Bourne Trilogy: Books vs Movie

[Airchallenged]

I didn't know which forum to post this in (Books or Movies) so I picked at random.

Anyway enough babbling. Since the two versions of the Bourne Trilogy are widely different I was wondering which one people liked better. For the Book version I am just including Robert Ludlum's original books not the two newer ones which apparently s**k. I will post my thoughts later.

Matt

[LRB]

Unfortunately I've only seen the films. But I did like them.

[Rambow]

Unfortunately I have read the book in russian translation only but it was great anyway.

I recall TV-series of 80s were great also.

Last movies are further from the book than TV-series but if you don't think about that watching the movie - it looks great.

[Colonel Sennef]

I ran out of patience with Ludlum a long time ago, but was hugely entertained as well as impressed by the Bourne Ultimatum movie. It is so thrilling you actually forget to realise at first how well it is made.

[Airchallenged]

I gotta say I liked both of them in their own rights but the first time I read the backs of the books I thought to my self "Where the h**l did they get the ideas for the movie." The only way they seem to relate is that they both include Conklin, Bourne/Webb, Marie, and Treadstone and that's about it.

AC

[Surrey]

I prefered the book, at least it had a plot. There seems very little connection between the books and the films.

[Airchallenged]

I prefered the book, at least it had a plot. There seems very little connection between the books and the films.

yeah there is none what so ever. It seems like they just ran with the idea of a "super-assassin" fight for "good causes".

AC