1. grandpajoe6191

   6

   Man, the movie's still has the same intensity, same action sequences, same stupidity, and the same plot. I wonder if the movie might become something like the James Bond Franchise...… Expand

   • Helpful?

     2 of 3 users said yes
2. jacks.

   5

   I wouldn't take any extremist sides, but overall the story was fairly straightforward (which is a blessing for this kind of genre), and yes, while the camera could indeed induce nausea, it was a very obvious character of the film itself. Natural/ambient light should be the prerequisite for every film made. Unrealistic car chases coupled with insane walk-aways are unforgivable, but tight, choreographed fisticuffs were passable as the real deal. A bit of a quick-ending wrap up made it somewhat hurried, but characters remained true, and almost a bit stereotyped (unbeatable Bourne, bumbling crony, maiden-in-distress, et al.). A solid mediocre rating.… Expand

   • Helpful?

     0 of 0 users said yes
3. RandyH.

   2

   Seemed like a great movie. I'm not really sure, because I had to look away through much of it or squint one eye shut to try and stem the nausea that the shaking, frentetic camera views inspired. Who thought this was a good way to film a movie? This artsy-fartsy director should be banned from any future filmmaking. Even the quiet moments in the movie when two people were just talking, the camera was moving and zooming in and out like the cameraman was smoking crack. I was looking forward to this third installment of the Bourne series, but by the end of the film I was looking forward to some Pepto Bismol. Complete waste of time and money, in my opinion.… Expand

   • Helpful?

     0 of 0 users said yes

See all 93 User Reviews