It’s been nearly a week now since I saw The Bourne Ultimatum and I’ve wavered between saying that the Bourne series is the Best Action Franchise Ever…
Or if it’s just the Best Franchise Ever.
I’ve decided to scale it back to my first classification, but that it even warrants mention in the second is something significant and kind of spectacular. In the end, I just couldn’t put it above some of the great film franchises of all-time such as The Godfather series (although III drags it down, something Bourne doesn’t have) or Lord of the Rings. I would, however, put it above Star Wars due to consistency (6 films, only 3 of which were good vs. Bourne’s 3-for-3). I know that's sacrilege, but I honestly don't care... I'm a Star Wars fan but not a Star Wars fanboy.
Anyways, turning to the Action Franchise aspect of the debate there isn't too much competition for the role as “Best Action Franchise Ever.” Although, compiling these franchises has made me interested in another Film Script Top 7 - Best Franchises (stay tuned for that soon and start compiling your own lists). Plus, it's also hard to classify some franchises (does The Terminator series fit in or is it strictly sci-fi? Alien was sci-fi, but Aliens was sci-fi/action, so where does it belong? Is Beverly Hills Cop primarily comedy? Should comic book series count? What would you consider The Man with No Name series?)
There are a handful of contenders, including Rambo, RoboCop, Mission Impossible, Dirty Harry, James Bond, Mad Max, Indiana Jones, Die Hard and Lethal Weapon.
I’m throwing out Rambo, RoboCop and Mission Impossible right from the start. While successful, I don’t think anyone regards these films as stellar, even in the genre. They’re fun (sometimes), but really nothing exceptional. And while I like the original Rambo, First Blood quite a bit… both sequels are just dreadful. And (as much as I hate to admit) I’ve never seen a RoboCop film, but the only one I expect to take slack for is the first one… which I will catch up with at some point, but one decent-to-good film does not make a franchise.
Then I’m going to get rid of Dirty Harry, James Bond and Mad Max. Mad Max because I honestly don’t like the series all that much – I don’t even think The Road Warrior is all that great. Bond and Harry are gone because they overextended themselves. Too many ups and downs in the series (much like Star Wars). Sure both might have three films in them (Dirty Harry, Magnum Force, Sudden Impact) (Goldfinger, Dr. No, Casino Royale) that stand up, but we’re taking the series as a whole… and when we do that they lose a lot of points for the lower rung sequels (The Dead Pool) (Any Pierce Brosnan Bond film).
That leaves the three big challengers, Die Hard, Lethal Weapon and Indiana Jones. I can lose Indiana Jones because it’s more adventure than action anyway (although the difference is very small) and though Bourne doesn’t have a single film to rival Raiders of the Lost Ark, I think Temple of Doom and The Last Crusade are fun but ultimately don’t hold up as well either. Bourne is more consistent. It’s good from minute one of film 1 until the final credits roll on film 3. Indiana Jones – if you classify it as action – might be the films that could most claim the Best Action Franchise crown… but by extending the genre limits to even include it, I have to add Terminator too and then I think I give Terminator the crown in that case anyway.
Finally, I don’t think either Die Hard or Lethal Weapon hold a candle to Bourne either. They’re a somewhat more respected series than RoboCop and Mission Impossible, mostly because the original films are considered classics of the genre whereas MI and RoboCop may not be, but taking in all 4 of each as 1 collective whole? You lose points. I don’t even remember Lethal Weapon 3 and I wish I could forget 4. And Die Hard I do remember each, but they’re ridiculous when you think about it. I think Kelly’s comparison of Die Hard to “24” is stunningly accurate, because after each film in Die Hard they seem to reboot with a new day, a new bad guy and the same lead character – much the same as Jack Bauer. Individually, they’re fine. The first one is great. The others are entertaining. But they’re not a continuous storyline like Bourne. I don’t think they’re as well acted either (come on, look at the string of brilliant actors in the Bourne series… even besides Damon, we get Franka Potente, Julia Stiles, Clive Owen, Chris Cooper, Brian Cox, Joan Allen, David Straithairn, Paddy Considine and Albert Finney).
Plus, there’s no mugging for the camera. There are no one-liners that need to be said each film. It’s all reliant on Jason Bourne being smarter and more clever than his would-be captors. Bourne’s character is on a mission with a clear ending to get to. The enemy is always the same, it’s Bourne vs. the Government. You’re not throwing him into a new ludicrous situation in each film just so you can make the movie. Most of all, they make sense.
Admittedly, the original storyline is not that interesting (amnesia victim, really?) but they toss that aside quickly in the original and get on with it. They embrace the idea and go with it and by the end of the film you’re not thinking about the amnesia gimmick anymore.
And that they’re brilliantly entertaining only seems to be a side effect. That's why it's my choice for Best Action Franchise.
Anyways, turning to the Action Franchise aspect of the debate there isn't too much competition for the role as “Best Action Franchise Ever.” Although, compiling these franchises has made me interested in another Film Script Top 7 - Best Franchises (stay tuned for that soon and start compiling your own lists). Plus, it's also hard to classify some franchises (does The Terminator series fit in or is it strictly sci-fi? Alien was sci-fi, but Aliens was sci-fi/action, so where does it belong? Is Beverly Hills Cop primarily comedy? Should comic book series count? What would you consider The Man with No Name series?)
There are a handful of contenders, including Rambo, RoboCop, Mission Impossible, Dirty Harry, James Bond, Mad Max, Indiana Jones, Die Hard and Lethal Weapon.
I’m throwing out Rambo, RoboCop and Mission Impossible right from the start. While successful, I don’t think anyone regards these films as stellar, even in the genre. They’re fun (sometimes), but really nothing exceptional. And while I like the original Rambo, First Blood quite a bit… both sequels are just dreadful. And (as much as I hate to admit) I’ve never seen a RoboCop film, but the only one I expect to take slack for is the first one… which I will catch up with at some point, but one decent-to-good film does not make a franchise.
Then I’m going to get rid of Dirty Harry, James Bond and Mad Max. Mad Max because I honestly don’t like the series all that much – I don’t even think The Road Warrior is all that great. Bond and Harry are gone because they overextended themselves. Too many ups and downs in the series (much like Star Wars). Sure both might have three films in them (Dirty Harry, Magnum Force, Sudden Impact) (Goldfinger, Dr. No, Casino Royale) that stand up, but we’re taking the series as a whole… and when we do that they lose a lot of points for the lower rung sequels (The Dead Pool) (Any Pierce Brosnan Bond film).
That leaves the three big challengers, Die Hard, Lethal Weapon and Indiana Jones. I can lose Indiana Jones because it’s more adventure than action anyway (although the difference is very small) and though Bourne doesn’t have a single film to rival Raiders of the Lost Ark, I think Temple of Doom and The Last Crusade are fun but ultimately don’t hold up as well either. Bourne is more consistent. It’s good from minute one of film 1 until the final credits roll on film 3. Indiana Jones – if you classify it as action – might be the films that could most claim the Best Action Franchise crown… but by extending the genre limits to even include it, I have to add Terminator too and then I think I give Terminator the crown in that case anyway.
Finally, I don’t think either Die Hard or Lethal Weapon hold a candle to Bourne either. They’re a somewhat more respected series than RoboCop and Mission Impossible, mostly because the original films are considered classics of the genre whereas MI and RoboCop may not be, but taking in all 4 of each as 1 collective whole? You lose points. I don’t even remember Lethal Weapon 3 and I wish I could forget 4. And Die Hard I do remember each, but they’re ridiculous when you think about it. I think Kelly’s comparison of Die Hard to “24” is stunningly accurate, because after each film in Die Hard they seem to reboot with a new day, a new bad guy and the same lead character – much the same as Jack Bauer. Individually, they’re fine. The first one is great. The others are entertaining. But they’re not a continuous storyline like Bourne. I don’t think they’re as well acted either (come on, look at the string of brilliant actors in the Bourne series… even besides Damon, we get Franka Potente, Julia Stiles, Clive Owen, Chris Cooper, Brian Cox, Joan Allen, David Straithairn, Paddy Considine and Albert Finney).
Plus, there’s no mugging for the camera. There are no one-liners that need to be said each film. It’s all reliant on Jason Bourne being smarter and more clever than his would-be captors. Bourne’s character is on a mission with a clear ending to get to. The enemy is always the same, it’s Bourne vs. the Government. You’re not throwing him into a new ludicrous situation in each film just so you can make the movie. Most of all, they make sense.
Admittedly, the original storyline is not that interesting (amnesia victim, really?) but they toss that aside quickly in the original and get on with it. They embrace the idea and go with it and by the end of the film you’re not thinking about the amnesia gimmick anymore.
And that they’re brilliantly entertaining only seems to be a side effect. That's why it's my choice for Best Action Franchise.
Who dares disagree?
5 comments:
Oh, also wanted to mention that I saw that August 8th was Chachi's birthday (thank you Myspace) and I wanted to wish Chachi a belated happy birthday. Hope you had a great one...
And hope you got around to Days of Being Wild as well, it's great and I want to get to discussing it sometime soon. I'll catch Falling Down as soon as I can too.
I finally got Days of Being Wild in. I'll watch it this weekend. And thanks for the Birthday wishes.
As for the topic at hand.
I saw all the Bourne films in theaters. I thought the first two were very capable films that were certainly smarter and more realistic than nearly any other action franchise, but for some reason, I just wasn't all that into it. Perhaps I grew up loving the typical "mugging" action hero too much. John McClane was my hero as a kid. And as great as Bourne is, I would still rather hang with McClane than Bourne. I wanted one-liners, humor, and over-the-top action sequences. And lets face it, Bourne has little of any of these. I understand that is why critics and many audience members loved the movies. I certainly saw the appeal, but I just wasn't as enthralled.
Until Now.
Bought the Bourne Files on DVD. Perhaps I just needed to watch them at home. Many of the problems I thought I had with any of them were suddenly resolved. In particular, Greengrass's direction...I remember liking it, but thought it was too distracting. I actually couldn't disagree more. It really pulls you in and makes for an extremely visceral experience. I also though his editing work was great too. He hit every beat appropriate to the scene, no matter if it it took a hundred cuts in a minute to do it.
Ultimatum was something else. Unlike the other too, it didn't revolve around some hit he made. It was all about the birth of Bourne. It was emotional (that initiation scene was insane), heartbreaking, intimate...Everything Die Hard isn't. And perhaps I just needed that more than anything from this series. I needed closure. Unlike the other action franchises you listed, Bourne is all about an ongoing story. Which I think kinda makes it a easy choice for best franchise. If Die Hard had an ongoing through line, than perhaps things would be different. So while I agree with your statement, I don't think it is the fairest one to make.
As a action film, I don't think Die Hard has been topped. Not even by Bourne. But that is because the Bourne films themselves are not wrapped up in a little bow like Die Hard is. I watch Die Hard with no real desire to see the other films right than and there. With Bourne I need to watch all three in a row in order to get the complete experience.
To be honest it is comparing apples and oranges. Without Die Hard, Bourne may not be. Not because it steals from Die Hard, but because it works so hard not to be just another Die Hard. Die Hard is all about excess, while Bourne is about subtlety. Nakatomi Plaza blows up in Die Hard. Bourne fights a man with a pen/magazine/phone book. McClane curses. Bourne emotes.
And as much as I loved this Bourne trilogy. I kinda hope it is over. It is complete in my eyes. But I do want another Die Hard. Besides as great as Matt Damon is as Bourne, I don't think it was essential casting. There is only one John McClane and only Bruno can play him.
PS Besides everyone knows that Rush Hour is the best action franchise ever.
Another thing I want to also say is that while Bourne is an amazing trilogy, it isn't all that memorable. All those cheesy lines and over the top FX all lead to a much more memorable experience.
Take for example the villians in the series. None of them hold a candle to Hans Gruber. Hell I don't think they hold a candle to Gruber's brother. They are great villains for Bourne and work well as unnamed agents within this world, but just aren't memorable.
I can vividly recall nearly all the Die Hards, I can't say the same about Bourne and I watched that more recently than the Die Hards.
I may be a little bias here since McClane is so nostalgic for me, but I think this is as objective as I can get when it comes to this topic. If I take out Die Hard, I can easily say Bourne is better than Lethal Weapon, Mad Max (though you are so wrong about Road Warrior), Mission Impossible, Rambo, Robocop, Dirty Harry, Bond (I liked Goldeneye though), etc. My inner child just can't say full heartedly that Bourne is better than Die Hard.
How's about this. Bourne is the best action franchise. Die Hard is my favorite action franchise. I think that is a fair compromise.
Dude, totally, I don't mean to crap all over your childhood here. I'm just making a statement that I myself believe in wholeheartedly. You see, I'm judging this basically on the consistent high level quality of the entire franchise. You're right it's unfair because Bourne gets to play out it's storyline over three while Die Hard had to figure out an original way of bringing McClane back every time. But at the same time this is a reason that McClane should have been left behind 15-20 years ago... it just gets ridiculous that this one man keeps getting dragged into these situations. And it's not like McClane goes looking for them either, he's the most laid back hero I can recall, maybe in movie history.
And I will say most people will give the nod to the original Die Hard over any of the Bourne's... but I'm just not one of them. I really like the first Die Hard but I don't know if I'd do anything more than marginally recommend 2, 3 and 4. They're fun, but they're really not that important or groundbreaking anymore. Which is unfair, but true.
And I like the conflicted hero. The inner turmoil. The subtlety of the Bourne series so much more than any of the Die Hard's that it's easy for me to put Bourne atop the pedestal.
And I'll admit also that the franchises are vastly different and it's hard to compare the two. They're both action franchises, but maybe they are opposites of one another - and maybe that's the point.
Still, how can you have a Best Action Movie Debate without discussing these two?
You can't. So I didn't.
Oh, and Road Warrior is fine. It's good even. But I get hysterical when I see it pop up in "Top 5" lists of Best Action movies ever. It's not even close. I could put all 3 Bournes and a handful of Die Hard's ahead of it by themselves to knock out Road Warrior.
I only had mild interest in this series until I caught back up with them on DVD. So for it to go from that to being certainly within my favorite action films of all time is something I was not expecting. Kudos to everyone behind this series for pulling the wool over my eyes and making the only great threequel to come out in this summer of threequels. Only other one I had a great time with was Live Free or Die Hard. Talk about irony. But that was the forth in the series, and as much fun as I had with it, it still can't touch Ultimatum. Oh and Potter was great, but still not as good as Bourne.
Post a Comment