Bourne Legacy (August 10, 2012)

[Cream Soda]

You Don't Need Jason Bourne For A Bourne Movie, Apparently

Matt Damon vowed, after director Paul Greengrass left the "Bourne" franchise, that he'd never do another "Bourne" movie unless they let Greengrass return. Tony Gilroy, screenwriter of two of the films and director of "Michael Clayton," has taken over the franchise, and he's found a way out of the Damon problem: Get rid of Jason Bourne.

The next film will be called "The Bourne Legacy," but even though the name's in the title, the film will have no Jason Bourne. Thus, no Matt Damon. Interestingly enough, the book "The Bourne Legacy" does have Jason Bourne (though it wasn't actually written by Robert Ludlum, the creator of the book series). Gilroy explained to Hollywood Elsewhere's Jeffrey Wells that he's just taking the title and running with it.

"The easiest way to think of it is an expansion or a reveal. Jason Bourne will not be in this film, but he's very much alive. What happened in the first three films is the trigger for what happens. I'm building a legend and an environment and a wider conspiracy…the world we're making enhances and advances and invites Jason Bourne's return [down the road]. Everything you saw in the first three films actually happened, and everyone who got into will be rewarded for paying attention. We're going to show you the bigger picture, the bigger canvas. When you see what we're going and see what we're doing it'll be pretty obvious….but Jason Bourne's actvities in the first three films is the immediate trigger."

When Gilroy says he's only using the title of the book, not the plot, he's not kidding: "The Bourne Legacy," which came out in 2004 and is written by Eric Van Lustbader (who took over the franchise from the Ludlum estate for six more books), is all about Jason Bourne. Picking up where "The Bourne Ultimatum" left off, "Legacy" features Bourne back as David Webb (his birth name), teaching classes at Georgetown. He survives an assassination attempt and is -- all together now -- drawn into a complicated web of intrigue and deceit. Considering the whole book -- and the rest of the books written by Van Lustbader -- is about Bourne's adventures, Gilroy's adaptation will be anything but: He's essentially inventing a brand-new character and hitching it to the Bourne franchise.

The new direction may jibe well with Gilroy's "Michael Clayton" sensibility, though basically it sounds like Jason Bourne started some sort of "movement," which doesn't seem like Bourne's style. Curiously, Gilroy leaves the door open for Bourne's - that is to say, Damon's - return at some point, presuming the films are so good he just couldn't help but want to be a part of them. So, we have another entry in the casting couch speculation derby: Who's playing the new Bourne/not-Bourne? Horizons should be expanded; when they cast the first Bourne film, no one considered Matt Damon an action star either.

Hollywood hollywood

[Rhinox]

wow

Why bother making it? might as well donate the money for this box office flop to charity.

[kuronosan]

Yea, but that's Hollywood for you. Let's completely change something but keep the title because we know it won't make money any other way.

[Zethren]

yay, honestly don't give a shit at all there is no matt damon(even though <3 him)
Will just treat this as another bourne type fast paced action flick.
That's enough for me

[kuronosan]

And that's why shitty movies keep being made, folks.

[tyven]

ahahaha i actually read the bourne legacy, wasnt even written by Ludlum. was a full on shit fest. they strayed so far from the books that it obviously doesnt matter but holy shit.

[Pharaun]

I'd be more likely to watch this if they were actually making a new franchise, the fact that they are just trying to cash in on the Bourne name will make me not see it on principle.

[Riposte]

The book Bourne Legacy basically starts off killing two of the three supporting characters and marginalizing the other(most important) supporting character. I just had to read a spoiler for it to know that I would never ever touch it.

What they should do is just adapt the books for real now.

CARLOSSSSSSSS THE JACKALLLLL

The other three movies were great though. Lack of Carlos aside.

[avelle]

This sounds lame as hell and as mentioned above is probably going to flop.

[Tyrath]

I like Jeremy Renner, but still not feeling this without Damon..

Pleasantly surprised to find Ed Norton in it though.

[Pirian]

Never got into the Bourne series, so probably won't see this either. I know I saw the first and third movie, but I'm pretty sure I never saw the 2nd.

Also,

[hey]

Saw thread, not realizing there was a new one coming, and got very excited.

Then saw Daemon wasn't in it, and now, ijdk.

[Odesseiron]

I'm very interested in this. Bourne 2 & 3 were absolutely ruined for me due to fucking shaky cam bullshit.

Also excited to finally see Renner with a Lead role. You can argue he was Lead in Hurt Locker, but not to the extent of this movie. Guy is very good. Time to see if he can hold a movie on his own. I have hope for him.

[WahiGuard]

^This.

[Kurokikaze]

Jeremy Renner is a pretty good actor so this can't be THAT bad. Lots of good movies coming out this year...

[GRT]

Why did they not use the 007 method and just have another actor play Borne? Jeremy Renner should be able to fill Damon's shoes just fine imo

[Elvis]

Looks good actually. Isn't the whole point behind this to eventually have a sequel where they'll both be starring?

[Delirium]

[Tyrath]

After seeing Renner in Avengers and MI4 I'm excited for this.

Looks good actually. Isn't the whole point behind this to eventually have a sequel where they'll both be starring?

Never heard of this but it could be cool if done correctly.

[Iono]

Don't remember Bourne films too well. They ever say they sent all the hitmen after J.Bourne?

Rachel Weisz looking good again tho.