Ah, the age-old question: which is better? The novel or the film version of a story? In the case of the Bourne Identity, I'm going to say that they are equally good but are two separate stories. While Hollywood loves to take liberties with novels, the film version of Bourne Identity takes necessary liberties. Given that the novel was published in 1980, some updating of the story was required, such as:

1. Technology: the film makes great use of technology to tell a better story, technology that simply did not exist when Ludlum wrote his novel.
2. The enemy: the U.S. government is Jason Bourne's primary enemy in the film, but the novel holds two opposing enemies for him (more on that in a minute). Plus, the Cold War of 1980 offers an additional backdrop that simply does not exist today.
3. JB's backstory: given the shift in timeframe, Bourne's backstory in the film was updated to include more modern conflicts. In the novel, a key component of Bourne's history was the Vietnam War, which still played prominent role in the reader's memory.

Let's go back to point #2 above, the enemy. One of the reasons the novel is so compelling is that Bourne is trying to recover his identity while being hunted by two opposing enemies out to destroy him, the U.S. government for which he worked and a terrorist named Carlos. Carlos is completely eliminated from the film probably because of the level of complexity his presence brings to the story. That's a shame because the presence of a second, deadly enemy heightens the tension of the "hunt" for Bourne.

The token-female-love interest in both the film and the novel is Marie. In the novel, however, she is a Canadian government economist, rather than a German bystander, as in the film. Marie plays a bit more active role in the novel in helping Bourne understand and deal with his situation. Interestingly, I found the "love" story b/w them less believable in the novel, however; this may be due to her calling Bourne "my darling" a lot.

Finally, I felt that Bourne's psychological turmoil and inner conflict more compelling in the novel. He really struggles with the realization that he's probably not a nice guy, but someone who hurts and kills people. While Matt Damon is nice to look at for a couple of hours on screen, he doesn't deliver the same level of angst that the character in novel experiences. (less) ( )

I read this several years ago, and having seen and loved the movie, I thought I'd read it again. I found it disappointing -- somewhat plodding and not very plausible, and with its wild tale of Carlos the Jackal, nothing whatsoever like the movie. I tried, but could not finish the book, and finally put it back in the basement. Once was enough for one lifetime. ( )

This was a really excellent book. The pace was fast paced and the story was quite intriguing. It is definately different from the movie, but well worth the read. Highly recommended. ( )

Having NOT seen any of the Bourne movies at this point (yes I'm sheltered) i figure this may be a slightly different take on the book from some of the reviews I've read. I quite enjoyed this, Ludlum keeps the reader interested and wanting to learn more as Bourne, or Cain, learns about himself. I like how Ludlum gives you the insight into how panicked and frustrated this man is by not having his memory. My only complaint is that in situations where characters speak a foreign language, no translation, or hint at translation is offered, and if the reader does now know other languages, it makes the reader feel left out of what could be important dialogue. All in all - I'm lookign forward tot he next book ( )

I might have enjoyed this more if I hadn't loved the film adaptation so much. Compared to the movie re-write, this book plods, often heavily and dully. I was not compelled to keep reading more in the series. A real disappointment.

If you haven't seen the movie yet, then go ahead and read the book--you'll probably enjoy it much more the right way round. ( )