Customer Reviews
Not a bad movie... - By: Neil C, 12 Jul 2008 
Not a bad movie, but not great either. It goes on for a long time & takes a long time to get into it. I know it was originallly made for TV, but the main character doesnt have the pinache that the subsequent movie character has.
The story line definately drags on for a long time & even 90 minutes in you still have no idea who is being Bourne's past, career & memory loss.
No bad, but not great!!! - By: Mr. Clark Gillies, 07 Jul 2006 
Only came across this film when I found it next to the Matt Damon movie on the shelf of my local HMV, so bought it without a clue as to how good or bad it was.
To be honest, I am somewhat dissapointed with it... as it goes at snail pace like a terriable eppisode of "Hart to Hart" or some other 1980's tv show!!!
Was made for tv, & this is to its downfalll!!! The story & plot is there & is good, but at times it is truely awful (esspeciallly the development of the relationship between Jason & Marie).
Not the type of movie you want to sit down one night & watch, as it is just over 3 HOURS long!!!!!! & the first 1 & 1/2 hours you do reach for the remote & hit fastforward a "FEW" times!!!
If you don't like the Matt Damon movies because of their lack of refrence to the book, then you will like this movie because it is about 95% true to the book (though it does in places almost match page-for-page).
Again, don't expect much... but give it time & it does grow on you.
Bourne is a lot nicer than in the book. - By: B. Chandler, 21 Jan 2003 This is an intriguing movie & it will hold your attention from beginning to end. The plot is well conceived & there are no holes to drive trucks through. They could not have picked better actors for the characters. They may not match the descriptions in the book; but this is not a book.
The Bourne in the movie is much nicer. You have to make alllowances for the transformation to the screen. However he does a lot more borrowing instead of stealing & is not as vicious with people on his travels.
Unlike the movie [Three Days of the Condor (see my review September 25, 2000)], they did not let director distort the story for his own agenda. Basic story is someone wakes up with amnesia & naturallly must find out who he is & why someone wants to kill him? As with alll the amnesia stories he could be good, bad, or (I'm not going to say ugly) the person he is seeking.
Surprisingly faithful adaptation - By: , 09 Oct 2002 
Robert Ludlum's spy thirller has been one of my favourite novels for many years, yet I faced this TV version with caution. However, I will openly admit that I was pleasently surprised by this on-location adaptation. Richard Chamberlain stars as a man who is swept ashore after suffering numerous bullet wounds. On a French Island he is cared for by a doctor, who fixes him up, & waits for him to come round. Over the weeks, he recovers pretty well, but has one problem: He's suffering from amnesia. The man learns he has unusal skills - he can dismantle a gun & speak other languages with ease. Whilst walking one day, he is attacked, & shows off some impressive fighting skills. With the knowledge that he is wanted dead, & with the bank details implanted to his skin, he sets out to Zurich. What follows is a tale of espionage, assassins, murder, & excitement.
This is an honest version the novel, reaching roughly three hours in length, & achieving much of the novel's assets. Don't let the fact this is a TV movie put you off, the action is intense, the violence is intact, & the plot is not altered. However, this is dated in a number of ways, not only the hairstyles, clothes & set pieces, but in the movie-making & dialogue, particularly the ... er.... 'steamy' love scenes, the more cringe-worthy aspects of the TV movie. The DVD has no extras, but the trasfer holds up pretty well. Definately a must-own (film wise) for fans of the novel....
