Smart, taut writing clashes with incoherent fighting

Rating: 6/10 (24 July 2004)

I went to see The Bourne Supremacy with high expectations. 2002's "The Bourne Identity" was one of the best action-spy-intrigue movies in years, and the critics were touting "The Bourne Supremacy" as a worthy sequel - one notch up from the original. Like another highly praised sequel (Spiderman 2), I would put it a notch down. In both cases, that's not exactly harsh criticism.
What separated the "The Bourne Identity" from its well-worn genre was a combination of a complex and engaging story, taut writing, and most importantly, solid directing, particularly with regard to the combat scenes between Jason Bourne and his various antagonists. We were spared elaborate martial arts choreography plunging rhythmically in and out of slow motion. Instead, the fights were brutal and short: if Bourne's opponents were unsuspecting policemen, they were quickly dispatched; if they were fellow Treadstone operatives, then blows were exchanged with lightning-quick staccato. These were men trying to kill each other, and they fought with mechanical determination. But at least the camera staid still long enough for us to SEE what was going on.
In "The Bourne Supremacy," the complex and engaging story as well as the taut writing are both still in place. It is the action that disappoints. The new director, Paul Greengrass, is clearly going for a similar effect, but his method leaves a lot to be desired. Basically, he changes camera takes so fast that what you see is almost a series of still images. You have no real sense of the fight, and the familiar sound that accompanies body blows is timed so that it coincides with the shifting of the camera. It is a cheap way out: it only creates the feel of a fight without the substance. If you try to reconstruct it after you see it, all you will remember is that Bourne and whoever were fighting, instead of the fight itself. There is something to be said for quick and disorienting camera work that mimics quick and disorienting violence. But this effect is lost to incoherence in "The Bourne Supremacy." The movie's climactic car chase (which the New York Times reviewer called one of the three or four best ever filmed) suffers from the same problems. You constantly see the moment of collision between cars, and split-second shots of Bourne's feet on the gas/brake/clutch pedals, but you don't actually see a coherent chase. Not only that, in a movie where the violence itself tends toward realism (Bourne hurts his leg jumping from a height of about 20 feet, etc), the damage sustained by Bourne's car in the final chase would have demolished it two or three times over. Sure, there is such as thing as suspension of disbelief. But one of the main strengths of both "Bourne" movies is that they veer away from the excesses of action flicks in the last several years (think: Mission Impossible 2). Had the rest of the film consistently portrayed a world where people and objects endure an inflated amount of damage, then the final chase would have been unremarkable. As it is, it stands out, and not as the crowning finale. I would still recommend this movie over pretty much every action movie that has been released since "The Bourne Identity" in 2002. But sadly, it falls noticeably short of its potential. 7/10