pi 0 Posted March 1, 2007 Share Posted March 1, 2007 First movie is great, second and third get wierder and worse.what happened to tank? I don't remember seeing him die.does anyone think the "reality" set up in the first movie, was violated in the second and third? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Breathmask 555 Posted March 1, 2007 Share Posted March 1, 2007 It's been almost four years since those crappy sequels came out. Who cares anymore? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goldsmithfan 6 Posted March 1, 2007 Share Posted March 1, 2007 The second and third definitely shat all over what was built up in the first but, to be honest, I can't watch the original anymore. They definitely should have let the first one be the last one though. It had a good ending the way it was. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bondo 33 Posted March 1, 2007 Share Posted March 1, 2007 I suggest you read two books:The Matrix and Philosophy (William Irwin)More Matrix and Philosophy: Revolutions and Reloaded Decoded (William Irwin)Those should clear up many questions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Morlock 11 Posted March 1, 2007 Share Posted March 1, 2007 I suggest you forget about the 2nd and 3rd films- you'll be far better off. Morlock- who couldn't help but be a bit gleeful when he discovered that the two sequels were just as vacuous as the first film promised any digging would be Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265 Posted March 1, 2007 Share Posted March 1, 2007 I suggest you read two books:The Matrix and Philosophy (William Irwin)More Matrix and Philosophy: Revolutions and Reloaded Decoded (William Irwin)Those should clear up many questions.If you need to read 2 books to be able to understand what a film is about, usually the film is not worth that effort...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Red 75 Posted March 1, 2007 Share Posted March 1, 2007 I applaud the Watchowski brothers for their ambition, but unfortunatly the Matrix sequels collapsed under the weight of its own depth and mysteries.The first is still great though, and The Animatrix rocks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Genius_Gone_Insane 5 Posted March 2, 2007 Share Posted March 2, 2007 I like Reloaded more than the original. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Red 75 Posted March 2, 2007 Share Posted March 2, 2007 You're also a fan of Batman Forever. Coincidence? I think not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ollie 1,064 Posted March 2, 2007 Share Posted March 2, 2007 It's been almost four years since those crappy sequels came out. Who cares anymore?You are correct.Frankly the whole trilogy is one overhyped piece of junk. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beowulf 4 Posted March 2, 2007 Share Posted March 2, 2007 I actually like all the movies and scores. Don Davis did some amazing work for the 3 films (and I enjoyed his collaboration with Juno Reactor, a group I liked before the movies).I guess i'm in the minority on this one, but I think that the overall story-arc is executed perfectly in the 3-act movie form, and there's some great philosophical underpinnings about technology that adds depth to the story. The trilogy is surely a cyberpunks dream. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeshopk 8 Posted March 2, 2007 Share Posted March 2, 2007 I actually like all the movies and scores. Don Davis did some amazing work for the 3 films (and I enjoyed his collaboration with Juno Reactor, a group I liked before the movies).I guess i'm in the minority on this one, but I think that the overall story-arc is executed perfectly in the 3-act movie form, and there's some great philosophical underpinnings about technology that adds depth to the story. The trilogy is surely a cyberpunks dream.I seem to remember being in the minority when everone liked Matrix trilogy better than prequels. So which has stood the rather short test of time? Matrix was a passing fad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pi 0 Posted March 2, 2007 Author Share Posted March 2, 2007 i never saw the 2nd, 3rd movie. some neet pan diatonism and modal writing by mr davis. Nothing awe enspering except for the matrix chord motif. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gkgyver 1,646 Posted March 2, 2007 Share Posted March 2, 2007 You're also a fan of Batman Forever. Coincidence? I think not. It's amazing how some members keep track of everybody's likes and dislikes.But I would say "what happened to Tank" is the least of all Matrix mysteries. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265 Posted March 2, 2007 Share Posted March 2, 2007 Nothing awe enspering except for the matrix chord motif.And the full frontal assault that is Neodammerung! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beowulf 4 Posted March 2, 2007 Share Posted March 2, 2007 But I would say "what happened to Tank" is the least of all Matrix mysteries.Quite simple really. The actor that portrayed 'Tank' demanded more money - the producers refused and the character was ignominiously erased without any further character development. I believe a certain 'Captain Panaka' met a similar fate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ray Barnsbury 8 Posted March 2, 2007 Share Posted March 2, 2007 I seem to remember being in the minority when everone liked Matrix trilogy better than prequels. So which has stood the rather short test of time? Matrix was a passing fad.Well, I think the first Matrix film is good, and better than any of the prequels (although that's not saying much). But the two sequels are just as useless as the SW prequels, so as whole trilogies, I don't think either will be remembered very fondly in the future.Ray Barnsbury Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Unlucky Bastard 7,782 Posted March 2, 2007 Share Posted March 2, 2007 They're all junk. And I haven't even seen 2 and 3. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Olivier 5 Posted March 2, 2007 Share Posted March 2, 2007 I suggest you forget about the 2nd and 3rd films- you'll be far better off. Morlock- who couldn't help but be a bit gleeful when he discovered that the two sequels were just as vacuous as the first film promised any digging would beWell, no, actually, the concept was rich enough to dig; they just missed the motherlode and were contented with a little gold dust."Reloaded" introduced intriguing new concepts (albeit clumsily at the end), but "Revolutions" did not follow up.The action is great, the music is good, it's wonderful eye candy, and there are plenty of interesting ideas, but they were drowned by the drive for more action, more effects, more in-your-face spectacular show-stopping pieces.Though even as eye candy it failed in several parts; the rave thing is a long boring useless waste of time, and the action gets "unreadable" at the end, with much too much going on screen, what with all those robots swamping the screen, moving extremely fast, amid plenty of gunfire and explosions.I did get the box set, however-- though I did wait for a good bargain, and eventually got it through a "Buy 1 Get 1 Free" discount on DeepDiscount. I have not taken the time to watch the movies, though, let alone the extras.(Incidentally, who's that girl, Drax, please? ) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Morlock 11 Posted March 2, 2007 Share Posted March 2, 2007 The first one has great action, good music, wonderful eye candy and interesting ideas. The second and third ones do not. The action is tedious, the eye candy is not very impressive, no interesting ideas. Though the music is still good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greg1138 3 Posted March 2, 2007 Share Posted March 2, 2007 Those movies are a guilty pleasure of mine - well - not SO guilty about the first one - it's a cracking movie - but the sequels hald a place on my DVD shelf and get watched reasonably regularly........but I couldn't give a fart in a hurricane about the plot holes.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robthehand 3 Posted March 2, 2007 Share Posted March 2, 2007 I think the first film is decent, though shockingly overrated. It has an interesting plot and looks absolutely great, but I can't see why or how it is considered by some to be one of the best films ever made.The sequels were a real struggle to sit through for me.- Rob, who loves the scores Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ollie 1,064 Posted March 2, 2007 Share Posted March 2, 2007 The second 2 contained some of the worst CGI I have seen.And people are hard on Spiderman for it's CGI? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ray Barnsbury 8 Posted March 2, 2007 Share Posted March 2, 2007 Yeah, the fight with the hundred Agent Smiths was laughingly bad. Really disappointing after the excellent effects in the first one.Ray Barnsbury Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bondo 33 Posted March 2, 2007 Share Posted March 2, 2007 If you need to read 2 books to be able to understand what a film is about, usually the film is not worth that effort......Or rather the time constraints of making a science-fiction action movie don't lend themselves well to detailed discussions of philosophy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elmo Lewis 6 Posted March 2, 2007 Share Posted March 2, 2007 If you need to read 2 books to be able to understand what a film is about, usually the film is not worth that effort......Or rather the time constraints of making a science-fiction action movie don't lend themselves well to detailed discussions of philosophy.So when the whole purpose of the sci-fi action movie is to discuss philosophy... where does this leave the movie? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ollie 1,064 Posted March 2, 2007 Share Posted March 2, 2007 Read the book, make the movie longer without boring the audience or come up with an entertaining film that skips the serious talk but manages to deliver.One of the reasons Jurassic Park worked so well is that Spielberg crafted a film that didn't need to rely on all the scientific elements of the book. If he had stuck to the book he might have lost the audience. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Red 75 Posted March 2, 2007 Share Posted March 2, 2007 If you need to read 2 books to be able to understand what a film is about, usually the film is not worth that effort......Or rather the time constraints of making a science-fiction action movie don't lend themselves well to detailed discussions of philosophy.I can assume that you are a fan, so I ask why? Why do you like them (the sequels or the trilogy as a whole)? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bondo 33 Posted March 3, 2007 Share Posted March 3, 2007 What I enjoyed:1. Plot of the first film2. Special effects in all 3 films3. Don Davis' excellent music, which needs to be released completely4. The philosophical questions posed by the films5. Ambiguous ending (I'm a Fincher fan, I don't always enjoy a happy ending)What I didn't like:1. The breakdown of the plot after the first film2. Too many pointless scenes (Zion)The Matrix films are in no way perfect films, but I enjoy them for what they are - pop culture science fiction movies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265 Posted March 3, 2007 Share Posted March 3, 2007 4. The philosophical questions posed by the filmsWhich then get completely ignored in favor of cookiecutter secondary characters fighting with big....sperms! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fommes 154 Posted March 3, 2007 Share Posted March 3, 2007 The plot of the first film was so ... spelt out in that film. And still some people didn't get it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265 Posted March 3, 2007 Share Posted March 3, 2007 It was basically a remake of Star Wars. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nightscape94 965 Posted March 3, 2007 Share Posted March 3, 2007 3. Don Davis' excellent music, which needs to be released completelyA little behind the times aren't we?Tim Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Breathmask 555 Posted March 3, 2007 Share Posted March 3, 2007 I think he means officially. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elmo Lewis 6 Posted March 3, 2007 Share Posted March 3, 2007 It was basically a remake of Star Wars.Basically an undefiled Hero's Journey tale. Dorothy had one too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ray Barnsbury 8 Posted March 3, 2007 Share Posted March 3, 2007 And she learned that a woman's place is inside her home.Ray Barnsbury Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bondo 33 Posted March 4, 2007 Share Posted March 4, 2007 A little behind the times aren't we?Ahem, no, he was right. "Official release." 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