Jason Bourne is back! (The Bourne Supremacy)

Crown · Post by **Crown** » 2004-05-07 07:36am

As a huge fan of The Bourne Identity I am more than happy to announce that the trailer for it's sequel The Bourne Supremacy has now been officially released!

You can view the details here!

Well I hope that they make it is well done as the first one, I can't wait for this picture!

Dahak · Post by **Dahak** » 2004-05-07 07:49am

I still prefer the mini-series over the movie. Had a bit more depth to it...

Admiral Valdemar · Post by **Admiral Valdemar** » 2004-05-07 09:33am

Ooh, looks fun.

I just hope they don't make a silly mistake like the suppressor over the barrel thing in the first one with the sniper dude.

The Mini chase was great though.

Stofsk · Post by **Stofsk** » 2004-05-07 10:10am

I don't know why but I just didn't like The Bourne Identity. It's not because of Matt Damon, who was pretty good. The action scenes were also excellent. None of this "wire-fu" crap that has become chic - just straight combat, very fast and damaging.

I guess I didn't like the plot, it just seemed to make no sense. But oh well, I'll go see this when it comes out. Damon makes a better secret agent than Affleck.

Tsyroc · Post by **Tsyroc** » 2004-05-07 10:47am

I liked it, although I was disappointed that there wasn't a gratuitous love/sex scene with plenty of nudity for the babe he was running around with.

From what I understand Robert Ludlam doesn't often put that kind of stuff in his books so in that sense it was true to the book.

neoolong · Post by **neoolong** » 2004-05-07 11:13am

Hmm, does this have anything to do with the book?

Sir Sirius · Post by **Sir Sirius** » 2004-05-07 11:15am

Admiral Valdemar wrote:I just hope they don't make a silly mistake like the suppressor over the barrel thing in the first one with the sniper dude.

I don't remember anything odd about the silencer, but it's been a while since I've seen the movie, what was the mistake?

Sarevok · Post by **Sarevok** » 2004-05-07 11:16am

I liked the original Bourne identity. I hope the sequel would be good too.

Shroom Man 777 · Post by **Shroom Man 777** » 2004-05-07 11:23am

Yeah. I liked the movie, although I didn't complete it, but it looked cool. We want more asbestos!

Admiral Valdemar · Post by **Admiral Valdemar** » 2004-05-07 11:23am

Sir Sirius wrote:
Admiral Valdemar wrote:I just hope they don't make a silly mistake like the suppressor over the barrel thing in the first one with the sniper dude.
I don't remember anything odd about the silencer, but it's been a while since I've seen the movie, what was the mistake?

It was over the barrel as in it covered the thing rather than be at the end and actually do something. There was the whole shotgun + propane tank = explosion thing too, but pretty much all films do that so I let it off.

Sir Sirius · Post by **Sir Sirius** » 2004-05-07 11:58am

Admiral Valdemar wrote:It was over the barrel as in it covered the thing rather than be at the end and actually do something.

Oh, that is called an integral silencer, they're real and are starting to become quite common. Usualy the gun has to be custom built or modified by a gunsmith to accomodate one. H&K MP5SD has one, CZ makes a version of CZ700 that has an integral silencer and there has been a recent trend in Finland with a few hunters getting such silencers fitted to their rifles.

CZ 700S.

Admiral Valdemar · Post by **Admiral Valdemar** » 2004-05-07 12:01pm

Sir Sirius wrote:
Admiral Valdemar wrote:It was over the barrel as in it covered the thing rather than be at the end and actually do something.
Oh, that is called an integral silencer, they're real and are starting to become quite common. Usualy the gun has to be custom built or modified by a gunsmith to accomodate one. H&K MP5SD has one, CZ makes a version of CZ700 that has an integral silencer and there has been a recent trend in Finland with a few hunters getting such silencers fitted to their rifles.

CZ 700S.

Is that the gun from the film? It's just what I recall it was a rifle that didn't usually have this type of suppressor, hence, it looked like BS. If it had been that rifle then I'd understand (I've used air rifles that have similar inbuilt mechanisms).

Mind you, it's been over a year since I saw this so I may be wrong.

Sir Sirius · Post by **Sir Sirius** » 2004-05-07 12:12pm

Admiral Valdemar wrote:Is that the gun from the film?

No, it's just the first picture of a rifle with an integral silencer I happened to find. I think the rifle used in the movie was a semi-auto, some H&K model IIRC.

Admiral Valdemar wrote:It's just what I recall it was a rifle that didn't usually have this type of suppressor, hence, it looked like BS.

If the rifle was fired with out the silencer then there is a mistake in the movie. Integral silencers require the barrel to be ported, although the silencer can be removed for cleaning you can't fire the gun with out the silencer.

I do have a faint recollection of reading about an "ordinary" muzzle silencer that enveloped the barrel, it had somekind of a cone shaped thingy to redirect the propellant gases in to the silencer... not sure though, been years since I read about it.

Illuminatus Primus · Post by **Illuminatus Primus** » 2004-05-07 12:31pm

AV means that the assassin after making his hit physically slipped the suppressor off the barrel, as it had been slid over it, not screwed onto the muzzle.

Crown · Post by **Crown** » 2004-05-07 12:41pm

Illuminatus Primus wrote:AV means that the assassin after making his hit physically slipped the suppressor off the barrel, as it had been slid over it, not screwed onto the muzzle.

I remember that too, but didn't he have to unscrew the suppressor in the farm house scene?

Stormbringer · Post by **Stormbringer** » 2004-05-07 12:47pm

Sweet!

I loved the Bourne Identity. It's definitely a class act secret agent pic and hopefully the follow up will be just as good.

Pablo Sanchez · Post by **Pablo Sanchez** » 2004-05-07 03:16pm

Sir Sirius wrote:No, it's just the first picture of a rifle with an integral silencer I happened to find. I think the rifle used in the movie was a semi-auto, some H&K model IIRC.

It's been a while since I saw the Bourne Identity, but I think it was actually a SIG 550.

the rifle

And then a page with the SIG 550 itself.

Post by **RogueIce** » 2004-05-07 03:25pm

Um, is this like a prequel or sequel?

If it's a sequel, what's the point? The first movie seemed to settle things quite nicely, didn't it? Project went bye bye, Jason was free, etc.

Unless that last killer dude goes psycho or something.

Admiral Valdemar · Post by **Admiral Valdemar** » 2004-05-07 03:28pm

RogueIce wrote:Um, is this like a prequel or sequel?

If it's a sequel, what's the point? The first movie seemed to settle things quite nicely, didn't it? Project went bye bye, Jason was free, etc.

Unless that last killer dude goes psycho or something.

From what I recall, it's basically a former target he was set to "take out" that spots him and thinks he's still in the business and so they try to take him out first. It's not like he can go "sorry, lost my memory and now I've retired. I won't kill you now".

neoolong · Post by **neoolong** » 2004-05-07 04:48pm

RogueIce wrote:Um, is this like a prequel or sequel?

If it's a sequel, what's the point? The first movie seemed to settle things quite nicely, didn't it? Project went bye bye, Jason was free, etc.

Unless that last killer dude goes psycho or something.

Depends on how much of the book they are trying to use.

Besides, there may be more sleepers out there, they only called in the ones that were in the area I think.

Tsyroc · Post by **Tsyroc** » 2004-05-07 07:53pm

I saw the preview at Van Helsing it looks pretty good. Essentially more of the cool stuff from the first film.

neoolong · Post by **neoolong** » 2004-05-07 10:12pm

Wow, it has like nothing at all to do with the book. Aside from the name. Ah well, seems interesting enough.

jairyn_1 · Post by **jairyn_1** » 2004-05-07 11:36pm

I think the second one is going to be a bit of a letdown. I thought the first one was well done (didn't like it, but it was well done), but I don't think it really warranted a sequel. But that's just IMO.

neoolong · Post by **neoolong** » 2004-05-07 11:40pm

Well considering its a trilogy, its not hard to imagine them trying to make a trilogy of films.

jairyn_1 · Post by **jairyn_1** » 2004-05-07 11:43pm

neoolong wrote:Well considering its a trilogy, its not hard to imagine them trying to make a trilogy of films.

Ah. Ok. See, this I didn't know. Being out of the media loop and all.. yeah.

I still expect it to be a letdown.