|
August 23, 2006
I used to see the posters for this film on the windows of bus stops as walked the dogs to and from the parklands. I read somwhere that it was generally accepted to be a good film in the thriller/action genre. It was heralded as the new breed of the espionage thriller.
So I ordered it from Quickflix sometime ago, and it turned up this week. I had no idea what to expect, other than it is the second installment of best-selling author Robert Ludlum's series----the first was 2002's The Bourne Identity, which I haven't seen.
I was bored, despite the exotic worldwide locations and the muscular cinematic edge (fast editing & edgy visuals) I could accept the standard Hollywood narrative of strong man alone fighting a corrupt state in the form of the CIA; a romantic nomadic hero motivated by his sense of privacy and personal relationship. I understand that the appeal of the thriller genre is essentially amoral in that death has no meaning or value. History is about death, a lot of death.
There were too many action/chase scenes for my taste--I guess these chase scenes stand for entertainment. The fistfights, the car chases, the gun battles, the explosions are the 'money scenes'. But in this film the CIA is openly engaged in political assassination. It promises more.
What lurked in the background was an interesting idea. The CIA's and FSB's (Russia's CIA) assassination of a politician opposed to the privatization of oil in Russia and the subsequent corruption of governments by oil tycoons established by the CIA. But this plot about CIA cover-ups, espionage, and a Russian politician was muddled and confusing. We have a Russian Secret Service agent who is on the take from a strange bespectacled man who wants Bourne as dead as the CIA. It was explained away by money--lots of money. Money explains power.
A review at Images Journal
|
My wife was watching war of the worlds the other night. I was mucking around in the general area and watched a bit of it, the movie went from one action scene to another. I was tense from the action but it got to the point of "for chrissakes, not another near escape". I can recall the same when watching King Kong at the theatre and the gorilla vs T-rex fight that jsut went on and on and on. I was bored by the action.
By the same token, I watched the thirteenth warrior the other day. It was action filled, but each point of action exposed and explained a bit of the original mystery. I was engrossed.