An expansion of the universe from Robert Ludlum's novels, centered on a new hero whose stakes have been triggered by the events of the previous three films.An expansion of the universe from Robert Ludlum's novels, centered on a new hero whose stakes have been triggered by the events of the previous three films.An expansion of the universe from Robert Ludlum's novels, centered on a new hero whose stakes have been triggered by the events of the previous three films.
- Awards
- 1 win & 12 nominations total
Robert Christopher Riley
- Outcome #6
- (as Rob Riley)
Featured reviews
"The Bourne Legacy" is prequel/sequel/spin-off/reboot of the Bourne Series. Yes, I know; there aren't many pre-se-reboot-spinoffs out there.
In "Legacy", Jason Bourne is sidelined for Aaron Cross (Jeremy Renner), another spy in the Bourne universe. Though, Cross is a product of "Outcome", a program that gave the agent pills called "chems" that improved their intelligence and physique. Yet, in Langley, Eric Byer (Edward Norton), an operations director, decides to "cut the program", which is spy language for "kill everyone involved". Cross teams up with scientist Dr. Marta Shearing (Rachel Weisz) as they head to the Phillipines to get the chems, while every operative with a finger and a gun is on their trail.
"The Bourne Legacy" has garnered very mixed reviews; some really like it, some really hate it, some are in-betweeners. I am one who really liked it. Comparing "Legacy" to the originals, more specifically "Ultimatum", is like comparing "Batman Returns" to "The Dark Knight". A good movie to a fantastic one.
If "Legacy" was a regular spy movie with no connection to Bourne, it would definitely be in higher regard. But, as it has the "Bourne" name associated with it, certain things were expected: 1. Insane non-stop action. 2. Insane non-stop action. 3. More action.
"Legacy" is extremely dialogue driven. About 3/4 of this movie is dialogue. And the dialogue is very technical, and very scientific, and it flies way over some people's heads. The previous Bourne films were not filled with this technical jargon.
The performances, though, are very good. Renner and Weisz are absolutely perfect in their roles. Renner perfectly captures the manhunting super agent with ease. He's a natural action hero, and one of my favorite actors. Though Edward Norton is devilishly underused. His character merely sits behind a screen and barks orders.
The Verdict: When you go into "Legacy", don't expect insane non-stop action. Yes, when the action happens, it is really awesome. But this is a dialogue-driven spy movie with lots of high-vocabulary dialogue. I really enjoy dialogue-driven films, and this film does entertain. A-
In "Legacy", Jason Bourne is sidelined for Aaron Cross (Jeremy Renner), another spy in the Bourne universe. Though, Cross is a product of "Outcome", a program that gave the agent pills called "chems" that improved their intelligence and physique. Yet, in Langley, Eric Byer (Edward Norton), an operations director, decides to "cut the program", which is spy language for "kill everyone involved". Cross teams up with scientist Dr. Marta Shearing (Rachel Weisz) as they head to the Phillipines to get the chems, while every operative with a finger and a gun is on their trail.
"The Bourne Legacy" has garnered very mixed reviews; some really like it, some really hate it, some are in-betweeners. I am one who really liked it. Comparing "Legacy" to the originals, more specifically "Ultimatum", is like comparing "Batman Returns" to "The Dark Knight". A good movie to a fantastic one.
If "Legacy" was a regular spy movie with no connection to Bourne, it would definitely be in higher regard. But, as it has the "Bourne" name associated with it, certain things were expected: 1. Insane non-stop action. 2. Insane non-stop action. 3. More action.
"Legacy" is extremely dialogue driven. About 3/4 of this movie is dialogue. And the dialogue is very technical, and very scientific, and it flies way over some people's heads. The previous Bourne films were not filled with this technical jargon.
The performances, though, are very good. Renner and Weisz are absolutely perfect in their roles. Renner perfectly captures the manhunting super agent with ease. He's a natural action hero, and one of my favorite actors. Though Edward Norton is devilishly underused. His character merely sits behind a screen and barks orders.
The Verdict: When you go into "Legacy", don't expect insane non-stop action. Yes, when the action happens, it is really awesome. But this is a dialogue-driven spy movie with lots of high-vocabulary dialogue. I really enjoy dialogue-driven films, and this film does entertain. A-
Now that the dust has settled and the fifth Bourne film (and Damon's return to the role) has come and gone, and after having re-watched this after seeing Jason Bourne (2016), I can safely say that this is still the fourth best Bourne flick, and a very solid action movie in its own right.
The main reason this is stronger than the fifth one: Tony Gilroy.
He wrote the original film trilogy. He understands the universe of the films, he understands this type of character. He did NOT write Jason Bourne (2016), which was the first and only one in the franchise that wasn't penned by him, and it showed. That movie was much less intelligent and gripping than Bourne 1-3, and this one.
This isn't perfect or as great as the first three. The main problem is that the plot for this installment feels slight. This is literally a throwaway concept (Renner's character and the organization he is a part of are basically being cast under the rug here by the evil US government, and that's the angle). Renner is essentially just reacting to the events in the previous films. It's not quite a sequel because it's actually happening concurrently with the trilogy. Which is a unique touch, I guess, but it destroys any true sense of importance into the proceedings, especially since you hear nothing about the events of Legacy in Jason Bourne (2016). So while this is a fun, well-made film, it inevitably feels inconsequential when you take the entire series into account.
I thought the lack of Damon would be a weakness but it's actually not; Renner is a solid actor, even quite excellent in some roles, and even if he doesn't have the sheer charisma/star power of Damon, he brings his own sense of tough smarts and cool wit to the film, and he does a really good job of communicating the same sense of constantly-three-steps-ahead that Bourne himself did. Renner has that same natural air of intelligence as Damon, but in a grittier fashion, and Tony Gilroy knows how to utilize it.
Rachel Weisz doesn't have a whole lot to do but she has her plucky moments and at least plays a heroine with some intelligence, and who isn't simply a love interest for the protagonist. I actually think Gilroy handled that part well.
Here's hoping that if they make another Bourne installment, Tony Gilroy comes back as the writer. And I would gladly see Renner continue this role, but it probably will never happen.
The main reason this is stronger than the fifth one: Tony Gilroy.
He wrote the original film trilogy. He understands the universe of the films, he understands this type of character. He did NOT write Jason Bourne (2016), which was the first and only one in the franchise that wasn't penned by him, and it showed. That movie was much less intelligent and gripping than Bourne 1-3, and this one.
This isn't perfect or as great as the first three. The main problem is that the plot for this installment feels slight. This is literally a throwaway concept (Renner's character and the organization he is a part of are basically being cast under the rug here by the evil US government, and that's the angle). Renner is essentially just reacting to the events in the previous films. It's not quite a sequel because it's actually happening concurrently with the trilogy. Which is a unique touch, I guess, but it destroys any true sense of importance into the proceedings, especially since you hear nothing about the events of Legacy in Jason Bourne (2016). So while this is a fun, well-made film, it inevitably feels inconsequential when you take the entire series into account.
I thought the lack of Damon would be a weakness but it's actually not; Renner is a solid actor, even quite excellent in some roles, and even if he doesn't have the sheer charisma/star power of Damon, he brings his own sense of tough smarts and cool wit to the film, and he does a really good job of communicating the same sense of constantly-three-steps-ahead that Bourne himself did. Renner has that same natural air of intelligence as Damon, but in a grittier fashion, and Tony Gilroy knows how to utilize it.
Rachel Weisz doesn't have a whole lot to do but she has her plucky moments and at least plays a heroine with some intelligence, and who isn't simply a love interest for the protagonist. I actually think Gilroy handled that part well.
Here's hoping that if they make another Bourne installment, Tony Gilroy comes back as the writer. And I would gladly see Renner continue this role, but it probably will never happen.
As a fan of the Bourne franchise, I enjoyed this deeper look in to that universe. The movie really does feel like one giant glorified DVD extra for that trilogy and I mean that in a good way. Deeper layers are revealed and the intrigue is as good as what we've seen before even though the character motivation isn't as strong across the board. Renner is fabulous as the second generation super spy. My only real complaint about this installment (because it does feel like they are blatantly building for three more films) is that the resolution has no real teeth. Still, it's a very good effort from a very good cast with hints and touches to the Bourne films of the past.
Overall, a thumbs up and a very enjoyable time at the cinema.
Overall, a thumbs up and a very enjoyable time at the cinema.
Thanks to the 2 heroes, I give a good mark though the script was a labyrinth of complications between different US National Security Services and their different projects more or less secret, some of them more secret within secrets because untellable, unacceptable. And when one of those has to disappear, lots of dead people it means. Here is the story of another run-for-his-life hero, Jeremy Renner! He surprised me this actor. He blows the screen from his very first appearance until the last. And Mrs Weisz, the co-runner-for-her-life does well too as an evolving character, a woman scientist who goes from naive close to stupid terrified victim to a full grown resilient survivor, doing very well with Mr Renner. Wow they are good! They SAVE the movie Let's hope there will be a sequel with these two but with a MUCH IMPROVED script, please. I declare myself a fan for Mr Renner (Please forgive my probably curious use of English, my second language...)
First film without Matt Damon and the Jason Bourne character. The movie turned out well and this is thanks to co-writer and director Tony Gilroy (who worked on all three previous films in the series) and Jeremy Renner, perfectly cast in the lead. The results are not flawless but good enough to provide the sort of action and storytelling that Bourne fans expect. Jeremy Renner has earned his way to this high-profile part, doing a great job since his performance in The Hurt Locker. He has the required physicality to make his character — a highly-trained, genetically enhanced undercover agent — totally believable. Furthermore he's perfectly matched with leading lady Rachel Weisz, also credible as a research doctor becoming a pawn and bail at the same time. On balance and on the whole the movie works, though a bit to long. To sum up I was entertained and I'm more than grateful for that.
Did you know
- TriviaWhen asked about his most difficult scene, Jeremy Renner revealed that it was the motorcycle ride with Rachel Weisz behind him in Manila, because he was responsible for the two of them. At the press conference of the film, Weisz was asked about this particular stunt, "How was it to ride on a motorcycle through Manila with Jeremy Renner?" and she said that "It was really terrifying! Jeremy never told me when we were in Manila, but that was the scariest stunt for him because he was responsible for my life. He didn't tell me that in Manila, thank god, because I would have been like, 'Oh, my god!' I just had to surrender and hold on. I didn't have to act. It just was terrifying".
- GoofsAfter showing a top-down view of Chicago's downtown elevated rail lines, there is a shot of two subway trains. These are New York City Transit trains, not Chicago Transit trains.
- Quotes
Drone Spec: What kind of weapon system is this guy operating?
Dita Mandy: He's probably got a rifle.
[Drone operators exchange incredulous glances]
Byer: It's a high-powered rifle.
- ConnectionsEdited from The Bourne Ultimatum (2007)
- SoundtracksKongkkakji
Written by Bi-ryong Choi (as Bi Ryong Choi), Jun-ho Choi (as Jun Ho Choi)
Performed by Yoon-jeong Jang (as Yoon Jeong Jang)
Courtesy of Inwoo Production
Details
- Release date
- Countries of origin
- Languages
- Also known as
- El Legado Bourne
- Filming locations
- El Nido, Palawan, Philippines(ending scene)
- Production companies
- See more company credits at IMDbPro
Box office
- Budget
- $125,000,000 (estimated)
- Gross US & Canada
- $113,203,870
- Opening weekend US & Canada
- $38,142,825
- Aug 12, 2012
- Gross worldwide
- $276,144,750
- Runtime2 hours 15 minutes
- Color
- Sound mix
- Aspect ratio
- 2.39 : 1
Contribute to this page
Suggest an edit or add missing content