The Matrix Resurrections (Fourth Matrix film)

[mrbellamy 6,273]

8 hours ago, crumbs said:

They should've waited 79 years until 01.01.01 to release it.

 

Coulda done it in January or October 2010

[Jay 37,323]

[Naïve Old Fart 9,508]

Whoa! Loving the artwork. Anyone know who did this?

[Jay 37,323]

Nope

[Naïve Old Fart 9,508]

It's got a John Alvin vibe.

[Jay 37,323]

Apparently the artist is "The Poster Posse" 

 

https://www.instagram.com/theposterposse/

[mstrox 6,647]

13 hours ago, Jay said:

Apparently the artist is "The Poster Posse" 

 

https://www.instagram.com/theposterposse/

and specifically Orlando Arocena, @mexifunk !  https://www.instagram.com/p/CXjrEn4J4wB/?utm_medium=copy_link
 

I think the reason the poster stands out so much (in a good way) is that it breaks the Matrix color scheme.  Since it seems like the movie will do the same to some extent, makes sense.

[crumbs 14,305]

Dark Horizons curated a bunch of reviews and I'll shamelessly paste them here:

 

Quote

 

As expected, the response ranges wildly though next-to-none seem to be outright negative, while plenty are wildly ecstatic – and that’s from some critics who tend to be harsher towards franchise fare.

 

All up it sounds like a sequel less concerned with fan service and appealing to a large audience than one that follows the beat of its own creative vision. As a result, some will rail against it, some will embrace it wholeheartedly, and some will be left confused by it. Here’s a sampling of reactions from Twitter:

 

“The Matrix Resurrections: best movie of the year? So angry, so joyous, so fun.” – Matt Patches, Polygon

 

“The Matrix Resurrections, despite (and because of) its infinite goofiness, is the boldest & most vividly personal Hollywood sequel since The Last Jedi. A silly/sincere galaxy brain take on reboot culture that makes peace with how modern blockbusters are now only about themselves.” – David Ehrlich, Indiewire

 

“#TheMatrixResurrections is a comedy. The action is disappointing and the new characters are thin. But the metatextual commentary is biting. It wrestles with its own legacy in that JURASSIC WORLD/BAD BOYS 3/RP1 fashion. I prefer the first three, but this is a wild swing.” – Scott Mendelsohn, Forbes

 

“#TheMatrixResurrections is a terrific, awe-inducing, meta mind-bender completely in line with the franchise’s legacy. Finds an innovative, high-concept way to frame the new story. Keanu Reeves & Carrie-Anne Moss’ chemistry burns. Jessica Henwick is a revelation! The action sequences are BIG, meaningfully engaging with character parallels & connections. Lana Wachowski & Co. thread subtle, nuanced nods to the other films through the fight choreography, visual effects, production design & cinematography.” – Courtney Howard, Variety

 

“Absolutely adored #TheMatrixResurrections, which builds on where the sequels left off in beautiful and unexpected ways, and presents a world that’s entirely consistent with what came before and also opens it up to a host of new stories. My synapses have been firing for days. So many world-building details to delight in–especially if you’re already deep into the rabbit hole like myself–but Lana Wachowski also never loses sight of the emotional story that’s been at the core of the series all along.” – Ethan Alter, Yahoo

 

“The Matrix Resurrections is a total blast. Weird, romantic, *extremely.* meta, and consistently funny. I kind of loved it. (Also, everyone in this movie is ridiculously hot.). It’s the ‘Gremlins 2’ of the Matrix series. I mean that in a good way…Wes Craven’s New Nightmare it’s that kind of sequel. I have issues – the fight choreography is lacking compared to the other films, and the fights themselves are edited a little too choppily. But the film is so earnest and so unapologetically romantic that it had me hook, line, and sinker.” – Chris Evangelista, Slashfilm

 

“There was a point in the middle of The Matrix Resurrections where I briefly thought it was the best movie ever made, and, like, I haven’t convinced myself it’s NOT? I lovvvvvvved it. A lotta people are gonna haaaaaaaate. My favorite kind of movie!!” – Emily VanDerWuff, Vox.com

 

“#TheMatrixResurrections is a Matrix sequel, that’s for sure. Better than the last two, it still pales in comparison to the original. Some of the ideas bandied about are interesting, and the cast is game to be back, but not enough feels new here. Solid, but a letdown.” – Joey Magidson, Awards Radar

 

“#TheMatrixResurrections is too self-aware of its existence. Poking fun at itself a bit too much, it’s very heavy on the love story, with not a lot of showstopping action and effects, which is what the people want. Best part is Jonathan Groff but that’s just life at this point.” – Clayton Davis, Variety

 

“I am deeply happy for those who will enjoy #TheMatrixResurrections. I am, regrettably, not among them. It’s leagues better than Reloaded and Revolutions – which let’s be clear are really not good – but has bad stakes. Nothing matters, and not in a cool nihilistic way.” – Alison Foreman, Mashable

 

 

[Thor 7,478]

First of all, I LOVED this film! It was more than I had hoped for.

 

Some minor issues, like the addition of some JUPITER ASCENDING/CLOUD ATLAS-like elements that didn't sit well with me, but no biggie. The biggest issue, really, is the absence of Don Davis, which is really, really felt.

 

Loved how it referred to the previous movies, and although not all questions are answered sufficiently, I was surprised by how coherent the film was; unlike some of Wachowski's other recent films. Looking forward to see it again!

 

Straight into my third place of the year.

[JNHFan2000 2,944]

Can I ask what's on 1 and 2?

[Thor 7,478]

1 hour ago, JNHFan2000 said:

Can I ask what's on 1 and 2?

 

DUNE and the new version of JUSTICE LEAGUE. Not thrilled that my first three are big Hollywood films, but that's how it may turn out this year.

[Edmilson 7,398]

Reviews are in, and according to this one, this movie will also "subvert expectations" like one of the most hated movies of all time did:

 

‘The Matrix Resurrections’ Review: The Boldest and Most Personal Franchise Sequel Since ‘The Last Jedi’

[Giftheck 916]

[mstrox 6,647]

3 hours ago, Edmilson said:

one of the most hated movies of all time

???

[Giftheck 916]

Small but loud sect of people hated The Last Jedi, behaving like they speak for everybody. And a small sect of that small sect is to this day reminding us of it.

[Positivatee 327]

I hate loud sects in the movie theater. 

[crocodile 7,990]

Will find out tomorrow night. I've got the soundtrack album but haven't listened to it. Will experience the film first and see how it all works in context first. I find this is the best way to experience these things. 

 

Karol

[Docteur Qui 1,544]

5 hours ago, Edmilson said:

Reviews are in, and according to this one, this movie will also "subvert expectations" like one of the most hated movies of all time did:

 

‘The Matrix Resurrections’ Review: The Boldest and Most Personal Franchise Sequel Since ‘The Last Jedi’

 

Lol, "most-hated" it was not. One of the most divisive, absolutely. But they are not the same thing.

[crumbs 14,305]

Negative review from The Guardian (** out of 5) from someone who loved the first movie and considers Reloaded underrated. Seems this film will be very divisive indeed.

 

Quote

Really, Resurrections doesn’t do much to remove the anticlimax that hung like a cloud over the cinema auditorium at the end of the third film in 2003. This movie is set up to initiate a possible new series, but there is no real creative life in it. Where the original film was explosively innovatory, this is just another piece of IP, an algorithm of unoriginality.

 

More and more it sounds like a soft reboot, in the vein of Jurassic World or The Force Awakens.

 

Though I'm yet to see the film, I'm most dreading the absence of Don Davis.

[Edmilson 7,398]

3 hours ago, Giftheck said:

Small but loud sect of people hated The Last Jedi, behaving like they speak for everybody. And a small sect of that small sect is to this day reminding us of it.

I don't think it was that small. Judging by the noise they make online, the haters does seem more numerous. I sometimes get the impression that it's easier to find people who despised TLJ than it is to find fans.

 

And just to clarify, I love TLJ.

[Docteur Qui 1,544]

Another middling review, interestingly this one highlights the nostalgia factor as being decidedly un-subversive, unlike the Indiewire one. I'm still keen to see this. The visuals alone look gorgeous, and it's always a treat to see Carrie-Anne Moss in things these days. Also it can't be worse than Ghostbusters.

 

6 minutes ago, Edmilson said:

I don't think it was that small. Judging by the noise they make online, the haters does seem more numerous. I sometimes get the impression that it's easier to find people who despised TLJ than it is to find fans.

 

You could say that about just about anything though; people who dislike something tend to be more vocal about it than those who think it's good, or even average for that matter. It'd be disingenuous to suggest those who disliked TLJ are in a tiny minority or a majority; it's probably closer to an even split.

[A24 4,328]

I've heard that if you loved the Matrix sequels, then go watch this one in IMAX. If you didn't care for the sequels, then stick to streaming. 

 

 

Streaming it is then!

[Naïve Old Fart 9,508]

14 hours ago, Docteur Qui said:

Also it can't be worse than Ghostbusters.

Do you mean AFTERLIFE, or the girlie GHOSTBUSTERS?

[Docteur Qui 1,544]

6 hours ago, Naïve Old Fart said:

Do you mean AFTERLIFE, or the girlie GHOSTBUSTERS?

 

Afterlife, the fruitless exercise in nostalgia that completely missed the point of the irreverent original and turned it into a cross between The Force Awakens and an Amblin film from the 80s. At least the 2016 one tried to capture some of the SNL/improv-heavy, slapdash feel of the first one, even if it ultimately didn't work.

[Giftheck 916]

So let's get the obvious out of the way. The Matrix Resurrections is not quite as good as the original. It is good, though, at least as good as Reloaded was. It makes an awful lot of fun at its own expense (and it pokes fun at the current sequels-and-reboots machine Hollywood's got going). There are great parts in amongst good parts. The only souring note for me was the post-credit scene, which was basically making fun of the audience for sticking through to see it. Deadpool had such a scene and pulled it off much better IMO. Despite that, I think it's a solid film. 7/10.

 

10 minutes ago, Docteur Qui said:

Afterlife, the fruitless exercise in nostalgia that completely missed the point of the irreverent original and turned it into a cross between The Force Awakens and an Amblin film from the 80s. At least the 2016 one tried to capture some of the SNL/improv-heavy, slapdash feel of the first one, even if it ultimately didn't work.

[Bespin 8,480]

I'll rewatch the first  third movie tonight with my husband, I still have it on VHS.

[Romão 2,274]

I absolutely hate post credits scenes. That trend needs to die

[DarthDementous 1,059]

2 minutes ago, Romão said:

I absolutely hate post credits scenes. That trend needs to die

Yeah. I hate that it has been instilled into my brain to wait until the end of the credits because tHe StOrY NeVeR EnDs, which is why when I did for Resurrections I laughed out loud because of how deliberately inane it was, as if to say 'the movie is over, and no, we're not necessarily making more. Deal with it and go home.'

[Edmilson 7,398]

I read a review today that pretty much killed all the hype I had left for this movie. 

 

It said that, unlike the previous three Matrix movies where you could see the amazing fight choreographies (done by the Master Yuen Woo Ping), in this one the fights are more modern: shaky camera, lots of cuts, closed shots and, of course, you can't understand what is happening. 

 

This has been a trend for quite sometime. While in the 90s/early 2000s you could watch the fights with clarity, these days it's a mess. Also, the choreographies themselves aren't that good. And not just in this movie: almost every recent Hollywood blockbuster that features a hand-to-hand fight scene is bland and uninteresting - just look at the MCU.

 

The Bourne movies have done some serious damage to Hollywood.

[Naïve Old Fart 9,508]

6 hours ago, Romão said:

I absolutely hate post credits scenes. That trend needs to die

The best post credits scene is, without a shadow of a doubt, FERRIS BUELLER'S DAY OFF.

[GerateWohl 4,345]

11 hours ago, Edmilson said:

This has been a trend for quite sometime. While in the 90s/early 2000s you could watch the fights with clarity, these days it's a mess. Also, the choreographies themselves aren't that good. And not just in this movie: almost every recent Hollywood blockbuster that features a hand-to-hand fight scene is bland and uninteresting - just look at the MCU.

 

The Bourne movies have done some serious damage to Hollywood.

Bourne II is probably the biggest mess in that regard. But for me the MCU movies used to be an example where the fight scenes were done quite well. Especially the movies of the Russo brothers, Winter Soldier, Civil War, Infinity War, Endgame, have absolutely outstanding fight scenes.

[Naïve Old Fart 9,508]

12 hours ago, Edmilson said:

...in the 90s/early 2000s you could watch the fights with clarity, these days it's a mess...the choreographies themselves aren't that good...almost every recent Hollywood blockbuster that features a hand-to-hand fight scene is bland and uninteresting...

Ordinarily I would agree, but I guess it depends on the editor, how much coverage they have, and how the director wants it shot.

Case in point: the pre-title sequence in CASINO ROYALE, and the fight in Shanghai, with Patrice, from SKYFALL. Both edited by the same person, but both vastly different, in style.

 

 

 

12 hours ago, Edmilson said:

...just look at the MCU.

I'd rather not look at the M.C.U., thank you very much.

[crumbs 14,305]

That was, without doubt, the worst film I've seen this year. An excruciating misfire for everyone involved.

 

A hopelessly disinterested Keanu Reeves looking like he'd rather be anywhere else, a completely wasted Carrie Anne-Moss, the shockingly bad replacement actor for Agent Smith (about as threatening as an Abercrombie & Fitch model), and the all-round terrible acting from the rest of the cast, playing a bunch of nobodies with zero characterization we're given no reason to care about, delivering the most inane dialogue since the Star Wars prequels.

 

Some of the cheapest cinematography I've seen in a "big budget" Hollywood movie (made-for-TV movies have looked more filmic). Incessant flashbacks to past movies are especially jarring against the pristine digital photography of the newer film. Action scenes are shot and choreographed with all the skill of an amateur director, with lazy Bourne-esque editing to match.

 

The score is as generic and underwhelming as you're expecting. Everything iconic about Don Davis' scores has been stripped away, leaving only the same mediocre dreck that underscores every Hollywood action film these days. Once in a while the film teases you with fragments of Davis' masterful scores, cruelly reminding you of what could have been.

 

But the film's biggest crime? It's excruciatingly boring. Whatever story it's trying to tell, there's little meat on the bone. The film's opening act is so desperate to be "meta" (literally referring to Warner Brothers and the existing trilogy in dialogue), you can't help but spend the first hour wondering when the story will actually begin.

 

As the credits rolled I asked myself, that's it? After two decades, that was the most interesting story they could come up with? To call the film a pointless waste of everyone's time would be the greatest understatement of the year.

[Jay 37,323]

Wow!

[crumbs 14,305]

... and I say that as someone who actually enjoyed the previous two sequels upon rewatch!

 

I cannot understate how annoying those flashbacks to footage from previous films were. I figured it was just the trailers playing it up, but the final cut must have over 50 flashbacks (and it only highlights how visually inferior the digitally-shot fourth film is compared to the gorgeous, grainy, textured cinematography of the trilogy).

[Giftheck 916]

It can't be an statement of any kind if not everybody agrees with you. I didn't feel like I wasted my time. But to each their own.

[stewdog1 50]

37 minutes ago, crumbs said:

That was, without doubt, the worst film I've seen this year. An excruciating misfire for everyone involved.

 

A hopelessly disinterested Keanu Reeves looking like he'd rather be anywhere else, a completely wasted Carrie Anne-Moss, the shockingly bad replacement actor for Agent Smith (about as threatening as an Abercrombie & Fitch model), and the all-round terrible acting from the rest of the cast, playing a bunch of nobodies with zero characterization we're given no reason to care about, delivering the most inane dialogue since the Star Wars prequels.

 

Some of the cheapest cinematography I've seen in a "big budget" Hollywood movie (made-for-TV movies have looked more filmic). Incessant flashbacks to past movies are especially jarring against the pristine digital photography of the newer film. Action scenes are shot and choreographed with all the skill of an amateur director, with lazy Bourne-esque editing to match.

 

The score is as generic and underwhelming as you're expecting. Everything iconic about Don Davis' scores has been stripped away, leaving only the same mediocre dreck that underscores every Hollywood action film these days. Once in a while the film teases you with fragments of Davis' masterful scores, cruelly reminding you of what could have been.

 

But the film's biggest crime? It's excruciatingly boring. Whatever story it's trying to tell, there's little meat on the bone. The film's opening act is so desperate to be "meta" (literally referring to Warner Brothers and the existing trilogy in dialogue), you can't help but spend the first hour wondering when the story will actually begin.

 

As the credits rolled I asked myself, that's it? After two decades, that was the most interesting story they could come up with? To call the film a pointless waste of everyone's time would be the greatest understatement of the year.

 

Completely agree.  I turned to my son during the first act, are they breaking the fourth wall?  There was so much tongue in cheek and flashbacks that it was really annoying.  

[crumbs 14,305]

They were definitely breaking the fourth wall, complete with that cringeworthy character who mocked Hollywood's obsession with reboots, remakes and sequels (only for the film to end up being exactly the thing it was seemingly self-aware of mocking). 

 

It was borderline satire at that point, reminiscent of the Scream films and the way they poked fun at the horror genre. The key difference being those films were actually fun.

 

24 minutes ago, Giftheck said:

It can't be an statement of any kind if not everybody agrees with you. I didn't feel like I wasted my time. But to each their own.

 

And that's fine, good luck to anyone who found enjoyment out of this! All I can say is, as someone who really liked the original films, this one did nothing for me. 

[mstrox 6,647]

I said this on Discord but everything you’ve said about Matrix sounds amazing, Crumbs!

[Edmilson 7,398]

20 minutes ago, crumbs said:

that cringeworthy character who mocked Hollywood's obsession with reboots, remakes and sequels (only for the film to end up being exactly the thing it was seemingly self-aware of mocking). 

Is this similar to the first Jurassic World, where the movie tries to make a meta-commentary about reboots and sequels (no one is impressed by a dinosaur anymore, so they build a new one that's deadlier) but then becames pretty much the thing they were trying to mock?

[Giftheck 916]

In a way, I'm actually wondering if the film potentially flopping winds up being vindication for Lana in a way. "See, I told you it wasn't a good idea to make a fourth".

[Jurassic Shark 12,033]

And then she'll make a fifth.

[Bespin 8,480]

Oh, just remember me, the first movie was directed by The Wachowski brothers, and this new movie is directed by The Wachowski sisters, right?

 

They are a big family.

[Giftheck 916]

4 minutes ago, Jurassic Shark said:

And then she'll make a fifth.

WB might. She won't.

[Van_Etten 111]

Only one sister is directing it.

[Demondm810 399]

Shockingly, I must say I agree 100% with @crumbs

 

a real bore. 

[Jay 37,323]

Why is that shocking?

[SilverTrumpet 638]

7 hours ago, crumbs said:

That was, without doubt, the worst film I've seen this year. An excruciating misfire for everyone involved.

 

A hopelessly disinterested Keanu Reeves looking like he'd rather be anywhere else, a completely wasted Carrie Anne-Moss, the shockingly bad replacement actor for Agent Smith (about as threatening as an Abercrombie & Fitch model), and the all-round terrible acting from the rest of the cast, playing a bunch of nobodies with zero characterization we're given no reason to care about, delivering the most inane dialogue since the Star Wars prequels.

 

Some of the cheapest cinematography I've seen in a "big budget" Hollywood movie (made-for-TV movies have looked more filmic). Incessant flashbacks to past movies are especially jarring against the pristine digital photography of the newer film. Action scenes are shot and choreographed with all the skill of an amateur director, with lazy Bourne-esque editing to match.

 

The score is as generic and underwhelming as you're expecting. Everything iconic about Don Davis' scores has been stripped away, leaving only the same mediocre dreck that underscores every Hollywood action film these days. Once in a while the film teases you with fragments of Davis' masterful scores, cruelly reminding you of what could have been.

 

But the film's biggest crime? It's excruciatingly boring. Whatever story it's trying to tell, there's little meat on the bone. The film's opening act is so desperate to be "meta" (literally referring to Warner Brothers and the existing trilogy in dialogue), you can't help but spend the first hour wondering when the story will actually begin.

 

As the credits rolled I asked myself, that's it? After two decades, that was the most interesting story they could come up with? To call the film a pointless waste of everyone's time would be the greatest understatement of the year.

 

I agree with all of this, but I'd add that the action made me sick.

 

They'd run up to each other really fast and then start punching or kicking really slow. It's like whoever did the action stuff has seen an action movie before but doesn't know how the rhythm of an action scene went at all. It would feel way slower than it looked like it wanted to be and slower than the score wanted to convince you it was, so it messed with our brains and we got dizzy a few times. 

 

Just a dreadful movie. Kinda gives me more appreciation for Reloaded and Revolutions. 

 

I'll save making comparisons to Star Wars, but you know where I'd go with that anyway.

[Nick1Ø66 4,689]

Yeah just saw this. It sucked.  Near Independence Day 2 level unnecessary and belated sequel level bore.

 

At least Will Smith had enough sense to stay away from that disaster, unlike Keanu who surely had better things to do.

[Bespin 8,480]

First, Keanu with a beard...

 

I didn't realize this saga began in 1999.

 

It was so much better than The Phantome Menace!