PDA

View Full Version : Bourne vs. Bond



pvtjoker
25th July 2007, 20:44
http://www.cnn.com/2007/SHOWBIZ/Movies/07/25/people.mattdamon.ap/index.html

LOS ANGELES, California (AP) -- Matt Damon's amnesiac assassin Jason Bourne shares initials with another notorious screen operative. But other than that, Damon doesn't see any similarities between Bourne and James Bond.


Matt Damon plays operative Jason Bourne in "The Bourne Ultimatum," the third in the movie series.

Bond is "an imperialist and he's a misogynist. He kills people and laughs and sips martinis and wisecracks about it," Damon, 36, told The Associated Press in an interview.

Damon's new film, "The Bourne Ultimatum," opens August 3.

"Bourne is this paranoid guy. He's on the run. He's not the government. The government is after him. He's a serial monogamist who's in love with his dead girlfriend and can't stop thinking about her," Damon said. "He's the opposite of James Bond."

The third movie in the series based on Robert Ludlum's books sends Damon's penitent killer back to his roots to uncover how he became such a perfect weapon and who was responsible.

Damon said he bumped into former Bond star Pierce Brosnan in London and they chatted briefly about how the British super-spy's movie handlers were trying to update the character with last fall's "Casino Royale," which introduced Daniel Craig as Bond.

Brosnan told him the aesthetics and style of Bond can be updated "but fundamentally, what the character is is something from the 1960s," Damon said.

Paul Greengrass, Damon's director on Universal's "Bourne Ultimatum" and its 2004 predecessor, "The Bourne Supremacy," agreed that Bond is a relic from a different era.

"He's an insider. He likes being a secret agent. He worships at the altar of technology. He loves his gadgets. And he embodies this whole set of misogynistic values," Greengrass said. "He likes violence. That's part of the appeal of the character. He has no guilt. He's essentially an imperial adventurer of a particularly English sort.

"Personally, I spit on those values. I think we've moved on a little bit from all that, the martini shaken, not stirred."

Bourne and Bond may be very different men, but that still leaves the big question: Which one would win in a fight?

"It's tough. I wouldn't bet against Bourne," Damon said. "Bond had all those gadgets, though."

Personally I find the Bourne series to be rather dull., I'd take Bond over Bourne.

Storm
25th July 2007, 22:49
This is again apples and oranges....the Bond sytle is typically British, fun and entertaining, fast cars, women etc and enjoyable...but not all Bonds or Bond films have been good. As for Bourne, he is completely different so why is there a need to compare the two I don't know.

As for the films, I enjoyed Matt Damon and the first 2 Bourne films much more than the previous few Brosnan Bond films (except Golden Eye).

Mark in Oshawa
26th July 2007, 15:51
Leave it to a Hollywood Liberal though to put a negative spin on the most successful movie franchise in the last 4 decades. I like Damon, I like the Bourne pics, but his bad mouthing Bond as a misgoynist and pointing out he is a killing machine without feeling I guess overlooks a lot of the movies where Bond's values at times are conflicted. Anyone who saw the last Bond saw the new dimension of him falling in love and vowing revenge. Not much different than Bourne I would say. Sure he has the gadgets, but Bond is escapism. Bourne works because he is a bit more real, and the movies are much grittier, but I wish Damon would quit putting some sort of spin on how Bond is a dinosaur. Bond is escapism. People WANT to see this suave hero with everything at his disposal, and the second that changes, it isn't Bond.

Bourne works, and I think I like the movies better, or at least I did, until I saw Casino Royale. That movie, I think was a response the Bourne franchise....

L5->R5/CR
26th July 2007, 17:09
I grew up loving the Bond movies.

The action, the excitement, the fantasy, the intrigue. For me the fantasy of it, his personality, the gadgets, the whole story lines, was part of the appeal.

Then I saw the Bourne Identity. Then I saw the Bourne Identity again, and again, and again. I love the Bourne movies. The action, the stories, the stunts have such a raw and realistic feel to them. There is a gritty excitement that you just don't get. Plus the character is more relatable even if a complete piece of fiction.

I thoroughly enjoyed Casino Royal, I think it was a wonderful update to the Bond franchise and brought it closer to what Bond would be if it were created for this generation of fans. That said, I have been counting down the days to the Bourne Ultimatimum, not just because a colleague of mine was on the lead stunt driving unit, or the fact that he said it was some of the most exciting and thrilling stunt driving he has been involved in; but, because I love the stories and the franchise more.

They are different, but inevitably, they are similar. Both movies are based on clandestine agents that were "programmed" by the intelligence service of their government. Both have some level of more than human extremism in their persona. And ultimately the movies are a similar genre so they can't help but be compared.

jonas_mcrae
26th July 2007, 21:50
both kick ass!
except bond in Moonraker hahaha hated that one!

AndySpeed
27th July 2007, 00:20
both kick ass!
except bond in Moonraker hahaha hated that one!

I look at Moonraker today and simply see it as a comedy!

Galveston dunes
27th July 2007, 03:33
If by chance your refering to the new Bond then its Bourne all the way,IMO.
However if Moore or even Connery for that matter had todays technology then it might be a close call,to answer the question though I'll have to go with any of the Bourne movies.

Malbec
27th July 2007, 12:24
I thoroughly enjoyed Casino Royal, I think it was a wonderful update to the Bond franchise and brought it closer to what Bond would be if it were created for this generation of fans.


Actually Casino Royale isn't so much of an update as it is a reversion back to the James Bond of the books (it was the first of the franchise) which explains his attitude towards women etc. The rest of the book-based Bond films were highly sterilised for the silver screen. He always was a brutal SOB in the books.

The earlier Bond films were turning into a pastiche of the genre, there was nothing really to mark them out as being special and Casino Royale was a refreshing change.

Bourne is good too, but Bourne has the advantage of being written specifically for a post-Cold war era while Bond has had to be adapted quite a bit to be kept relevant to whats going on in the world around us now.

L5->R5/CR
27th July 2007, 16:42
Actually Casino Royale isn't so much of an update as it is a reversion back to the James Bond of the books (it was the first of the franchise) which explains his attitude towards women etc. The rest of the book-based Bond films were highly sterilised for the silver screen. He always was a brutal SOB in the books.

The earlier Bond films were turning into a pastiche of the genre, there was nothing really to mark them out as being special and Casino Royale was a refreshing change.

Bourne is good too, but Bourne has the advantage of being written specifically for a post-Cold war era while Bond has had to be adapted quite a bit to be kept relevant to whats going on in the world around us now.



When I said update I meant the whole structure and appearance of the film, not just the character. Even the more recent pre-Daniel Craig Bond movies were stylized in a way that simply didn't play as well as it could in the current market. It lacked a lot of the grittiness of how action scenes best appeal these days and it also had a very super hero versus the super duper villian feel. Overlooking the change in Bond's affect and character the presentation change was for the better and held more appeal.

JovialJooles
27th July 2007, 16:56
This is again apples and oranges....the Bond sytle is typically British, fun and entertaining, fast cars, women etc and enjoyable...but not all Bonds or Bond films have been good. As for Bourne, he is completely different so why is there a need to compare the two I don't know.

As for the films, I enjoyed Matt Damon and the first 2 Bourne films much more than the previous few Brosnan Bond films (except Golden Eye).

Couldn't agree more, although I thought Casino Royale was a refreshing re-interpretation. However, the thought of going through all the films again just to make more Bond films is not appealing at all.

Hazell B
27th July 2007, 19:07
Bourne, Bourne, Bourne.

I shall say no more :)

stevie_gerrard
27th July 2007, 22:56
I prefer the Bond movies, i haven't really got into the Bourne Films, but i am looking forward to the new one coming out, i'm sure it will be brilliant :)