Do titles for film franchises really hold so much currency that it's strategic to keep producing the same series with different people? If James Bond is any indicator, then... maybe?
Now granted, in the Bond example, it is actors rotating through to play the same role (cue the "X" was the BEST Bond ever argument), and the Bourne films went in a different direction. I'm sure producers knew that replacing Matt Damon wasn't really an option for audience goers (we'll see how that goes for you Andrew Garfield), but the question is, did this movie get made under the umbrella of the franchise just so they had an excuse to recycle the same plot again? And the next question is, can we all acknowledge that a Matt Damon cameo could be pretty rad?
Feels like any minute we should cue Jimmy Kimmel to end the trailer with "sorry we didn't have time for Matt Damon." But maybe... maybe they will pull this off...
Okay fine. It looks awesome and the Bourne series lives on.
I guess they got me.