{"id":533128,"date":"2025-10-28T11:26:19","date_gmt":"2025-10-28T11:26:19","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/533128\/"},"modified":"2025-10-28T11:26:19","modified_gmt":"2025-10-28T11:26:19","slug":"my-fiendish-plan-to-kill-off-james-bond-with-jason-bourne","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/533128\/","title":{"rendered":"My fiendish plan to kill off James Bond \u2014 with Jason Bourne"},"content":{"rendered":"

Jason Bourne died in the same place he was born \u2014 Nixa, Missouri \u2014 in an old red-brick orphanage. He was facing down his nemesis, the assassin Paz. Bourne reached for his jacket, and Paz shot him in the heart, only to find that what Bourne had been reaching for was a photograph of his long-deceased lover, Marie. \u201cWhy d\u2019you do that?\u201d Paz asked, dropping the photo on to Bourne\u2019s body before walking away. <\/p>\n

So read the final pages of Tom Stoppard\u2019s draft of the third Bourne film, The Bourne Ultimatum \u2014 commissioned but not used by the film-makers, who opted instead to have Bourne drop into the East River and swim away to fight another day. But when the producer Frank Marshall, the screenwriter George Nolfi and Paul Greengrass met at the director\u2019s home in Henley in the summer of 2008 to discuss how they were going to make a fourth and final film, they quickly arrived at the obvious plot point: Bourne had to die. <\/p>\n

\u201cThe movie that I wanted to make was the movie where Bourne dies and passes the identity over to a new Jason Bourne,\u201d Greengrass says. \u201cThat would have been a really interesting film to have done. He\u2019s going to hand the baton over to the next generation. Do you set that film up as those two fighting, and then finally they realise they\u2019re on the same side? Or does he come in, in a cameo, at the end? Anywhere between those two poles you could have put that film.\u201d <\/p>\n

That way, he thought, Universal would have a truly lasting franchise on their hands to rival Bond. That, after all, was why Greengrass had been brought on in the first place. On first reading screenwriter Tony Gilroy\u2019s treatment for the second Bourne film, The Bourne Supremacy, in 2002, \u201cit was like, \u2018Oh, I know what they want. They want to take on Bond,\u2019\u201d the director recalls. \u201cIt was never said, but that\u2019s what they were hoping for. That played to my competitive nature. I\u2019ve never been crazy about James Bond as a character, whether literary or cinematic. I admire the franchise, of course, but revelling in the cruelty, the amorality, the frankly xenophobic nature of Bond would never have been to my taste. <\/p>\n

\u201cBut Bourne isn\u2019t about the technology, the Aston Martin and the gadgets and so on. He\u2019s on his own, living by his wits, and when he does have to kill someone he is full of remorse. He\u2019s actually a very moral character. I felt I knew what to do with Bourne, which was to strip him back and make him more iconic \u2014 to make him speak less, make him dress only one way, make him enigmatic and engineer a turn from revenge to atonement. And, of course, Bond then copied all that and he started dressing exactly the same \u2014 bless him.\u201d <\/p>\n

By the early 2000s the Bond franchise<\/a> was pretty much spent. In Die Another Day (2002), Pierce Brosnan\u2019s Bond, armed with a laser-cutting wristwatch, surfed down the slope of a mountainous CGI tsunami \u2014 and everyone shook their heads over the crummy demise of the once-great spy series. Devoid of high-tech gadgets, Bourne had to use only his fists, his feet, and whatever he could grab on the run \u2014 a thumb drive, an aerosol can, a walkie-talkie \u2014 to outsmart the national defence capabilities of the United States. \u201cPaul Greengrass, who either has very creative attention deficit disorder or the fastest reflexes of anyone over 14, keeps his movie moving and then some,\u201d Manohla Dargis wrote in her glowing review of The Bourne Supremacy in the Los Angeles Times. \u201cRarely does pop come with such sizzle.\u201d<\/p>\n

\"Pierce<\/p>\n

Pierce Brosnan as James Bond in 2002<\/p>\n

ALAMY<\/p>\n

Greengrass\u2019s run-and-gun technique \u2014 lots of handheld cameras on long lenses, whip-fast editing to give the impression of a live news event \u2014 proved wildly influential. Google \u201cshakycam\u201d and hundreds of films come up, from Batman Begins (2005) and Cloverfield (2008) to The Hunger Games (2012), World War Z (2013) and John Wick (2014), as well as Casino Royale (2006) \u2014 the first of the Daniel Craig Bonds, which took a leaf or two out of Bourne\u2019s book, not least with the watery death of Eva Green\u2019s Vesper Lynd, echoing that of Marie Kreutz at the start of The Bourne Supremacy. But Bourne had the edge over Bond in one key area, Greengrass tried to explain to the estate of Bourne\u2019s creator Robert Ludlum, as they contemplated a fourth film. <\/p>\n

\u201cUnlike James Bond, where you\u2019ve got to recast the character, you\u2019ve actually got a story where the identity is separate from the character,\u201d he told them during a meeting in 2008, where he reminded them that \u201cJason Bourne\u201d is not a person but an alias assumed by Matt Damon\u2019s David Webb. \u201cAll you need to do for your fourth film is create a character who assumes the identity of Jason Bourne, and David Webb dies either in order to stop him gaining that identity \u2014 difficult \u2014 or, better still, to ensure that he passes the torch on.\u201d <\/p>\n

\u2022 Paul Greengrass: \u2018Filming fire? I knew it\u2019d be a nightmare\u2019<\/b><\/a><\/p>\n

The problem was the Ludlum estate hated the idea of killing off Damon\u2019s Bourne. After the success of The Bourne Ultimatum in 2007, Universal had signed a deal with the Ludlum estate, engineered by the author\u2019s old accountant, Jeffrey Weiner, ensuring that the estate got contractual approval on screenplays, characters and actors for the new Bourne films and also putting the studio under enormous pressure to make a movie every couple of years or else lose control of the franchise. At the end of January they sent their notes to the film-makers, specifying that \u201cJason Bourne\/David Webb dying at the end of the film is not acceptable to us\u201d. <\/p>\n

\u201cThey were obsessed with the wider Bourne universe,\u201d Greengrass says. \u201cCharacters in the Bourne world whom they could spin off into other movies, instead of concentrating on what made the Bourne franchise unique, which was that it was an unfolding story. That was 100 per cent wrong for Bourne, just as it would have been for Bond \u2014 you don\u2019t have Miss Moneypenny movies. They were so fixated on milking the golden cow that they had that they forgot to lay down the plan for tomorrow. It shows you how a great franchise can be f***ed.\u201d <\/p>\n

At a meeting on February 12, 2009, Universal\u2019s Donna Langley reiterated to Greengrass that the estate did not want Damon\u2019s Bourne to die on camera or preclude the return of Damon to the franchise. What about if he appeared to die? Marshall, Greengrass and Nolfi all said they knew Damon didn\u2019t want to \u201cappear to die\u201d, as that had happened in the previous two films. The argument continued through September and October, with Langley doing her utmost to see if they could find a way through. One day, while catching the Tube at Oxford Circus, Greengrass saw a poster promoting movie-going that featured Damon\u2019s Bourne, and underneath him the words \u201cI remember everything\u201d.<\/p>\n

\"Paul<\/p>\n

Greengrass on the set of The Bourne Ultimatum in 2007<\/p>\n

ALAMY<\/p>\n

\u201cI was feeling pretty anguished about it, and I came around the corner and suddenly there was a big Bourne poster. It was sort of surreal. And I\u2019m looking at this thing, going, \u2018He\u2019s remembered everything. It\u2019s over. What are you going to do with another Bourne film?\u2019 That poster made it crystal clear to me. I was, like, \u2018This is nuts. If we can\u2019t kill him, I\u2019m not doing it.\u2019\u201d <\/p>\n

In early 2010 Greengrass wrote a memo to Marshall, in which he stated: \u201cThe only one I\u2019m interested in making \u2014 and the only one I can guarantee for 2011 \u2014 is the storyline I pitched last year.\u201d The estate refused to budge and Greengrass was forced to walk away. Facing a contractual deadline with the Ludlum estate to produce another film, Universal then turned to Gilroy, giving him the green light for a spin-off script focusing on another black-ops agent, Aaron Cross, but leaving the door open for Damon\u2019s character to return. The Bourne Legacy was released in 2012.<\/p>\n

\u2022 Paul Greengrass: the Bourne director on making a film about the Utoya massacre<\/b><\/a><\/p>\n

In late 2013 Damon \u2013 who made millions from the franchise \u2013 met with Greengrass for lunch in LA and tried to persuade him to return to the series. \u201cThe truth is, audiences really want another Bourne movie,\u201d Damon said. \u201cWhy wouldn\u2019t we give it to them?\u201d<\/p>\n

\u201cWell, they might not if we give it to them and it\u2019s bad,\u201d Greengrass replied. <\/p>\n

\u201cBut that\u2019s not the point. They want it, so why wouldn\u2019t we spend a year or 18 months of our lives trying to give them the best one that we can think of?\u201d <\/p>\n

Greengrass wasn\u2019t persuaded, but Damon\u2019s argument stuck with him. \u201cIt had a big effect on me,\u201d he says. \u201cYou feel a bit of a heel. Loyalty goes two ways. He never said that to me, by the way, but that resonated.\u201d <\/p>\n

\"Matt<\/p>\n

On set in London with Matt Damon<\/p>\n

ALAMY<\/p>\n

In early summer 2014, after the editor turned screenwriter Chris Rouse delivered his draft of the screenplay for the fourth proper Bourne film, Jason Bourne, Greengrass \u201cbegan to feel like I was the only one holding out\u201d, he says. \u201cIt\u2019s fomo, is the truth of it. Towards the end I remember it just felt like I was letting the side down at some level. Of course, you\u2019re always going to be paid handsomely and all that \u2014 it\u2019s pointless to pretend that\u2019s not part of it. But that\u2019s the only film where that\u2019s been a part of it.\u2019 <\/p>\n

\u2022 Read more film reviews,<\/b> guides about what to watch and interviews<\/b><\/a><\/p>\n

The deal struck with Universal in September of 2014 was simple: in exchange for agreeing not to kill Bourne, Greengrass could have final cut, with no requirement to embrace Gilroy\u2019s The Bourne Legacy or the wider universe of Aaron Cross, and no interference by the Ludlum estate. \u201cIt was a really simple deal,\u201d Greengrass says. \u201cIt made the process controllable, which is what I wanted \u2014 a more coherent process, where we\u2019ll have a script, rather than being close to the precipice every single day, from the beginning to the day you wrap.\u201d <\/p>\n

\u201cBut I have to face the fact that perhaps that was also a contributory factor to it not having that sparkle. The anarchy of birthing the previous two was part of why they had this intensity and immediacy, and so Jason Bourne did rather have the feeling of a rock band doing a greatest hits tour. One of the things about film-making that\u2019s a total nightmare is that feeling you sometimes get after you\u2019ve finished a movie, where you go, \u2018Well, if I could start all over again, now I know exactly what to do.\u2019 You can be haunted by it. I felt it after Jason Bourne.\u201d<\/p>\n

Extracted from <\/b>The Greengrass Papers <\/b>by Tom Shone (Faber \u00a330), published on Nov 6. To order a copy go to <\/b>timesbookshop.co.uk<\/b><\/a>. Free UK standard P&P on orders over \u00a325. Special discount available for Times+ members<\/b><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"Jason Bourne died in the same place he was born \u2014 Nixa, Missouri \u2014 in an old red-brick…\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":533129,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[3935],"tags":[77,3943,16,15],"class_list":{"0":"post-533128","1":"post","2":"type-post","3":"status-publish","4":"format-standard","5":"has-post-thumbnail","7":"category-movies","8":"tag-entertainment","9":"tag-movies","10":"tag-uk","11":"tag-united-kingdom"},"share_on_mastodon":{"url":"https:\/\/pubeurope.com\/@uk\/115451553893237534","error":""},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/533128","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=533128"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/533128\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/533129"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=533128"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=533128"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=533128"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}