Are the Jason Bourne books worth a read? I like the movies so far....

[yoda313]

Well earlier this year I bought the Bourne Trilogy used on dvd. I finally got to watching it today.

I watched the Bourne Identity and the Bourne Supremacy this afternoon (Supremacy is the second one right? Whichever the second one is is what I watched after Identity). I liked it.

I'm thinking I might get to the library and check out the books. Are they called the same thing or were they renamed for the movies? Who was the author again?

Also I just started Ultimatum or whichever is the third movie.

I don't want to really spoil the ending exactly but I do have to ask:

Is Bourne a mutant super soldier?

What exactly is he?

Do they explain it in the last movie?

I didn't seem to catch it in the first or second movie exactly what he is. He isn't invulnerable obviously but he survives the shooting in the opening of the trilogy and has these super senses and all that. So what gives?

Granted I haven't finished the trilogy yet so if any of these answers are given in the last movie please don't answer. I'll find out when I finish the movie.

So I guess I want to know if reading the books is worth my time.

I did like reading the Hunt for Red October a lot. I loved the movie and reading the twists in the story was enjoyable. Same with Jurrasic Park and Sphere. Lots of the big movies based on books make lots of interesting choices in what to leave out, who to alter, what to change and all that.

Thoughts? Suggestions? Should I just finish the third movie and then decide if I want to check out the books?

[gadgetguy]

The original Bourne trilogy was written by Robert Ludlum, and additional books were written by Eric Van Lustbader after Ludlum's death. I haven't read the books or watched the movies, so I can't answer your other questions.

[stiltman]

Is Bourne a mutant super soldier?

Yes, if you don't remember he was right next to Jean-Claude Van Damme in Universal Soldier 3

[yoda313]

right next to Jean-Claude Van Damme in Universal Soldier 3

Sorry I've only seen US 1 and 2

Actually I think the only Jean Claude Van Damme movie I've seen in its entirety is the Street Fighter movie (the one with Raul Julia). Yeah shoot me it was fun, stupid, really stupid but fun.

@gadgetguy - thanks for the name. I didn't know they made more than the trilogy.

I'll probably watch the third one this weekend. After that if I don't get the answers I want I'll google it and go to the library to look up the books.

[yoda313]

Well I finally got around to finishing the last Bourne movie.

Unfortunately it doesn't really answer the questions I wanted answered. I guess that leaves open the possibility of more movies.

I rewatched the last scenes with the director commentary and he was making out like they worked up the ending of the movie on their own. How much does it deviate from the book? Does the last of the book explain everything?

I'm gonna scrounge the net for a synopsis of the movies and the books. I'm not sure I quite got it.

Also I have to admit I didn't realize until after it happened that the third movie time loops and starts before the second movie ended. Don't really know how to explain it or not even sure I am fully aware of the time difference between the second and third movie. It has been a couple weeks since I saw the second movie and that ending is a little fuzzy.

I'm also thinking of either checking the books out or buying them to figure out what the heck it was all about. I still don't know why he could survive the shooting before the first movie nor the free fall into the river after being shot at the end of the last movie. Also he also these super senses but isn't indesctructible so he isn't a super human but isn't normal either. They didn't mention any bioengineering or anything like that from what I could tell.

The last movie was good and similar to the first two. However it didn't tie everything up as much as I wanted.

Also was the girl in the third movie (Lily?, can't remember the name) his sister or girlfriend or wife or what? She makes it look like there was something between them before they part ways. She says something about the past with him being difficult. I couldn't figure out what that was eluding too.

Anyway off to hunt for a review and book comparison.

I'm glad I picked the movies up in the garage sale earlier this year.

I hate to admit it but it was a good series despite Matt Damon being in it. I have this natural dread and loathing of any Matt Damon, Brad Pitt, or Leo Dicaprio movie. I just avoid them like the plague. But this one happened to be interesting enough to me to put aside the personal embargo on their movies and go for it. (actually I broke this ban again this morning and bought MR AND MRS SMITH on dvd used at a garage sale - but only because Angelina Jolie is in it - not because Brad Pitt is in it - Tomb Raider is better than it is perceived - especially the first one with that early shower scene..... )

Edit - I've read a little bit on wikipedia about the last bourne book by the original author. Apparently the movies don't follow the books too much if at all. I'm wondering if I should bother getting the books at all if the movies strayed a whole lot from the source material.

I'll keep searching and seeing if I want to take the time to read the books now that I"ve finished the movies.

[lordsmurf]

The book descriptions look REALLY boring to me, and it's set in Vietnam era.
I decided to pass.

I was looking at this myself just a few months ago.

[yoda313]

and it's set in Vietnam era.

I don't know about that. That takes away all the tech they were doing in the movies. I did read up a few synopsis and it talked about him having 'microfilm' implanted with a bank account instead of the little laser pointer thing they used in the first movie. THat kind of let me know it wasn't gonna be high tech - current high tech that is. That and the 1980 print date gave me pause.

It can still be a good action book regardless of when it was written but it seems like they may have really strayed from the book for the movies.

I have the dvds and if I want more sometime I think I'll watch the first movie with the commentary to get more insight into what they changed and kept.

[lordsmurf]

It's one of my go-to examples for why "the book was better than the movie" isn't always true.
I've not read them, and I'm not at all tempted.

Maybe I would if it were 1980 again?

[yoda313]

Maybe I would if it were 1980 again?

I think thats what I'm thinking. If it were closer to the time it was written it might work better. If its supposed to be super high tech that stuff doesn't last well into the future. Now 31 years later high tech is SO yesterday.

I wonder if there are examples where people could agree that a movie was better than the book with a vast majority agreeing? I think there will always be strong dissenters on both sides for and against the book or the movie.

[lordsmurf]

I think Iron Man was better than the comics. It's been years since I read those 1960s issues, but I think Robery Downey conveyed an emotion and attitude that's hard to get across in speech bubbles. That's really the only incident I can think of right away.

Some books based on movies are better than the movies! For example, I far prefer the level of detail found in the Back to the Future book trilogy, which is like reading an enriched script. After reading those books, BTTF became one of my favorite movies (or movie series).

[yoda313]

Regarding the back to the future stuff that reminds me of Robotech. While the shows were great the book series gives it that much more depth.

I will say Hunt For Red October was just as good as the book. I put them equally together since movies always have to make changes to appeal to larger audiences.