Screw This Movie and Everything it Stands For

Rating: 1/10 (9 August 2017)

The Bourne Legacy - 2012
Directed by Tony Gilroy
Starring Jeremy Renner, Rachel Weisz and Edward Norton
Plot Overview: ​When the actions of Jason Bourne spark a fire that threatens to burn down decades of research across a number of secret intelligence agencies, Eric Byer (Edward Norton), the man who built the programs, decides he must sacrifice one of them: Outcome. Aaron Cross (Jeremy Renner), one of Outcome's six agents, and research scientist Marta Shearing (Rachel Weisz) go on the run when Byer targets them for termination. But Cross proves to be a far deadlier target than Byer realises.
It is an insult to Supremacy and Ultimatum(not a fan of Identity) to call this movie a Bourne movie. Supremacy revolutionised the modern political thriller and Ultimatum revolutionised the modern day action film. What does this film revolutionise? How little companies care about the quality of their film, so long as it makes money. Trust me when I say this, I didn't want to hate this movie, and I am not being overly harsh on it. It is atrocious. With the bleak, bleak exception of one minor, minor idea - I hate everything about this movie. And I mean everything.
The plot. I don't take shame in admitting that I had to google the plot of this film to make that overview up there. I understand what was happening on a basic level, but the motivations and logic behind all of the film's events in either nonexistent, poorly explained or a bit of both. That 50/50 up there is a mutually exclusive even(only one is feasible at any one time) but I think this film found a way to make both realities coexist simultaneously. As stated previously, I liked the concept of the US government dealing with the aftermath of Ultimatum. Here's the problem with that in the film though. This idea(the thing hinted about in the title for God's sake) is mentioned once or twice(in the form of scenes from Ultimatum by the way) and never mentioned again. They gloss over it in a throwaway flashback to something I like. That is cruel. Screw the writers for this movie. Screw you, Tony(Double to you) and Dan Gilroy.
Now the 'performances'. People praise the actors in this movie for doing the best they could with this horrible, horrible script. I don't think they should be praised at all. I disagree that they were competent. Jeremy Renner was pretty mediocre as Aaron Cross and he was basically an invincible Jason Bourne. He was trying too hard to be like Bourne and the writers jacked him up on a mix of steroids and cocaine to do so. I will give Renner credit were credit is due however. I do think Renner would be, with a better director and script, a competent action hero. He clearly has the capability but just was unlucky enough to have Gilroy with him. I see untapped potential for some form of action hero in the future but I can't use the future as credit for something in the past.
Rachel Weisz was also pretty mediocre as Dr Marta Sheering and I still don't understand why she was in the movie. Her character was introduced in quite possibly the most stupid way possible and then she just decided to tag along. I don't know what purpose she served to the film and, quite frankly, I don't know if I care.
Edward Norton - you are better than this. Don't do this to yourself. You have great abilities and I can tell you were at least trying but you are above this. Please, don't come back for a sequel(God forbid it). As an 'antagonist', Norton was pretty weak. I placed the noun antagonist in quotation marks because I think it is generous to call him a villain. He wasn't imposing, threatening, skilled, interesting, strangely likable/charismatic. He was just a dull guy behind a computer monitor who became our villain because Edward Norton is a name people know. It's a shame as well - the pieces for a great villain are there, we just had Tony Gilroy in charge.
The cinematography is really poor in this movie. They utilise shaky cam and quick cuts but don't utilise either effectively. So, if you have a 'thing' for shaky cam or quick cuts, firstly get yourself to a doctor, and then watch this film - you'll probably love it.
The action in this movie(all 10 MINUTES of it) was awful. It was poorly handled. Again that is a shame because it is clear Renner is capable of it.
The visual effects in this movie are atrocious. They look so, so, so fake - it hurts my eyes.
Legacy is a boring, uninteresting, dull, pathetic excuse of an 'action' movie. It doesn't deserve to be credited with the Bourne name and I doubt it will leave a legacy of its own. I'll rate this travesty of a 'BOURNE' film 1 'Bourne Wannabes' out of 10! Don't see it. It isn't even funny bad.