In-Depth Movie Reviews & High Quality Trailers

Posts tagged “intelligence agent

The Bourne Legacy (2012)

I have never been so bored out of my skull in a theatre as I was watching this movie.  I’ve never walked out on a theatrical screening, but this tempted me to.  Not because it’s some atrocious motion picture, but just by how boring it is.  If I was watching this anywhere other than in a theatre, I would’ve stopped watching within the first half hour.  I have thoroughly enjoyed all three previous entries in the Jason Bourne franchise, and while on paper this might seem to have a lot of potential to be a decent Bourne-less sequel, it entirely fails.  There are so many factors that feed into the dull, lifeless quality of this film.  Not the least of which are a flatly conceived new lead character and a mess of exposition trying to impart three movies of back story which ultimately have no consequence on this story.  There is nothing exceptional or engaging in the least about The Bourne Legacy.  Why must my summer movie experience be filled with so much disappointment?  Oh well, here we go, again.

In the wake of Jason Bourne’s dismemberment of Operation Blackbriar, the CIA discretely enlists the expertise of retired USAF Colonel Eric Byer (Edward Norton) to investigate and purge all incriminating evidence between the agency and Blackbriar.  The CIA then decides to dispose of their other black ops programs, which includes the termination of their field agents.  However, Aaron Cross (Jeremy Renner), an agent from Operation Outcome, escapes from being executed in the Alaskan wilderness and, with the help of Outcome scientist Dr. Marta Shearing (Rachel Weisz), sets out to find a permanent solution to the Outcome physiological enhancement medication he has become dependent upon while fighting to survive those who would try to terminate him.

This is a very peculiar film.  One would think that this would be a sort of fresh new beginning for the franchise without the Bourne character, but it’s weighed down to suffocating depths with back story which could easily have been excised for a far leaner and more streamlined story.  If you haven’t seen the previous three films, you’re going to be so lost and clueless about what’s going on as characters bombard the audience with events that overlap with and fallout from The Bourne Ultimatum.  However, after a while, the film ultimately has nothing to do with anything that happened in the previous three movies.  Having seen The Bourne Identity, Supremacy, & Ultimatum multiple times, I was still lost within this maze of excessive and pointless exposition.  There is such a massive volume of explanations of things that just don’t amount to anything.  It’s not confusing, per se, but the prolonged complex dialogue scenes eventually blur into mind numbing ramblings very quickly.  For example, Edward Norton’s character is meeting with so many people early on giving them a breakdown of what the ramifications are of everything that’s happening, but it’s so painfully convoluted and overbloated that the point of it all gets lost in the mix.  I’m sure a far more focused and sharp screenwriter could’ve condensed fifteen minutes of exposition amongst numerous one-off characters into a straight-to-the-point two minute conversation.  The film also gets so wrapped up in its own severe grounded realism that it forgets to clearly or efficiently relate information to an audience.  Nothing is explained in laymen’s terms.  Dr. Shearing fully explains what these chemicals do to Aaron’s physiology, but it’s explained in such pure clinical science terms that I would doubt that Cross himself would understand much of what she’s saying, let alone a general audience.

Some scenes are so drawn out to the point where they are counteractive to their own point.  For a spoiler example, a team of undercover operatives try to off Marta by staging her suicide.  They go under the guise of investigators or psychiatric counselors, and that psychiatric conversation is dragged on and on for several long, pointless minutes before they actually get around to attempting to stage the suicide.  The act is only broken up when Aaron Cross shows up out of nowhere at her home, to which it’s never explained how he knows where she lives.  It’s a terrible plot contrivance and a hole in logic that the filmmakers just expect us to not question.  For all the mind numbing time they spend explaining everything else in this film, you’d think they could take half a minute to explain that.

This film has several great and highly capable acting talents in Jeremy Renner, Edward Norton, Rachel Weisz, and Stacy Keach, but there is just nothing here for any of them to work with.  There are barely any proper introductions for any of these characters for an audience to even learn many of their names.  If the film can’t clearly convey that simple aspect of the characters, it’s no surprise that the film never develops any substance into these characters.  I barely knew anything more about these people at the end of the film than I did at the start.  There is no depth and barely any diversity of emotion shown to build up an empathy with anyone.  Every actor does as good of a job as they could do with what they were given, but this is such a lifeless, soulless movie with purely one dimensional characters.  I was indifferent towards every single character, and that partially contributes to a lack of tension or suspense in the film.  What also adds to that is the fact that Aaron Cross never sustains so much as a scratch jumping off cliffs and rooftops, fighting wolves with his bare hands, dodging gunfire, beating people up, and running for his life.  Every adversary seems all too easy for him to take down, and thus, there’s no one that poses a real threat to him in any of the extremely few action scenes this film has.

The action sequences are very few and very far between.  Where my review of the Total Recall remake suggested there was probably too much action and not enough character development in that film, The Bourne Legacy has an extreme lack of action in addition to an extreme lack of character development.  The action sequences probably add up to ten, maybe fifteen minutes of the more than two hour long runtime.  Ultimately, these are all terribly forgettable and tired action sequences.  There’s nothing fresh or particularly exciting about them.  Director Tony Gilroy had said that the film would not employ the use of Paul Greengrass’ notorious shaky-cam, quick cut action style.  Well, he lied.  While it’s not consistently as bad as what Greengrass does, it does eventually get to being that bad in the lackluster climax of the movie.  As with the previous three movies, Legacy gives us another motor vehicle chase sequence.  This time, it’s mostly on motorbikes, but like how some dialogue scenes drag on and on without a point, so does this climax.  It seriously goes on for the better part of ten minutes where there’s barely anything at stake in it.  The villain that’s chasing them is just some random hired gun who has no investment in the plot.  The exposition about who he was got so jumbled up in all the other procedural dialogue that I never understood exactly who he was.  I just kept waiting for this chase sequence to finally end, but it just kept picking itself back up off the pavement for more.  And this ending has no pay-off.  With no emotional depth to the story, there’s ultimately nothing anyone is actually fighting for, and thus, nothing to triumph over.  There are no passionate principles or struggle for a new self-identity for Aaron Cross to dedicate himself to.  There is no change to who he is at any point during the movie, and we barely know anything about him.

There is some back story given about Aaron Cross, but none of it mattered to me.  His story isn’t tragic, it’s not conflicted, and it certainly has nothing sympathetic about it.  The film takes well over an hour to actually tell us why he keeps jonesing for these meds, the same amount of time it takes for an actual semblance of a plot to develop, and the reason isn’t convincing.  One of the pills he takes enhances intelligence and brain function, and his recruitment officer had to falsify his IQ by 12 points so he could qualify for service.  He goes off the meds, he becomes dumb, again.  So, his whole motivation in the film is to obtain more medication so he doesn’t lose his fabricated intelligence.  That just doesn’t sell as a credible, relatable motivation.  It lacks any self-less quality or humanity for an audience to connect with.  I also find it peculiar that he has been physically enhanced to be stronger, faster, and more resistant to pain.  However, Jason Bourne had none of those drug induced enhancements, and was still able to do every impressive physical feat that Aaron Cross could do in this movie and more.  Not to mention, he could still do many of them while injured and beaten up.

As Jeremy Renner has demonstrated with both Mission: Impossible – Ghost Protocol and The Avengers, he can capably handle a role of this nature.  He can give us a strong action oriented performance fueled by a relatable and charismatic character.  However, that character is not Aaron Cross.  He’s a guy fighting only for himself, and is only aided by Marta because she’s being hunted by these same people.  After he initially saves her, he doesn’t start inquiring about her well being after nearly being killed.  He straight up, aggressively asks if she has any of the medication on hand so he can get his fix.  Cross has no charm, no heart, no depth.  I don’t know if there was an intention to spark a romantic connection between Aaron and Marta, but Renner and Weisz certainly have no spark.  I surely wouldn’t want Aaron Cross to be a carbon copy of Jason Bourne, but it’s hard to replace such a powerfully dimensional character in Bourne.  Jeremy Renner handles all the physical demands of the role very convincingly, but the character just has nothing interesting to offer.  It’s certainly not Renner’s fault that the script was so overbloated and shallow.  The dialogue and story give him no room to breathe life into the role, to give it charisma, levy, or emotional depth.

The one word I keep going back to in my mind to describe this movie is “pointless.”  The story it tells has no point, the characters have nothing purposeful to say, and the action serves little purpose to exist.  This is a film that doesn’t showcase any potential at all to be good.  It’s not a steaming pile of garbage, but it just lacks passion and motivation.  The script seems like something that should’ve gone through a few more drafts to chop out all that tiresome, go-nowhere dialogue, and build some strong characters and a thrilling story.  Doug Limon directed The Bourne Identity, and had a great sense of gritty, coherent action and a vibrant, character driven story.  Despite the cinematography drawbacks of Paul Greengrass’ style, he is an amazing director who can craft a powerful, deeply emotional story with some hard hitting drama and action.  Tony Gilroy falters greatly with The Bourne Legacy.  He can write and direct some great stuff.  Michael Clayton was an excellent dramatic film that he wrote and directed amazingly well, and has been a co-writer on every film in this franchise.  So, I don’t know what happened here.  Beyond just how he made such a terribly boring, lifeless, hollow movie, I don’t know how Universal Pictures backed this script.  Usually franchise cash grabs are train wrecks or just reek of second rate indulgence.  This is just not trying at all, and that just hurts.  I wish there was more to analyze about this movie to deconstruct it further, but there really isn’t.  It has no substance or ambition to be anything worthwhile.  I found nothing interesting, exciting, or redeeming in the fabric of this film.  Again, it’s not a horrendous film that will make you curse its existence, but it simply had no reason to exist.  I do not recommend seeing The Bourne Legacy.  I found it to be a waste of time.  You’ll be far more pleased re-watching The Bourne Identity, The Bourne Supremacy, or The Bourne Ultimatum instead.


Double Team (1997)

Jean-Claude Van Damme and Dennis Rodman.  Far too strange of a pairing to ignore.  You throw Mickey Rourke into the mix as the villain, and how can you really say no?  Okay, so this wasn’t a blockbuster, and even plans for a sequel never materialized.  I was not allowed to see the film in theatres at the time, punishment for getting poor progress reports in high school that week.  So, I discovered it on VHS, and now, re-discovered it on a decent widescreen DVD.  I can understand why this got negative reviews, but the fact is, Double Team wasn’t trying to be anything more than what it was – a fun, exciting, and highly entertaining action film.

Van Damme portrays CIA counter-terrorist operative Jack Quinn who runs one final mission before retirement to start a family with his lovely wife Kathryn.  Years later, with his pregnant wife in the South of France, Quinn is paid a visit by an old colleague to rope him back into action to help bring down his old nemesis Stavros (Mickey Rourke).  A man who once worked for the good guys when they needed someone with the stomach for dirtier work to be done, but has long since worked for the other side supplying arms and other contraband.  In prepping this operation in Antwerp, Jack taps eccentric arms dealer Yaz (Dennis Rodman) who himself “doesn’t play with the bad boys anymore, just the good guys.”  They strike a fun chord with one another, making a memorable impression.  However, Quinn misses the target, and the mission is a failure.  Stavros loses both his son and girlfriend in this violent encounter.  In the aftermath, Quinn is sent to an island called “The Colony” where former intelligence agents and assassins work together to counteract terrorist plots around the world.  Jack is ushered through this new environment by former operative Goldsmyth (Paul Freeman).  However, Jack seeks escape from the seemingly inescapable island after he receives a message from Stavros stating the he has abducted his pregnant wife who is about to give birth to their son.  A daring and dangerous escape brings Jack back to Antwerp seeking Yaz’s arsenal and savvy.  What ensues beyond this is an unlikely partnership that evolves, through adrenalin fueled danger, into a trusted friendship as Quinn attempts to save his wife and child while trying to burn down Stavros once and for all.

What would make or break this film was clearly going to be how Van Damme and Rodman meshed.  The eccentric NBA star was hot news at the time easily coined a bad boy for his antics on and off the court.  Here, he is surprisingly funny and likeable without being crass.  I found him nicely charming generating a lot of the film’s clean sense of fun and humor.  Van Damme holds down the more serious end of things nicely.  It’s not anything exceptional, but he inhabits Jack Quinn very well.  You can feel his determination and love for his wife and child throughout the film.  JCVD has a lot of heart to offer in these roles which I think gets overlooked by the sensational aspects of his movies.  As Quinn, it really shows through.  And while Rodman handles the bulk of the humor, Jean-Claude dishes out a few quips here and there as banter with Yaz.  As a team, they may not be 100% pitch perfect, but their performances balance out the film well.  Van Damme and Rodman seem to be enjoying themselves, and their chemistry works out to surprising success to make them a fine, if unlikely team.  Of course, there are numerous basketball jokes throughout the movie, but they are handled with a bit of charm.  And frankly, would you expect otherwise?  A film of this sort with many plot, humor, and character throwbacks to the cliché 1980s action film couldn’t possibly deny those ripe opportunities.  Don’t take that as a knock at all.  Double Team takes that style and formula, and gives it a nice splash of fresh paint with a late 90s style.  A sharper, sleeker design that I thoroughly enjoyed.

Mickey Rourke could play a heavy without even trying, but as we’ve seen in recent years, he has a wide range of acting talents.  Here, he doesn’t need to stretch far, but Stavros is a solid villain with a fine array of henchmen and assassins.  He has a clear plan of revenge that he handles calmly and confidently.  He keeps his cool throughout because he’s got the game nicely strategized for Quinn to follow his lead.  Mickey has a smooth coolness wrapped up with a tough bad ass edge which suits Stavros perfectly, and gives Quinn a hell of an enemy to combat.

Rounding out the meat of the cast is Paul Freeman as Goldsmyth.  The role has some nice British charm mixed with a touch of humor and shadiness.  He’s both ally and adversary to Quinn, and he shifts from one to the other with a bit of grace without losing his likeability.  Goldsmyth would rather not have to be an adversary, but circumstances deem it necessary for him to be as such.  In the end, Goldsmyth is given an upbeat final note to go out on.  Freeman handles the role smoothly.

The action, of course, is very well handled.  Competently shot with a dash of style, and nicely edited to maintain energy and pace without sacrificing the clarity of the visual storytelling.  I have not seen even most of Van Damme’s movies, but this has a nice mix of action sequences that should satisfy his fans.  He does plenty of hard hitting martial arts fights mixed with shootouts and explosions to keep the film exciting and varied.  The climactic action sequence is flat out AMAZING with a tiger set loose on Quinn in the Roman Coliseum with a field of hidden landmines, and some daring motorcycle antics by Yaz.  It’s an explosive, rather original double edged ending that also gives Rourke the chance to show off his impressive physique.  Mickey Rourke trained rigorously to be up to Van Damme’s level for their fight scenes, and certainly holds up his end providing a formidable adversary.  This being a film from the late 1990s, there’s some splashes of John Woo style action, but in general, it’s solid work.  The European setting is a very nice touch giving a different style to the film in many ways.  It helps the movie to stand out a bit more with a fresh flavor.

Other elements of fun definitely come from Rodman’s character.  He handles some brief, but enjoyable and entertaining action sequences.  Being an athlete already, I’m sure it was an easy fit for him, and the role is written in such a way to maintain a sense of sly humor.  It all fits for his character’s style, and supplements the more hard hitting action that Van Damme offers.  Another fun bit are Yaz’s “cyber monks.”  A group of monks in Rome that Yaz has befriended with the gift of modern technology.  They are an endearing bunch which provide some additional smiles and chuckles for a brief period late in the film.  The humor present in the film really does help balance out the heavier dramatic and action aspects, and gives Double Team its endearing charm.  There’s some cheesy dialogue, but it’s all handled in good fun.

Again, the cinematography offers up some style that is very telling of the time it was made.  Dutched angles here and there are used more to add a stylistic composition to a few shots than create an artistic off-kilter perception.  Unlike in Thor when it was used to no purposeful effect, here, it just feels like a sign of the times.  Dutch angles in action films were used as a stamp of “cool.”  You would shoot a subject with an awkward angle, and they take on a more skewed “cool” look in combination with the sleek, shadowy lighting.  It’s nothing I take issue with, but it is indeed a trademark of late 90s action films that a modern audience wouldn’t be so used to.

The plot is pretty standard fare that was practically a decade old by this time.  That was brightly highlighted in the Nostalgia Critic’s review of the movie, which is what sparked me to check it out, again.  However, as I’ve said, I think the storyline is handled well with doses of humor, Van Damme’s unique action stylings, and the European setting.  While the film does have its humor, it’s never used at the expense of the drama.  It’s very nicely balanced for both to co-exist without clashing. The movie is well cast with actors who bring distinctive personality to their characters, and make the ride one worth taking.  There are certainly gaps in logic with the screenplay, and some things on-screen are a bit ridiculous.  Still, like I said, this was meant to be a fun thrill ride.  It never takes these elements are serious, and are usually brief gaps.

I watch Double Team again now, and I just wish they made a sequel.  It’s so much fun with enjoyable, colorful characters, and nicely energetic and slightly over the top action sequences.  Plans were considered for a sequel, and while its box office take did exceed its production budget, it wasn’t a huge success.  Every film, generally, should be judged on its own merits, and based on the genre and style of film this is, I think it’s definitely worthwhile.  Plenty of big action to be had along with some solid laughs.