Matrix Revolutions
- Thread starter The Memory Hole
- Start date
lilbandit
I hate Meath
hulkaros said:Then, I suppose you belong to Soprano followers, aren't you?Or could that be Sex in the City?
ah hulkaros...the eternal voice of reason on these boards
perhaps some qualification of the claim that ALL of the matrix stuff=great. Seriously, you don't put the last two films on a par with the first..do you? I would agree that the first was a great film and will probably be the only one that anybody remembers in the years to come but the last two were average at best. Anybody I ask feels the same way except for a few hardcore fans, but that category of movie-goer is normally blinded by their fanaticism anyway and can't be objective!
Arden
Where mah "any" keys at?
Well, I'm not a fanatic, but I definitely would not rate R&R as lowly as you have. I thought they were both well done, with enough philosophical stuff interspersed with heavy action like the freeway scene, the battle for the dock, etc. I think all 3 films are great.
hulkaros
The Incredible...
Look: I am sick of reading and hearing that Matrix 2 (2+3=2 actually ) is an average movie! What did you expect to see in it? Just because you didn't see more of Neo VS Smith or this and that VS this and that or the ma-n-chines winning or the humans winning and blah-blah that doesn't mean that the Matrix 2 was/is worst than 1 or even an average movie! Not to mention that the whole Matrix experience is Matrix 1, Matrix Comics, AniMatrix, Enter the Matrix and last and surely not least, Matrix Reloaded and Matrix Revolutions... If you followed closely all those things then you would definitely agree with me that all matrix=great! It is a pure stroke of genius all those matrix things and such genius always cannot be appreciated by mere mortals
As Morpheus said:
"What happened, happened and couldn't have happened any other way..."
Or if you prefer what the Architect said:
"And because you still remain human some of my answers you simply will not understand..."
Or something along those lines
) is an average movie! What did you expect to see in it? Just because you didn't see more of Neo VS Smith or this and that VS this and that or the ma-n-chines winning or the humans winning and blah-blah that doesn't mean that the Matrix 2 was/is worst than 1 or even an average movie! Not to mention that the whole Matrix experience is Matrix 1, Matrix Comics, AniMatrix, Enter the Matrix and last and surely not least, Matrix Reloaded and Matrix Revolutions... If you followed closely all those things then you would definitely agree with me that all matrix=great! It is a pure stroke of genius all those matrix things and such genius always cannot be appreciated by mere mortals As Morpheus said:
"What happened, happened and couldn't have happened any other way..."
Or if you prefer what the Architect said:
"And because you still remain human some of my answers you simply will not understand..."
Or something along those lines
Randman
HA! HA! HA!
Matrix was fantastic, a true trend-setter. 3 was much better than 2, but both suffered from sequelitis. The great thing, imho, in the first was that you could almost imagine that something like the Matrix could actually exist, or that we are a part of it.
The second two had none of that. You became more and distanced from the main characters. In 3, the most "human" characters were the family talking to Neo in the train station.
The special effects were awesome, but the machines won in real life with CGI overcoming the human elements that truly made 1 a classic.
I loved Agent Smith in 1 and 2 but other than the fight scene, he became too over-the-top.
Morpheus became Lando Calarassian by 3, what a waste of a great character. Heck, even Neo didn't seem to have as much screen time as Niobe.
And the Merovingian also seemed an afterthought in 3, and Monica Belluci should have been given much more screen time with that amazing outfit of hers in 3.
The final theme was very interesting: Humans needed to the machines to live and the machines needed humans to live and both sides had heroes and villians, but the point became too muddled with the jumps and reliance on CGI (and here, once again, I'll say I didn't dislike 2 and I enjoyed 3, especially what happens to Neo).
And finally, I enjoyed both the first couple of seasons of Sopranos and Sex And The City until they jumped the shark.
Rant over [fin]
The second two had none of that. You became more and distanced from the main characters. In 3, the most "human" characters were the family talking to Neo in the train station.
The special effects were awesome, but the machines won in real life with CGI overcoming the human elements that truly made 1 a classic.
I loved Agent Smith in 1 and 2 but other than the fight scene, he became too over-the-top.
Morpheus became Lando Calarassian by 3, what a waste of a great character. Heck, even Neo didn't seem to have as much screen time as Niobe.
And the Merovingian also seemed an afterthought in 3, and Monica Belluci should have been given much more screen time with that amazing outfit of hers in 3.
The final theme was very interesting: Humans needed to the machines to live and the machines needed humans to live and both sides had heroes and villians, but the point became too muddled with the jumps and reliance on CGI (and here, once again, I'll say I didn't dislike 2 and I enjoyed 3, especially what happens to Neo).
And finally, I enjoyed both the first couple of seasons of Sopranos and Sex And The City until they jumped the shark.
Rant over [fin]
Gambit
MacManiac
I've now seen the last sequel of the Matrix treasure chest.
I've heard alot and read alot about the last part (and the second).
I can now say seriously that these 3 parts that makes the whole of the story "The Matrix" is one of the best films made so far in terms of story, philosophy, fx, period!
If we all strip down our need to constantly find something to crank down on (even when it's hard to find anything) and honestly see the film without preceptions....most of us will find that this movie is a mile stone in the film history.
I usually don't use big words about a film but this time I will.
The parts are not suposed to be treated as seperate films.
The sequels are A film. One.
That's how I treat them.
If one does the opposite one misses many points and what more....the whole plot gets messed with. And the story, I find, is brilliant.
I will miss The Matrix now that I've seen it all. But that says something about the impact of the story and the film on the whole.
Regards,
Gambit
I've heard alot and read alot about the last part (and the second).
I can now say seriously that these 3 parts that makes the whole of the story "The Matrix" is one of the best films made so far in terms of story, philosophy, fx, period!
If we all strip down our need to constantly find something to crank down on (even when it's hard to find anything) and honestly see the film without preceptions....most of us will find that this movie is a mile stone in the film history.
I usually don't use big words about a film but this time I will.
The parts are not suposed to be treated as seperate films.
The sequels are A film. One.
That's how I treat them.
If one does the opposite one misses many points and what more....the whole plot gets messed with. And the story, I find, is brilliant.
I will miss The Matrix now that I've seen it all. But that says something about the impact of the story and the film on the whole.
Regards,
Gambit
Cat
Registered
The idea behind the matrix is a good one, but an old one. The first movie was nice when it came out, revolutionary as to the technology used. The sequels are less good because everything has been overhyped and ripped since the first one. That's not the fault of the Wachowski brothers. Yeah, they are nice movies to watch, but I still like Shrek better. I laughed from the beginning to the end of that one and after seeing the trailer of Shrek 2 I have the impression that the sequel will be up to the original. The matrix was a good movie, but the sequels haven't kept me on the edge of my seat. The one-liners are trite and predictable, the action is meaningless and sometimes even gratuitous. It could ahve been a better movie if they had made the sequels more credible. In 2 however, nothing happens. It's like an extended intro to 3. Smith is introduced as a virus, we have the pseudo tech-speak of the Source and hacking into it with SSH-keymaker stuff, yeah right... the long boring highway scene (well, the trucks at the end were neat), the twins were nice, but the stairway scene never ended ... they could have done reloaded in half the time. I wasn't very impressed with the cave scene either, neither the dance nor the love scene. Too damn many cliché's. Go look at Metropolis for gods sake! Now THAT is a movie. In the matrix sequels the magic of the first one is missing.
Gambit
MacManiac
*SNIP*
Cat:
If you see the film"s" as you have written above, I quite understand your points but...then perhaps you didn't read my last post.
I still stick by it and my underlying point that "The Matrix" is not to be seen as a regular film with sequels.
It is a story in parts...just like, for instance, LoTR (made in parts for obvious reasons = try to sit on your bum and see a film thats 6-7 hours long)
There is no "new" matrix:es or parts or film"s" (1+2+3).
It's one film, one story...a beginning, the followoing and an end.
Shrek is a great film but...does that have any connection to Matrix other than that its a great film and you (and I, for that matter) like it?
Regards,
Gambit
*SNIP*Cat said:
Cat:
If you see the film"s" as you have written above, I quite understand your points but...then perhaps you didn't read my last post.
I still stick by it and my underlying point that "The Matrix" is not to be seen as a regular film with sequels.
It is a story in parts...just like, for instance, LoTR (made in parts for obvious reasons = try to sit on your bum and see a film thats 6-7 hours long)
There is no "new" matrix:es or parts or film"s" (1+2+3).
It's one film, one story...a beginning, the followoing and an end.
Shrek is a great film but...does that have any connection to Matrix other than that its a great film and you (and I, for that matter) like it?
Regards,
Gambit
Cat
Registered
Well, the matrix is not one big movie. THe Wachowski's made a movie and they waited to see how it would turn out and whether or not to make the sequels. If you watch the first movie again, it could all end there. The second and third were only made after the first proved a success. I'll stick with seeing the second as a long intro to three, because it needs to stitch them together and introduce new plot elements, missing in the first one.
Regarding LotR: the literary work itself is divided in three books and the three movies do correspond (roughly) to the three books. It was filmed all in one long take, intended and plannned as a trilogy from the beginning. There is no way the forst movie could stand without the sequels.
Shrek 2, however, can prove that a sequel can be just as good as the first movie. I sure hope so and the trailer was very good IMHO.
Regarding LotR: the literary work itself is divided in three books and the three movies do correspond (roughly) to the three books. It was filmed all in one long take, intended and plannned as a trilogy from the beginning. There is no way the forst movie could stand without the sequels.
Shrek 2, however, can prove that a sequel can be just as good as the first movie. I sure hope so and the trailer was very good IMHO.
Randman
HA! HA! HA!
No, Cat is correct. The story was planned as a trilogy (many movies are these days since franchises are so important as money-makers).
Had the first not been such a monster hit, the second two would have been green-lighted (pun intended) and financed.
You can look at 2 and 3 as the same movie split into 2 (a la Kill Bill), but the series wasn't envisioned as one long thread such as LOTR.
Heck, even SW: A New Hope needed to make it before any others could.
Had the first not been such a monster hit, the second two would have been green-lighted (pun intended) and financed.
You can look at 2 and 3 as the same movie split into 2 (a la Kill Bill), but the series wasn't envisioned as one long thread such as LOTR.
Heck, even SW: A New Hope needed to make it before any others could.
Cat
Registered
If it had been planned as a trilogy from the beginning, whay did they wait 4 years before making & releasing 2 & 3? Why didn't they make one big take and then release them one per year? Why was the first one a complete movie with a conclusive storyline? It had already a beginning and an end, 2 introduced new plot elements to get it going at all again ... I'm not really convinced by the contract argument ... it may simply have stated that in the eventuality of sequels he would have played his role again.
That's more or less my take on the sequels...
Indeed!
That's more or less my take on the sequels...