If you have read the Robert Ludlum books then you have no doubt been disappointed by the way the story has been handled in the movies.This TV mini series keeps much closer to the book than the film.If that were the only good part about this, I would not be writing a review.It does not have the action of the films but it has the tension of the book. It is gripping!!Obviously it still cuts some part from the book but it does have so much more than the films.The acting is good, to be expected from the great cast.I am so glad that I watched this. I was so disappointed by the films until I gave up and disconnected them from the books.Brilliant stuff and well worth watching!!!

I've only watched Part I of this two-part miniseries but it's possible to see with some clarity where it's going. I may have managed to see the whole thing when it was released some twenty years ago but didn't remember any of it except for the criminally beautiful Jaclyn Smith and a sexy scene in which Jason Bourne, Richard Chamberlain, tenderly undresses her. Don't worry. No nudity, and the sex is all slow-motion close ups and dissolves, one cliché following in lockstep on the heels of the previous one.Compared to the more recent release with Matt Damon in the title role, it's better than I'd expected. TV movies don't have the time for rehearsals and the budget imposes other limits on the production. I worked in a miniseries with Jaclyn Smith -- the critically acclaimed cult hit, "Sidney Sheldon's Windmills of the Gods" -- and it was slam-bang fast.Compared to the recent version, this one is more of a mystery than an action movie, and although I gather it sticks closer to Ludlum's novel (you can do that better in three hours than in half that time) it still has a couple of holes that were missing from the Matt Damon feature. It was never hard to follow the feature film but this series sometimes lost me in its divagations. In the film we get a good look at every piece of information Damon uncovers in his search for his identity. Here, sometimes Chamberlain acts on intuition.The lack of rehearsal time and character development shows too. Two times, in Part I, someone mentions how good Chamberlain is at fighting and killing people. But he's not particularly good at it. He gets the crap beaten out of him several times. And when he pulls a hidden gun from his sock and blows his captor away, it's something any routine Private Eye could do. The magisterial mano a mano combat in the feature film required extensive choreography and rehearsal. It was evidently based on karel maga, the most brutal form of martial arts. We were treated to some practice in it while I was in boot camp, only it didn't have a name then. Here's one of the lessons. If you're in a fight for your life, you use whatever objects are at hand -- ball-point pens or blankets -- and you can't lose if you simply pop the other guy's eyeball out with your thumb, as if it were a grape. That's what a professional assassin would learn. Chamberlain, on the other hand, seems to know nothing of this. His natural form is the fist fight, like those you've seen in thousands of other movies. Easier to learn and to choreograph, therefore easier and faster to shoot, and therefore less expensive.Chamberlain's conception of Bourne's character is different from Damon's. Not necessarily worse than Damon's, but different. Chamberlain's Bourne is constantly puzzled by what he's being put through, and shows an occasional cranky mood. Half the time he's unsure of himself, uncertain about what to do next. And the writers have him (and Jaclyn Smith too) talk to themselves quite a bit so the viewer can keep up with his thoughts and the emotions that accompany them. "What am I doing here?" Or, "That CAN'T be true." Or, waiting for someone to answer a phone, "Come on! Come on!" Damon's Bourne acts almost entirely on instinct. He seems to remember more of how to behave like a prey animal, and he remembers how to speak French and German. He strides quickly from place to place and he reacts impulsively and with skill in situations of violence. He's entirely aware of his surroundings and their potential, while Chamberlain is befuddled by them.The miniseries, like the film, was shot in European locations and captures well the chill drizzle of a continental winter in Zurich and Paris. Not a bad effort, all things taken into account.

Made in the era when the mini-series were in relatively high regard and one classic was swiftly followed by another, this very respectable version of "The Bourne Identity" was released and, if memory serves, it was quite popular.Production values here are very good, it's tightly written (for the most part) and the Robert Ludlum story is full of surprises and suspense. Despite the three hour-plus running time it never slows down too much and keeps a solid momentum.Richard Chamberlain is no Robert De Niro but he pulls the role off well enough. He's quite fit and handles himself in the action department admirably. There are some good supporting actors here as well but I've never thought Jaclyn Smith to be a very good actress. She's wonderful eye candy but I didn't find her believable here at all. But then I never do.Also, call me crazy but I actually prefer this to the Superhuman agent Matt Damon portrayed in the big budget trilogy based on the Ludlum novels. Chamberlain looks a bit more human and he actually takes beatings here and gets bruised like a normal human being. He's a good fighter but nothing that borders on supernatural.

I didn't expect too much from a TV mini-series based on an adventure novel, which was later made into a big budget action film.I had not enjoyed the 2002 version of The Bourne Identity with Matt Damon, but this one was gripping from the first frame. I read a lot of the reviews and posts here as I always do to compare reactions, and found people were praising some elements, and criticizing others. Here is how it affected me.Primarily it was a story about a man's search for his identity, and Chamberlain, never known as the greatest actor in the world, was very believable and effective. Jaclyn Smith was just adequate in her role and she is definitely one of the worst actresses they could have chosen, but one can't have everything. She makes good eye candy. The movie's other characters played pivotal roles and delivered excellent characterizations. Notably Denholm Elliott as the doctor.The story was a fast moving adventure, which was almost Hitchcockian, the story of one bewildered man with villains trying to kill him, and a random pretty girl he abducts to help him (also echoes of the Redford movie Three Days of the Condor), and the extensive scenery of Paris was beautiful. Except for the obvious pauses where commercials used to be, this looks like a real movie and not a TV series. It doesn't look cheaply made. They obviously took pride in this production.But to me the most surprising thing of all was the human element, the complex emotions in the amnesiac's story. Richard Chamberlain delivered them far above what one would expect from him, or from a TV movie. Yet this movie is all but forgotten since the theatre versions were made. I think that Hitchcock, if he had been alive to make this picture, would himself have chosen Chamberlain as he was very much like the James Stewart "everyman" who raced against time to solve the mystery of his amnesia.There are a few places where key scenes from the past are shown briefly and never explained (apparently a sequel was planned, which would explain them), and yet I was able to fill in a likely explanation, from my own imagination. This is the mark of good film making. There were no fantastic special effects or avant garde techniques. It was straightforward story telling.I am easily bored, highly critical, and so because I loved this, I am very surprised and had to post about it, in case it might help someone decide to go ahead and see it. Yes, it is well worth it and highly enjoyable. It hails from another era (where the story was more important than the chases and effects).I am glad it is still available in video, and if I find it in DVD I will buy it because it was a movie I would like to see again. I still think about it - and went to the library to get the book the next day - and that rarely happens with an action movie of this type.