This version follows the Robert Ludlum book very closely. As such I prefer it to the smash, bang big screen version. The one advantage of having such a diversion in the versions, is that both are equally watchable. Richard Chamberlain is much more believable in his roll as Bourne and Jaclyn Smith does a much better job as his new found love life and his supporter.
If you wish to see the real story, be sure to watch this.
This original has the old world charm of the 20th century Europe. The buildings have arches, spires, antique furniture & character, before today's glass & concrete blocks. The actors have character, compared to the micro-chipped personalities of this century's movies. He communicates via landline phones & goes to the bank to sign for transactions, like we did back then.
The modern version I like equally for Matt Damon's un-assuming presence & the competent action scenes.
Not a patch on the remake with Matt Damon - this version has no intrigue into the personality of Jason Bourne - you keep being told that he is a cold-hearted killer but a bit of storyline to back this up would have been helpful but the main character doesn't really have many skills. The acting is wooden from Chamberlain and Smith and the supporting characters are very poor - the Treadstone "committee" doesn't lend itself to the storyline very well, making the whole scenario very one-dimensional unless you have read the book or seen the film remake. Flits from country to country and tries to merge itself with the real 'character' of Carlos in its timeline but I would avoid this film unless you want to make comparisons between the two versions