Solid sequel, but did it HAVE to be shot in Shakyscope?

Rating: 7/10 (13 September 2004)

I can unquestionably say that by its end I had thoroughly enjoyed this sequel to (the better) "The Bourne Identity". But there were two factors that almost RUINED the movie for me (and they have been justifiably discussed below): the CONSTANTLY moving camera and the too-fast editing during action scenes. What was the director/editor thinking? "Hey, if it works for Bruckheimer, it'll work for us!"? Did they ever stop to realize these are the two reasons why most of Bruckheimer's movies are AWFUL?! Even during scenes in "Supremacy" where two characters were absolutely motionless and merely having a conversation, the camera still meandered around the room, never stopping to register on a subtle expression here and there or on people's eyes. How was this ill-conceived "technique" ever born (no pun intended)? What moron ever thought for a moment that constantly moving the camera was a good idea? Were they afraid that audiences today had grown so jaded with time-tested cinematic grammar that they would flee movie theaters in droves? Hand-held camera work is fine for documentaries, out of necessity. But when it is so over-utilized in a theatrical film, it just translates to one thing and one thing only: the director has NO FAITH in the material. Did Greengrass never look at "Bourne Identity" to see how beautifully constructed it was?
The action scenes in "Supremacy" were a joke. When will filmmakers understand that when said scenes are so chaotically edited together (see "The Transporter" as an example), the viewer's brain literally "disconnects" from the action; because there is too much information in too short a time to analyze adequately, it is impossible for the average film-goer to cognate and construct a linear visual narrative in their head. Consequently, the mind simply...gives up. The fight scene in the small apartment is a perfect example: all I could see were just two black blurs being tossed around for three minutes. Was I ever in the moment? No. Was I engaged? No. Was I empathetic to the hero? Uh...which one is the hero, I can't tell? I found myself actually looking away from the screen, I was so disinterested (more involuntarily than voluntarily).
Whoever directs the next sequel, and I certainly hope it is NOT Greengrass, please do the following: learn as much as you can from Liman's success and Greengrass' blunders before you proceed. Millions of loyal Jason Bourne fans will thank you for it.