It’s impossible to avoid saying it: I hated The Bourne Legacy. The one thing it gets absolutely right is Jeremy Renner, who brings haunted tough guy verve to a role unburdened by the qualities of a complex, layered character. Put differently Renner’s performance can only do so much, as the film’s most crippling deficiencies are found in its structure and plot. The Bourne Legacy wields conceits that lose sight of what made Matt Damon’s character– both as written and as performed– so magnetic and fascinating, and employs storytelling techniques that are sound in theory but end up ballooning the film and grinding its pacing down to a halt. The result is a franchise picture replete with the most offensive attributes of franchise pictures. To read my full dissection of the film, head over to Go, See, Talk!.
A Constant Visual Feast 
Oh dear! I won’t get my hopes up too much then!
Yeah, stay away from this one until it hits home theater. It’s…well, it’s really terrible.
I’m with you – structure and plot (both Tony Gilroys responsibility) are whats flawed. and where was the action in the first half?
It was off-screen with Matt Damon, while all the boring hand-wringing/snow trudging was on-screen with Ed Norton and Jeremy Renner. Seriously, the first hour was torture. By the time Gilroy brings us to that one amazing long take of Renner climbing a house, busting in through a window, and shooting a government assassin, it’s too little too late.