There is no nuclear missile countdown or secret codes housed in a steel briefcase there’s simply Jason Bourne, defending his life and trying to piece together the broken shards of his identity. In the Bourne films, these conventions are almost entirely ignored. The Bourne Identity (2002) – source: Universal Pictures

Our new Bond can now brood and question his purpose, but in the end, he functions as a tool of the Crown – foiling plots, dispatching various foreigners and bringing down some threat to the Kingdom. The modern Bond is darker and more violent than his debonair predecessors, but his conflict remains primarily a nationalistic one. Take, for example, the Daniel Craig-era James Bondfilms. To understand how the Bourne films confront this question, it’s important to first compare them to similar genre pieces.

The issues confronted in this particular reading of the films make sense given the socio-political context at the time their production, but the issues are no less pertinent today.

The ethical questions raised by the Bourne films have profound meaning given the seemingly endless cycle of violence being enacted by Americans throughout the world.

The United States have been embroiled in foreign conflict for much of its history, and indeed throughout the production of the entire Bourne series. It is this admonition which frames the subtextual question posed by the Bourne films what parts of our spiritually identity are we forced to sacrifice when we place our conscience on the altar of a cause? Though other aspects of the trilogy function in the same way, it is this scene which most poignantly illustrates the filmmakers’ statement.

The order of the jason bourne movies