Another poor film for this year.. - when will it end?

Rating: Null/10 (28 June 2002)

*spoilers*
Why oh why can't we have a decent, stylish thriller? Why? For some reason, directors think they can have some flashy binoculars and the words 'Zurich, Switzerland' in a computer-style type-written font, and that all us idiots in the world will sigh 'ooooh...cool'. Well not this idiot. Oh, and I haven't even gotten onto the ridiculous plot-holes yet.
The premise of the movie sounded good. However, you have to suspend disbelief immediately when you're supposed to believe that Bourne didn't drown in the water in the beginning. I'll let that go though and move on... When we finally have Bourne on his feet, we're rewarded by some relatively solid acting. Matt Damon is a far superior and more believable actor than Ben Affleck, who was pretty unconvincing in "The Sum of All Fears", out around the same time as "Bourne." Anyway, Damon does a decent job, as does Franka Potente, who hasn't really done anything great since "Blow" and "Run Lola Run" - which was superb. Julia Stiles should be ashamed of herself for taking such a nothing part, and I won't any further mention of her during this review. Clive Owen does a pretty suave job as a government hired assassin, and I think we'll see a lot more of him in the future. 007 perhaps?
Anyway, to the meat of the review - the terrible plot holes. Stop reading here if you haven't see the movie! Firstly, why exactly is it that the CIA want Bourne dead? Why? It makes absolutely no sense! Wombosi was killed afterwards, and so surely they just need to contact Bourne and sort out the whole amnesia thing. But no! Why not kill Bourne? No wait! I think I figured out why the CIA wanted to kill him! - because the director thought it would make a good movie and that hopefully movie-goers wouldn't notice! Genius! As soon as we see Potente arguing at the American Embassy, you know she's going to be a part of the movie. How wonderfully coincidental that she just happens to be outside with a 'soon to be Porsche style' Mini when Damon makes his escape. How handy. Cliché-orama. And what about that red bag? Damon leaves it at the station in the locker, yet apparently never picks it up again. How then does he happen to have it back when they're shacked up at Eamon's house? The point of leaving it at the station was what, pray tell? That might not be too ridiculous, but you'd think the director could at least understand time zones whilst making the movie. 'Meet me in Paris at 5.30pm today' says Bourne, in one scene. We then see the plane, quite clearly not a Concorde - at the airport. There's no possible way the CIA agent could have made it to Paris at that time. You could just say I'm being picky, but it just irked me the second that scene graced the screen. Sigh (number 1 of many). Heck...watch the movie. You'll probably pick up far more instances than me in regards to the plot holes.
In regards to the action, of which there was little, - it was pretty irritating. There was once nice car chase, which has been likened to Ronin's, but it's not in the same league. Firstly, Bourne is driving a Mini. Secondly...well..is there need for one? It did however amuse me when a policeman on a bike tries to...well...ram the car, or something. I couldn't quite figure out that part. Car vs bike. I wonder who will win.

In regards to the Bourne fight scenes, they were astonishingly poorly shot. The camera kept moving in different directions. It hurt the eyes to watch. It was a real mess.
I could go on, but I won't. I feel like this review is written as badly as the movie was directed. If you've seen the movie already, you'll know what I mean, and if you're about to see the movie, you'll soon know what I mean. Oh, and the ending. Can we say 'cliché' any more times?

Sigh. (number 2 of many)