did we really find out why he chose to go into the programme in the first place? maybe i blinked and missed it in all that mayhem, or perhaps its the Bourne betrayal. i agree with the other writer who said the fllm had become a bit ridiculous, but it was cracking nonetheless.

kathy, manchester, cheshire

Bourne isn't a liberal hero at all. It's not like he's trying to outdo the CIA only to raise taxes, feed the homeless, get people to stop smoking, save the forests, and make the world safe for homosexuality. If anything he's a libertarian who wants his life back and will do whatever it takes to get it from the people who are trying to control him. And all government, even that needed to bring about the laundry list of liberal wet dreams, is about control. You know what they say, a government powerful enough to give you everything you want is powerful enough to take away everything you have. What's the difference between a brainwashing spook with lots of sexy but invasive techno-gadgets and a schoolteacher shooting you full of Ritalin and plumping for FDR and his ilk? None. Except the former makes a better movie.

Robert P. Churchill, Laurel, MD

I've read the Bourne books and the first one is probably the best action book I've ever read. So when I saw the first movie I was hugely disappointed at the way the story had been "updated". I found the third movie quite enjoyable but reckon all three movies would have been better had they been set in the 80s like the books. I also initially thought that the casting was wrong for the first movie as Bourne is an older character, more Kiefer Sutherland than Matt Damon, but hey they changed the whole plot afterall. I can't recommend the books enough to anyone remotely interested in the movies. As for this movie I did enjoy it and loved the camera work and what they added to the fight scenes.

S, London,

The first two Bourne films concentrated on the intriguing character of Jason Bourne. In those the tension was wonderful because even though the feats were difficult, they were in the realm of possibility if a guy were in perfect condition and highly trained. No way in the third film could anyone have done those things nor survived if he tried. In the Ultimatum, disappointingly, the concentration is on the unrealistic action. A car drives off a roof! No one could have survived that wild ride and crash and the unlikely leaping through glass windows from afar, etc. It became ridiculous. What a shame. Just as I thought we had an interesting character developing (one and two), it turns into a silly and rather boring action flick (three). Poohy. Maybe Matt Damon will refuse the next one unless it returns to his former interesting character. One can hope.

R. Roy, Portland, Oregon, USA

The first two Bourne films concentrated on the character of Jason Bourne. In those the tension was wonderful because even though the feats were difficult, they were in the realm of possibility if a guy were in perfect condition and highly trained. No way in the third film could anyone have done those things nor survived if he tried. In the Ultimatum, disappointingly, the concentration is on the unrealistic action. A car drives off a roof! No one could have survived that crash and the unlikely leaping through glass windows from afar, etc. It became ridiculous. What a shame. Just as I thought we had an interesting character developing (one and two), it (three) turns into a silly and rather boring action flick. Poohy. Maybe Matt Damon will refuse the next one unless it returns him to his former interesting character. One can hope.

R. Roy, Portland, Oregon, USA

Fast action, superb cinematography, breathtaking chase scenes and a satisfying 'conclusion' to the trilogy - what more could a viewer want?
I'm an avid fan of Jason Bourne as a character. He convinced me that things I've only ever heard about regarding espionage and the use of trained assasins, are actually real.
His story stirred my emotions: I loathed what he represented; feared for his survival and breathed a sigh of relief at the bubbles at the end of Ultimatum. The trilogy has ended but I didn't want him to die.
If a film can draw me into its action so much that I'm fully entertained for 2 hours (without looking at my watch) then I consider it a success.

Sally Moore, Birmingham, England

Brilliant, whatever the criticism. Bond films have a lot to learn from this one, eventhough in Casino Royale they diverted slightly from the rigid lines dictating the 007 saga. The initial element of memory loss is, in my opinion, a key factor that makes the story very gripping.

f rivas, luton, uk

There will always be some parts from the books that I would have loved to see on screen. For example, Bourne harrassing the employees of the Paris fashion house to find a lead to Carlos. I know the films have brought the story up to date, but they have also missed some memorable scenes.

Helen , Bournemouth, England

Do me a favour with all that Liberal guff at the start of this review.
Is his motivation in this one not only a desire to find out who he is, but a need to avenge his girfriend?
And to suggest Shwarzenegger in True Lies and Vin Diesel in xXx were spy heroes is doing a grave disservice to the genre.
This is a lazy attempt to apply liberal politics into what is simply a fantastic trio of action/spy movies. Leave it at that.

Dave, East Kilbride,

Great plot, good acting, but totally unwatchable, I'm afraid:

"At times, the film seems to have been shot by a hyperactive child having an epileptic fit – the handheld camera zooms in and out of shots, swirls, spins, shakes; .... You are left feeling disorientated, car-sick and excited..."

Precisely (except for the 'excited' bit). My wife and I both left the cinema feeling seasick. I threw up on the way home. The fashionably 'low-tech' hand held close-up filming is nauseous and disorientating to watch, and over-rides all other sensation when trying to watch the film. A good film spoilt by massive over-use of pretentiously intrusive, nausea generating camera work.

Still Vomiting, Oxford,

Saw the movie and (mostly) agree with the review!

Nishant, London, UK

Read the books, it's worth it.

Jason, Gosford, Australia

"he doesn’t have a fantastic secret-agent body," ... seriously? Maybe my standards are too low then.

Katharina, Geneva,

Why is the story in the film totally different from the Ludlum book?

Alan Hewett, Ashwell, Herts.

Saw this last night
Superb end to a superb trilogy
They MUST not make another one
(a la Die Hard 4, Lethal Weapon 4...) for the sake of cash
Other films by Greengrass well worth searching out
especially Bloody Sunday and United 93
Raw and emotional
Don't feel like you're watching a film but you are there.
Excellent

Neil, Leicester,

I don't agree but I liked reading your heavy duty analysis on Bourne fans, very entertaining and thought provoking though :) Nice article.

I watched this film last night and enjoyed it, although the camera-shaking has reached new heights of shakiness and nothing new was added to the [successful]formula to evolve it, sadly. A great sequel must evolve. Nevertheless its essential viewin. But this is a very good sequel and that is a rarity in the movie industry.

I want a Bourne 4, please Mr Greengrass...

IAN, MANCHESTER, UK

hi
I have really enjoyed the Bourne Trilogy and its one of the few examples where the standards are manitained thoughout and every stands on its own right .
I reckon one reason the films are so popular is that most people would admire Bourne , not to say would like to be him .
His quick thinking , calm under pressure , deadly unarmed combat skills , not to mention his linguistic ability , physical strength , inventiveness , resourcefulness , coupled witha very modest demeanour , and a mongamic devotion to his German Girlfriend
What life to compare to ;-)
would recommend the films to anybody , 8 out of 10 , strap your seat belt , action film .

papko, Standrews, Fife

The whole discussion of the film's "liberal politics" is quite silly. I bet that the use of _that_ newspaper has more to do with product placement than anything else (unless it's in the novel, which I doubt). It looked as though it could've been any major media brand; The Guardian was merely the highest bidder.

Speaking of which, it made me laugh to see that the CIA were relying on clumsy Google Maps to track their targets! And why didn't the car airbags seem to go off at all, during the extensive crash scenes? Being geekish, it's often difficult to suspend my disbelief when I'm watching films like this, because they are guaranteed to get terms such as "firewall" and "IP address" quite wrong indeed. Mass market entertainment strikes again... But still better than Bond.

But it's still an enjoyable film, I think. Whilst it could've done with a bit of a reduction in "edgy" camerawork and editing frenzies, it didn't make me nauseous.

Marc, Newcastle Upon Tyne, UK

The whole discussion of the film's "liberal politics" is quite silly. I bet that the inclusion of The Guardian has more to do with product placement than anything else (unless it's in the original book, which I doubt -- might get them out at the library/charity shop in future). It looked as though it could've been any major media brand; The Guardian was merely the highest bidder.

Speaking of which, it made me laugh to see that the CIA were relying on clumsy Google Maps to track their targets! Being a computer geek, it's often difficult to "suspend my disbelief" when I'm watching films like this, because -- as happened with Die Hard 4 -- they are guaranteed to get terms such as "firewall" and "IP address" quite wrong indeed. Mass market, lowest common denominator entertainment strikes again... But still better than Bond.

It's an enjoyable film, if a bit too repetitive and fu

Marc, Newcastle Upon Tyne, UK

Loved the film but came out feeling sick. Why, oh why, do directors think that a cameraman wobbling a camera at the actor as he speaks is a good thing? Actually, all it does is make the watcher feel as sick as a parrot and, rather than concentrate on the plot, sit and focus on not throwing up! Fab movie, great storyline, shame about the DTs!

CDV, Swindon, UK

Bourne - no story, just continual noise, smashing cars and badly acted unbelievable violence. Not worth seeing - read the book instead!!

James Nisbet, Edinburgh,

Vin Diesel dumb? Sooo not. Get your face out of your ego and lookwho actually has the looks brains AND talent....It isn't Damon.
Damon is no different than Paul Walker. Couldn't hold the screen if you tattoed it on his butt.
I do however agree with you on Arnold. and... even Bond would not have watched Bourne.
You know..genius is not just held within the actor...it must also be held within the script. Damon probably hasn't had the right script yet. With the exception of Bagger vance which was NOT an action film.
Bourne is definately NOT one of great writing or acting.
The story line is to used and the dialog...God... even Lulu from Pacifier had better lines.
I loved that one by the way... sooo charming.
Go Vin!

Jolissa, L.A. & N.Y.,

Excellent

johnkerr, reading, united kingdom

I noticed the Guardian but the whole thing was made for me when a Guardian investigative journalist was killed.
Firstly I didn,just made it up.
The fact is that any CIA assassin would read the Guardian to see what exciting new government jobs were on offer. Multicultural diversity genocide manager etc.
I saw the Bourne Identity again last night and remembered how good this Doug Liman film was. More full characters and some semblance of script. Clive Owens dying with an existentialist murmur from his lips.
I've enjoyed the other two from a quick action, well shot, well cut point of view but Identity will always be my favourite.

Minnie Ovens, LA,, CA,USA