Shaky camera almost ruins strong follow up to 'Bourne Identity'

Rating: 7/10 (23 July 2004)

What really kept this film from becoming what it really could have, was the tiresome over-use of the, 'shaky camera' syndrome.
I mean come on, it was like Katherine Hepburn shooting from atop a circus ball in a mudslide on a stormy day. (No disrespect for our beloved Hepburn) It has it's place however too much of a good thing can be bad and that's what happened here. It took away from many moments including, the fight scenes.
As in the first Bourne, the action was quick yet settled enough to let you absorb what was happening while keeping the effect. Here, two monkeys could have been flailing around and you wouldn't be able to tell the difference. Why the need for so much cover up instead of taking the effort to choreograph some smart and believable sparring? It was truly effective in the first Bourne and should have been kept along the original spirit. Yes we understand different Directors have their own niche so, I'm saying Greengrass and his niche wasn't as Bourne as Director Liman.
It was an interesting story and I believe writer Tony Gilroy did a good job, even humorous at times which played very well. Yet I would like to have seen a bit more that unpretentious and natural physical combat and clever side winding as in the first. Still, it was an interesting film, though it was done pretty well yet still fell short of my hopes.

Damon was made for this and like roles and again an excellent character portrayal. Being a stud without trying to be, is just what this part needed and Matt does a great job at it. As far as I'm concerned, it's about time Damon finds another part of his stride. I hope he continues a while along this path.
All in all Damon and writer Gilroy were the best aspects of this film. Not quite enough to make it what it should have, but they did a good job in making up the best they could for Greengrass' minor mistake in vision, that made a very big impact.
7/10