A part of me was thinking that since this is the last of the books then the following movies are probably just trying to cash in on the popularity of these films, except that I discovered that this film, and the previous one, pretty much have absolutely nothing to do with the books. In a way it seems as if the creators decided to veer as far away from the books as possible for what ever reason I'm not really sure. Actually, I can probably guess and I suspect it has a lot to do with the action. The film basically begins where the previous film finished off - sort of. The previous film ended with Bourne in New York speaking to Landry over the phone, however this film takes a back step and has him back in Moscow running away from the cops (which is something that he always seems to be doing in these films - running away from cops, or at least other intelligence officers, but mostly cops). However, it turns out that a journalist in London has been writing articles about Jason Bourne, so Bourne decides to make contact with him. Mind you, the CIA also have him under watch as well. Look, this is a pretty good film and all that, and even includes the scene in New York, showing us that it is actually a part of a bigger picture. Well, sort of, because I suspect that at the end of the previous film they weren't really all that sure if they were going to be continuing the franchise, and thus when they got the green light, decided to incorporate it into this film, which sort of makes sense because it does show us the bigger picture. Still, as I have mentioned, if you have seen the other films, you basically get more of the same, except for the thing that Bourne really doesn't seem to like killing people. Sure, he was trained as an assassin, but having suffered amnesia, it seems that he really wants to get away from that life, which I why I suspect he spends more time running as opposed to killing everybody he comes across. Then again, he is a fugitive, so I guess he doesn't really want to give them a valid excuse. Yet they are still continuing with this amnesia story. Basically he remembers something important in the last movie, but there is still a lot hidden away, such as his real name. So sure enough we have more flash backs, and this leads him further on to dig up more of his past. Honestly, I'm not really sure what there is to dig up, and why he wants to remember it because, well, he knows that he is a trained assassin, and really doesn't want to be a trained assassin any more, and simply wants to be left alone. Well, that isn't going to happen because it is clear that they really want to clean up the mess that they have made. I guess that is the thing with these secretive government types - or at least those that operate in the world of Hollywood. Then again, truth is stranger than fiction, and there are many stories about shady government operatives doing shady government things such as overthrowing democratically elected governments because, well, they are bad for business. Sure, they claim peace and security and all that, but in reality it is all about business people making money, and making money as easily as possible, which means getting rid of governments that might get in the way, such as trying to regulate labour laws, and making them pay taxes, because, well, that is unnecessary costs to the bottom line. Also, it once again seems to be, like the other movies, Bourne attempting to track down the people involved in these shady practices, or should I say secret plans to deal with the enemies of the government, or rather the enemies of business. Okay, he may have volunteered, but really, by this time, the formula seems to simply be more of the same, and I suspect that this is going to be the case with the next two movies as well. I'm still unlikely to read the books though.

This movie is one hell of a movie ,Action is so good ,Plot is excellent and the chases just as good as the other two ,Best one out of the 4 movies .

Finally getting round to seeing the original Bourne film trilogy, after hearing nothing but good things, there hasn't been any regret watching them. Wasn't sure initially as to whether they'd be my cup of tea or not, hence why it took so long to see them, but that was not the case.'The Bourne Identity' was a very pleasant surprise, giving a fairly well-worn genre a much needed freshness. It had its imperfections, but was a very solid and even very good film with much to recommend and introduced a cast-against-type Matt Damon in one of his best roles. 'The Bourne Supremacy' was an example of a sequel that was every bit as good as its predecessor, maybe lacking its freshness but also made a few improvements along the way. The original Bourne trilogy ends with 'The Bourne Ultimatum', which has been regarded often as the best of the three, cannot disagree.Some of the hand-held shaky cam is used a little too excessively (epileptics be warned!) and the ending could have been a little less frenetic and confused and had more careful tying things together and explanation.Visually, on the other hand, a vast majority of the time 'The Bourne Ultimatum' like its predecessors looks slick and stylish with even more breath-taking locations. There were many instances when the hand-held shaky cam did intensify the tense claustrophobia of the atmosphere and intensity to very good effect, never making things incomprehensible.Like 'The Bourne Supremacy', the music score is even more dynamic, atmosphere enhancing and more layered this time round, while Paul Greengrass' drama-documentary style and background to his directing is used to full advantage. 'The Bourne Ultimatum' has the sharpest, most intelligent and subtle script of the three films, in a way that is just dazzling.The story never lets go of its grip and never strains credibility or reality. It is a tense adrenaline rush throughout, with the best mix of exciting action, the best of it is absolutely thrilling, and meaty story-telling, with lots of emotion and characterisation meat, that develops Bourne the best of all three films. Paul Greengrass' directing style and his experience in drama-documentary is once again used to full advantage.Matt Damon has really made the character of Bourne his own, at the time of 'The Bourne Identity' it was very much a cast-against-type role but now it is one of his best. Julia Stiles and particularly Joan Allen are marvellous, as is a suitably malevolent David Strathairn, and while the supporting cast are a little underused they all do uniformly sterling work (one would be very hard pressed to get a bad performance out of Albert Finney for example).In conclusion, what a conclusion to the Bourne trilogy. 9/10 Bethany Cox

Jason Bourne doesn't deceive. Here he comes once again for the third time, trying to survive as he's still chased by his ex-employers.This third installment is as good as the two first movies. Jason Bourne is a magnet and watching him tormenting the CIA and exact his revenge for the life he lost is still exciting and masterfully shot.Matt Damon is once again amazing as Jason Bourne, this CIA assassin who wants to start over. It's no longer a quest for his past. It's about redemption for all the crimes he committed for the CIA and put down the monster by revealing its dark secrets. Which makes him the biggest threat to the CIA who is more than willing to end it definitely.So here we go again following Jason throughout the world from Moscow to New York while stopping at Paris, Amsterdam and Tanger, taking down the assassins sent after him and his allies to his final destination where everything began for him.The rest of the cast is as great as Matt Damon especially David Strathairn who plays the main villain in the movie. He's so cold blooded and despicable he's giving me chills at each of his scenes. So does Albert Finney who plays Dr Hirsch, the one who conditioned Bourne and turned him into a cold blooded killer. Those two are great additions to the cast alongside Julia Stiles and Joan Allen.Please give us more!