One thing that makes
the latest Bourne movie something other than your
usual summer action film is its
deeply subversive narrative.
(Minor spoilers after the cut).
The Bourne Ultimatum is leavened with clear, though not overt, references to the War in Iraq and the use of practices like torture and rendition, but it isn't until Jason Bourne (Matt Damon) confronts Dr. Albert Hirsch (Albert Finney) that the film's truly radical message is delivered. Here the flashbacks that have been hobbling Bourne during the course of the movie are put into context. It becomes clear that the man we know as Jason Bourne volunteered for his special duty, but did so without really knowing what that duty entailed. As it comes flooding back, as he makes a fateful decision regarding Hirsch, and as he re-encounters another agent that he let live earlier in the action,
Tony Gilroy's,
Scott Burns', and
George Nolfi's script sounds its far reaching conclusion: volunteering in service of the state does not obligate you to do whatever you're asked or ordered to do, particularly not regardless of or without reason. It does not require you to check your humanity at the door. It does not give your handlers or superiors license to do whatever they want to you. Such requirements are, of course, articles of faith for the current Bush administration, but beyond that, they are cornerstones of the security state globally, and not just here in the U.S. The nation-state as we know it is partly sustained by convincing certain people to give this kind of loyalty to its institutions. It promulgates the idea that state boundaries are natural divisions between "us" and "them", and "they" can be easily identified and eliminated by whatever means necessary because they aren't "us" (or have lost their right to be considered as one of "us"). The newest
Bourne uses its title character to say "no" to these practices. It is done subtly and organically, but it seems clear enough not to be missed or mistaken.
Originally posted on:
Short-Circuit Signs