Why film it this way?

Rating: 6/10 (4 August 2007)

Just saw the third chapter of the 'Bourne' franchise and I must say I was disappointed. Paul Greengrass needs to understand that the use of the Steadycam worked very well in United 93, a hypothetical documentary (I refrain from calling it a mock-umentary), it's use is NOT optimal with this subject. The action scenes are way to shaky, even the excessive close-ups are shaky. I noted this same problem when he directed the 2nd film of this series. This is an ACTION picture, I need to be able to make out what action is happening, not just that action is happening. The first director, Doug Liman, did a far better job of filming action scenes. In addition to that, there are a number of plot issues that I'll not outline in detail, but are notable enough for me to go "What? they're just now figuring out she lied?" or "How did he get in there?" Also, are supposed to have any character depth? Aside from Bourne having some flashbacks, where we mostly see the top of Jason's head, no one has or shows much emotion. There is some possible spots where some humanity could show, but we never get there. So, if the focus is supposed to be "Who Am I...Really?" and we are supposed to care, then this isn't that film.