RedM Posted September 1, 2007 Share Posted September 1, 2007 If you haven't seen film two and three do not read this post! The second film ends with Bourne in New York talking to Pamela Landy, she tells him about his real identity and he tells her that she looks tired. This suggests that some time has passed since Bourne was in Moscow. The third film starts just minutes after the main events of the second. Bourne is still in Moscow and on the run. The film plays out in extended real time with Bourne on a mission to find out who he is after meeting with the Guardian reporter. However, the ending of the second film suggests he doesn't have to. He already knows! So, some way into the film, Bourne arrives, unexpectedly, in New York. He has a conversation with Pam Landy and she tells him who he is but changes the birthdate to give him a clue. The problem is that the third film is pointless if Bourne already knows who he is and he gives every impression of not knowing. Is the scene from film two the same scene as film three? NO! Film twos scene was in the summer time. Three happens in the depths of winter. Whichever way you look at it either Bourne knows who he is throughout the third film which makes the plotline redundant. Or he doesn't which means the scene in film two never happened (except it did). The third film following on so closely from the second gives Bourne no time to get to New York in the summer. He only gets there in the winter. Bit of a faux pas all round and one that Paul Greengrass (director) has yet to respond to my email about. One more thing: The 'baddies' only become aware of the Guardian reporter when Echelon picks him up saying "Blackbriar" in a phonecall. Don't they read the papers? Bourne is seen reading the third article in a series about himself. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cable Posted September 1, 2007 Share Posted September 1, 2007 If you haven't seen film two and three do not read this post! The second film ends with Bourne in New York talking to Pamela Landy, she tells him about his real identity and he tells her that she looks tired. This suggests that some time has passed since Bourne was in Moscow. The third film starts just minutes after the main events of the second. Bourne is still in Moscow and on the run. The film plays out in extended real time with Bourne on a mission to find out who he is after meeting with the Guardian reporter. However, the ending of the second film suggests he doesn't have to. He already knows! So, some way into the film, Bourne arrives, unexpectedly, in New York. He has a conversation with Pam Landy and she tells him who he is but changes the birthdate to give him a clue. The problem is that the third film is pointless if Bourne already knows who he is and he gives every impression of not knowing. Is the scene from film two the same scene as film three? NO! Film twos scene was in the summer time. Three happens in the depths of winter. Whichever way you look at it either Bourne knows who he is throughout the third film which makes the plotline redundant. Or he doesn't which means the scene in film two never happened (except it did). The third film following on so closely from the second gives Bourne no time to get to New York in the summer. He only gets there in the winter. Bit of a faux pas all round and one that Paul Greengrass (director) has yet to respond to my email about. One more thing: The 'baddies' only become aware of the Guardian reporter when Echelon picks him up saying "Blackbriar" in a phonecall. Don't they read the papers? Bourne is seen reading the third article in a series about himself. He may know his real name but that's about it. He still wants to figure out where it all began. The only thing that wound me up was when he told Noah that he was in his office. Why would he do that? No need... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedM Posted September 1, 2007 Author Share Posted September 1, 2007 He may know his real name but that's about it. He still wants to figure out where it all began. Rendered impossible by the time-line. Bourne could not get to (and did not go to) New York within the framework of film three before he actually did. Therefore the scene in film two can't ever happen or already have happened due to three following on so closely from two! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cable Posted September 1, 2007 Share Posted September 1, 2007 Rendered impossible by the time-line. Bourne could not get to (and did not go to) New York within the framework of film three before he actually did. Therefore the scene in film two can't ever happen or already have happened due to three following on so closely from two! Yeah, you're right. I'll let it slide as just a teaser... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pot Posted September 1, 2007 Share Posted September 1, 2007 Therefore the scene in film two can't ever happen or already have happened due to three following on so closely from two! It's all a conspiracy... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedM Posted September 1, 2007 Author Share Posted September 1, 2007 It's all a conspiracy... The Bourne Conspiracy! I like it. Off topic but there was a brief moment of fun on the Bourne Thread at AVForums where people were coming up with new Bourne film titles. 'Bourne on the fourth of July' cracked me up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pot Posted September 1, 2007 Share Posted September 1, 2007 The only thing that wound me up was when he told Noah that he was in his office. Why would he do that? No need... I thought about that too, but then though he's been trained to be an uber confident super agent, so he could could drag everyone to his position, then slip through everyone coming on the offices, so he could go off to the other place, therefore creating less hassle there... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cable Posted September 1, 2007 Share Posted September 1, 2007 'Bourne on the fourth of July' cracked me up. lol I heard "Being Bourne" on the radio as a prequel Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pot Posted September 1, 2007 Share Posted September 1, 2007 The Bourne Conspiracy! I like it. Off topic but there was a brief moment of fun on the Bourne Thread at AVForums where people were coming up with new Bourne film titles. 'Bourne on the fourth of July' cracked me up. I'll copyright mine, just like Paris Hilton, if I say it enough I might stand a chance... Bourne Conspirasy Bourne Conspirasy Bourne Conspirasy Bourne Conspirasy... Argh, I'm bored now... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedM Posted September 1, 2007 Author Share Posted September 1, 2007 I'll copyright mine, just like Paris Hilton, if I say it enough I might stand a chance... Bourne Conspirasy Bourne Conspirasy Bourne Conspirasy Bourne Conspirasy... Argh, I'm bored now... If you say it correctly you may have a chance! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pot Posted September 1, 2007 Share Posted September 1, 2007 She never said it right... she sounds like, "It's Hat" to me Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darren Posted September 1, 2007 Share Posted September 1, 2007 The books are better... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cable Posted September 1, 2007 Share Posted September 1, 2007 The books are better... I dunno, I like both but the films have very little relevance to the books. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarkR Posted September 1, 2007 Share Posted September 1, 2007 my eyes hurt after number 3... far too much camera motion. Also, number one seemed vaguely plausable. Number three was too much James Bond! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.