It was like they were trying to force a round peg into a square hole with this story and film.

Rating: 5/10 (10 August 2012)

Going to the midnight showing of The Bourne Legacy I wasn't expecting much, but was hoping to be pleasantly surprised like I had with other movies I've had doubts with. Like I had doubts with when I went to see the Bourne Identity, but before I get to my opinion of the film I must first talk about the films that came before. After all Legacy is a continuation and a direct sequel to the Bourne films, so I must first talk about the previous films a little first. Back in 2001 and 2002 leading up to the Bourne Identity I had only remembered seeing Matt Damon in Saving Private Ryan and Good Will Hunting nor had I heard of the books Identity was based off of, so I had my doubts about the film. Still I took a chance and was happily surprised. The Bourne Identity was a great film. The action wasn't over the top like much of the action films of the 1980's and 1990's. It had a unique story, which at the time I don't remember it having been done like it had with this film. The characters were interesting, and the music was great. The film led me to Robert Ludlum novels the film was based off of. I read his three Bourne novels and I must admit I enjoyed the Identity and the rest of the films more then I like the novels. Right now I can only think of one other time that has happened, and it was with The Lord of the Ring series. I enjoyed the novels, but they were truly great books. The films on the other hand were great especially the first two. When The Bourne Supremacy came out in 2004 I had no doubts about the film or Mat Damon this time. It was a great film, and that was even with them killing of Marie an important character from the books and a character I liked. That's how good Supremacy was for me, and who could forget the car chase seen in Moscow with Karl Urban. It's one of the best car chases scenes of all time along with the likes of Bullitt, The French Connection, Ronin and The Road Warrior. When The Bourne Ultimatum came out in 2007 it had a lot to live up to, and through I thought it would be good I didn't think it could surpass Supremacy, but again I was wrong. Ultimatum was as good if not better than its predecessor. That's a rarity in films and franchises for a third sequel to be as good if not better than the film that came before. Right now I can only think of a few films like The Revenge of the Sith, The Dark Knight Rises and Alien 3. Ultimatum was a great film and had a good ending. I know the studio and director left an opening for another film, but in my opinion they should had let sleeping dogs lie. Robert Ludlum had stopped writing Bourne novels back in 1990. I know Eric Van Lustbader is a capable writer, but Ludlum had finished Bourne's journey and the novels feel forced. Matt Damon was moving on, and so was Paul Greengrass. If Universal really wanted to continue with the franchise it should have gotten down on its hands and knees and begged those two to come back, and pay them whatever they wanted. You can see why I had my doubts about Legacy. Still with that being said I'd still gave it a chance like I had with Matt Damon and Identity back in 2002, which leads us to Bourne Legacy.
Where to begin? Where to begin? I could start with the lackluster action, the uninteresting characters. No I'll start with the forced story. When I saw the trailers it looked like they were trying to turn Aaron Cross (Jeremy Renner) into some kind of super soldier. If I want to see a movie with super heroes in it I'd go to see any of the super hero films that come out every few months now a days. That was what was so good about the Bourne films. Sure Jason Bourne was government trained killer, but he was still human, and could get hurt. It's one of the reason's the films were so good. In Legacy they tried to destroy what was so good about the previous films with the story about genetics and drugs turning people into super soldiers. Then there is Gilory trying to force his failed story into the Bourne universe. It's like a child trying to force a square peg into a round opening it just isn't going to work. That's what it feels like in this film as director and writer Gilory tries to force his story with Bourne's. Sure Gilory was the writer for the previous films, but he had inspiration from Ludlum's books. If he created this screenplay on his own then he needs to stick to adapting screenplays from novels, because he can't do it on his own. Maybe Universal forced him to do it this way after all I know they were desperate to keep this franchise going. If so then I can forgive him for his lackluster to bad screen play. The only thing or person that truly saves the story is Aaron Cross. His story is compelling especially how he came to be part of the program and who he was before it. The character kept me interested in the film.
Sorry I'm not posting my full review, but IMDb doesn't let users post reviews with more then a thousand words for some reason. You can check out my full review over at Movieweb.com under Huntsman.