Yes, the character name was used but the premise/bones of the story were vastly changed. I also have no problem in updating the story into present time. It's rare for a movie to take a book of this size and not leave out parts of it when adapting it into a good film. I partially agree with your comments Andrew. Jeff ShannonĪndrew wrote: "The Ludlum novels were superb but of their time when adapting them twenty years on, the filmmakers faced a choice: either make a period piece or bring the story up to date." Incorporating more of Ludlum's interwoven subplots, this ambitious Bourne is a globetrotter's delight, with a spy-thriller identity all its own. Chamberlain and Smith have adequate chemistry (albeit somewhat shallow), and their dangerous adventure-and eventual romance-is played out against a dozen European locations. Suffering from amnesia and forced to piece together his past as a world-class assassin, Jason Bourne (Chamberlain) enlists the aid of a Canadian economist (Jaclyn Smith), and this pairing of '80s miniseries mainstays remains consistently intelligent, well paced, and altogether respectable. It's far more loyal to Ludlum's serpentine plot, boasts greater latitude of geography and character development (allowing Richard Chamberlain's fine performance in the title role), and rises above TV limitations to achieve a big-budget look and feel.
Though not as briskly exciting as the 2002 theatrical release, this earlier TV adaptation of Robert Ludlum's bestseller has distinct advantages over its big-screen counterpart. The answer is the mini-series with Richard Chamberlain.
0 kommentar(er)
