboard a merchant vessel. Along the way, he encounters Autua – the last surviving member of an aboriginal race, desperately fighting for his freedom.

#2: Epistolary – 1930s: Paul Frobisher, an aspiring musical virtuoso, becomes the apprentice of aging composer Vyvyan Ayres. Embarking on a passionate affair with Ayres’ wife, the amoral Frobisher soon finds himself drawn into a web of fear and despair.

#3: Novel, 3rd person present tense – 1970s: Bold tabloid reporter Luisa Rey uncovers a potential scandal at the Swannekke nuclear reactor. With help from Joe Napier – a Swannekke whistleblower with an old debt to Luisa’s father – Luisa delves ever deeper into a grand political conspiracy.

#4: Novel, 1st person past tense – 1990s: Literary agent Timothy Cavendish is imprisoned in a hostile retirement home against his will. With time running out, the elderly Cavendish must engineer a risky plan of escape.

#5: Interview – the future: In a corporatized dystopian Korea, genetically modified clone Sonmi-451 struggles to make sense of her chaotic world. She quickly learns that her sanitized environment conceals a host of terrifying secrets…secrets that will transform her understanding of reality.

#6: Oral history – the far future: Years after the apocalypse, the world is teetering on the edge of a new Dark Age. Pacific tribesman Zachry, when he encounters scholar-priestess Meronym, is propelled into a savage war with civilization itself hanging in the balance.

At first glance, these plotlines couldn’t be more divergent. Each is distinct, both structurally and tonally. From a thematic standpoint, however, the similarities immediately become apparent.

This is a novel about human nature. Its story necessarily stretches across centuries, so as to demonstrate the consequences of misunderstanding man’s true essence. Mitchell draws upon a host of literary forbears – Plato, Melville, Orwell, Nietzsche, and Golding, among others – in formulating his thesis: that man is invariably corrupt, and that utopian dreams are futile. A number of other concepts swirl around the edges of this core: man’s desperate need for spiritual fulfillment; the fluidity of history as written by the victors; the power of words and music; the intrinsic dignity and value of human beings; and the awful consequences of wrongdoing.

Mitchell’s book is impossibly ambitious, but somehow manages to cohere into a superlative whole. To affix it with a genre label, as some have attempted to do (calling it “science fiction” due to its portrayal of the future) is to cheapen the universality of its scope.

“Cloud Atlas” is not overtly religious, but contains some interesting ideas. It’s fair to say that Mitchell affirms some notion of the Divine or the Cosmic – ethics in Mitchell’s world are absolute and transcendent. Furthermore, his story decisively indicts optimistic humanism without lapsing into nihilistic ennui. Worldview-wise, it’s probably accurate to call “Cloud Atlas” a deistic vision of existence.

From a literary standpoint, “Cloud Atlas” is undoubtedly polarizing. Mitchell is a magnificent writer, but his prose consistently hovers at a postgraduate level. Readers put off by the casual use of terms like “amanuensis” will not enjoy this work – and it’s worth noting that a comprehensive knowledge of art and mythology is also required. Sometimes, this becomes excessive – Mitchell’s protagonists should probably be using more colloquial language – but it’s still a beautiful piece of fiction. It is absolutely not, however, light reading.

Objectionable content isn’t extreme. Violence and language are subdued, and sexual themes – occasionally integral to the plot – never manifest graphically. Thanks to the high-level writing, descriptions of vice sound more clinical than titillating…and, to be fair, immorality almost always results in grim consequences.

Is it worth your time?

At once an affirmation of Nietzschean cynicism and a rebuttal thereof, Mitchell’s novel is a thoughtful philosophical odyssey that will challenge the most erudite reader. Lovers of grand metaphysical epics (a la “The Tree of Life”) will find “Cloud Atlas” a work of inspired genius. It’s not easy, but it is immensely rewarding. Audiences looking for clear narratives and readily accessible motifs, however, will likely not enjoy this book.

Personally, I found “Cloud Atlas” a well-executed, profound exploration of the human experience. It’s well worth the investment of time and thought.

VERDICT: 9.5/10
A sweeping, visionary study of human nature and existence, coupled with a sobering prophecy of future darkness. Highly recommended.

 
1 Comment

Posted by on August 6, 2012 in Contemporary