posted
I am so disillusioned. I had learned to accept the Hatrack consensus as practically infallible, almost scripture. You have all let me down.
I just watched Matrix: Revolutions. I knew that most of you hated it, in fact most of the people I know who watched it pretty much hated it. At least, that was the impression I got. I watched it anyway, not because I didn't believe you, but because I had watched the first two and I have this thing about leaving things unfinished.
That was seriously one of the best movies I have ever seen in my life. It started off good, and then about halfway through it started blowing me away, and it never let up. I was left almost speechless, or I would have been if I hadn't been shouting so much.
Either Hatrack doesn't know what it's talking about, or something about me is awfully screwed up.
Come to think of it, I can't rule out the latter.
Posts: 202 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I wouldn't say it's the best, but it's not as bad as I thought it would be except for a few irratating things.
Posts: 9942 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I really liked all of the Matrix films. I don't know why Reloaded and Revolutions get bad-mouthed so often other than that they weren't quite what people expected.
Posts: 1569 | Registered: Dec 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'm still willing to give Revolutions a try. I loved the first film but the second one just bored the ever-living crap out of me. Is the third one going to have any character driven story or is it going to be more like Reloaded?
Posts: 527 | Registered: Aug 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Was it Hatrack itself or the people contributing to Hatrack (or are they the same thing) that lead to your disillusionment? : )
Posts: 1355 | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
I felt that Reloaded squandered the depth of the first film, and that Revolutions tried hard to get it back but failed miserably, mainly due to plot and philosophical problems inherited from Reloaded (but ALSO because the entire tactical situation was ludicrous, even though I'm willing to give them some leeway there.)
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
Great movie. People were demanding that the brothers W. tell the story the people wanted to hear, rather than the story the brothers W. wanted to tell.
posted
The Hatrack consensus about Revenge of the Sith and Attack of the Clones was way off.
But it was right about Revolutions. Did anyone else here the Galaga Challenging Stage music when the sentinels poured into the bay?
quote:ALSO because the entire tactical situation was ludicrous, even though I'm willing to give them some leeway there
See Galaga Challenging stage. Sentinels come in, head straight to the floor, latch on the mech-armors back, and the battles over in about 5 minutes.
Posts: 26071 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
No kidding, Tom and Dag. That had to be one of the most idiotic battle sequences in the history of filmmaking.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
I liked that Neo had to become the evil to thwart it, but I could have lived without all the little touchstones that made it feel like a parody of other messianic lore (The blinding/unblinding from Dune Messiah, various quotes from the KJV bible.)
I was also bummed that Trinity died after all that happened in the second movie, but oh well.
Posts: 11017 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:By that logic, "Little Nicky" was a masterpiece of plotting.
By that logic, I'm President of the United States. Usually, Tom, your biting wit has at least *some* kind of connection with the point you're rebutting.
Posts: 2267 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Even the first sentence? Because that was kind of incoherent. It makes it seem like you completely missed my point, and I'm sure someone as wise as you reveal yourself to be in your second sentence isn't capable of that kind of error.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
To clarify: arguing that people who criticized the plot of the latter two Matrix movies simply wanted a different story than the Brothers W. wanted to tell is like defending the plot of "Little Nicky" by pointing out that it's exactly the movie Adam Sandler wanted to make.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
Revolutions was okay. However, I did have several eye rolling moments during the final Dragon Ball Z fight between Neo and Smith. At least they didn't have a storybook ending.
I spent the majority of Reloaded completely confused . There were so many holes that my head just couldn't fill any of them. The fight scenes were cool, though.
Posts: 3003 | Registered: Oct 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I didn't like the plot of the sequels. I hated the dialogue. The Matrix was mind-blowingly amazing. The sequels were B-movies. I think that's why people criticized them so much--higher expectations.
Posts: 1314 | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote: To clarify: arguing that people who criticized the plot of the latter two Matrix movies simply wanted a different story than the Brothers W. wanted to tell is like defending the plot of "Little Nicky" by pointing out that it's exactly the movie Adam Sandler wanted to make.
Not exactly. I mean think about it this way, is the reason that those who disliked the final two Matrix movies because they wanted to tell the story differently? If so, then I think TL has a point. If not, then yeah Tom it is the same...
ETA: I should add that I liked the movies, but then again its for purely superficial reasons. I had fun, and to me, thats what a movie is supposed to do. However, on a philosophical level, the movies were not satisfying because, as an author pointed out in "More Matrix Philosophy", the first Matrix was about exiting Plato's cave and the final two were about placing those freed back within chains.
Posts: 457 | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
It is an extraordinary leap to say that the argument: "People were disappointed in the Matrix sequels not because of a lack of quality, but because they were expecting a different kind of storytelling," is equivalent to: "Little Nicky is a masterpiece of plotting because it was the movie Adam Sandler wanted to make."
And you know that, Tom. Come on, please. Stop being ridiculous.
Posts: 2267 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Nowhere am I making the argument that if the filmmaker accomplished what he or she set out to accomplish, the film is automatically a masterpiece.
It's not an equivalent argument. What I said isn't "like" what you said... At all.
Posts: 2267 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
So maybe I liked Revolutions because I've never read Dune Messiah, never watched Dragonball Z, and was never any good at Galaga. (Does Little Nicky fit in there somewhere? I haven't seen that, either.)
On a slightly different note, I also watched a film that came highly recommended by Hatrack, The Sixth Sense, and it was pretty darn good. And no, I'm not making any Haley Joel Osment/Ender jokes here; I refuse.
Finally, I watched Hitchhiker's Guide, and I'm really not sure what to think about it.
[ July 17, 2006, 02:09 AM: Message edited by: Silent E ]
Posts: 202 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
If you want an action movie, watch an action movie. If you want a good sci-fi movie, watch a good sci-fi movie.
The Matrix - Good to Awesome Sci-Fi.
Reloaded & Revolutions - Decent to Good Action.
With the premise of them being a set of movies, you'd think they'd be in the same genre; They aren't. This is exactly why I hated the second and third movies.
Edit: I can't leave it at just that. To me it's like going to an awesome resturaunt, ordering and having everything beyond what I thought it could taste. Then to go back after your first time they've changed the decor, and instead of serving that awesome lasagna you had last time, you get some decent sushi.
Note: I love lasagna, I hate sushi. (I don't hate action movies, but man if I'm expecting lasagna and you bring me sushi, I'm going to be pissed.)
Posts: 1132 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by TomDavidson: I felt that Reloaded squandered the depth of the first film, and that Revolutions tried hard to get it back but failed miserably, mainly due to plot and philosophical problems inherited from Reloaded (but ALSO because the entire tactical situation was ludicrous, even though I'm willing to give them some leeway there.)
Its a classic case of Lucas syndrome.
You make an oblique reference to your "ideology" and let the viewers and fans invent something REALLY interesting in between the lines.
Then later, to learn the real definition of "selling out," you go back and EXPLAIN to the viewers and fans what you meant by the references in the first movie(s). The convo goes a little like this:
Fans: OMG OMG OMG LOLZ>>>> This movie is the BEST thing ever. IT IS TOTALLY OPENING UP MY MIND. All kids of questions are being asked. I am learning so much about life, I think I have found my religion!
Creator: REAAAALLY?? WOW, LOL! This is so awesome, thanks! :::accepts the academy award::: I guess I will have to continue with my work, for you!
Fans: YAAAAYY!!!!! :::exchange tips and gossip on the internet for 8 years.
Creator: ITS READY! AND ITS EVERYTHING YOU DREAMED IT MIGHT BE!
Fans: :::WATCH THE MOVIE::: I am tentatively dissapointed. I feel dirty.
Creator: WASN'T IT AWESOME!!!! ISN'T IT THE NEW JESUS>:??????? OMFG LOLZ. I AM GOD NOW!!!!
Fans: Remember when you said it would be everything we ever dreamed of?
Creator: Yah, wasn't it????
Fans: Yes. It was. But we thought it might be more. We already had all those dreams.
Posts: 9912 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
In fairness to the fans, I'm reasonably sure none of them had dreamed that werewolves and vampires existed as rogue programs within the Matrix for the purpose of a video game tie-in.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
There were werewolves and vampires? That's a good thread right there. What is it with people and those films?
Posts: 1236 | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
TL, my argument is that "they made the film they wanted to make" is not a defense of a film. It's perfectly possible that, for example, the film the fans wanted to see made would have been a much better film.
In fact, I think the Matrix sequels, along with the Star Wars prequels, are perfect examples of this possibility.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
quote:TL, my argument is that "they made the film they wanted to make" is not a defense of a film. It's perfectly possible that, for example, the film the fans wanted to see made would have been a much better film.
Well, yeah. You're saying something I actually agree with as a rebuttal to a point I didn't actually make. I never said: "they made the film they wanted to make, and therefore the film is a great film." I never drew that correlation. The correlation I drew was: "It was not what the fans were expecting, and that was the reason for the disappointment."
Which I happen to think is true.
Posts: 2267 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:I am so disillusioned. I had learned to accept the Hatrack consensus as practically infallible, almost scripture. You have all let me down.
Just a thought, but try forming your own opinions without regard to what others you associate with think. If you let others form your opinions for you then you are letting your ability to think for yourself attrophy. Also, think what would happen to your opinion in your old age when all of your peers are dying off, your ability to have an opinion would die as well. Posts: 148 | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I agree with Tom. The problem with the movie is that it was a bad movie. It's pretty much that simple.
Posts: 3243 | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
I agree. They're fun, they're exciting, and the philosophy is what you make of it. It's one of my favourite movie series. I also like the Star Wars prequels. These kind of movies are about fun and fantasy. If you watch them from the perspective of a serious philosophy student, a cynical film critic, or a military strategist, you're probably taking them too seriously and won't enjoy them.
But it seems that we live in an age where people do take movies too seriously, even though it wasn't so a generation ago. The original Star Wars films have some of the same flaws as the prequels, but they are largely ignored. Superman II is considered a classic by many, but it has some HUGE plot holes and nonsensical elements that people would never forgive if it had been made in 2006. Hell, I've heard people tear Superman Returns apart for "plot holes" that are no where near as large or obvious as the ones in the first two "classic" Superman films.
Posts: 1569 | Registered: Dec 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I frequently bring up the Matrix sequels in efforts to explain to people how very little visual effects impress me these days.
The fact that the visual effects are pretty much the only thing about the sequels which I've ever heard praised, well, you can probably guess my opinion on the movies.
Posts: 5656 | Registered: Oct 1999
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
