The first official image has arrived from The Bourne Legacy, and it gives us a first look at Jeremy Renner as Jason Bourne’s replacement - arse-kicking super-spy Aaron Cross.
Wearing a dark leather jacket and grey t-shirt, it seems as though Cross has been raiding Bourne’s wardrobe while he’s been away. Tut-tut.
In all honesty, the image doesn’t tell us too much about what to expect from the film, suffice to say that Renner has got the steely-eyed intensity of your average Treadstone operative down to a fine art.
The film is not a reboot per se, rather a separate story told within the parameters of the existing Bourne universe. The film will be directed by Tony Gilroy, who should be a dab hand at maintaining continuity, given that he was screenwriter on the first three films.
Renner will be joined by Rachel Weisz, Albert Finney, Joan Allen and Oscar Isaac, with Edward Norton on villain duties. The Bourne Legacy opens in UK cinemas on 17 August 2012.
Source: USA Today
Will Renner make a good replacement for Damon? Tell us, below.
Comments
TheKingofCinema
Jan 6th 2012, 9:10
in the original novel of The Bourne Legacy written by Eric Van Lustbader (which I have read). does have the character of Jason Bourne in it & of the start of the book he is actually his alternate identity David Webb & is now a professor of linguistics at the Georgetown University & he see's his two best friends dead & someone wants him killed. so I personally think this film version based on this novel is going to be s**t. how in the blue hell can you have a film called The Bourne Legacy without the Jason Bourne character. its just stupid. anyway I have ordered The Bourne Dominion novel from Darrens book shop in pontefract & I really cant wait to read it. plus it will be far better putting up with this c**p. I also would highly recommend The Bourne Sanction & The Bourne Deception novels to read too. they are both a superb gripping double read. :-)
Alert a moderator
BoomStick
Jan 6th 2012, 10:54
@KingOfCinema - alas, you can easily have a Bourne film without Jason Bourne in it - you call it the Bourne Legacy and focus on the legacy of Jason Bourne and Treadstone etc etc. You also have to cash in on the brand of the Bourne franchise by using the name in the title as a cynical marketing ploy to add $50m to your gross. The name Bourne tells the average punter how doesn't follow movies like we all do, but likes to go to the cinema, what to expect and therefore will part with his/her cash. It's a horrible practice (taken to the nth degree by upcoming Battleship - a film based on a game that has no narrative structure, purely to trigger a nostalgic response in people of a certain generation who played the game and probably now have kids too - double ticket sales! Plus make it look like Transformers on water - even more cash!) This is also why 90% of movie poster for genre films are identical (see rom-coms for a prime example) If the film was called The Treadstone Agent or something, no f****r would see it. Put Bourne in the title, get a good PR firm to tow the line (it's different, it's edgier, it's a unique story that needed to be told) and you're away. It's the state of Hollywood nowadays - the safe, easy buck because audiences won't turn out for something original because they've been fed the same swill for years (remember Inception was considered a huge risk for the studio at the time) Hollywood makes it really f*****g hard for me to remember why it was that I loved Hollywood cinema in the first place
Alert a moderator
trist808
Jan 6th 2012, 11:05
The key word in the film's title is "Legacy", it's Bourne's Legacy and how the events in the first three films have affected the Treadstone project. If you remember, in every Bourne film there were other agents sent after Jason to take him down (Clive Owen, Karl Urban etc) so there was a ripple effect to what he was doing. Cross' story apparently ties in quite closely with Bourne's and there's rumours that a fifth film featuring Renner & the return of Damon teaming up is planned. I'm rather looking forward to this "side"-quel as it's being called, it's a companion piece to the trilogy an doffers a different perspective, in an age when every film gets a sequel that feels the same at least they're doing something a bit different.
Alert a moderator
trist808
Jan 6th 2012, 11:30
Oh @BoomStick, you are far too cynical ... but alas a lot of what you say is true.
Alert a moderator
writerdave87
Jan 6th 2012, 13:38
I'm sure I remember Damon himself saying they were planning to bring back Bourne himself. Also Dalidab if you read the original Bourne books there are several mentions of other people working under the Bourne alias.
Alert a moderator
alexr
Jan 6th 2012, 14:20
Also, the Bourne movie trilogy is almost nothing like the original Bourne novels (written by Robert Ludlum) so why in Hell would The Bourne Legacy be any different? If movies were made as complete carbon copies of the books they were based on, not only would these movies be really f*****g boring and take days to watch, but you would lose so much of the character's 'thought narrative' because no one can f*****g read minds!!! Instead, film makers do the 'best' they can with what they got, and if that means changing stories, locations, characters, plots, titles, and physics to make the movie more 'entertaining' then so be it... and @BoomStick I agree - Battlefield is going to suck so much a*s!
Alert a moderator
writerdave87
Jan 6th 2012, 15:24
Battlefield? :p
Alert a moderator
trist808
Jan 6th 2012, 15:30
Alien ships sweep majestically across the green grassy plains ... welcome to BATTLEFIELD!!!!!
Alert a moderator
Ali1748
Jan 6th 2012, 20:43
Hmm the fact Edward Norton and Rachel Weisz have signed up for this makes me want to give it a chance.
Alert a moderator
TheKingofCinema
Jan 6th 2012, 21:01
Yes but the main reason why I do NOT want to see this film is because its not going to be faithful to the original Bourne Legacy novel. :-(
Alert a moderator
writerdave87
Jan 7th 2012, 0:56
Er... and? First few films weren't faithful to the books either.
Alert a moderator
Ali1748
Jan 7th 2012, 23:06
Was Tony Gilroy the man who directed Michael Clayton ?
Alert a moderator
TheKingofCinema
Jan 7th 2012, 23:46
@Ali1748 yes Tony Gilroy did infact direct that imho that utter s**t George Clooney film Michael Clayton. but tbh I much prefered Neil Jordan's superb & outstanding drama thriller Michael Collins starring Liam Neeson. :-)
Alert a moderator
writerdave87
Jan 8th 2012, 0:00
What the hell does Michael Collins have to do with anything?
Alert a moderator
StevePotter
Jan 8th 2012, 6:32
I know this may or may not get me killed, but I have no love for the Bourne films. It's not that they're BAD per se, and they're not poorly acted, but for some reason I just find them so insanely boring.
Alert a moderator
Jeffbiscuits
Jan 8th 2012, 11:04
Battlefield could be Michael Bay's next film. Giant robot farm animals smashing the hell out of each other. Transfarmers. Moo
Alert a moderator
Ali1748
Jan 9th 2012, 0:48
LOL Dalidab strikes again.
Alert a moderator
writerdave87
Jan 9th 2012, 4:14
Also doing a faithful adaptation of the bourne legacy might prove a bit difficult considering it revolves around the killing of Conklin, Chris Cooper's now dead character in the first film (who doesn't get killed in the book).
Alert a moderator
EddieFelson
Jan 10th 2012, 10:03
@StevePotter I feel the same, good acting, good action although far too many poorly directed fight sequences, good plot however they just leave a bit well numb I guess is the word.
Alert a moderator
StevePotter
Jan 10th 2012, 20:47
I know that the Bourne movies influenced "Casino Royale", but "Casino Royale" is much better than the Bourne films, in my opinion. Probably because the action was better.
Alert a moderator
alexr
Jan 11th 2012, 16:59
@writerdave87 Freudian slip. I meant Battleship! But I am a COD fan who thinks Battlefield DOES suck (IMHO)!!!
Alert a moderator
writerdave87
Jan 11th 2012, 22:36
That's your opinion Alex, and that's cool, but I think you're wrong and I hope you get cancer :p hehehe
Alert a moderator