Bourne Ultimatum

[Morgenstern]

I liked it. Suggested a few feats, but mostly it made good game sense to me.

And possibly the best demonstration of the Saboteur expert class I've seen in a long time .

[Bill Whitmore]

 

Went to see this on Friday,  , and the stupid mall we went too,  , suffered a power outage half-way through. 

 

I was really enjoying it too. 

Oh, well.  Going to go see it again on Tuesday. 

[Forcegypsy]

One of the few trilogies that have had strong outings (maintaining essence and quality of the original) throughout. Really enjoyed it. I take them as totally separate entities to the books, otherwise I'd hate them. Solid cinema experience.

[Bill Whitmore]

I take them as totally separate entities to the books, otherwise I'd hate them. Solid cinema experience.

Agreed.  I read the books.  The story in the movies and the story in the books have diverged so greatly as to be unrecognizable as the same, except for the main character's name.

Which is a good thing.  I don't think the story told in the books would have translated straight across to the Silver Screen very well.

[Crafty_Alex]

I loved it! I agree the continuity was quite strong - using similar shots, consistant plot devices, and clever screenwriting. Good stuff.

Couldn't help but stat Bourne during the film as a Soldier/Stuntman with max ranks in Athletics, Drive, and Resolve; high ranks in Blend, Acrobatics, and Sleight of Hand; feats: Ghost Tree, Zeroed Tree, Improvised Weapon Basics, Daredevil, Martial Arts, and a few Unarmed Combat feats. Sounds like fun to me...

[Crafty_Pat]

Went to see this on Friday,  , and the stupid mall we went too,  , suffered a power outage half-way through. 

They hooked you up with free tickets, I hope?

[Crafty_Pat]

Agreed.  I read the books.  The story in the movies and the story in the books have diverged so greatly as to be unrecognizable as the same, except for the main character's name.

Which is a good thing.  I don't think the story told in the books would have translated straight across to the Silver Screen very well.

I humbly disagree, but then, The Bourne Identity is one of my favorite books. Personally, I think they abandoned the better half of the first novel, which kinda killed the first movie for me, and I haven't bothered to see either sequel as a result. (I'm typically highly forgiving of this sort of thing, but I freely recognize that it's an irrational love of this particular story.) Eventually, I'll watch the whole trilogy in some controlled environment where I can mentally edit all the Bourne out and enjoy them as unrelated action pieces.

[Bill Whitmore]

Went to see this on Friday,  , and the stupid mall we went too,  , suffered a power outage half-way through. 

They hooked you up with free tickets, I hope?

Sort of.  There were 20 theatres which let out all at once, so there was a run on the customer service desk.  They then made an announcement that people didn't have to get their replacement vouchers right away, we just had to bring our ticket stubs later and they would honor it.

Fair enough...except I actually only go to this theatre once in a blue moon.  We were only there Friday for someone's birthday, but it is usually WAY too far from home for me to go regularly.  But my friend goes all the time so I gave him my ticket stub to redeem.

[] Luckily, since he was the one who had picked up the tickets earlier, he took the ticket stub over the money. [/ ]

[foproy]

i have yet to see ultimatum, though i am currently reading the books for the series. in the books i would stat him out more as a intruder/faceman. though the skillset would not change much.

[Bill Whitmore]

Agreed.  I read the books.  The story in the movies and the story in the books have diverged so greatly as to be unrecognizable as the same, except for the main character's name.

Which is a good thing.  I don't think the story told in the books would have translated straight across to the Silver Screen very well.

I humbly disagree, but then, The Bourne Identity is one of my favorite books. Personally, I think they abandoned the better half of the first novel, which kinda killed the first movie for me, and I haven't bothered to see either sequel as a result. (I'm typically highly forgiving of this sort of thing, but I freely recognize that it's an irrational love of this particular story.) Eventually, I'll watch the whole trilogy in some controlled environment where I can mentally edit all the Bourne out and enjoy them as unrelated action pieces.

What helped me here is, I had never read the books (or even knew they existed) until after I watched the first movie.  So I saw the first movie (which was cool), read the 3 books (which were cool, but different from the movie), then saw the last 2 movies.

As I read the books, I was thinking about how their movie counterparts might play out and realized that I probably would not have liked a straight conversion to the Silver Screen.  There was a lot of introspection on Bourne's part in the books which would have meant A) staring at Bourne staring blankly out at the ocean for a few minutes, B) thought voiceovers (ugh) or C) long exposition dialogue with Marie.

A) doesn't tell us anything, B) always seems corny to me at the best of times and C) would have taken a lot of screen-time to really fill it the information conveyed in the books.

All-in-all, even as I was reading the first book I realized I was experiencing two very different stories.  Once so compartmentalized in my mind, I had no further problems with the fact that they were different and I enjoy them both for what they are.

But the thing I really liked about Bourne in both forms is his reluctance to kill.  It makes him seem so much more real than someone like Bonds.

[Crafty_Pat]

What helped me here is, I had never read the books (or even knew they existed) until after I watched the first movie.  So I saw the first movie (which was cool), read the 3 books (which were cool, but different from the movie), then saw the last 2 movies.

Yeah. That's why I'm not reading the Harry Potter books until after I've seen all the movies. Unfortunately, I read TBI when I was in high school, before I realized that reading was hazardous to a movie goer. 

As I read the books, I was thinking about how their movie counterparts might play out and realized that I probably would not have liked a straight conversion to the Silver Screen.  There was a lot of introspection on Bourne's part in the books which would have meant A) staring at Bourne staring blankly out at the ocean for a few minutes, B) thought voiceovers (ugh) or C) long exposition dialogue with Marie.

Oh, don't get me wrong. If I were making the movie, all that would have been left out or worked in differently. I'm not even remotely suggesting a literal translation - as I've said, I believe that model is inherently flawed - but rather a faithful adaptation which preserved what I consider the most compelling aspect of the novel: Carlos the Jackal.

[FishXXIII]

I'm not even remotely suggesting a literal translation - as I've said, I believe that model is inherently flawed - but rather a faithful adaptation which preserved what I consider the most compelling aspect of the novel: Carlos the Jackal.

Exactly! I read the book after seeing the first two movies and was blown away about the much better plot elements from the book. The whole Carlos angle really appealed to me, and I thought maybe in the third they'd somehow work that in but they didn't. Thier loss.

The Matt Damon incarnation of Bourne isn't the first, and I'm kinda hoping if there gets to be another one they actually tell that story. Until then, I'll appreciate them as action-espionage movies. More action than espionage, but good enough to get you in the Spycraft mindset and keep your attention span through loud noises and an excuse for violence pretending to be a plot.

Straight conversions would rarely ever be pleasant anyways. I'm an avid fan of the Dresden Files books and when SciFi channel announced a series I was originally very excited... until I actually saw it. I understand the need to expand Bob's role so that Harry would have someone to talk to, since the book is a narrative and some of the information needed to be converyed to viewers, but so much else was needless changed to be watered down for TV that it is barely recognizable. I mean, Harry is an investigator, sure, but as far as magic is concerned he's basically just a thug. He burns down buildings. Lots of buildings. In the show, I'm suprised he doesn't just pull rabbits out of hats, because that's about as much magic as he's shown doing. Sad really.

[Bill Whitmore]

At the time it was written, I think including Carlos the Jackal was an excellent addition to the books, but I don't know how much of a movie impact it would have made.  Most people don't know who the hell he is and Carlos the Jackal would be just another name.  They would have to include an expository conversation (likely between two of the CIA operatives) filling in the necessary background around him.

Don't get me wrong, it likely would have been really cool, but it might have ballooned out to a 3+ hour movie, and I for one am not a fan of long movies.  (as much as I thought the LotR movies rock, I haven't sat down and watched them since it was in the theaters)

*   *   *

In regard to your sig, FishXXIII, they seem to disagree over here with that sentiment.

[ThunderMonkey]

Yeah. That's why I'm not reading the Harry Potter books until after I've seen all the movies. Unfortunately, I read TBI when I was in high school, before I realized that reading was hazardous to a movie goer. 

Hey... that was my idea. 

It's a lot less stress on me not to read books before the movie comes out. I enjoyed "Nightwatch" as a movie and a book for the exact same reason. See movie, read book. Now, if they would speed up the translation of "Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon."

Oddly enough, I made that discovery with "Contact." I thought the movie was great and Carl Sagan's book was simply amazing.

[Forcegypsy]

Agreed.  I read the books.  The story in the movies and the story in the books have diverged so greatly as to be unrecognizable as the same, except for the main character's name.

Which is a good thing.  I don't think the story told in the books would have translated straight across to the Silver Screen very well.

I humbly disagree, but then, The Bourne Identity is one of my favorite books. Personally, I think they abandoned the better half of the first novel, which kinda killed the first movie for me, and I haven't bothered to see either sequel as a result. (I'm typically highly forgiving of this sort of thing, but I freely recognize that it's an irrational love of this particular story.) Eventually, I'll watch the whole trilogy in some controlled environment where I can mentally edit all the Bourne out and enjoy them as unrelated action pieces.

Trust me, I know where you're coming from. Marie? Fantastic in the books (plus she was a totally put together Canadian, not some euro-trash headcase ). The Bourne Trilogy of books are among my favourite spy-fiction novels of all time. Pure adrenaline and yet smart. The movies don't touch them at all really. However, as a source of inspiration, they (the movie producers) could have done much worse.

The movies took the most basic plotlines from the books and treated them with some respect. Bourne is not a cookie cutter action hero and they stay true to that in the movies. The actual nitty-gritty and the protagonists involved are almost completely different, but it works for the movies. Could the movies have been more faithful to the books? I think so, but now that the trilogy is done, I prefer it this way. It's worth your time IMO.