"Bourne" Franchise Exclusive to Universal Pictures, Now

[ps3andlovinit]

Originally Posted by J_UNTITLED

Produced by Frank Marshall and Ludlum Entertainment chairman-CEO Jeffrey Weiner, the film will be readied for a summer 2010 release.

"There is a deep Ludlum library. Over 25 of his novels have never been exploited in movies," Weiner said.

You think he would have the good sense to be a little less crass about it .. as someone representing the Ludlum name.

[SBrooks1]

Excellent news. I love the Bourne trilogy much more than Daniel Craig's Bond.

[dobyblue]

Originally Posted by Liquid-Prince

How is it that you guys have so much problems with the shakey cam? They're not that hard to follow.

Watch the Bourne Ultimatum.
When Bourne is talking to Potente's brother on the bed, telling him that she died, why is the camera bobbing all over the place? Why?

I don't mind if some action scenes are filmed that way, it can add to a movie, but in the case of the third Bourne not only are ALL the action scenes filmed that way, but Greengrass films EVERY bloody scene that way.

It's ridiculous that a scene like that one I'm talking about shouldn't be a steady shot. Greengrass goes WAYYYY overboard. Doug Liman did a much better job.

[PS3-Playb3yond]

I also wish they would film the Bourne movies with a steady focused camera. But what are you going to do, right?
I hope we see more Bourne movies in the future though.

[Liquid-Prince]

Originally Posted by dobyblue

Watch the Bourne Ultimatum.
When Bourne is talking to Potente's brother on the bed, telling him that she died, why is the camera bobbing all over the place? Why?

I don't mind if some action scenes are filmed that way, it can add to a movie, but in the case of the third Bourne not only are ALL the action scenes filmed that way, but Greengrass films EVERY bloody scene that way.

It's ridiculous that a scene like that one I'm talking about shouldn't be a steady shot. Greengrass goes WAYYYY overboard. Doug Liman did a much better job.

I think it was for continuity purposes more then anything else. It would be jarring to go from a extreme shaky cam to a completely stiff style.

[dobyblue]

It wouldn't be though if there was no shaky style during scenes where there is no action. I didn't even think there was continuity, for me that particular scene stood out because of it.

[Liquid-Prince]

Originally Posted by dobyblue

It wouldn't be though if there was no shaky style during scenes where there is no action. I didn't even think there was continuity, for me that particular scene stood out because of it.

I don't know, I really like the shake. It makes everything feel a lot more fluid and intense. As much as I like Dark Knight, I remember the action to be sort of stiff. Then again, Dark Knight was more of a psychological thriller.

[Ferris]

The shaky camera is meant to immerse the viewer in the environment. During the scene where he's talking to "Marie's" brother, I felt the shaking of the camera made it feel like I was a third person in the room. Just my opinion.

With respect to the article, I'm actually happier about the "inside track" approach to the rest of the Ludlum library. He wrote some phenominal books, and would love to see more of them onscreen (and even modernized) in the same fashion as Bourne.

[Spitfrnd]

Originally Posted by FriedEggs

The shaky camera is meant to immerse the viewer in the environment. During the scene where he's talking to "Marie's" brother, I felt the shaking of the camera made it feel like I was a third person in the room. Just my opinion.
.....

I think it has just the opposite effect. When you watch something, you are not shaking. For one scene it might be interesting, for all of them, it is simply annoying and distracts from the enjoyment of the film. When you read the books, do you imagine a shaking image, I think not. The first film was the best, the second the worst and the third in between, just due to that fact alone.

[GreenScar]

Originally Posted by dobyblue

God I wish they'd take Paul Greengrass off the project, his insane dedication to never having a single still shot makes me want to gouge my eyes out, which is a shame because the stories are so good, as is the cast.

The first Bourne film was so much better from a visual aspect.

I agree 100% Also the style of closeups showing only 3/4 or 1/2 of the face really urks me (while the camera is moving back and forth no less). They do it in the Bourne sequels. They did it a ton in Hancock.

Love the Bourne stories. Hate the style (to each his own)

[STARSCREAM]

Love the Bourne series as well but I too hate the shaky cam all the time. You can't harldy ever see or tell what is happening when fighting occurs. I'd like to actually be able to see all those awesome moves and see someones #$$ kicked!