Not a close follower of this Bourne series, but caught this on a flight and was not impressed. Seemed as though there was not a lot of action and alot of unnessessary dialog. Hard to picture/watch the film without Damon (although not a fan of him either) in it. Glad I didn't pay $ to watch this in the theater or on DVD.

The Bourne Legacy was completely unnecessary. Not only was the plot weak, but it didn't follow what happened in the other movies at all. The one good thing was that there were some awesome action sequences.

As expected, Renner does fantastically in the lead role here in "The Bourne Legacy". The movie won't appeal to everybody and the mixed reviews are no surprise. Personally, I really enjoyed the film, but that's because I like movies that are largely centered on the action and not so much the plot, which is the case here. Thus, if you're more into movie plots, odds are this one won't be for you.

A worthy addition to the Bourne franchise. The action is non-stop and frequently breath taking. Great script. Great acting. Great editing. Great movie. My only problem was all the references to Damon. He isn't in the movie so why all the talk about his character.

This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Wow, I thought the reviews were misleading, especially given how Bourne has to compete with Batman, and that Retner's previous film, Mission Impossible, was IMHO underwhelmingly reviewed at this site. But this time they got it right.

Both Bourne and TDKR are films generally for fans of the series only. Anyone not privy to The Bourne Ultimatum is going to get a bit lost in Legacy. Luckily the film does a bit of hand-holding. But the first few minutes can be confusing, and in general the film suffers from somewhat mediocre storytelling.

Retner does a good impression of a Bourne-esque hero, which tries to be this offshoot of Treadstone, but ultimately the whole film was trying to achieve the Bourne trilogy in 2 hours. And unlike Batman, which tried to approach the story via a new method of exposition, this film suffers from recycling plot points, general characters, and even action sequences from the previous movies. Its as if it tries to be a homage, but ultimately it is made to look like it can't survive on its own without hearkening back to Matt Damon's time.

Characters are not very memorable apart from Cross. Like I said, the characters look recycled, and unoriginal. Fans of the series can only recall these people from previous movies, like its a homage.

The story, despite the exposition, does expand upon Ultimatum. Ultimately, Legacy does show the fallout of Ultimatum, both during the film (but parallel using Cross POV), and shortly after the film. It does feel like a sequel is in the horizon, and it does feel like Jason Bourne's saga is not going to end in New York.

Overall it is not a very bad movie, but only to fans of the series. Again the whole setup feels like a throwback to the Damon era, whilst trying to establish a mythos on its own. Unfortunately Cross would at best come out as a Bourne without the amnesia or struggle with his emotions, and his life's story would not be any different (some say even ripping off) from Bourne.… Expand

I've heard a lot of negative criticism surrounding this film, and quite frankly I can't really understand why. From start to finish this visceral narrative skips and hops around absolutely stunning locations that are an adventure in their own rights. There is a solid mix of both lush visuals and grounded prose that gives clear insight to the story behind the elusive pills and the whole story slowly weaves itself into an excellent film. I won't give too much away, but if you decide to watch the film you're in for one hell of a ride, with a hopeful ending and possible hint to a sequel!… Expand

Excitement starts at the last half hour, before that you might as well munch on your popcorn, text someone or do whatever. Stunts are exhausting yet surreal, Bourne without an excellent car chase is next to impossible. And don't be surprised when you see the credits rolling so suddenly.

'Legacy' is more of an action thriller than 'Identity' or 'Supremacy', but only because Bourne has already done most of the footwork for us. Less thought, more action this time around, but also more talking.

Enter Rachel Weisz and Jeremy Renner, who are both very good at talking, and look good doing it. On screen, their characters describe perfectly the world they are in, even though it seems they don't know who or where they are, or even what they are doing. Typical Bourne... it's entertaining to see characters discover themselves on screen. But, with two characters, the dynamics are less internal and more about dialog. Lots of dialog.

Eventually, they ask each other the right questions, and find that they each hold the key to the other's survival. They form an inseparable, if imperfect, team, so near to total disaster and death, that any mistake would normally prove fatal, but thank God for fiction, right? Many bullets are dodged but every bullet the hero fires hits. Disasters are averted by causing preemptive disasters. Continuing the Bourne themes of running, shooting, and asking too many questions, this film follows in the tradition of its predecessors.

The shortcut of using pre-existing sequences and characters is both a boon and a bane; time is saved and newcomers are put on the fast track to understanding the plot, but previous viewers and fans will recognize sequences they've already seen and wonder why there isn't a better way. Sure, the stories happen simultaneously, and the flashbacks help show that the new film's time line coincides with past films', but it feels like someone was cheating when they did this. Shouldn't there be new material, artfully blended into the background to give the desired impression (the carved name was perfect), instead of stock footage? Shouldn't Bourne be hinted at, instead of flashed on screen? Honestly, 100% of the re-used footage needed to be left out. And that is why, ladies and gentlemen, this film is not getting top reviews.… Expand

The male and female leads are great and good acting. Unfortunately this movie doesn't have enough actions, not enough tension and overall I found it boring after one hour and wanted to leave the cinema but i couldn't as i have paid it to watch this tormenting movie. Bourne trilogy, I would give 9/10. BUT Bourne legacy i give it 5/10 because of good acting only.

This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. The original Jason Bourne trilogy starring Matt Damon had become a re-interpretation of action-spy films, perhaps even giving the James Bond series a run for their money, and after how well The Bourne Ultimatum was received, the icing had become the icing on the cake as it could not have gone much higher. Well, it would be pretty difficult to do so, at least. However, the fourth instalment The Bourne Legacy had other plans due to Matt Damon and Paul Greengrass… Expand

Let me start off by saying that I wasn't thrilled with the original Bourne trilogy. They were redundant and all ended the same way. Sadly, this film is no exception. In fact, its plot is exactly the same as The Bourne Identity, which makes it a totally uninspired addition to the already dull franchise. It may entertain you, but the story and point have been shown all too many times.

It's a good movie, that's for sure, and frenetic enough for me not to have noticed how quickly it went by, I wish there was more of it. Jeremy Renner was definitely the right actor to play Aaron Cross, and the rest of the cast did a good job too (taking into account what they were given). The idea/concept behind the story was interesting. I'm looking forward to watching a the sequel when it is done. The issues I have with it are: 1) There was not enough character development for Aaron to be a more likable lead character (the existing scenes weren't great and some felt even unnecessary) 2) Aaron did not seem to be fighting for anything other than survival, he didn't seem to have any objectives other than running 3) It seemed to take a bit too much for any real action to happen, and the action in Bourne Legacy is not as good in the other Bourne movies 4) CIA agents (including Edward Norton's character) were only there to fill in information on why Aaron was being pursued. They didn't do anything more than a wall of text on the screen would have done.5) The ending wasn't good. It was terrible, actually. I hope the sequel gets a much better conclusion.… Expand

This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Riding on the back of the Bourne trilogy. It could just as easily have "borrowed" a title from Bond, or Batman - the connection is about as tenuous. A picture of Jason Bourne on the wall, and reference to his name, does not make it a Bourne film. The tedious chase sequence towards the end could have been shortened, and made more plausible, I was reminded of the remake of "Total Recall". Watchable, but not up to the Bourne standard.… Expand

The Bourne Legacy failed to have the same greatness as the previous films but still delivers great action and acting, although the script is average and so is the story.

The best thing about Legacy is the acting. Jeremy Renner and Rachel Weisz have done a fantastic job of acting their characters and totally fulfills their roles. Only the script let such good actors down.

The worst thing about Legacy is the storyline. The protagonist (Jeremy Renner who plays Aaron Cross) needs to find pills in order to survive and is on the run with Dr. Marta Shearing (Rachel Weisz) who knows where they are and both are on the run from the CIA. That´s it. Not very fulfilling.

I shall give "The Bourne Legacy" a 6.5/10. Thanks!… Expand

This movie started out great as a stand on it own movie, great beginning action. Then they started putting clips of the past three movies that Matt Damon did into it. I am not taking anything away from those I own all 3 and they are great! But did the writers just have brain freezes or something?
Writers you should have set your standards higher and wrote this as it were Bond James Bond. You do not see them jumping back in time to previous movies just to be able to fill the screen. You left it so you could continue the story, please continue it don't back track.… Expand

The Bourne Legacy will dissapoint many fans of the orginal trilogy. It ultimatley feels like a cash in attempt to do Bourne without Bourne, although the cinematic style is thankfully reminiscent of the orginals. The story is easily the film's biggest let down and by the end of the film it's all to easy to just not give a toss. That said, the action, specifically a rooftop chase remain as enthralling as you should expect of a Bourne film, and solid performances from Jeremy Renner and Edward Norton almost overshadow the feeling that the film has no point. But in essence, The Bourne Legacy is a letdown for fans of Bourne, compelling plots and good spy movies altogether.… Expand

Better than Supremacy by a hair. But couldn't keep pace with Identity or Ultimatum (of which both I would give a 10). Jeremy Renner does a nice job as the new anchor of the franchise. His character felt rooted in the real world with real training. Set in a story true to present day issues. For the most part the action and ingenuity of the lead didn't disappoint the first 90% of the film. But, overall the antagonist seems to growl more than bite. And I would love to know who's ending we got. The Studio's or the directors. The momentum seemed to sputter like a boat out of gas in view of the checkered flag. With the only real goal being the setup for a sequel.… Expand

While not as action-packed as the trilogy, The Bourne Legacy does not contain a single dull moment. The ending just happens, but hopefully there is a sequel to make up for that.

I'm just gonna give this an average score because of two major mistakes the movie has. First of all, this movie is too long for a story and script so thin. The story seems to never develop as the movie has other unnecessary scenes like the death of the other agents and the long confrontation between Marta and the agents in her house. The other reason is that the pacing of the movie is very bad as the pacing is too slow at the start and middle then suddenly speeds up when they arrived in the Philippines with an abrupt ending. Despite good performances by the cast, it is still barely a good film. Oh yeah, action scenes are not as thrilling than the previous films. The franchise should have ended with Ultimatum.… Expand

The Bourne Legacy has moments where it's electrifying, pulse-pounding, and everything else it's supposed to be. The problem is those moments don't add up to anything worth your while.

The fight scenes in this film are FANTASTICALLY choreographed - Renner turns killing into a dance. The ending leaves just enough open that we can realistically expect a sequel.

Having never seen any of the previous "Bourne" films, I have a feeling there's a lot of background I'm missing out on here, especially in the first several minutes. However, on its own, it still stands as a very watchable action thriller. There are some true standout performances here, particularly from Rachel Weisz (damn, I need to check out more of her movies now), and I've become a quick fan of Jeremy Renner. The first and third acts were definitely the stronger points the second felt like they dragged just a tad at moments, and as a rule I would have liked the action to be slightly less frenetic in its editing (though from what I understand, that's something of a Bourne staple). But I enjoyed it. Certainly not among the more impressive action flicks I've seen, but definitely not bad either.… Expand

Made no sense.

I was really looking forward to a new Bourne movie, even if Matt Damon wouldn't be in it. Lets just say.. I was disappointed. The story wasn't interesting, the direction was horrible and probably the main reason why the acting was terrible. Rachael Weisz is quite capable of acting, although in this movie it seemed she was asked to improvise too much, leaving, in some cases, an annoying display of fumbles for 5 minutes. The pacing wasn't great, and Jeremy Renner was playing a different character to the one he was meant to be playing. He was goofy and stuck up, when I believe his character description probably said "confident" Jeremy Renner can't do "confident" he can only do "Jeremy Renner" So coming from Matt Damon perfect representation of what a spy on the run would be like, it was a shock to see such a horrible performance from the leads. There are too many points in this movie where you don't care what's happening, but you can see that you are meant too. This is not good. There is a point where Rachael Weisz is distraught about seeing her colleagues murdered. Which is fine, although we hardly know this character, we don't care about her enough yet to then sit through a scene which goes for about 15 minutes where she is sobbing while talking to people who we don't know either until after that scene. If you loved the Bourne trilogy, and you haven't seen this one yet, I recommend you don't. 4/10… Expand

Nowhere near as good or as visceral as the Bourne trilogy, but how could it be? Those films have set the standard for action and it's a hard one to live up to. Still enjoyable and gives an idea of the life that Bourne led before he lost his memory. I think that's the main problem here. With Jason Bourne we have an essentially sympathetic character who feels disgust at his previous self and wants to exorcise his past. With Aaron Cross we have a man motivated by smart drugs. Bourne is now a franchise.… Expand

I watched about an hour before skipping to the end. The main problem for me was the long exposition scenes where in characters sit or stand around yelling or insulting each other. All the exposition could have been edited down to a few minutes and still told the audience everything it needed to know.