ROTTEN TOMATOES: Exclusive: Doug Liman Has Designs on Bond

Exclusive: Doug Liman Has Designs on Bond

The Jumper helmer tells RT that Bourne was his Bond substitute.

by Joe Utichi | February 15, 2008

When Swingers director Doug Liman delivered The Bourne Identity in 2002 to be swiftly followed by Paul Greengrass' explosive sequels Supremacy and Ultimatum, it was the sharp burst of electricity the spy genre of cinema, led by suave super agent James Bond, desperately needed. In 2006, EON Productions, who make the Bond movies, released Casino Royale as a reaction to the changing face of the spy genre, a movie that owed its darker, more stoic tone to Liman's work on Bourne. But, says Liman, it was the Bond series he was always interested in. In the middle of promoting his latest, Jumper, RT sat down with the director to talk about his passion for blockbuster cinema and why Bond was always his dream project. "After Swingers people said, 'You can do anything, what would you like to do?'" Liman told us. "I said, 'I want to direct a James Bond movie.' They said, 'Well, you can't do that. They're not going to let you do that. They have a specific kind of director they hire, so just forget it.' I said, 'Well I've got a spy book I read in college, The Bourne Identity, what about that?' They said, 'You can't do that either. Do something else. How about a romantic comedy?' I ended up not doing that and making Go before I did end up getting the rights to make Bourne Identity. Liman tells us that he chose to take Bourne in a grittier direction only as he was making it. "What I discovered when I started adapting the book was that as much as I enjoyed those movies I wasn't interested in making a totally mindless piece of entertainment." But with the reinvigoration of the franchise, Liman is aching to play in that universe again. "It really is surreal that all I was trying do to was direct a James Bond film and I ended up changing the James Bond franchise," he tells RT. "That being said, I'd still love to direct a James Bond film and I heard Steven Spielberg quoted recently saying he'd always aspired to direct a James Bond film. I think that is one of the spectacles that sitting there as a young boy in the movie theatre and being swept away to these exotic locations and the sexiness of it is one of the things that made me fall in love with cinema in the first place." Jumper is out now in cinemas, and you can read our full interview with Doug Liman right here.

Related Items

Movie:	The Bourne Identity
	The Bourne Supremacy
	The Bourne Ultimatum
Celeb:	Doug Liman

(1-20 of 36 posts) | Reply

Gimy writes:
on Feb 15 2008 06:52 AM

well bra, you did one better...you did a trilogy better than the recent bond films. just one thing, whomever's idea it was to shoot OVER the shoulder and cut off the face of the person talking...don't do that in another movie. its annoying as h3ll. its like watching a movie in front of a sasquatch...if you can't see the entire scene, it ruins it...

Go was ok, nowhere near the caliber of Swingers. and Speilberg doing bond? that'd be ridankulous...

(Reply to this)

fullmetalnek writes:
on Feb 15 2008 07:42 AM

In my opinion Go is his best film, then Swingers, then Identity. Hated The Smiths and havent seen Jumper yet. Hes 3/4. Thats good.

(Reply to this)

citizenjames writes:
on Feb 15 2008 08:12 AM

not to hate on liman but i like SWINGERS but i also like MADE a lot so i think that has more to do with jon favreau having written both of them. GO is like a junior version of PULP FICTION and i am good with that. MR AND MRS SMITH is a lots of fun but really it's a mess with all the depth of a sitcom with explosions. i still can't believe simon kinsberg spun a career out of that screenplay. haven't seen JUMPER but it's an entire movie sold on a hunky dude and a special effect... eye candy for everyone.

as for BOURNE, people keep forgetting paul greengrass directed the second two. liman left after the first and weakest of the three.

give credit where credit is due.

(Reply to this)

Young Turk writes:
on Feb 15 2008 08:16 AM

Smiths wasn't bad, and I can't see how Jumper is as terrible as critics say. Go, Swingers and Identity are definitely gold though.

(Reply to this)

photosuperstar writes:
on Feb 15 2008 09:12 AM

One of my students thinks he's a guido!

(Reply to this)

dahluzz writes:
on Feb 15 2008 09:16 AM

In reply to this comment (#1576414)
"first and weakest of the three"? gonna have to disagree with you there. i feel like the films got propgressivley worse. now don't get me wrong, i enjoyed parts 2 and 3, but let's think about what set 'identity' apart in the first place and aided in this whole 'reinvention process.'

it was bourne's fighting style coupled perfectly with liman's direction. unlike greengrass' eforts, where he will put 5 cuts inside 3 seconds, liman's shots were clean and specific.

i always felt like greengrass just had 3 or 4 handicam's rolling at once and then picked through the footage, cutting together the best moments from each perspective. this rough-and-tumble, hands-on approach stands in stark contrast to liman's clearly intentional, storyboarded shot selections.

it's impressive the greengrass makes it work as well as he does, but the increased grittiness of films 2 and 3 isn't really in keeping with bourne's personal style: well-kept, efficient and sharp.

greengrass' films wind up looking like reality TV, whereas liman's was an exercise in specificity and the execution of pre-determined shots (ya know, "cinematography" not just getting lucky).

(Reply to this)

Shatter24 writes:
on Feb 15 2008 09:28 AM

The great thing about the Bourne series and choosing which is the best, is that no one has a particularly wrong answer. I believe the third Bourne film was the best and my favorite, followed by one and then two. Bourne Supremacy felt a little too story heavy and action light, compared to the well-balanced other two films.

Though none of them are bad movies. Still, I think Bond would have done better sticking to what makes Bond = Bond, rather than jumping on the gritty bandwagon. In Hollywood, once there's a good idea, everyone copies it until there is a glut, and then they go back to the original idea, and people think they're daring and inspired.

(Reply to this)

nathanpoitras writes:
on Feb 15 2008 10:07 AM

I hear that Jumper is a big steaming pile of elephant poop. Liman's movies seem to be getting progressively worse as he goes along, and of the 3 Bourne flicks, he made the weakest one so please Doug, Leave Bond alone.

(Reply to this)

arendr writes:
on Feb 15 2008 10:44 AM

I'm going to go off-topic here, because RT hasn't picked up on this story yet:

Al Pacino is going to be the Bond villain in Quantum of Solace?
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/section/1501119/story.cfm?c_id=1501119&objectid=10492645

Hmm....

(Reply to this)

donatsu2000 writes:
on Feb 15 2008 10:58 AM

I would love to hear from the lovers of the second two Bourne movies as to why they are better, when they clearly are weaker in every department. I guess for the ADD riddled masses they seem cooler. Smash, bash, crash. But they are over-edited, poorly photographed, and terribly plotted. From watching the movies you would never think they were actually books before hand, and they weren't made up as they went along or in the editing room.
Bourne globtrots, yet you cannot discern any kind of atmosphere or locale other than the turning the blue knob or the orange knob in the Color Timing Suite.

Oh it's soooooo gritty the way the camera bobs and weaves, TO BOB AND WEAVE. Shaky Shaky.
Paul Greengrass the fantastic master of reality. Taking his success from Bloody Sunday and thinking it was all because of the handheld camera, using it in every film he does now. Yet, his first film was more traditional with planned out shots. Etc. I guess since that was a bomb, he needed to get in everyone's face to get noticed.

The first Bourne movie is by far the best. The first one had a story. The second two repeated the same story but dilluted, and lacking the basic sympathetic premise of figuring out who he was, since that question was answered in the first. Every piece of information in the second two was already known. Conspiracy, brainwashing, assassins.

(Reply to this)

nathanpoitras writes:
on Feb 15 2008 11:38 AM

Paul Greengrass is just a far better filmmaker than Doug Liman could ever hope to be, especially in the action department. oh and BLU-RAY WINS!

(Reply to this)

IndianaSchwartz writes:
on Feb 15 2008 11:54 AM

i don't know why i'm posting on here, but did anyone notice how liman said spielberg "recently" said he wanted to do a bond picture? that's an old story, my friend. i don't know...i just can't respect a director who's not up on his spielberg knowledge. liman has gone a little crazy with his "style"... saw jumper and i had a headache halfway through. i like to actually SEE my bond movies.

ps - ultimatum was the best of the 3

(Reply to this)

knowingtoast85 writes:
on Feb 15 2008 12:23 PM

The Bourne trilogy is just about excellent, but "Identity" was more like a nice surprise, bolstered by Damon's commitment to the role, the tried-and-true attraction of the premise and the moderate credibility of the love story. It worked. Greengrass' contributions took Bourne in the direction I feel it needed to go. For us to continue caring about his journey, we had to be there with him at all times. His sense of immediacy as a filmmaker was totally integral.

Not to mention Gilroy's adaptations were lean, muscular and intelligent. It proved that spy action thrillers could design set pieces entirely around ingenuity and quick-thinking instead of explosions and fight choreography, although there were some of those as well.

(Reply to this)

Joe Utichi writes:
on Feb 15 2008 01:15 PM

I don't think I've ever been more interested to read everyone's comments in a thread. Your fine arguments are all making me feel very nervous for my job.

(Reply to this)

Ashron writes:
on Feb 15 2008 01:46 PM

And no one has called anyone else an idiot yet. What's happening to my beloved RT forums :-)

(Reply to this)

arendr writes:
on Feb 15 2008 01:58 PM

In reply to this comment (#1577248)
Shut up, you idiot.

:-)

(Reply to this)

Joe Utichi writes:
on Feb 15 2008 02:00 PM

God knows, but I love it.

(Reply to this)

cabezone writes:
on Feb 15 2008 02:46 PM

I loved identity, but just don't get the shaky cam stuff. I couldn't watch past the diner scene in Ultimatum, it's just too irritating.

(Reply to this)

Segkee writes:
on Feb 15 2008 05:06 PM

Down with Shaky-cam. Greengrass is a brilliant director, but the shaky cam has to go. It's actually a cop out. To shoot action clean is actually a lot harder because less can be faked. And it's cheaper. In Ultimatum or The Kingdom the shakiness becomes distracting to vomit inducing even when no action is taking place. When real movement occurs - a car chase, a foot chase, a fight - I found I had to turn away from the screen.

I haven't seen Cloverfield yet, but I hear it's a similar problem.

It's a shame. It appears movies are not being designed for the big screen any more.

(Reply to this)

Matanuki writes:
on Feb 15 2008 08:24 PM

In reply to this comment (#1577396)
lol. There it is...

My personal tally? Identity, Ultimatum, Supremacy.

(Reply to this)

Related Links

Quantum of Solace

Related Articles

Most Discussed

Latest News

Latest Interviews

Latest Features

Sponsored Links