my profile | my password | search | faq & rules | forum home

» Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE   » Community   » Film Handlers' Movie Reviews   » Bourne Ultimatum (2007) (Page 1)

This topic comprises 4 pages: 1  2  3  4

Author Topic: Bourne Ultimatum (2007) Kurt Zupin Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 989 From: Maricopa, Arizona Registered: Oct 2004 posted 08-03-2007 08:29 AM                     Out of the three movies I would have to say that this is by far the weakest film. I've read early reviews that said, OMG this is a nonstop thrill ride. It only slows down so you can catch your breath just so it can take it right back away. This film is a good movie, I really liked it but in the trilogy it is the worst. There really is not car chases to speak of, not like in the other two, and thats what I love about the others. The way the car scenes were shot and the fact that they were real cars and real drivers. AND YES, the shakey cam is here. Not as much as the last instalment but its there. The fight scenes are hectic and make you feel like your in the cramped little apartment. I've always loved how Jason Bourne is a no nosense fighter. He'll use what ever he can to fight you and beat you. His use of a random book in the apartment fight is great. The fast paceing of the fights make them look real, with the moves being in a combo flowing smoothly. Matt Damon turns in another great performace as Bourne, which is expected with this being his third run. He has all the little things down. David Strathairn was a great add on to the cast, to take over being the bad CIA guy. Hes in good company with Chris Cooper and Brian Cox. This is worth seeing a solid 4/5 but like I said, its the worse of the three.  |  IP: Logged Louis Bornwasser Film God Posts: 4441 From: prospect ky usa Registered: Mar 2005 posted 08-04-2007 06:52 AM                        I really liked this film. Theatre: Corydon (Indiana) Cinemas in Dolby Digital with great (loud) volume. I felt as if I had been beaten about the head by the end. I am certain that this is the effect that was desired. Please note that the last Bond film (Casino Royale) owes a great debt to the Bourne films sylistically. Louis  |  IP: Logged Mark Gulbrandsen Resident Trollmaster Posts: 16657 From: Music City Registered: Jun 99 posted 08-05-2007 09:09 PM                     I agree with Loius... Excellent film but the DP(Oliver Wood) should be shot! Way too much jerky camera movement in this one to the point that it distracted me from what was going on. Almost the entire film is this way . If you see it on a 70 foot screen take some Dramamine first. I thought it just about the best plot line and story of any film this year. The mix was awsome and this is one to go see in D-Cinema, both the uncompressed digital track and the image are superb. The presentation I saw at Megaplex Gateway #1 (70 foot screen) was flawless including the rolling titles at the end. Those of you that think D-Cinema is equal to 16mm in resolution need to visit this theater that has a 70 foot wide screen! All I can say is that this 16mm equivelent image looked unbelievable. There were zero image artifacts. In spite of the jerky camera movement I give it four stars. Mark  |  IP: Logged Kyle Anderson Film Handler Posts: 86 From: Tyler, TX, USA Registered: Dec 2005 posted 08-05-2007 11:43 PM                     DLP projection has come a long way since it opened - most of that has been on the studio end, as well. Great flick, camera action = Too bad it didn't stick to the books, but those were boring anyway.  |  IP: Logged Kurt Zupin Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 989 From: Maricopa, Arizona Registered: Oct 2004 posted 08-06-2007 02:39 AM                     I wouldn't blame the DP for the Shaky cam, thats a Paul Greengrass thing. The other movies were that way also, as well as Flight 93. I don't know, but it dosn't bother me in the least, I think it adds to the movie and makes you feel more like your there over his sholder then just watching it. You guys make such a huge deal about it, but I watched it on our 71' by 30 foot and didn't get sick from it. We have had some people come out after and say they felt sick but that might also be because they were sitting in the first couple of rows.  |  IP: Logged Mark Gulbrandsen Resident Trollmaster Posts: 16657 From: Music City Registered: Jun 99 posted 08-08-2007 12:28 PM                     I went back and watched the first movie on HD-DVD last night and there is not the level of "camera shakiness" that is evedent in the third installment in which they certainly carried it to new heights of annoyance. Hand held camera doesn't bother me if done competantly but this stuff looks like it was left up to a third grade child or a camera operator that held the camera for four hours straight before any takes were actually filmed. The first film is actually photograped extremely well with some hand held camera at the appropriate time and nice sweeping camera moves at other times... many static shots too. I haven't watched the second film again to see what level it was driven to but I suspect it has just gotten worse and worse over the films. The only good aspect of alot of handheld is that it does speed up shooting since many complicated camera setups are eliminated. Mark  |  IP: Logged Michael Gonzalez Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 790 From: Grand Island , NE USA Registered: Sep 2000 posted 08-08-2007 02:23 PM                     Saw it this past Sunday and really enjoyed it. I especially liked how they tied the ending from the last one to this one. My theory on the shaky cam in instances like this is that it shows the untrained actors trying to "perform" martial arts in a better light. Matt Damon is not Jet Li. If they where to attempt to do a straight shot fight scene, it would look awful. This way they can do a million different takes, the actors can move is slow motion and it all gets speeded up and hacked together so that it looks "cool". My two cents anyway.  |  IP: Logged Louis Bornwasser Film God Posts: 4441 From: prospect ky usa Registered: Mar 2005 posted 08-08-2007 03:25 PM                        Now you know what it looks like when the Steadicam breaks down during the helicopter shots! Louis  |  IP: Logged Mark Gulbrandsen Resident Trollmaster Posts: 16657 From: Music City Registered: Jun 99 posted 08-08-2007 04:41 PM                     I suggest that you go back and watch the first Bourne Film and you'll see there is a lack of shakiness. You'll see the same type of fight scenes in that film!! Mark  |  IP: Logged Joe Redifer You need a beating today Posts: 12859 From: Denver, Colorado Registered: May 99 posted 08-08-2007 06:28 PM                        Is Bourne Ultimatum the thrill ride of the summer? I refuse to see movies that aren't non-stop roller coaster thrill rides of the summer.  |  IP: Logged Mark Gulbrandsen Resident Trollmaster Posts: 16657 From: Music City Registered: Jun 99 posted 08-08-2007 07:55 PM                     If you don't find it to be I can take you for a ride in the Land Rover! Mark  |  IP: Logged Jeremy Jorgenson Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1002 From: Chicago, IL, USA Registered: Feb 2005 posted 08-08-2007 08:34 PM                        quote: Mark Gulbrandsen I went back and watched the first movie on HD-DVD last night and there is not the level of "camera shakiness" It's not a Bourne thing, it's a Paul Greengrass thing. The First Bourne was directed by Doug Liman & all three were shot by Oliver Wood. Handheld camerawork has never affected me negatively ... all the complaints on f-t about Blair Witch, the 2nd & 3rd Bourne films, United 93, The Death of Mr. Lazarescu ... etc (those are the ones I remember complaints about specifically) ... anyway, none of those bothered me. The only time I've been affected was on Haunted Castle (the 3D 15/70 film) but that had more to do with the idiot that "fixed" some damaged frames & inserted the wrong amount of slug film, being off two frames from one eye to the other. Anyway ... enough of that ... I enjoyed this.  |  IP: Logged Shane Cooper Expert Film Handler Posts: 232 From: Little Rock, Arkansas Registered: Jun 2004 posted 08-08-2007 11:12 PM                     quote: There really is not car chases to speak of, I have to strongly disagree with this! I really enjoyed the car chase in this movie through New York. It was really intense for me and I probably enjoyed this movie the best of the three. I also agree with Louis that Casino Royale is very much in the vein of the Bourne movies. Stripped down, hand to hand combat and better writing and direction.  |  IP: Logged Tristan Lane Master Film Handler Posts: 444 From: Nampa, Idaho Registered: Feb 2002 posted 08-09-2007 01:47 AM                     quote: Michael Gonzalez My theory on the shaky cam in instances like this is that it shows the untrained actors trying to "perform" martial arts in a better light. Matt Damon is not Jet Li. If they where to attempt to do a straight shot fight scene, it would look awful. To which Mark Responded: quote: I suggest that you go back and watch the first Bourne Film and you'll see there is a lack of shakiness. You'll see the same type of fight scenes in that film!! My words exactly. What made the first film so great is that the fight scenes so great was that the were not sensationalized by slo-mo or stupid camera work. It was all very realistic, and was refreshing to see a change from the normal movie fight scene. To say that seizure cam was used due to lack of acting ability is ignorant. The perfect example would be the cast of "The Matrix". Hugo Weaving would never have struck me as a talented on-screen fighting actor. The directors of the past two movies probably selected the seizure cam for one of three reasons: 1 - They are not capable of directing a fight scene that compared to the first installment. 2- They were lazy and wanted to complete the fight scenes in as little takes as possible. 3- The directors honestly believe that people like this style of cinematography, or that it is an artistic "trademark". For whatever reason, I dislike the style and am very disappointed to hear that "Ultimatum" is done in seizure cam style. "Supremacy" didn't thrill me due to this, but neither did the lack of screen time given to Chris Cooper (yes I know his character was killed).  |  IP: Logged Kurt Zupin Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 989 From: Maricopa, Arizona Registered: Oct 2004 posted 08-09-2007 05:05 AM                     Paul Greengrass did the last two bourne films. And it is his artistic thing, its in all of his movies.  |  IP: Logged

All times are Central (GMT -6:00)

This topic comprises 4 pages: 1  2  3  4

Printer-friendly view of this topic

Hop To: Select a Forum: Category: Operations -------------------- Digital Cinema Forum Film Handlers' Forum Large Format Forum Ground Level Feature Info, Trailer Attachments & REAL Credit Offsets Category: Community -------------------- Film-Yak Film Handlers' Movie Reviews The Afterlife Bob Maar's Joke-A-Thon Category: Classified -------------------- Equipment and Supplies Wanted/For Sale Help Wanted/Seeking Employment Category: System -------------------- Software Beta Testing Forum

The Film-Tech Forums are designed for various members related to the cinema industry to express their opinions, viewpoints and testimonials on various products, services and events based upon speculation, personal knowledge and factual information through use, therefore all views represented here allow no liability upon the publishers of this web site and the owners of said views assume no liability for any ill will resulting from these postings. The posts made here are for educational as well as entertainment purposes and as such anyone viewing this portion of the website must accept these views as statements of the author of that opinion and agrees to release the authors from any and all liability.