Third Bourne not a charm.

Rating: Null/10 (6 August 2007)

After reading all the glowing reviews and having loved the first two Bournes, I was eager to see this film. And, of course, with Matt Damon as the star, how could it be anything but great? But the reviewers must lack any kind of discrimination because the film was a bore. And it didn't even star Matt Damon. It starred the camera, which was a complete ham throughout: bobbing, weaving, leaping, panning, jumping, spinning, doing everything but capturing real action. The fight scenes were what I call "Tarzan and the Snake" shots. (In 1981's "Tarzan, The Ape Man" we don't actually see our loin-clothed hero battle a snake, just some quick still shots.) Damon was, as usual, strong, but the story, when you could see it, was nothing but all the chase scenes you've seen in a hundred films from "Bullitt" to every Bond. Stiles, Allen, Strahairn, Finney et al were wasted, the apartment-jumping chase scene (borrowed from the last MI) was hilariously unlikely (doesn't anybody live in that neighborhood?). Pity, the first two Bournes were tight, exciting, believable. This was a string of clichés lensed by a cameraman on too much caffeine by producers who had the arrogance to think that today's reviewers are so film-illiterate that they would fall for lots of fast-moving shots but very little real action. And damned if they weren't right.