Before reading just note I' m a bad writer but the point is clear

Well for awhile there I thought sequals were finally turning out to be better then the origionals. This movie quickly went back to the traditional theme.The first wasnt the greatest movie ever but it had a decent story and good fight scenes and a nice car chase. This movie however was slow and the editing was horrible.

You' ll often find yerself thinking you need glasses with all the blurred shots. It is especially annoying when the camara stays zoomed up close during a fight.
Also the use of a shaky cam was very badly done. A shaky cam is used during a scene thats are intense usually... here it is damn near used at all the times. Gave me a headache.

The story was ok for the most part but the directing and everything else was just poor poor poor. The last time I saw ppl walk out was when I saw Cabin Fever and 3 elderly ppl went out and threw up (one of them did at least).

4/10

It had it' s moments but those moments were often ruined by bad editing. Also the movie moved extremely slow, way to slow for a supposed action flick. The slow pace might be a result of me playing Midnight Club 2 latly and watching I,Robot and Spiderman-2 previously. Either way it was still boring beyond all things.

Actually, I liked the first one.

As did I. I wish they kept the origional director.

Here are some great comments I have overheard about The Bourne Supremacy:

" Pay attention (not like you couldn' t) to the " style" of filmmaking in this movie. Yes indeed, I am speaking of that whole " what, you forgot the tripod again???" style. The camera is CONSTANTLY shaking and zooming and focusing for no damned good reason. I' m sure the director thinks that it is cutting edge or some such lameness, and he probably also thinks that this MTVish style will increase tension in the scenes...but don' t be fooled, you will be watching the action scenes saying to yourself " gee I know those two guys are fighting, but it sure would be nice to be able to follow the action."

_________

" This type of filmmaking is SUPPOSED to make you feel like you are watching it with your own head. Apparently our heads continuosly move around so much that we cannot distinguish what we are looking at. Personally if I moved my head that much I would have an annurism."
________

" I' m quite surprised that no one has caught on to the genius that is Paul Greengrass' hectic storytelling. Quite simply, it is an exercise in audience participation (i.e. the ability of the audience to identify with the main character.) Obviously, very few people watching this film will be superspy assassins like Bourne, so the next best thing, for parallelism' s sake, is to pick one trait that both Bourne and the audience can share - Bourne' s constant headaches. By subjecting the viewers to shaky camera shots, constant close ups, and jumpy editing, Greengrass has essentially put us in the head of Bourne, and I must say I really feel sorry for Bourne. He has my complete sympathies. Unfortunately, any way you look at it, this is an asinine method of storytelling."

Joe, Joe, Joe (deja vu). You crack me up (again)!

first one was great.....so regardless of reviews i' ll be seeing it...but appreciate your opinion none the less.

The camera work stank in this movie. I had to sit in the front because I went on the first night and my eyes were actually hurting from trying to deal with the shoddy camera work.

The fight scenes were very hard to keep up with because the camera would focus on the body part (i.e if a Damon kicked, we would only see his foot fit the mark) and then quickly zoom out. Going in and out and rotating took the umph out of the fights. I felt like I was filming them with my camcorder.

right on time thread, i just saw the first one a few days ago, it was tight. I just can' t believe the whole security network couldn' t capture the guy. The movie could' ve been better with more physical fights w/out weapons.

My most anticipated film this month.

Have to wait a couple of months for the UK release unless our movie guys come through with some screening tickets !! (Hint).

I will be seeing this eventually but I don' t really have any expectations for it. Couple people said it was real good couple others said it was real bad. I saw the first one and really liked it (pen fighting was awesome) so I intend on seeing this one.
Any news on whether they are planning on making more of the books into a movie (i.e. continue the series)?

If they do I hope they use the origional director or som1 better then the one who made this movie.

I think that going back to the original director would be the best move. The first movie was much better because of him.

I' m a bit cautious. I saw the first movie, liked it, but though the ending was great and was ready to accept that as ' the end' . I can' t see a good reason for him to continue on fighting. Though if a good reason is given then that’s ok

They made a nice story for it. But its just sad that it was ruined by bad directing.