Hm.

I second.

Just watched Bourne, the stakes were certainly too low. The problem with Bourne is he has no relationships with anyone, they tried to force a relationship with his father here which just doesn't come close to working. They are not prepared to let the character grow and move on so we just go round in circles as Bourne outsmarts various CIA cliches film after film.

The first three films tied into what was in the zeitgeist at the time in terms of surveillance culture which turned out to have some grounding with the Snowdon documents and Wikileaks however, this film only uses them as touchstones and not actual plot points, it really wants to have something to say but simply doesn't.

I can't quite believe this is Greengrass as it feels like another director coming in to do the sequel. (Don't get me wrong, it's better than the Jeremy Renner one that I only got half an hour into.)

The first film is a nice piece of cinema, the second is an abomination against narrative structure and then the third one wraps things up pretty nicely.

I'm not saying that I expect every mainstream film to have a message but occasionally they do and can put a light on things that are happening in the world and in doing so raise their game, this film started to do that and then just didn't bother.

My favourite moment of bad tech was the CIA trying to stop someone hacking into a server they could have simply turned off, quickly followed by the hacker trying to cover their tracks by... setting the monitor on fire.

My wife and I are going to see Sully tonight. We'll see how that goes.

I saw this too, enjoyed it greatly. I'd be surprised if the NTSB were actually as dickish as the movie makes them out to be.