04 September 2010


I was reading over an exchange of comments at a social network site earlier and the content of the exchanges made me reflect for a bit on how jaded many movies watchers –no doubt including myself- have become. I wonder what it is we expect from to movie to get to it qualify to be decent enough that we can spend an evening watching it without experiencing feelings or revulsion  and contempt. The name of the film that was commented on was The Bourne Identity. I know from reading over the net most people bash the movie to no end. The vitriol raged against it is not as hostile as a film like Twilight that seems to generate nothing short of hatred from some bloggers. But I thought The Bourne Identity was a decent film. Was it a great film? An immortal classic of one sort or another? Far from it. In fact there one of the three films, the 3rd one I believe, that I have to be honest I did in fact hate because that stupid jerky camera style. Jesus just mount the camera already and stop with this artsy pseudo-documentary technique that worked at the beginning of Saving Private Ryan but does not have the same effect when the camera is bouncing around two guys sitting around a coffee table. But the 1st Bourne film was a fair film and not one that should inspire such contempt in people who are film watchers and bloggers.

Hang on Matt buddy, I'm on you're side on this!
I go through many horror films here looking for something decent and trying to give movies the benefit of the doubt for the most part. I literally sit through actual garbage of the type that I do not even want to write about the film. But I seem to be missing something here and find myself enjoying quite a few more main stream type films that a most bloggers I follow all but castrate with dull knives. I even fear to admit that I sort of like Matt Damon for the most part. Of course all this is a bit outside the regular theme of Necrotic Cinema but I guess it is my blog and I can write about anything I want. In fact I am burned out with modern horror films and can hardly find any material to write about and lately spend my time watching stuff from the 50’s and 60’s mostly. But I also am watching a lot of so called regular films with the wife as she is not really into Al Adamson and Larry Buchanan films to the degree I am I guess. Maybe that is an element to films like Bourne Identity as well, something I can share with the wife when we have some free time. In fact I am thinking now of rewatching the first two Bourne films. They are good films and I am at a total loss why they garner such rabid disdain in most blog reviews I have skimmed over. Other films I like that usually work like an emetic on people are Van Helsing, Twilight (which is also lambasted as ‘bad literature’), The Lost Boys and Underworld. There are more but why list them all. Maybe I have watched so many real b-movies and crappy no-budget Asian films that I am at a loss as to what most people think constitutes bad directing and acting in main stream films anymore. What standard is being used? Maybe there is something wrong with me. Some sort of bi-polar disorder perhaps. But I think I am going to rewatch the Bourne Identity later tonight and I am going to really try and see what is wrong with it and if there is some glaring shortcoming my flawed thinking process has missed before I will admit the errors of my way and get back here and report it.

Necrotic Addendum: The wife and I watched Bourne Identity one and two last week and after watching them I have changed my opinion to some degree. While I really like the first film directed by  Doug Liman I found myself hating the second one directed by Paul Greengrass. While I felt the story in the second film was great I just could not deal with the shaky, artsy camera work. On this point I find myself in total agreement with the always astute Andre Dumas over at The Horror Digest in regards to an exchange of comments I saw posted on Facebook.

And as I now recall I had this same reaction the first time I saw the second and third Bourne films. I simply hate that rocky camera technique and I am at a loss as to why it is even employed other than to make movie viewers nauseous. I have no issues actually with the stories for parts two and three, just the fact a chimp is holding the camera all of the time.

No comments:

Post a Comment