Sayonara Posted November 7, 2003 Share Posted November 7, 2003 When "Matrix" came out I was quietly convinced that it does not take much to please most people. It was a good film though. It was also self contained, and needed no further "story" added to it. When "Reloaded" came out, it became immediately and blatantly obvious that the Wachowski brothers cannot provide what I need from a movie. They also managed to completely stop me from caring about any of the characters. In fact I ended up hating half of them. Therefore I am boycotting "Revolutions". I don't even want to see it. Join me or die. (Actually, you don't have to join me at all, and if you don't it's unlikely you will die as a consequence. I just wondered how widespread this view is ) PS - I have to wonder why people who do like R&R keep trying to make me like them. It's not a religion you know. Read the ****ing thread, I've already basically said I'm immune to the tricks R&R use in order to exploit the young and impressionable mind. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
greg1917 Posted November 7, 2003 Share Posted November 7, 2003 Im going to go and see it, although I expect to be failry disappointed as Reloaded was a pretty bad film. My mates thoughts and reviews all point to a similarly diappointing outing this time around as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sayonara Posted November 7, 2003 Author Share Posted November 7, 2003 On my afternoon break ("break", lol) I was informed that it is "at least as bad as Reloaded". Seeing as I know the plot already I don't intend to expose myself to the acting and dialogue as well Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Squintz Posted November 7, 2003 Share Posted November 7, 2003 I saw a matirx movie. Im not sure what one but it did suck. Im not really into sci-fi movies tho. I prefer action and comedy, sometimes i have to through in a little romance for the g-friend but not often. I hat so called horror fims. They are not scary and you can always tell when somethings going to happen by the sound of the music. Maybe if someone make a horror movies without all the dead giveaways that the monster is going to pop out in about a half a second because the music get creapy then i might like them. But i hate when people(drama queens) grab onto you and claw you with their fingers as they didnt know that the little girls head was gonna get choped off. I like movies that could be real. Gangster movies are my favorite and i also like spy movies. Im into all the spy tech survalence gear i buy it although i have no use for it. I think its cool. Back on topic tho: I think the matrix movie sucks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pinch Paxton Posted November 7, 2003 Share Posted November 7, 2003 The Matrix was OK! Reloaded is my favourite film of all time! Haven't seen Revolutions. Pincho. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dudde Posted November 7, 2003 Share Posted November 7, 2003 after the first, the matrix should die I've seen the first too many times though too, so it can die as well I hate boring action movies Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skye Posted November 7, 2003 Share Posted November 7, 2003 Ha! I haven't even seen Reloaded yet, so I see your boycott and raise by one. I figured they took the plot as far as they could without being a whiney existentialist. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dudde Posted November 7, 2003 Share Posted November 7, 2003 I saw the beginning of reloaded, and the ending, but I missed like a whole hour and a half or something in between there, because I fell asleep all three times I was going to watch the dang thing Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blike Posted November 7, 2003 Share Posted November 7, 2003 Faf just informed me revolutions officially blowed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dudde Posted November 7, 2003 Share Posted November 7, 2003 I've heard the same review from several peers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iglak Posted November 8, 2003 Share Posted November 8, 2003 yeah... everyone i know who saw it said they didn't like it... but i am going to see it anyway. other than the fact than reloaded was kinda corney compared to the first one, i liked it. sure, it didn't change the world of film making like the original, but does that make it bad? at about this point, i don't really care about the story... i just want to see the special effects and cool choreography, and find out the end to the story (which i heard wasn't much of an end). P.S. and you call yourselves nerds, you're all discraces to the good name of geeks everywhere. lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sayonara Posted November 8, 2003 Author Share Posted November 8, 2003 At least I'm not the film industry's bitch. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
matter Posted November 8, 2003 Share Posted November 8, 2003 The last hour of The Matrix was action packed. The extreme action starts in the lobby and if you notice it doesn't really stop, and it has some quality comic relief. I thought it was an awesome action movie. I wouldn't say it was more Sci Fi than action. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blike Posted November 8, 2003 Share Posted November 8, 2003 oh goodness. I saw it last night. do not see it, you'll waste your time. After seeing last night's I realize that the first one could have just been the end, and that would have been fine [quite simliar to the ending in this last one anyhow]. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dudde Posted November 8, 2003 Share Posted November 8, 2003 Sayonara³ said in post #12 :At least I'm not the film industry's bitch. *GASP* You have successfully warned Sayonara³ mwahaha >=D inappropriate language should really have more than two points worth....23 mayhaps? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dudde Posted November 8, 2003 Share Posted November 8, 2003 WTF you can't warn yourself? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Posted November 8, 2003 Share Posted November 8, 2003 Revolutions did completely suck compared to the other two. They tried to make it too deep when to be honest they didn't need to. The entire thing was a bit silly really. (hi btw, been at uni == not much if any posting) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sayonara Posted November 8, 2003 Author Share Posted November 8, 2003 Dudde said in post #15 : inappropriate language should really have more than two points worth....23 mayhaps? What's inappropriate about that? It's completely relevant. If it was considered "naughty" it would be on the expletive filter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dudde Posted November 8, 2003 Share Posted November 8, 2003 You have been issued a formal warning by Sayonara©¯ on the account of Inappropriate Language/References. You now have 2 Warning Points. aww I didn't say anything inappropriate, you ***** good point though Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iglak Posted November 9, 2003 Share Posted November 9, 2003 blike said in post #14 :oh goodness. I saw it last night. do not see it, you'll waste your time. After seeing last night's I realize that the first one could have just been the end, and that would have been fine [quite simliar to the ending in this last one anyhow]. i just saw it an hour ago... IT WAS AWESOME!!!!!!! i don't get why people don't think it's good. sure the philosophy was corney, but there wasn't much of it. i think just that there was some corney philosophy in the beginning was a huge turn off for people, and they didn't really pay attention afterwords. what's wrong with the ending? it was a perfect ending. anything else would have been stupid and predictable. if you think it wasn't really an ending to the trilogy, i think you need to pay more attention to the plot. :rant: P.S. this is not directed agaist blike. so don't kill me!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sayonara Posted November 9, 2003 Author Share Posted November 9, 2003 Blike did not say the ending was bad, he said that the first film "could have been the ending" - and indeed it was at the time that production ended for "Matrix". There isn't actually any philosophy in the film - it is a regurgitation of pop-psych, cultural references, and mythological/historical lore so badly mangled it makes the blood curdle. The Wachowski Bros need to be publically flogged for R&R. Did you know that Joel Silver actually bragged that Revolutions needed no advertising, because people will just go and see it regardless? Of course he's right - Reloaded made over $750 million worldwide in theatres. They're laughing, literally all the way to the bank. Perhaps it's simply that you are more easily pleased than some of us. I for one feel that R&R fall well short of expectations, and I am not impressed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sayonara Posted November 9, 2003 Author Share Posted November 9, 2003 Dudde said in post #19 :I didn't say anything inappropriate, you ***** Referring to my references as being inappropriate was inappropriate Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iglak Posted November 9, 2003 Share Posted November 9, 2003 Sayonara³ said in post #21 :Blike did not say the ending was bad, he said that the first film "could have been the ending" - and indeed it was at the time that production ended for "Matrix". There isn't actually any philosophy in the film - it is a regurgitation of pop-psych, cultural references, and mythological/historical lore so badly mangled it makes the blood curdle. Perhaps it's simply that you are more easily pleased than some of us. I for one feel that R&R fall well short of expectations, and I am not impressed. no, blike didn't, but other people did (not neccesarilly on this forum). the ending to this revolutions is quite different than the ending to the original, and it does, in fact, end the trilogy. there is some minor philosophy: -choices 'n' basic chaos theory. -what are we fighting for? then there was some mythological lore: -vampires 'n' ghosts 'n' stuff i probably am more easily pleased than others, but you just said why without knowing it. the first movie was just right: -a good amount of fighting -little philosophy, but all understandable -special effects that changed the world of Hollywood -started a plot about a war the second movie was okay: -a good amount of fighting, but the fighting was kinda corney -too much philosophy, resulting in not much understanding -special effect were the same as last time -the middle of the war the problem with this was that people expected it to change the world again, but it didn't the third movie was good: -a lot of fighting, but excelent use of special effects -very little philosophy, but what little there was is pretty corney -special effects were slightly improved -the end of the war, and unexpected happy ending i have no idea what was expected here, but the i think many people don't understand the ending, or expected the humans to miraculusly build a bomb that blows up all of the machines... P.S. wait a minute... "I for one feel that R&R fall well short of expectations, and I am not impressed." r and r? YOU SAW REVOLUTIONS!!!!!!!!!!! YOU'RE A TRAITOR TO YOUR OWN BOYCOTT!!!!!!!! lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sayonara Posted November 9, 2003 Author Share Posted November 9, 2003 First things first: (1) There's little point answering people on other forums in a thread on here. (2) I have not seen Revolutions and do not intend to. However I have read the entire plot. This boycott is not because I do not want to know what happens (although I no longer care about the characters since the travesty that was Reloaded, so effectively I don't), but because I do not want to reward the Wachowskis for being crap film-makers. The philosophy in "Matrix" was just about OK. It asked questions such as "what is reality?", and very wisely only barely tried to answer them. The philosophy in Reloaded (and presumably Revolutions, since they are two parts of a single script) was a complete mess. Bringing up an issue and failing to explore it, then fleshing it out with references to theology and myth, does not constitute deep or meaningful handling of anything. Chucking religious references into your film willy-nilly and slyly mentioning cultural artifacts as if you're really clever does not make your film "better", it makes it sloppier if this is not properly handled. Revolutions does not end the trilogy. It ends the extra story that began in Reloaded. At the end of "Matrix" it is inferred that we will win, and that's the end of the story. Smith has been destroyed, the resistance have their Messiah fighting on their side, Neo is all-powerful. The suggestion is that we will either eventually win over the machines, or gain control of our fate - thereby answering humanity's greatest questions. R&R form a completely new story that does not follow on from the original. The links between the first film and these two are tenuous at best. What has confused many people is that R&R hook back into "Enter the Matrix" and the "Animatrix", a very cunning marketing ploy that was intended not only to swell sales but also to make it easier to graft R&R onto the existing story. The whole package is patronising and trite, and that's why I won't pay to see it. The cable fighting is nothing new to cinema. The fact that they claimed they invented "bullet time" is just offensively untrue. The horrifyingly stilted way in which the Wachowski Bros. try to blend theological and cultural themes is nigh on blasphemous and makes me want to vomit blood. They tried to fit in too much, too fast. In their rush to get every cool thing they could think of into R&R, quite a lot that should have been in there got left out. Lastly (rant or what?), the fact that some of the problems they created in Reloaded get solved in Revolutions does not necessarily mean that the plot made sense, supported its own weight, or needed to exist at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iglak Posted November 9, 2003 Share Posted November 9, 2003 Sayonara³ said in post #24 :First things first: (1) There's little point answering people on other forums in a thread on here. (2) I have not seen Revolutions and do not intend to. However I have read the entire plot. This boycott is not because I do not want to know what happens (although I no longer care about the characters since the travesty that was Reloaded, so effectively I don't), but because I do not want to reward the Wachowskis for being crap film-makers. The philosophy in "Matrix" was just about OK. It asked questions such as "what is reality?", and very wisely only barely tried to answer them. The philosophy in Reloaded (and presumably Revolutions, since they are two parts of a single script) was a complete mess. Bringing up an issue and failing to explore it, then fleshing it out with references to theology and myth, does not constitute deep or meaningful handling of anything. Chucking religious references into your film willy-nilly and slyly mentioning cultural artifacts as if you're really clever does not make your film "better", it makes it sloppier if this is not properly handled. Revolutions does not end the trilogy. It ends the extra story that began in Reloaded. At the end of "Matrix" it is inferred that we will win, and that's the end of the story. Smith has been destroyed, the resistance have their Messiah fighting on their side, Neo is all-powerful. The suggestion is that we will either eventually win over the machines, or gain control of our fate - thereby answering humanity's greatest questions. R&R form a completely new story that does not follow on from the original. The links between the first film and these two are tenuous at best. What has confused many people is that R&R hook back into "Enter the Matrix" and the "Animatrix", a very cunning marketing ploy that was intended not only to swell sales but also to make it easier to graft R&R onto the existing story. The whole package is patronising and trite, and that's why I won't pay to see it. The cable fighting is nothing new to cinema. The fact that they claimed they invented "bullet time" is just offensively untrue. The horrifyingly stilted way in which the Wachowski Bros. try to blend theological and cultural themes is nigh on blasphemous and makes me want to vomit blood. They tried to fit in too much, too fast. In their rush to get every cool thing they could think of into R&R, quite a lot that should have been in there got left out. Lastly (rant or what?), the fact that some of the problems they created in Reloaded get solved in Revolutions does not necessarily mean that the plot made sense, supported its own weight, or needed to exist at all. okay... responding by paragraph: 1) i was reffering to a common point among ALL people, not just blike, my community, other forums, or whatever 2) sorry, i assumed you did because of what you said, sorry. btw, what did you read that was the entire plot? a.k.a. how did you read the entire plot? 3) okay, i didn't understand that before. 4) exactly what i was trying to say 5) i agree 6) i agree, though i didn't pick up many of the religious references or cultural artifacts... 7) that's a good point. though at the end of "matrix" it is inferred more as we have taken the matrix, and will now fight for the real world. 8) R&R forms the story of the war that immediately follows "The Matrix." it doesn't really hook back into the animatrix, and i haven't played the game so i don't know about that. i heard that the game made a big contribution to the plot... 9) a) cable fighting? of course not. although, in revolutions, neo and smith fight while they are flying... not easily done very well. c) when was bullet time used before "The Matrix"? and was it used as extensively as "The Matrix"? d) what do you mean by "blend theological and cultural themes"? can you give me an example of when they did that? 10) i agree with half intensity... 11) the plot was just that there was a war going on, and that the matrix is part of it... what else is there? there are the sub-plots of: the whole Smith thing the architect/oracle thing the machines being everywhere thing... what else? i don't see how the plot doesn't make sense, can't support it's own weight, and isn't needed at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now