3 for 3, Gilroy's Screenplay Destroys This Fine Series

Rating: 3/10 (27 December 2011)

For any of you who have watched any or all of this series and left scratching your head and wondering why you didn't follow the plot .. well, you're not to be blamed. How Gilroy could have written not one but THREE consecutive screenplays without a single mention of Carlos the Jackal astounds even a jaded movie watcher like me.
If you who don't know who Carlos the Jackal was (he's a real character - Ilich Ramirez Sanchez - from recent history who was just sentenced to life in prison again on 16 Dec 2011, about 10 days ago), then you can't possibly know who Jason Bourne is, nor the very reason for his existence and the ***entire point*** behind this outstanding Ludlum series.
Why would a screenwriter completely strip the core out of three books? Bourne coming to an understanding of how he had been 'created' by the agency, and his growing awareness of the true nature of his mission would have only added to this film. Why oh why was anything of importance to understanding the plot excised? Does Gilroy harbor secret feelings of respect for the hit-man character of Carlos, and was he embarrassed to actually write this character into the script as a villain? Surely Hollywood hasn't drifted that far too the left. However, I can offer no other explanation. Gilroy isn't usually this inept.
That said, even Damon criticized the installment previous to 'Legacy'. Along with Sanchez' re-sentencing, Damon this last week delivered his own sentence upon Gilroy for his writing skills. Damon advised GQ magazine that the script that Gilroy had delivered for 'The Bourne Ultimatum' was "unreadable." Damon reported that "This is a career-ender. I mean, I could put this thing up on eBay and it would be game over for that dude. It's terrible. It's really embarrassing. He was having a go, basically, and he took his money and left." So perhaps Gilroy really is that inept.