Publication details
Bournův mýtus: akční film pohybu
| Title in English | The Bourne Supremacy: An Action Film of Movement |
|---|---|
| Authors | |
| Year of publication | 2015 |
| Type | Article in Periodical |
| Magazine / Source | Iluminace |
| MU Faculty or unit | |
| Citation | |
| Web | Elektronická verze článku, jež byla veřejně zpřístupněna časopisem Iluminace |
| Field | Mass media, audiovision |
| Keywords | film analysis; film history; action cinema; film narration; film trilogy; film sequel; Hollywood; proces of storytelling |
| Description | The analytical study demonstrates how the process of storytelling in the film employs techniques and centripetal tactics in order to lead the viewer’s attention in a comprehensive and intelligible way despite the complex network of information provided by the film and their rapid presentation. In doing so, it uses an inner logic of splitting the narrative into four blocks, within which the motifs of the first allow for the development of the second and third but return only in the fourth. Each block employs a different model of work with information and different techniques of composition, thanks to which the hectic system of the work does not repeat itself in a tiresome way, but rather develops in a spiral. A comparison of the beginning and ending of the film reveals that the film, on the background of spy games, action clashes and travelling around the world, approaches the largely intimate motif of inner reconciliation. The dominant construction principle of the system of the work is the effort to present the information provided by the film and ongoing action as taking place at present. In its concluding part, the study relates the explicated systemic traits of The Bourne Supremacy to three more general frameworks. Firstly, the relation of the film to the trilogy is explained, claiming that every new film in the series develops the techniques of the preceding one. Secondly, The Bourne Supremacy is assessed from the perspective of aesthetic norms of action films in the period 2002–2008, against which the Bourne trilogy seems to be narratively and stylistically progressive. Thirdly, the features of the trilogy analyzed in the study are related to analytically inferred tradition of the so-called action films of motion, which according to this study has been developing at least since the 1930s and against which the Bourne trilogy appears thoughtfully evolutional rather than radically revolutionary. |
| Related projects: |