Yes, I liked the Ludlum books, but there is much more action in Eric Van Lustbader's novels on Bourne.
I read the books too, but I have always liked the movie better. In the books Bond seems abit more timid.
James Bond or Jason Bourne
- Thread starter Captain Ryan
- Start date
Bourne is good, very good, but I go with Bond. The sheer number of good Bond films makes the memorable Bond moments outweigh Bourne's by a long shot.
Not to mention way better cars.
Not to mention way better cars.
Change it to seventeen years and that could be my response! I've enjoyed all the Bourne films, but never felt the need to watch them more than once. A Bond film, on the other hand, gets added to my DVD collection as soon as it is released.
Bourne. There is something about him that makes him more human and more relatable in my eyes. Whereas Bond has always been this very larger-than-life character (besides Casino Royale).
^ Like all the car crashes Bourne can walk away from? 
A lot of people only know Bourne through the movies, which have nothing in common with the books except the titles. But it's funny to see the same people who bitch about comic book movies not being true to the source material, or movies that don't follow their more popular novels to the letter, yet they love the Bourne movies.
A lot of people only know Bourne through the movies, which have nothing in common with the books except the titles. But it's funny to see the same people who bitch about comic book movies not being true to the source material, or movies that don't follow their more popular novels to the letter, yet they love the Bourne movies.
When I meant more human, I meant that he's not the sort of cliche emotionless hero of the Connery/Roger Moore films (and even the Brosnan ones). Bourne is someone who you can feel for, you feel empathetic towards him, you understand him.
I'd have to say that I'm partial to James Bond since Casino Royale is one of my favorite movies; That David Niven kicks ass. 
Bourne, definitely.
I hated how campy and hokey the Bond films were and if anything, Casino Royale felt like a response to Bourne. "What? We don't need stupid gadgets to make a good spy film? Who knew?"
I hated how campy and hokey the Bond films were and if anything, Casino Royale felt like a response to Bourne. "What? We don't need stupid gadgets to make a good spy film? Who knew?"
^ Like all the car crashes Bourne can walk away from?
Well, limp away from.
The Jason Bourne series has been overall stronger then the Bond Series. In my opinion only two Bond movies standout in the series thus far; Tomorrow Never Dies and Casino Royale (Craig). Bourne wins, but just barely because he gets the job done without any fancy gadgets. A better "American" spy to put up against Bond would be Ethan Hunt, which Bond would win hands down.
The Bond people knew. They did it in 1989 with License to Kill, the public just wasn't ready for it at the time (and Timothy Dalton never really caught on in the US, unfortunately). The Bourne films influenced Casino Royale to a certain extent, but it seemed to me they just decided the time was right to go back to the direction they tried 15 years earlier.
ETA: In fact, gadget free Bond comes 'round in cycles. Dr. No, From Russia With Love, On Her Majesty's Secret Service, and For Your Eyes Only all have few, if any, gadgets.
I'm sure those movies still had the expensive brand name product placement cars though?
Anyway, I guess I'm young enough to only really know the 90s Bond and he just pissed me off to no end. Bourne was just a refreshing take on the "spy movie thriller" that at least tried to go for realistic action and plot.
Anyway, I guess I'm young enough to only really know the 90s Bond and he just pissed me off to no end. Bourne was just a refreshing take on the "spy movie thriller" that at least tried to go for realistic action and plot.
Jason Bourne by far.
Similar threads
