Does not let spectacle erode substance, or style destroy thought

Rating: 8/10 (14 August 2012)

The Bourne series (comprising of 2002's The Bourne Identity, 2004's The Bourne Supremacy, and 2007's The Bourne Ultimatum) redefined the spy movie genre- first up it was one of the few movies to be better than their source material (Robert Ludlum's books were not a patch on the films), it created a heady concoction of realism with fantasy, along with edgy action sequences, a believable hero and crucially, topped it all off with an apt ending- no wonder they made over a billion dollars at the box office. And yet again, 5 years down the line- we have a reboot/sequel, whatever you may call, but i think the word that best fits The Bourne Legacy is sidequel- there is NO Bourne, just some vague references...it takes place in a time-line overlapping the events of The Bourne Ultimatum, and introduces a new central character in addition to tying in lines from the previous movies. Is the movie any good? Or more importantly, was the sidequel necessary?
The basic plot is not largely different from its predecessors. Bourne's public revelations at the end of The Bourne Ultimatum have had far ranging ramifications- all government secret soldier programs are being hastily shut down, active agents and scientists associated with those programs are being mercilessly exterminated. But come what may, one of them refuses to be put down- Alex Cross, played by Jeremy Renner is a different kind of Bourne. His super soldier routine requires active medication- and the blue/green pills that he takes give him almost superhuman strength, pain resistance, agility, and acumen. Alex survives his assassination attempt to unite with Dr. Marta Shearling (Rachel Weisz) who can help him remove his dependency on the pills yet keep his enhanced skills. The rest of the movie is one long across the world chase sequence, where Alex and Marta pool in every skill at their disposal to stay ahead of the wolves, both the howling type and the tech laden ones, led by Edward Norton's Eric Byer.
The good things first- fans of the original Bourne series will surely be satiated- Jeremy Renner is an excellent replacement to Matt Damon. The first sequence in Alaska sets up interesting traits of his character- he is smart, resourceful, curious and a does not hesitate in giving it back (" You should have left me alone"- he says to an insistent wolf while popping in a GPS tracker down its throat). Renner 110% looks the part and plays it with both charisma and sincerity. The Hurt Locker, Mission Impossible 4, The Town, Avengers- seems he is the go to guy for action movies currently, and he delivers excellently too. So often people get the damsel in distress wrong, but age has only made Rachel Weisz prettier and experience, a better actor. She is utterly believable as a scientist out of her depth and on the run. Even though there isn't an explicit romantic angle, the chemistry between Renner and Rachel is sizzling. Like Denzel Washington, Edward Norton's mere presence in any movie makes it a couple of notches better. Essentially the villain and passionately convicted to the cause, he is underutilized here, but even then manages to add a touch of class. The action sequences are right up Bourne's alley- raw, electrifying, and the climactic rooftop- bike-top chase sequence will surely go down as one of the greatest ever, there are a couple of suspenseful scenes as well- none better than when a scientist goes berserk in an utterly cold and calculated way. The dialogs are concise, and the soundtrack catchy.
It has its share of imperfections though, the movie at 136mins feels too long- there are segments which tend to drag and would have worked better with some editing. This is also not for people not familiar with the series as it picks up directly from the previous movies, and so there are humongous sections tossing out lingo such as Treadstone and Blackbrair that will be understandable to dedicated followers of the series. Plus, though the action was good, i would have wanted a bit more of it. Tony Gilroy wrote all the previous Bourne movies, and directed this one, and while his script is top notch, the direction, though competent, could have been better- the plot is simple enough but the attempt to link it with the Bourne of yore is a bit confusing.
In retrospect, this movie is kind of like passing of the baton- while the ending was open enough, reboots/remakes are always about money and box office success will determine whether there is a Bourne 5 or not- whether Cross or Bourne work together, or against or fly solo. Unlike recent CGI special action flicks such as Total Recall, The Bourne Legacy does not let spectacle erode substance, or style destroy thought- it takes time to pick up speed but once it does, its one hell of a ride, besides the fact that it fulfils what 99% of the audience want ie. to see beautiful people do exciting things. 8/10- remember to take the popcorn!