Frank Marshall knows a thing or two about successful film franchises. Even a cursory glance at his remarkable list of credits (Raiders of the Lost Arc, Back to the Future, Gremlins 2 to mention just a few) will confirm that this consummate filmmaker has been one of the creative driving forces behind some of the most successful movies of the last three decades.

And as one of the core team on the Bourne series of films – starring Matt Damon as former black ops assassin Jason Bourne – Marshall is well aware that the first two films have set an incredibly high standard which the eagerly awaited third instalment, The Bourne Ultimatum, will have to live up to.

“I think if you start reacting to the outside pressure then you make bad decisions,” says Marshall. “You have to keep your head down and do what we did on the first two.”

That means concentrating on keeping the franchise fresh and innovative. “For me, it’s all about the story,” he says.

“I’ve been involved in a few franchises - Indiana Jones, Back to the Future and Gremilns and it’s really about the story. If you run out of story I think you have to stop.

“With Bourne I think we have come up with a really interesting story. It’s gripping and unpredictable, just like the first two films. And once we’ve finished this one we’ll be asking ‘where does he go after this?’”

It also helps, he adds, when you have a director of the calibre of Oscar® nominated Paul Greengrass who helmed the second in the series, The Bourne Supremacy, returning to take control of the third film and an actor like Damon in the starring role.

“Matt is such a good actor and he plays it with such intensity that you go ‘I’m not going to mess with him...’ even if he does look like this nice guy from Boston! He’s fantastic in this role.”

Marshall also believes that re-uniting the core creative team for The Bourne Ultimatum – actor, director, producers and writers – has helped keep the momentum going into the third film.

“The movies are really a collaboration between four or five different people and we are constantly trying not to do the same thing but we all know each other so well and we know who the character is, what the movie is about, that we are able to go forward in a much better way than if we didn’t know each other,” he explains.

“We know what worked before and we are taking that and adding the new elements. Like the stunt coordinator will say ‘no, we did that before, let’s do something different.’ I think it’s actually a plus for us to have the same people.”

Marshall, 60, has a remarkable track record in Hollywood. As a producer his CV includes The Color Purple, Empire of the Sun, Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade, Hook, Congo, The Sixth Sense, Signs, and the up and coming Jurassic Park IV.

As a director, Marshall’s credits include Arachnophobia, Alive, Congo, Eight Below and the forthcoming Untitled Lance Armstrong Project.

This interview was conducted on location at one of London’s busiest railway stations, Waterloo, for a key scene in The Bourne Ultimatum where Jason Bourne has arranged to meet a British journalist, Ross (played by Paddy Considine) only to discover that he’s been followed.

Q: What’s it like filming in one of London’s busiest train stations?
FM: I thought it would be chaotic but it’s not, it’s fine. Matt Damon walks around here every day and nobody notices. It’s great. We don’t have lights, we’re shooting with a hand held (camera) and we’re pushing the equipment around on luggage carriers so people kind of don’t notice. London has been our production base and a lot of the central scenes take place in London this time. We’ve already been to Tangier and we are going to Madrid then to Paris and probably Moscow and back here to London and then New York.

Q: If passers by get in the shot do you have to get them to sign a release?
FM: No, there are signs all around saying that we are filming, like a disclaimer. You kind of do that in crowds. And we surround Matt with our own extras so most of the time the people in the shot are our people.

Q: But there is a strong chance that ordinary members of the public will be in shot?
FM: Yeah. I had a guy the other day who was going like this (mimics taking a picture) and that’s not going to work. [Laughs.]

Q: What’s the scene you are shooting today?
FM: It’s a cat and mouse scene between Bourne and a journalist who is played by Paddy Considine, and surveillance cameras and agents are closing in on them, trying to get Paddy. Bourne is guiding him without them seeing him. Bourne is in and out, and all of these security cameras that exist here in England – they are everywhere – are being monitored by people back in New York. They are tracking Paddy’s character and they don’t realise Bourne is here and Bourne, in turn, is trying to guide him to safety. They are talking with mobile phones and he is saying ‘go right, go left’ telling him what to do.

Q: You’ve had two very successful Bourne films both in terms of box office and critical reception. Does the pressure increase each time to maintain that level of success?
FM: Absolutely. And also you start running out of story because when we made the first movie we had to change it from the book because the book was written in the 1970s and it was the Cold War so it really was irrelevant except for the set up of Bourne waking up in the water. That was great. So we sort of veered off the path in the first story and the second one was totally made up, it had nothing to do with the book. I’ll tell you a secret, the ending of the last movie, which everyone loves, was a last minute thing. You know, where Bourne is in New York and watching Pamela Landy (Joan Allen)? Well, when we sat down to write the third movie one of the writers said ‘what are we doing in New York when is she there?’ So we had to figure out what Bourne is doing in this movie and why we, as an audience, are interested. A lot still has to do with him trying to find out who he is and whether he was always an assassin and also to bring all of this to an end.

Q: What is the reason for the success of the Bourne franchise do you think?
FM: It’s real. The action isn’t in the movie simply to have action. It’s not ‘oh it’s been ten minutes, we need a car chase.’ It’s sort of a thinking man’s action movie where all of the action has to come out of a story point. For example, in the second film there’s a fight in Munich and that’s about something. And Bourne is resourceful – like when he rolls up a magazine and puts it in the toaster (in The Bourne Supremacy). James Bond solves problems by having gadgets and Bourne solves them with his brain.

Q: You could say that one of the reasons that Bond has a new approach is because of the success of the Bourne films…
FM: [Laughs.] It’s the best form of flattery! I think it’s the grittiness, it’s the realism of it, it’s the fact that we go to these places – Goa or Tangier or Berlin – and they are real. We didn’t fake Paris in Montreal, you know we try and go on location and take the audience to these places and we don’t make them touristy. Bond would go ‘here’s the Eiffel Tower! Here’s the Brandenburg Gate!’ We didn’t see those in Bourne. We’re showing you real life in these cities and I think that’s the formula that people are attracted to.

Q: What can you tell us about the story for The Bourne Ultimatum?
FM: There are always these bad guys that come up against Bourne and try and capture him and try and kill him! [Laughs.] And there might be a car chase and this scene we are doing now, which is much more of a Hitchcock type sequence. With covert operations they have to operate in a world today that is a lot different than it was six years ago – and in a way that’s about what you see happen here in Waterloo Station. And the scenes in Tangier are a bit noisier – explosions and things like that.

Q: Bourne is a much darker character than some of the others we have mentioned…
FM: Oh yes. Because he is an assassin. A political assassin.

Q: And he has amnesia which has provided such a powerful storyline in the first two films and I presume the third.
FM: Yes, which is an interesting problem for an assassin to have. But you have to remember when we started this series the world was a different place. Before 2001 Jason Bourne would have been off the radar - it’s like we don’t talk about those guys. Today it’s like ‘where are these guys? We need those guys to go and take out the bad guys.’ It’s all above board and it’s really interesting how the world has changed. Now it’s not a black ops operation.

Q: Is it the case that the more Bourne finds out about himself the more he despises himself?
FM: Yes and wants to really know if he was like that. ‘Was I really always this person or did someone make me this way?’

Q: There’s also the ‘one man against the system’ scenario which is a big part of the films. I wonder did films like Three Days of the Condor influence you at all?
FM: Yes, we looked at all those great movies – Three Days of the Condor, Manchurian Candidate, all of the sixties great spy thrillers. Tony Gilroy (screenplay) is very skilled in all of that and then when you bring in a director like Paul Greengrass, with his background – he wrote a book about espionage, his film Bloody Sunday – and then you have some interesting elements coming together. If you put Matt Damon into the mix, a guy who looks like your college roommate and yet happens to be the perfect assassin, then it gets extremely interesting. No one would think that guy is a bad guy which works so well for the character. Matt is such a good actor and he plays it with such intensity that you go ‘I’m not going to mess with him,’ even if he does look like this nice guy from Boston! He’s fantastic in this role.

Q: Will there be a love story this time?
FM: Not really a love story, no. But Julia Stiles has a much bigger role this time.

Q: You have the same core creative team of this one. Do you have to guard against complacency?
FM: It actually works in reverse. The movies are really a collaboration between four or five different people and we are constantly trying not to do the same thing, but we all know each other so well and we know who the character is, what the movie is about, that we are able to go forward in a much better way than if we didn’t know each other. We know what worked before and we are taking that and adding the new elements. Like the stunt coordinator would say ‘no, we did that before, let’s do something different.’ I think it’s actually a plus for us to have the same people.

Q: Was the development process harder on this one than the last two?
FM: Yes, it was because of that New York thing. And also, I think people like these stories because they are unpredictable. I mean, nobody kills off their lead actress in the first ten minutes (which happened with Marie played by Franka Potente in The Bourne Supremacy). Some people still don’t like that, but I think it was cool. People go ‘oh they won’t die, because they are the lead’ and we killed her. And then you go ‘wow, what’s going to happen now?’ So you are interested in what direction the movie is going in and you are not ahead of it.

Q: What did the Robert Ludlum books give you?
FM: Well, they gave us a great character and a great set up for the character and we’ve had to bring it into the 21st century. There’s no Cold War but he set the bar with this great spy thriller and a great character and I’m happy with preserving that theme and preserving those characters. When he was alive he was very happy with the first movie and how it was going and his estate, which represent him, is very happy.

Q: Is Matt Damon contractually obliged to do a fourth film?
FM: It’s all about the script. There is no requirement.

Q: Has he grown more adept at the action sequences? Because with the first Bourne it was the first time he had ever done anything like that.
FM: He is very comfortable with the fighting technique.

Q: His preparation period on the first one was about 3 months. Is it shorter now?
FM: Yes, it’s about six weeks now. He just has to get in shape again and re- learns the moves. We have the same stunt people who did such a fantastic job before.

Q: Did you have Paul Greengrass in mind to direct the third after the second film?
FM: Yes, we had talked about it after the second and Paul was keen on it. He had a good experience on the other film and he and Matt work together very well. And I think we felt ‘this is great, if we can make the schedules work.’ And then Paul went to do United 93 and he was doing that while we were writing the script so it was fine. He is really perfect for this movie – his visual style, the way he thinks, the way he analyses the politics, all of that works really well.

Q: How involved does Matt get with the script?
FM: Matt is very involved. He is keeper of the Jason Bourne character and he’ll say things like ‘I would never do that.’ He doesn’t like any of the movie clichés, or the action clichés, he wants it to be as authentic as possible and he’s spent a lot of time with undercover SAS, secret service and he’s talked to them a lot.

Q: Would you say that this is a more topical film, politically?
FM: Well, it deals with the world that has changed. It doesn’t acknowledge it, but exists in the world as it is today with all the security and all of the threats that are there today. We are going to London and to Madrid and that is a subtle reference to the places that have had problems. There are not specific references to the problems but I think Paul brings that without trying.

Q: What keeps you excited with the Bourne franchise?
FM: I’ve been involved in a few franchises –Indiana Jones, Back to the Future and Gremilns, and it’s really about the story. If you run out of story I think you have to stop. With Bourne I think we have come up with a really interesting story. It’s gripping and unpredictable, just like the first two films. And once we’ve finished this one we’ll be asking ‘where does he go after this?’ For me, it’s all about the story.

Q: The first Bourne movie was a sleeper hit, the second one did much better than anyone expected but with the third people expect a success. How do you react to that?
FM: I think if you start reacting to the outside pressure then you make bad decisions. You have to keep your head down and do what we did on the first two.

Q: Do you feel more comfortable now?
FM: Yeah, it’s great because it’s like a family. There’s this whole group that was in Berlin for so long together. The pressure is the release date – it’s going to open all around the world in August so that means we have to be earlier because we have to get the translations done.

Q: A lot of directors say that people take action for granted and that it’s much harder than you might expect. Were you always confident that Matt Damon would be able to do the action sequences?
FM: With Matt I was confident because he is a very physical guy and very comfortable in his own body. But you are right and a couple of the bad guys we’ve cast, we’ve had to re-cast them because they would come in and start working with the fight trainer or something and they couldn’t do anything. And they looked fit and so you would assume they could do it. But Matt really handles himself well and he has done some action stuff – not the stuff we have in this movie – and there wasn’t ever a doubt in my mind that he could do this. He’s got this character down. It’s extraordinary. Maybe he has a secret pill he takes. [Laughs.] The Jason Bourne pill!

Q: Does the fact that you are a director yourself give you a better insight into some of the problems that Paul Greengrass is facing?
FM: Oh yes, I’m very sympathetic to the director. It’s really a team effort, a great collaboration and we all respect each other – and if you have a dumb idea that’s OK. [Laughs.]

Q: How big is your crew here at Waterloo?
FM: Oh, 200. Because we have people that handle the extras, put them in the same clothes every day. It’s a big circus.

Q: Do you think you re-defined the action movie genre with this series?
FM: I don’t know if we re-defined it but we certainly created a new version of the action genre. You know it’s hard to do things you haven’t seen before and it’s hard to take a fresh approach to things. I think that started with Doug Liman (director, The Bourne Identity). I think Doug had in his mind a fresh approach to the spy thriller and that’s what people like. We’re the antithesis of the big explosions. We want to go the other way.

Q: Shooting in Moscow was tough last time. How has it been on location in Tangier this time?
FM: Well, it was tough in Tangier because we were there during Ramadan and people get a little irritable at about three o clock in the afternoon when they haven’t eaten, drank or smoked since sun up. So the crowds would get a little more agitated and there was a lot of people. And then at six o clock we had to be finished and back at the hotel because all the drivers finished then and would go eat. We would say ‘couldn’t you take a sandwich?’ and they were like ‘no, no, we’re going home.’ And it’s really interesting and everybody does it. You would find yourself having a doughnut and a cup of coffee in the tent and then you would walk out on the street and go ‘why are people looking at me?’ and it would like ‘oh, I’m not supposed to be doing this.’ Because you can’t walk around with a bottle of water. Nothing. Nobody is eating, drinking, smoking, anything on the street. It’s amazing. You always have to work within the culture you are going to. But that was a different thing. In Moscow they had just never seen anything like us before – cars flying down the street at 90 mph and crashing into things. This (Tangier) was more of a foot chase type of thing – we blew up a car, and that we had to let everybody know and run an ad in the newspaper.