I hear you. In fact, it's my biggest problem with Milla Jovovich's character in the Resident Evil movies, too. No sense of concern for the well being of the protagonist, since I'm sure she's pretty much indestructible, and since the world is also gone to shit/post apocalyptic, no real sense that 'If she can't stop the evil, the world is lost!' because it already is lost.tdylan said:That's my biggest problem with the Superman vs Zod fight in Man of Steel. They're knocking each other through buildings, Superman goes tumbling through the streets, Zod tosses a Lex Corp gasoline tanker at Superman, and Cal casually floats between the tankers, ignoring it as it detonates destroying the building behind him with a nonchalant "I just farted and exited the elevator, so it's someone else's problem now" look on his face. I thought to myself "You just got punched through a goddamn building! At least wince a little."the December King said:I never really felt that Bourne was in any real danger or that the situation was out of his control after the first movie, and so his plights lost some of their urgency.
I didn't mind it in the first Bourne movie, but every one since, including Legacy, failed to have any sense of tension or urgency, cuz they so ably and readily dispatched any situation. So I'm not eager to see Bourne return. Based on the previews of the Ultimatium movie, I thought that he was at least in for a compelling fight. But even the chase sequences are "meh. Just padding out the runtime here. Don't mind me."
Now, I do know that it can be a challenge to lend a hero character that sense of mortality over the span of a series of films, or even TV, and especially if the series or films are action-oriented. And sometimes it's fun if the hero is larger than life- it is escapism, after all. But, at least in the case of Bourne, the effort could be made, or should be made, I think.