Especially if you don't want them being constantly reminded of Matt Damon when they're in the theatre. And Ludlum's original vision of the character is different enough from the Greengrass/Damon version to be pretty intriguing to audiences. I think there's a LOT of material there which can serve as a framework for a rebooted Bourne franchise.
#Will there be more jason bourne movies tv
A whole new approach to the character and his mythology is needed.Īnd I feel the best way to do that is to go back to Robert Ludlum.Īpart from the 1988 TV miniseries with Richard Chamberlain (which I love by the way), Ludlum's original Bourne novels have never really been done justice. No remaking/retreading what's already been done.
#Will there be more jason bourne movies movie
So, my question is, can it work? Can you guys see Bourne ever returning/existing without Damon and Greengrass? (Of course, movie studios will do it regardless, but what are your thoughts?) Will you be excited if they announce a movie without Damon as Bourne, or will you automatically tune out?Īs much as I'd love for Matt Damon to return for a sixth installment, if we're getting a new Jason Bourne, it can work.provided they start over from scratch completely! No doing Jason Bourne 6 (or would that be 5, if we ignore Legacy?), just with another actor.
I'm a big reader, and I haven't even found any books that come close to this. So it's hard to come back to this franchise, with all these elements easily able to be done wrong.īut I love this franchise, and I deeply miss this kind of conspiracy/chase/paranoid/action/spy stuff that feels grounded, and Bourne is just about the only game in town for that. (Bond has Q and M, Batman has Alfred and Commissioner Gordon, etc.). We also like him as a loner, but that doesn't allow him to grow a cast of likeable characters around him to create that "saga" feel. But do you reboot it, so that he doesn't remember who is now? Or do you keep going, and have him say, "Oh yeah, now I remember this OTHER thing I forgot about?" So then it's NOT Jason Bourne anymore, so why bother?Īlso, what we like about Bourne is he is a sympathetic character, that he doesn't remember everything, and that he doesn't WANT to remember being an assassin. But here's the thing: If you make Bourne without Greengrass, you will likely get something akin to either Rambo, John Wick, or over-the-top Bond-type stuff. It's moments like those that make Bourne BOURNE, and Greengrass and Liman's visual style is really what brings it home. I also love those scenes like the one where Bourne realizes there must be a shotgun hidden on top of a cabinet in the living room, because first he finds shotgun shells, but then there are toys on the floor and he assumes (without verbalizing it to the audience) that the owner of the house would keep guns out of reach of children. Even if you don't like the shaky-cam (which I argue Greengrass does better than anyone, and uses effectively in his "documentarian" style, and everyone else just copied him BADLY), you at least probably love the feel of those gritty foot chases and careful movements by Bourne. Because at that point.why replace him? It would almost be a parody at that point, and we would keep thinking/comparing them.īut then I thought, even if you replace Damon, it's not just him, it's the STYLE of the films that we know and love, and that comes from Paul Greengrass and Doug Liman. Stallone has been Rambo so long, we cannot imagine anyone else playing that character. Sean Connery was Bond for as long as Damon has been Bourne, so can it be done with Bourne? And if so, how? For instance, Michael Keaton only played Batman twice, and after he was replaced the first time, it became standard. One of my favorite franchises of all time is the Bourne saga-I even liked the last one, though not as much as the original trilogy.īut I've been thinking about it, and the longer a single actor plays a character, the harder it is for us, the audience, to accept anyone else playing them.