sign of the times

Rating: 6/10 (20 August 2012)

The previous Bourne films with Matt Damon were driven by Jason Bourne's relentless pursuit of his humanity: freedom, redemption and identity. In those films, the CIA was similarly animated by a strong sense of (misguided) nationalism, paternalism and duty. Jason Bourne tread similar ground to the action heroes that preceded him in his fight to escape from the karmic wheel of violence that he seems inevitable drawn into. It is these themes that make his otherwise brutal character sympathetic.
The Bourne Legacy is made of different stuff. Jeremy Renner's agent is driven by nothing deeper than an animal instinct to survive, whether he is braving the wilds of Alaska or hiding among the sheep-like masses of common humanity. The film also makes it clear that the CIA units that pursue him have identical motivations: political survival, which the film implies is tied to the survival of the individuals involved. Renner's agent knows who he is and what he is capable of, and stops at nothing to keep his CIA grafted abilities because he believes he will not survive otherwise. The effect is a film which has scant humanity for the audience to sympathize with.
My feeling is that political thrillers/actioners are written like a mirror to current events of the time. The prior films are a different beast because they are a product of different times, perhaps a time when the idea of politics as a human endeavor (if not humanistic) was at least believable. As a thriller, the Bourne Legacy, in contrast, is informed by a frighteningly simple belief in realpolitik: power as a means of guaranteeing continued survival. This feeling that as individuals or a nation we are a snarling animal backed into a corner is unappealing, but perhaps a fairly honest assessment of our milieu.