“The Bourne Identity” is one of my all-time favorite movies. Matt Damon, perfectly cast as the amnesia assassin, tries to figure out the truth about his life. From the beginning of the movie, where fishermen found his body at sea, to one of the most memorable car chase scenes in all of cinema, Director Doug Liman delivers a near perfect film. 

Even though the movie came out nearly 20 years ago, it still has a timeless quality as it doesn’t rely on high-tech gadgets to impress the audience. While there is technology that represents that time period, it never felt outdated after many re-watches. 

I can’t say the same about the novel by Robert Ludlum. It was a decent read, but it was a victim of its time when it came out in 1980. If I were alive when the book came out, the advanced tech would have impressed me. This includes the chameleon like contact lenses. It symbolized Bourne’s chameleon like ability to weave in and out undetected. 

We also learn that Bourne was as a Vietnam Vet, further clarifying the time. If I read the book before the movie, my criticism would probably be different. But it was difficult to get past the archaic time period, which included Bourne and Marie going to the library to read records of Carlos the Jackal. I’ve become spoiled with my present day electronics that the novel’s gadgets left me underwhelmed.

The novel also dragged in the second half and was difficult to follow the story. With the repetitive “Cain is for Charlie, and Delta is for Cain,” it felt like Bourne was being whiny rather than the stone-cold assassin he was supposed to portray.

I also felt that the mutual attraction between Bourne and Marie (played marvelously by Franka Potente) in the movie was genuine, as they spent time together and eventually slept with each other. In the novel, Bourne kidnaps Marie. He eventually saved her from a sexual assault, which led Marie to feel he was some crazed kidnapper after looking into his eyes. It felt forced. 

I wonder what the movie would have been like if they included Carlos the Jackal. They were neck and neck with their abilities. In the movie, we get a fine performance from Clive Owen, who plays The Professor. I doubt he was a replacement for Carlos, but due to time constraints, he needed to be included, so there would be a conflict with two superior assassins. 

Carlos could very well have his own movie based on his storyline in the book, so my guess is they wanted to avoid a convoluted storyline. In doing so, Liman and his crew just didn’t include him at all.

The movie does a great job in creating its own story from the source material. I loved the confusion in Bourne’s head, such as in the diner scene where he explains what he notices to Marie, but can’t remember who he is. The movie gets everything right. Unfortunately, the book falls short. 

Source:

https://screenrant.com/bourne-identity-book-movie-differences/