Bourne and Jarda


First, I really love the Bourne movies especially Supremacy. The only problem is every time I watch this part; I still can’t understand why Bourne would do this.

Bourne goes to Jarda’s house to see what information he can gather. Jarda doesn’t tell him anything relevant, only that Conklin is dead, and that treadstone is shutdown. Before interacting with Jarda, Bourne has Jarda tie his hands. Later on, the phone rings and a fight break out between the two. Bourne ends up killing the man. Why?

Couldn’t Bourne have left him incapacitated? Even if Jarda told the CIA team that showed up, Bourne was here, and they circulated a photo of him to the police, Bourne showed many times he could evade them. He disables one of the before entering a cab.

If you wanted to kill, why not the man that killed your girlfriend? After an intense chase through a tunnel, you confront him, but leave him. You could have killed Abbott but he does that to himself later.

reply

Bourne killed Jarda in self-defense, plain and simple. The same way he killed the Professor in the first film, and Desh in the third film.

Bourne didn't want to kill in cold blood, which is why he didn't kill Abbott or Kirill (in Kirill's case, the man was bleeding to death anyway...)

reply

obviously the OP has never been a threatening situation.

reply

It was self defense.

Bourne didn't want to kill him, and as we see moments later in the washroom scene, after thinking he had moved on he had made his first kill in 2 years.

Bourne probably could have incapacitated him, but Jarda put up a good fight and would result in one of them die'ing... probably the moment of the kill Bourne's training "kicked in" for survival.

reply

Because he knows that later, perhaps days or months later, Jarda will probably track him down and kill him. Bourne can't leave him 'incapacitated' because he does not know what Jarda will do when he ... re-capacitates.

Tosca isn't for everyone.

reply