Tony Gilroy will direct THE BOURNE LEGACY

[The Nth Doctor]

Damn you and your cursed logic!

 

[JacksonArcher]

Deadline Hollywood sat down with writer-director Tony Gilroy on The Bourne Legacy. He confirms that Matt Damon won't be returning for the film, and neither will Jason Bourne. Instead, the story will focus on a new assassin character in the Bourne mold, similar to Clive Owen's character in The Bourne Identity or Karl Urban's character in The Bourne Supremacy and will deal with things post-Bourne Ultimatum.

"Matt was completely not an option, and personally I couldn't imagine trying to replace him. All the conspiratorial politics aside, these are very un-cynical, honest movies, and I don't know another actor who brings more integrity and dignity, and a lack of cynicism to his work than Matt." [...] "I'm not going to get into the plot, but you saw the other three films, you know everything that happened, and it's not a dream sequence. What I can say is, you thought that was the whole world, but it was a small piece of what was going on. Ultimatum exploded at the end with people arrested. We deal with that as a reality, it has ramifications that echo out into the larger world. And of course, Jason Bourne is still alive and out there in the world. I don't want to go beyond that, because the last thing I need is for every blogger to be second guessing."

I'm still iffy on this idea, but I'm gradually becoming more and more open to it. If anyone can make this work, it's Tony Gilroy. He's pretty much the main reason why I still hold out any hope for this. Apparently Gilroy and Universal Studios are eying an August 2012 release.

 

[Gaith]

The strangest bit:

Gilroy has also helped remove the ticking rights clock that put pressure on Universal to get another Bourne film into production. It is not at all a scorched earth situation between Damon and the studio.

What on Earth would another studio do with the rights? Reboot, without any prior talent involved? Yeah, that'd be just as easy as, say, Disney/Marvel getting Spider-Man back and doing their own take on that.

 

[Harvey]

With the rights, another studio could certainly produce a more faithful adaptation of Ludlum's novels, or produce their own remake (capitalizing on the name) just as different from the books as the trilogy Universal has produced.

I have to say, despite Gilroy's involvement, I'm not wowed by this idea. I just don't see a lot of story potential with a Bourne movie that doesn't include the namesake character.

 

[Captaindemotion]

^ Agreed.

 

[Gaith]

With the rights, another studio could certainly produce a more faithful adaptation of Ludlum's novels, or produce their own remake (capitalizing on the name) just as different from the books as the trilogy Universal has produced.

Yeah, but the vast majority of the public only knows Bourne through the Damon movies. Even a more faithful adaptation of the books would therefore be seen by nearly everyone as a more or less random reboot.

 

[Harvey]

Probably, but somebody at Universal clearly think the franchise has potential in the name alone, so it's not a stretch to believe other studios are exercising the same line of thought.

 

[Gaith]

Sigh... but it's not "just the name." It's a continuation of events, possibly with Joan Allen, David Strathairn and Julia Stiles. The previews will probably feature Damon clips, and if the new movie's successful, they may succeed in bringing Damon back down the line. It's not at all comparable to doing a straight reboot and doing the amnesia thing all over again.

 

[Harvey]

The supporting cast is nice, but the first three films were the story of Jason Bourne, as played by Matt Damon. Continuing the series without Damon, and without Bourne, is only Universal trying to cash in on the franchise's namesake, which the returning supporting cast provides a tenuous justification for. It'll probably be different than a straight reboot, sure, but it's still doing the same thing a reboot would ultimately do: continue the series without Matt Damon as Jason Bourne.

Eh, I'm just not enthused. It's like a James Bond movie that brings back M and Q, but drops the actor and character of James Bond. Huh?

 

[JacksonArcher]

The supporting cast is nice, but the first three films were the story of Jason Bourne, as played by Matt Damon. Continuing the series without Damon, and without Bourne, is only Universal trying to cash in on the franchise's namesake, which the returning supporting cast provides a tenuous justification for. It'll probably be different than a straight reboot, sure, but it's still doing the same thing a reboot would ultimately do: continue the series without Matt Damon as Jason Bourne.

Eh, I'm just not enthused. It's like a James Bond movie that brings back M and Q, but drops the actor and character of James Bond. Huh?

I'm less outraged than I was when I first heard the news, but I have to generally agree with this assessment.

 

[Gaith]

it's still doing the same thing a reboot would ultimately do: continue the series without Matt Damon as Jason Bourne.

For this particular installment. Or does your crystal ball tell you Damon's never coming back?

 

[Captaindemotion]

^ All the same, while they are keeping the door open for him, it's hard to see why he'd come back for any future Bourne movie, despite not doing this one. Unless Greengrass comes back, which I also doubt.

Besides which, Damon has said that the older he's got, the harder it is to make these movies. Makes a Connery-esque 'Never Say Never' moment all that harder to contemplate.

 

[Gaith]

From upthread:

Damon said in a Charlie Rose interview for Green Zone a few months ago that he thought the best way to do a sequel would be to wait ten years, then check up on the character and see what he's been up to. Sorta like Before Sunset, but with spies, I guess. Sounds to me like the ideal way to go also.

I doubt he'd say that if he had no interest in ever revisiting the character.

And reprising the role at a future time doesn't necessarily mean being the #1 action protagonist again. He could be a shadowy mentor-figure, etc.

 

[Captaindemotion]

^ Fair point.

 

[Harvey]

it's still doing the same thing a reboot would ultimately do: continue the series without Matt Damon as Jason Bourne.

For this particular installment. Or does your crystal ball tell you Damon's never coming back?

Damon's only coming back if Greengrass returns, which seems unlikely at this point. Also, for Damon to return, the fourth film will have to be profitable enough to warrant a fifth movie, and I'm pretty skeptical of a Matt Damon-less Bourne film's chances at the box office.

That's no crystal ball--just a pretty sound guess, I think.

 

[Captaindemotion]

James Franco is being mooted as Matt's replacement.

http://www.moviehole.net/201033206-james-franco-to-lead-new-bourne

 

[Gaith]

Boo.

 

[JacksonArcher]

I think James Franco is a terrific actor, so I'd be on-board with that.

 

[Gaith]

I've got nothing against his chops, but he's too conventionally handsome/pretty. Whoever they pick should have a naturally tough look a la Damon/Craig/Statham.

 

[JacksonArcher]

I think if Franco buffs up and roughs up his image, he could pull it off.