Jason Bourne, 2016

WARNING: I made no effort with spoiler tags in this post. Read at your own risk.

Except these sig and kik specific spoilers: LOLOLOLOLOLOLLLLLLOLOLLLL at you morons. Read or not I don't care. I have nothing to offer you but finger points and LOLOLOLOLOLLLLLLLOLOLLLLLL. Russian troll loooooosers.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by G:

Yep, their scales keep getting longer.

---

LOL. And to think I once respected Sig as a maybe long winded and high falutin poster but knowledgeable and therefore interesting. What's come of the posted discussions lately has made me dismiss her and her clone entirely. Insane in the membrane, both of them.

Quote:

---

---- spolier alert - you know the drill ----

- face recognition = hat/beard/glasses/wig/hoodie/cheesehead - something! Bourne? Nah. Gotta see Damon's mug.

---

OMG so lame. I read these books loooooong before they were movies and the coolness of Bourne is how he reads any situation and plays a role to blend into it and make it work for him. He can't be recognized because he finds the perfect role to play. He fools people and plays them. Matt Damon is a fine actor and he could of done the Jason Bourne of the novels in a very convincing way. But no, the writers went with cheesy action. It's sad.

Quote:

---

Bourne one-punches several (!) large, trained fighters, but has a hard time beating a french actor (heh).

---

A yep.

All I thought where it comes to that "asset" actor was: bitch get back to your dysfunctional ballet company and your sexual harassment of the ballerinas. The big baddy "asset" in the Bourne movie was the ballet company director in The Black Swan. He was better in the ballet company role, imho. But maybe that's because it was a far better movie.

It really was.

Quote:

---

The only thing that stuck with me afterwards was the light grey cable knit sweater the young agent wore with a white t-shirt underneath. That was a nice look. (heh).

---

Seriously, I have no idea what you're talking about. To each his/her own eh? LOL! I will look for this is the future tho, when the movie is available online.

Quote:

---

Time to end the franchise imho, though the ending tells us not so fast. Bring back the German love interest!

---

I admit, I liked the Bourne Legacy. I would like to see what happens of the characters in that movie. I openly accept my role as a minority by expressing this opinion. So shoot me LOL.




*-----------------------------------------------------------------*
Battle is the Great Redeemer. It is the fiery crucible in which true heroes are forged. The one place where all men truly share the same rank, regardless of what kind of parasitic scum they were going in.
*-----------------------------------------------------------------*

NOTIFY: Y  | REPLY  | REPLY WITH QUOTE  | PERMALINK  | TOP  | HOME

I decided to actually answer your post (for the life of me, I don't know why
I'm doing this).

I'm assuming that your post is in reference to our ongoing friendly feud on RWED. Why do you bring politics into the cinema discussion board?

I don't like it when a movie franchise tries to pull a fast one and pushes a movie solely for monetary gain.

Basically, I feel that they chose to bring Matt Damon back as Jason Borne to exploit his popularity. Okay, this is what Hollywood does for a living. But every once in a while they produce a good cinema experience that doesn't
suck. It seems that more and more these days that we are getting shit and "they're" trying to pass it off as filet mignon.

I love a good spy thriller:

2001's Spy Game comes to mind.
2011's MI: Ghost Protocol (except for the ending).
2015's Bridge of Spies
1965's The Ipcress File
1994's True Lies
1990's The Hunt for Red October (one of my favorites)
2015's Spy (surprisingly good)
2010's Salt
2015's MI: Rogue Nation
2002's The Bourne Identity

Just to name a few that I actually watched. I know that these movies are a
fantasy escape, like most, but what makes you think my head will explode
when presented with "real" facts/truth? You are referring to my
observations and comments when I post in RWED, to which you disagree. I get that. But bringing that here to Cinema, it just doesn't fit or make sense.
Of course, you could do what you want, it is a free country.

Just wanted to speak my piece.


SGG

NOTIFY: Y  | REPLY  | REPLY WITH QUOTE  | PERMALINK  | TOP  | HOME

Is SGG whining about a thread which BELONGS in Cinema forum getting diverted to a RW exchange? Really? After putting an EXPLICITLY RWED TOPIC in General Discussion forum? Really?
http://www.fireflyfans.net/mthread.aspx?tid=60670

If you are speaking to me, I thought you had delved into RW with your comment, but upon reflection you may have not intended to. I did consider the ramifications but did not think I was the initiator.

I tried to make clear that although you were responding to the Hilliary's America topic, I did still recommend Bourne.

NOTIFY: Y  | REPLY  | REPLY WITH QUOTE  | PERMALINK  | TOP  | HOME

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SHINYGOODGUY:
I decided to actually answer your post (for the life of me, I don't know why
I'm doing this).

...

Just to name a few that I actually watched. I know that these movies are a
fantasy escape, like most, but what makes you think my head will explode
when presented with "real" facts/truth? You are referring to my
observations and comments when I post in RWED, to which you disagree. I get that. But bringing that here to Cinema, it just doesn't fit or make sense.
Of course, you could do what you want, it is a free country.

---

I'm confused. Are you replying to me?



*-----------------------------------------------------------------*
Battle is the Great Redeemer. It is the fiery crucible in which true heroes are forged. The one place where all men truly share the same rank, regardless of what kind of parasitic scum they were going in.
*-----------------------------------------------------------------*

NOTIFY: Y  | REPLY  | REPLY WITH QUOTE  | PERMALINK  | TOP  | HOME

Quote:

---

Originally posted by MAL4PREZ:
Anyhow, I was interested in your take on this movie. I saw bad reviews elsewhere, positive here, so I trusted you fireflyfans and went to see it today.

I can't review in full without spoiling. Simple summary: I thought the movie was poor unless you approach it in a certain state of mind.

---

I am sorry you did not find it enjoyable. It was not my intention to mislead you or anybody else.

Quote:

---

Select to view spoiler:

---

This review starts very negative. There is some positive to come. Hang in there.

The first half - balony! You're an uber-spy doing uber-spy business in the middle of a city wide riot full of protesters covering their faces while they throw bombs, and you MUST know about facial recognition because you're an uber-spy, and it doesn't occur to you to wear a hat and put a scarf over your mouth? If these morons Jason and Nicki had done this small thing all would have been well. But that don't fit movie plot. *smh*

Oh yeah. Jason figured out to wear a hat in Vegas. So he knew. But not in Greece? Moron.

Ok, so you're an uber-spy with a USB drive full of of mega secrets and it doesn't occur to you to turn off the internet access of the laptop you're using before you decode and read the USB? Put the damn thing in a metal box so no signals can go in or out? Pfft. Some uber-spy.

There was plenty more like this. My eyes were rolling out of my head for the first half of the movie. Garbage.

And let's just talk about the camera shake. WTF? It is not at all clear that any fight happened with anyone other than the idiot trying to hold the camera. Compare this to Daredevil, a series on a TV budget where fighting very clearly actually happened because we could see the fight. Beautiful amazingly choreographed fighting, in terms of both the fighters and the camera motion. Bourne? Nope.

There is some positive writing-wise in this movie as far as the big picture of the plot. Riots in Greece, software privacy and piracy, several nods to the game change (good or bad?) that was Snowden. The writers were up on the current issues and I like that. I also really like how they built the tension into the final showdown, and they used a tech conference as the scene for it. Thumbs up there. I really wasn't sure what would happen in Vegas and I was looking forward to seeing how it all came together.

OK and it fulfilled that promise in a way. The movie finally made sense to me at this point: the car chase in Las Vegas. This movie (unlike the novels) was not about spys and plots and politics and the cleverness of manipulating and outsmarting your foe. It was about the pure visceral visual pleasure of those cars flying about. Watch it again and blur your eyes: blue, red, yellow, white lights. That's a deliberate color scheme developed throughout the movie, with the quickly passing blurred-but-sharp-in-the-frame visuals introduced early and developed steadily. Those colors of Las Vegas lights are reflected sharply on blurred surfaces of cars as they fly past the camera with edited cuts every second or less.

There is no telling which car is going which way and why but daaaamn those colors and blurs look cool.

Pass the bowl dude!

That car chase scene is not about understanding the reality of it, where this car turned left and that one counter-moved. It's about enjoying the visual at each second with no such deep understanding. It's about a pretty picture that changes every second. The whole movie was about setting up that visual. It was all sensibility and no sense.

You will love this movie if you are not a thinker. You will really love it if you are high. Really really high.

Sad. The novels were much better than that.

---

*-----------------------------------------------------------------*
Battle is the Great Redeemer. It is the fiery crucible in which true heroes are forged. The one place where all men truly share the same rank, regardless of what kind of parasitic scum they were going in.
*---

NOTIFY: Y  | REPLY  | REPLY WITH QUOTE  | PERMALINK  | TOP  | HOME