Matrix Reloaded - Surprise! by merlindrea

GENERAL DISCUSSIONS

Matrix Reloaded - Surprise!

POSTED BY: MERLINDREA
UPDATED: Tuesday, May 20, 2003 12:57
SHORT URL:
VIEWED: 7471
PAGE 1 of 1

Friday, May 16, 2003 8:31 AM

Hi,

yesterday night I was one of the lucky to get tickets and see the new Matrix movie. I don't want to spoil it for you, so just 3 notes:

- Its awesome! I was half afraid they showed all the good stuff in the trailer already, but there is much more! (By the way: for the highway scene they built a 2 mile highway just for the movie. Well, after seeing it, I understand it, there was no way they could do it on a real highway!)

- Stay put after the movie is over and you will see a trailer for Matrix Revolutions coming out in November (the credits are the longest I've ever seen, so be patient)

- And finally: big surprise! Guess who's familiar Firefly face smiled at me from the big screen???

By the way: I'd love to discuss the movie, but I don't want to spoil it - if anybody else has seen it already, we could start a threat with spoiler warning.

Merl

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, May 16, 2003 8:37 AM

KYOBONITSUKI

did we see the same movie?

matrix 2 was not good. i mean it wasn't clint eastwood's pink cadillac - but man - how disappointing.

first third was really bad - the last third made up for it somewhat.

i really wasn't enjoying it until monica bellucci came on screen.

the effects were like hitler's new berlin - copies of stuff we've already seen done bigger - but without the punch or beauty of the originals.

i was not impressed.

cheers

matt

p.s. let it be known that i for one, greatly enjoy the character of kaylee - even tho polls show that most of you don't!

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, May 16, 2003 10:07 AM

MERLINDREA

I am sorry you did not like it. Did you enjoy Matrix 1?

I guess it depends with how much expectations one goes to see the movie. I was for instance very disappointed by the second LOTR movie.

So I tried to expect not too much and just go and see. Also, the first Matrix movie came to me as a complete surprise, so it is a bit unfair to compare my feelings then and now. But I do believe they lived up to my expectations. I am also impressed they still took time for slower scenes (like that love scene, that was wonderfully made), and not only doing stunts and fight stuff.

I especially like the mind twist they let us off with. What is real now?

Merl

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, May 16, 2003 10:20 AM

KYOBONITSUKI

SPOILER ALERT

well - i watch ALOT of movies. and i watch ALOT of foreign movies - and for me reloaded was like kentucky fried movie. it was just a collection of elements from other films brought together - if was full of sound and fury signifing nothing.

i like matrix 1 okay - i don't own the dvd. i saw it - it ended at the perfect time - because the narrative would have lost me had it gone any longer.

i don't expect high art from hollywood - that's why i watch foreign film. but i do enjoy the entertainment of hollywood flicks. but for any film - what is needed is a maintaining of the narrative. reloaded streched and tore the narrative as several points - most of thenm in the beginning third of the film.

the rave scene was crap i thought. it was a base appeal to young movie gowers that was entirely forced on the production and completely against the expectations of the narrative - a rave in the matrix would have been less abusive - but one in zion.... no.

the frenchman's demonstration of causality was forced at best - it was a scene that obviously came to life as a "wouldn't it be cool to have thighs of code seperating to reveal a glowing vagina" and it was poorly tied into the narrative.

as for the end mindscrew - i saw that already in the first matrix. while the end third of the film was the strongest i thought - this part really bugged me - a sequel is not supposed to rehash the same old thing - especially in a trilogy - it is supposed to advance the story. reloaded did not do that. all that changed from beginning to end was that now we know that the oracle is a program that maybe we seem to not be able to trust.

we knew that already.

it's like being driven around the block - parts of the ride are exciting - but you just end up where you began.

cheers

matt

p.s. let it be known that i for one, greatly enjoy the character of kaylee - even tho polls show that most of you don't!

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, May 16, 2003 11:35 AM

MERLINDREA

Actually, regarding the mind twist, I meant something else:

Select to view spoiler:

As Neo was able to stop the ship-smashing machines, that means that Zion and the 'real world' is also just another matrix and NOT real. That would also explain why Agent Smith could corrupt this one guy and use him to go back into the real world. Its like dreaming to wake up. And this creates a whole new set of questions: is anything we have seen so far real? The humans breeding facility, Zion, the original rescue of Neo's body? Or is it just another matrix to collect the rebellious spirits?

Merl

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, May 16, 2003 5:30 PM

KYOBONITSUKI

not really - because we don't really know if he stopped the machine or if the ship stopped it with an em pulse before it swooped in. that might also explain neo's collapsing.

won't know until the last chapter.

cheers

matt

p.s. let it be known that i for one, greatly enjoy the character of kaylee - even tho polls show that most of you don't!

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, May 16, 2003 6:23 PM

SLOWSMURF

Select to view spoiler:

They actually posted something on the lines of Matrix in a Matrix long long ago at movies.com.(like a year or more) Seems the most likely theory right now based on everything in the movie. I'll be thinking about it more when I see it again.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, May 16, 2003 6:30 PM

EICHENLAUB

Reloaded sucked, and beleive me I can tolerate cinematic crap, but not this much crap. G. Lucas himself couldn't have screwed it up any worse. Hell, TPM was more exiting (Dual of Fates) than Reloaded( Slo-mo fuck/rave scene). Atleast G. Lucas was able to make one good sequal (Empire). And The Two Towers was crappy too(way too long with no real developement except for gollum). But it had some good battles. The best part of Reloaded was the free-way. And that was because it didn't have all the stupid kung-fu, or Morpheus talking out of his ass. Most people liked the shoot outs in the first movie more than the kung-fu crap. Like the federal building shoot out. This movie had nothing like that, and the free-way sequence was only half as good. If you are a Matrix fan you have probably seen the movie already, but if you aren't DO NOT waste your time.

Oh yeah, good news! John Doe and Fastlane went the way of Firefly! My misery loves this company.

Oh yeah, and my five bucks say that revolutions will end with humans and machines coexisting.
Listen to what the oracle and the councelor say, plus listen to that retard Keanu as he talks about the "Buddhist philosophy" in the movie.

God damn I miss Firefly. They should make a movie out of it. A two hour episode is all you need, it would be better than most movies, easier to make and it could make an easy profit as long as production costs were the same as the TV show.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, May 16, 2003 7:53 PM

SLOWSMURF

I think too many people went in with hopes way too high.

I thought the fights weren't quite as good as the first one(dunno about you, but I thought the kung fu battles in the first were awsome), but still good. Its kinda annoying that most people would've liked it more if they'd just done almost the same thing they did in the first :(

Oh, and yes, EVERYONE hates the rave scene. That is by far the biggest mistake they made in this movie.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, May 16, 2003 8:43 PM

XORYN

Well, I generally don't reply to movie talk because they can be so subjective and as we have seen already in this tiny posting what one person dislikes about a movie is exactly what other loves about it, but thats what makes movies great, to spark our minds, but this time I will, just because I have been coming to this board for a while and I feel more confortable here.

So, I really liked the Matrix Reloaded, for a couple simple reasons: first,it is the original(sort of). Ever since the original Matrix, a growing trend had been occurring where every studio,director, or producer with a few dollars and in need of an action scene in a movie had to have either bullet-time, or some over-elaborate kung-fu fight, and for years I have seen some good and most bad and after seeing Reloaded I realize that noone, in this country anyway, does it better. Everything about each scene, from the long shots to the quick pans to jump cuts to close-ups is done , in my opinion, right, and no movie has been able to do that besides the original Matrix.
Secondly, the dreaded rave scene, I guess I am looking at a little different then you guys. To me I thought it was good because it gave us a sharp contrast of the hard edge machines and the dirty, passion filled, heat and desire of human emotions and ability. The other angle which a friend of mine pointed out which also was a good thought was the religious angle. Neo is "The One", and thought of as a Jesus type character, the City of Zion was about to be destroyed for being who they were and doing the things they did, ala Sodom And Gamora (sp?). Just a thought.
Lastly, simply put, I loved the story. That one was easy to write....

Xoryn

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, May 17, 2003 3:25 AM

MELEE

Count me in with the people who sctually enjoyed it! I saw it at it's first showing on wednesday evening and thoroughly enjoyed myself.
I agree that people went in with hopes too high. They were really hyped up, and I think a lot of people were expecting it to blow them away like the first one did, but the fact is, no matter how cool the movie is, the idea isn't novelty anymore, no matter how good it is or isn't, it's NOT going to blow you away like the first one did, it's just not possible. Not that this was the case with everybody, but I think it might have been witha lot of people. This second movie also had a bit of a tough time because it's more transitional than anything else, and I can say from experience that it's the same with books, screenplays, etc. The transitional bits are ALWAYS the hardest to deal with. I have a feeling REVOLUTIONS will probably be better than this one.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, May 17, 2003 4:46 AM

MSCKAREN

I saw the movie late Wed night with a group of "true believers". Through the first 20 minutes my disappointment was building as it looked to me that they had strung together a bunch of music videos - visually interesting but what happened to the story?!

Instead of the prolonged rave scene, I would have much preferred to see the messiah idea developed and how Neo dealt with this aspect of being "the One".

Oh well, once they got into the search for the key, the movie via narrative started to improve and I left feeling like the movie was good overall. I think I will enjoy it the second time more, knowing what is coming.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, May 17, 2003 6:09 AM

HOTFORKAYLEE

I agree that some people must have, I don't know, been expecting the first Star Wars when they went to see it. Copying other movies? Isn't that what other movies (and video games) have been doing to the Matrix? I went with no expectations and came away feeling it was a good movie, even want to see it again. Sorry if it wasn't 'sophisticated' enough for some people and the dialouge lacked (come on, it stars Keanu Reeves, you expected him to suddenly get good?) but I'd take it over some crappy french film anyday. The movie was supposed to be about special effects but it did have some twists that make you think if you were to stop complaining about little details long enough to just sit back and watch it.

The dance scene (it wasn't a rave per se) could have been trimmed down a little but it was conveying the emotions of the citizens. If this was such a bad movie, what, you could have done better? Then why aren't you in Hollywood making movies?

Everyone is entitled to their own opinion but it seems some are just being downright rude about. If you didn't like it thats fine, I did like it, don't try and make those of us who did sound like we are morons because if it. Maybe you'd rather see a new Ernest goes somewhere movie? Remember, it's supposed to be entertainment and personaly I think they did a pretty good job compared to what else is out there. I almost never go to the theater because I feel like I wasted my money on some of the crap they try to push off on us but I'm glad I went to this one.

Quote:
"No, she's always quiet. We think maybe there's something wrong with her."
"Yes .. or something very right. The quiet ones are the ones that change the universe, Luc Derardi. The loud ones only take the credit."

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, May 17, 2003 6:21 AM

CHRISTHECYNIC

I think that the problem isn't that people went in with hopes too high, it's that they went in with hopes.

You guys seem to be acting like someone going to the Olympics and coming out and saying, "I can't believe that they did that with the story."

If what you expected to have happen happened then the story would be contrived and unrealistic. On the same level nothing in the movie should have come as forced, because it wasn’t. Just like in life everything made sense once you understood what happened. The idea of programs hiding in the matrix and a general disharmony among the A.I.s should have come as no surprise to anyone as it is the logical extension of the concept of the matrix.

The fact that the oracle was a computer program was known by me at least since the second time that I saw the original. So KYOBONITSUKI, that isn’t what where the story progressed. The sort progressed in the philosophy, the crushing of philosophy and legend under the cold hard truth, and the controls beyond those that they could feel. The story has been brought to the point where the second in a trilogy always brings it, hopelessness. I personally would have preferred a break from the standard trilogy format, but you can’t get mad at it for not doing the job of the second movie because it did.

I think you guys missed the point that this was art. The rave was the natural human impulse, you see the same concept before the coming storm Lord of the Flies. People let base emotions take over to avoid facing the possibility of death, lust and sadism (as show in this and Lord of the Flies respectively) are the most base of all emotions. Art holds a mirror to life, and like it or not that kind of rave is what happens in life, look at any historical instance, the Black Death and both World Wars are the best-recorded instances of this activity.

For those of you who didn’t get it the sentinel killing at the end was not an EMP, the EMP is shown to go outwards where that went sideways in an internal to external way emanating from multiple sources.

This has set us up for the break in the cycle, the first showed us the legend, the second the truth and the imminence of the break in the cycle. At first we see that he is not the godlike power we thought he was, through small things so subtle, some not so much. Then it all comes crashing down when we realize the truth, but because of smith, and the differences between Neo and his predecessors, as well as his new outside of the matrix abilities (likely due to the imperfections of a planed anomaly and a lingering connection to the network) all show that there is a flaw in the system of cycles that will bring an end.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, May 17, 2003 6:40 AM

TRAGICSTORY

Ok my 2 cents,

Reloaded was nothing but quickly rehashed special effects. PLOT>SFX. If I had to compare it to anything it would be the last Robert Jordon book. Nothing happens except for the last bit, whihc makes you want to go out and get the next book. It could have been done much better IMHO if there was some sort of FINAL CONFRONTATION. Killing Smith or the Albinos would have been good.

The whole rave scene was nothing but a sorry excuse to make up for the lack of TITS and SEX in the first movie.
Finally, the whole idea of programs gone bad and revolting is just about as lame as possible. The whole concept of the Matrix was the inability of humans and machines to live together. Sorry but that just seems like an easy and cheap way to advance the plot and allow Neo to win. The last film is Matrix: Revolution, I just hope that it is an actual revolution and not some tree-hugging hippie-machine tolerance "lets live together" shit. The only good thing in the movie was the last 5 minutes in which you realize that Zion is just another matrix and of course the Firefly cameo!

So here are some questions:

Select to view spoiler:

Do you think Neo is a program?
Do you think the counciler (who kept talking about how they were still plugged in) is a program?
What does Smith want with Neo? (perhaps to free him from his programming?)
What special effects would you have rather seen?
Why did they have "rebel" programs Why would things be upgraded?

"Societies are supported by human activity, therefore they are constantly threatened by the human facts of self-intrest and stupidity." --Peter Berger

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, May 17, 2003 7:18 AM

CHRISTHECYNIC

Quote:
Originally posted by TragicStory:
Ok my 2 cents,
Select to view spoiler:

Why did they have "rebel" programs Why would things be upgraded?

Why is anything upgraded? Does history record a single instance in which the obsolete did not rebel and try to survive by whatever means possible? Didn't you notice the self-preservation inherent in the programming?

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, May 17, 2003 8:51 AM

EICHENLAUB

The story isn't good, it is just rehashed cyber punk, and there was an episode of Star Trek DS9 that had almost the exact same plot too. And using humans for energy makes no damn sense, yet it is what the movies are based on. That makes it impossible to make anysense out of these movies and their plots. Even the title of the movies are stolen from William Gibson. If anyone ever tried to make another Gibson book into a movie people would think it was a rip off of the Matrix. Which is a shame, because Gibson is creative. Too bad these fools ripped him off and did it poorly. Just think of how people would have felt if The Wheel of Time had been made into a movie before Lord of The Rings.

Now I admit, if it turns out that Zion exists within an Matrix within a Matrix, I will like that. That would explain why the story is nonsensical.

But I doubt the screen writers have that much talent.
Besides, the producers were already sure to make their money back no matter how crapy a movie they made, so why bother make a good one? Hell you could make a movie for a few million dollars, spend most of it on promotion, and you would then be sure to make a profit. They don't want to make good movies, so why even pretend to try?

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, May 17, 2003 9:38 AM

TRAGICSTORY

But they are machines, they are not supposed to have the same "human" qualities... Notice how they had not problems accepting that this is what has to happen a la the keymaker dieing, yet they fear being shut down? I think not. The machines should have a communal psyche. What is good for all should be done mentality.

Secondly, the matrix itself is not upgraded. There is no reason for it to be upgraded. Unexplained changes cause panic and fear, People don't accept it. Whole crops are lost,etc...

"Societies are supported by human activity, therefore they are constantly threatened by the human facts of self-intrest and stupidity." --Peter Berger

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, May 17, 2003 9:48 AM

CHRISTHECYNIC

If you really want to get into it Gibson just ripped it off from other people who in turn ripped it off from other people. But the fact is that few would call Gibson unoriginal, so why is it that if someone does something that is just as original as what he did it's a rip off?

It's like west side story, that was stolen from Shakespeare, Shakespeare stole it from an Italian, the Italian copied it from real life, and the people who did it in real life likely got the idea for what they did (when it was in their control) from something that had come before. All that changed was setting and language.

I personally like Neromancer, but to call the tile a rip off of the matrix from that is like calling the title A Beautiful Mind a rip off of your dad because he once used the expression "a beautiful mind." The term “matrix” predates Gibson by centuries, and was used with reference to computer networks back when a computer was a person who could do math in their head because no one had ever even heard of silicone chips.

As for the use of humans as energy, it is in fact a very simplistic idea, which is entirely possible. It is a bit shortsighted for a machine, because without the external power of the sun biological power is on a time limit, but heat and electricity are two very useable sources of power, however biological materials, full of potential power, must be converted. If the heat of a person is totally conserved, add to that the lack of frictional loss, then a person exists with negligible power loss, that means that every material that you put into that person (once they have reached physical maturity) comes out as excess power. When the world lost the sun it would have been covered with resources that machines would have quickly harvested, all of which could sustain the human race, ant thus their power plant for at least a millennia and a half, assuming that the conservation of heat was started almost immediately.

Without the sun the temperature would drop, as was stated in the movie and should be obvious, thus it would be possible to have outside temperature superconductors, this combined with heat conservation would mean that the only significant loss of energy would be frictional.

If you don’t understand this Eichenlaub, let me spell it out Human beings would make an excellent way to convert the resources that would be at hand to usable power. This is not somewhere where you can say that it doesn’t make sense, because it does. The truth is that any animal life on this planet, if it did not have to move, and had near 100% heat conservation would be an excellent power plant, instead of coal it would burn food. If you can not deal with the fact that this makes sense then perhaps that is why you do not like the movie. Either the idea of using people for power was well thought out, or they just got lucky. But rest assured it does make sense.

What doesn’t make sense is why they would keep with it rather than simply switch to geothermal. Although we know that they have no problem with their current system (it has been working for at least 1200 years) it would still make more sense to part it out in exchange for geothermal. This is where you get to say that the movie makes “no damn sense” because this is where you must suspend you disbelief. The reason that they didn’t swap to geothermal after the first time they got a drill that close to the core is because then there would be no people. It is very difficult to get people to watch a movie with just machines. Although the possibility for an impressive movie with a good plot and nice effects would still be there, most people just don’t relate with things that aren’t people.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, May 17, 2003 10:04 AM

JAKE7

Geez! Does anyone go out to watch a movie to just have a good time anymore?

I saw Reloaded last night and loved every single minute!

I went expecting to see fantastic special effects and to be entertained and I got just that -- more, really, because I felt the fight scenes were just incredible! The choreography it took to get them to flow like they did was absolutely amazing to me.

I'm looking forward to see Revolutions in November.

--------------
MAL: Everyone's makin' a fuss.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, May 17, 2003 10:10 AM

CHRISTHECYNIC

Sorry for two in a row, but a long one like the one before is what you get when you get when you say something stupid in the presence of someone who is a trained movie critic (not a professional, I would never stoop that low.)

Quote:
Originally posted by TragicStory:
But they are machines, they are not supposed to have the same "human" qualities... Notice how they had not problems accepting that this is what has to happen a la the keymaker dieing, yet they fear being shut down? I think not. The machines should have a communal psyche. What is good for all should be done mentality.

Secondly, the matrix itself is not upgraded. There is no reason for it to be upgraded. Unexplained changes cause panic and fear, People don't accept it. Whole crops are lost,etc...

"Societies are supported by human activity, therefore they are constantly threatened by the human facts of self-intrest and stupidity." --Peter Berger

You have to remember that this is not about machines, it is about AI. Watch Short Circuit, what was it that convinced the guy that number 5 was really intelligent? Answer is he got a joke. Intelligence is directly related to creativity, the ability to process and extrapolate isn’t intelligence any computer now can do that. It is really made plain when the oracle is described as an intuitive program.

Everything that human beings consider intelligent has come from an intuitive process, even things that seem counter intuitive were discovered by intuitive processes. So with that in mind what do you think someone would consider to be intelligent? Logic alone can’t cut it, if you lived you entire life off of logic you would be the stupidest person that I ever heard of. Part of being intelligent is knowing when logic doesn’t apply. As soon as you break away from logic any number of things can happen, and human like qualities are one of them.

I like what you said “The machines should have a communal psyche. What is good for all should be done mentality.” I can put out something that is also true “People should have a communal psyche. What is good for all should be done mentality.” Think of it, people doing what is good for all, no more murder or rape, no more war, no more hunger, resources given to those who need them, no more greed or suffering.

Should has never, once, in the world of nature or mechanics made any difference. Should is not a defining factor. If you want proof, then imagine that what I said did happen, and everyone was nice to each other, how long would it take before someone took advantage of the situation and took over? All it would take is one who was greedy for it all to come crumbling down.

And what if they were exactly as you said, because they are intelligent there would be areas where they would disagree, so then there would be conflict, if one did not believe that it was for the common good for it to be shut down then for the common good it would oppose it. What you are trying to describe is a perfect machine society, perfection doesn’t work out most of the time. For what you described to work there would have to be a hive mind, and that is not what we are shown in the Matrix, so it only makes sense that there would be a disharmony.

As for the upgrades, I’ve spoke enough, but it does make sense for there to be them. However I don’t think that they meant that the matrix was upgraded, just the agent programs and the like.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, May 17, 2003 12:35 PM

SIRENKAIN

Let's face it Matrix 2 was weaker then the first one. It felt slow and preachy in the beginning and even some of the fights seemded strained. Was it terrible NO, does it deserve the hype NO. Is it just a long set up for M3 OH YES, will I be at the sneak preview for the next one too OH YES (here is my 10 bucks give me my fix please).

still thinking I think

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, May 17, 2003 12:49 PM

WULFHAWK

The rave so many seem to find distasteful isn't just a giant 'club' scene. The W. bro's don't have to put in scenes just to appeal to barely post-pubescent teens who need MTV interpretation of social issues.

Simply put, it wasn't a 'rave', it was a town meeting. Some folks go out and bowl after a town meeting, or head to McDs, or whatever strikes their fancy. These folks dance, drink, eat, and be merry. First, it clearly frames the somewhat alien society we are seeing here (not totally alien, I think; surely you've seen American Democratic/Republican Party meetings). Second, it points up the somewhat alien behavior of these people; they demonstrate some nearly 'hive' behavior. Third, it connects with history, our history; Romans, Vikings, and American Indians would certainly have related to this kind of political/social gathering.

This is a beautiful, if verbose, movie. I am certainly going to see it again.

tanstaafl

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, May 17, 2003 1:05 PM

CHRISTHECYNIC

Wulfhawk, thank you.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, May 17, 2003 1:40 PM

SLOWSMURF

I was calling it a rave cause everyone did, hell, I'm not even sure what a rave is!

I loved it, not as much as the original(sorry :P), but all the effects/story/etc wasn't what I was expecting, it was good. I kinda wish they'd done a bit more with neo(more bullet stopping for example), but, then the fights would've been over too easily and that would've been bad too.

Oh well, it was good and quite enjoyable, thats good enough for me.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, May 17, 2003 4:22 PM

MERLINDREA

Wow, seems I opened a can of worms here

. But I am happy that I am not the only one who enjoyed the movie.

Regarding the so-called Rave scene (not sure if it is Rave really, either), what it conveyed to me was not teenies dancing, but the urge for dance, sex, life - to enjoy everything, feel everything because tomorrow you might be dead. And the rhythms really supported this feeling.

I agree that Reloaded has the problems most 2nd's of Trilogies have. But it left me with a lot to think about. If Zion and 'Reality' is after all not real - what is? With this twist, everything is possible for the Revolutions. I can't wait!

Merl

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, May 18, 2003 10:10 AM

SCOTTI

Finally got a chance to go see TM:R, and I just have to chime in here. It was incredible. It seems to me that most everyone here that feels the need to give a negative review of it, do so just to be "controversial".

First and foremost, we go to the movies to SUSPEND belief. If you're looking for deeper meaning at the movies, you have bigger problems than any of us can help you deal with...

That being said, I really enjoyed the movie. Someone said earlier that the previews you've seen are just a taste of the whole experience. Visually, the effects are incredible. The bar is definitely being raised, constantly

The "rave" scene (to use the popular misnomer) has sadly been misinterpreted by a lot of people. This is a lot more than a "slo-mo rave/fuck scene". It is a "Celebration of Life" (quotes and caps necessary here). Zion is the center of humanity, and this is an attempt to defy the machines, by dancing and cavorting in the face of their impendimg demise. IMHO

Also, it's about 8 minutes of the movie, so I fail to see the problem.

Finally, I have to mention this: this was the first movie I had been to in a long time where people actually clapped and cheered.

_______________________________________________
Mal: You are very much lacking in imagination.
Zoe: I imagine that's so, sir.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, May 18, 2003 10:41 AM

ARCHER

I was suspending my disbelief right up to the part prior to the 'rave' where Neo says "I've been thinking..." to Trinity.

At which point my subconscious took over and provided an alternate and more plausible dialogue.

"I've been thinking..."

"No Neo, no! Don't you remember what happened last time?"

"..."

"The electric can opener that needed 'more power'? The reason we had to get another ship?"

"Whoa."

Seriously though, I did enjoy it. Having a Matrix in a Matrix goes a long way toward clearing up the coppertop nonsense. (Why not just plug in some nice cows? Keep the grass green and they'll never go around unplugging themselves.)

The 'rave' is explicable in terms of a society that requires a high reproduction rate to survive in a state of constant warfare. That said, it wasn't inserted very well and dragged on. Likewise, the first fight scene with Smith just went on... and on... and on...

But damn, the highway sequence was beautiful.

Not a great movie, but I did manage to settle in and enjoy it.

"Surprised to see me, Mr. Anderson? Never heard of... backups?"

"Still using all the muscles but the most important one? No, no, that's not a muscle, Mr. Anderson. Put your pants back on."

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, May 18, 2003 12:01 PM

TRAGICSTORY

I have to respectfully disagree. This movie is not about AI, but machines. As you stated before it is nessicary to suspend belief. People do not want their movies gray. They want Jedis vs. Stromtroopers. They want the hero to win against all odds and to see some T&A in the process (FAN SERVICE).

You can rave about how the rave scene (pun intended

)but in truth I see it as fan service. Had that and the sex scenes been removed it would not have altered the plot. This makes it fan service. The fight scenes were cool, but in a been there, done that kind of way. Anyone who sees decent martial arts films would know that it was nothing extrodinary. They too were fan service. The only part of the movie which extended the plot was the last few minutes AND that is what makes the movie a failure IMHO.

I liked watching it and it is a fun way to kill 2 hours but it is no where up to the hype.

"Societies are supported by human activity, therefore they are constantly threatened by the human facts of self-intrest and stupidity." --Peter Berger

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, May 18, 2003 12:59 PM

KYOBONITSUKI

is matrix a good movie? no. is it "pink caddillac? no. i have no problem suspending disbelief - but matrix presents itself in the manner of a serious (as compared to ernest films) manner. for a serious film to require the viewers to conciously have to make the choice of suspending thier logic and saying - "okay this is a movie" is poor filmmaking.

is matrix an episode one - hell no. there were parts of matrix i did like - not so for episodes 1&2. honestly i never found matrix to be "original." i mean christ bullet time is from a goddamn gap commercial! the story is an old one - told many times before - i mean bladerunner was a story that questioned what the viewer assumed as reality (is decker a replicant - well the director said yes).

i don't really have that much to say about the story of martix reloaded - it was unremarkable but not bad. my disappointment lies in the details - as has been said the rave served no real function to advance the story - it was gratuitous - and a poor substitute for real nudity - but it's a cop out pg13 film so whatcha gunna do?

i like kung fu - and tiger/dragon was a great will that i had no problem accepting that fantasy of - matrix doesn't make that sell all the time. the wire work in the beginning - despite being by the same guy - is not nearly as good as tiger/dragon. it looks like wire work not like flight or throws or what have you.

the computer gen in the pole fight is horrible - it looks like cgi. the goal should be to NOT look like cgi. many of the actors are poorly utilized - bellucci is an incredible actress - and with an R rating maybe she could have given us our gratuitous erotica in style.

i will say the i think this is the best i've ever seen keanu. which doesn't say much i kno, but hey. jada pinkett sucked however. hugo weaving - entertaining. monica bellucci has been better - but the three lines she was allowed weren't bad.

am i a film snob - maybe. hollywood puts out an enormous ammount of crap. to be fair so does europe and asia - but most of what we get at art houses here has filtered filtered out the crap. thus i tend to like foreign film more - i mean how many times can i watch gibson/willis/arnold/stallone save the day in a big orange explosion?

point being i completely disagree that matrix 1 or 2 were the best thing since sliced bread or were original. in story or FX. it was a big budget version of stuff we've seen in some way before - in HK film or what have you. however matrix one came to gether better - reloaded, despite being thrown back into production after the spiderman preview came out - failed to pull everything together.

it was a disappointment. was it the hype? maybe. but i do remember thinking that matrix managed to end right as i was getting tired of it. so maybe matrix just aint my bag.

i guess i expect more. what more you ask? well you've all seen firefly - i dig that. original or not it pulls everything together in a way that i'm not compelled to sit there and think - christ this scene sucks - or look at my watch. oh hell some of the ernest films did that for me - tho i wouldn't consider them anywhere near the calibre of firefly.

thats what i mean by matrix being uneven. it aimed high - hit the mark in places but missed in others. ernest aimed low - hard to miss there. firefly aimed high and delivered.

hopefully hulk will fair better than reloaded - but the hulk pulling that super-speed crap has me worried.

cheers

matt

p.s. let it be known that i for one, greatly enjoy the character of kaylee - even tho polls show that most of you don't!

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, May 18, 2003 1:31 PM

EMBASSY

I'll just say that it's one thing to suspend your disbelief and quite another to hang it by the neck until dead.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, May 18, 2003 3:33 PM

ARCHER

The story is nothing original, which is typical with big-budget science fiction efforts. Science fiction fans are a distinct minority, and the general public is largely oblivious to the depth of issues examined in the genre. For example: As longtime science fiction fans, my friends and family were rather amused at the massive amount of hyperbole and discussion about the prospects of human cloning.

"No kidding. We've been talking about this since the forties."

Well.

I haven't been talking about it since the forties, before anybody starts asking me about my dentures, thanks.

Likewise, the worlds-within-worlds nature of the Matrix movies is fairly old hat, and not exactly the best examination of the inherent issues. But then I didn't go to the movie expecting Neo to break out into a lengthy and verbose discourse on the nature of reality.

In the end, I wasn't disappointed because it was exactly what I expected. A decent, if not cerebral, storyline, and some majorly cool action scenes.

If I want REAL science fiction, compelling and gripping, I'll watch OoG for the fifty-seventh time.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, May 18, 2003 3:38 PM

CHRISTHECYNIC

This is quite long, you guys give a lot to respond to.

I think that it's one thing to say that a movie isn't good, and another to say that you didn't like it. You guys didn't like it, that you've made clear, but to take it another step to say that is wasn't good is too far. If you want to call Gibson original, then you have to give this the same credit, to compare this to Blade Runner is like comparing an orange to The Beetles, they are both organic, and are both named after things out side what they are but to compare them is for the most part not a good idea. Blade Runner takes it’s plot almost directly from slave hunter and fugitive movies. The matrix comes from an entirely different vein.

Bullet time is in fact totally original, utilizing both still and motion cameras in a way never done before, if it looks like something else that doesn’t make it less original.

I guess what I want you guys to understand is that the matrix is far more original that Romeo and Juliet, but that didn’t stop Shakespeare from getting praise. And that if you don’t understand it then you shouldn’t simply assume it is bad, if the special effects were meant to look real then you would be in the right saying that that is a downfall of the movie. Truth is that every single scene that takes place in the matrix (lowercase because this is the thing, not the movie) is doctored so that it will not look real. If the fights didn’t look real then they did their job, if the scenes that you didn’t even count as effects scenes didn’t look real, even if it was only something you barely noticed in the back of your mind that made it harder for you to suspend your disbelief, then they did their job. If you can’t get your mind around the fact that you should disbelieve some parts and believe others then it doesn’t matter how good of a job they did with the movie, it would have been lost on you.

That’s ok, it’s not as if any movie is for everyone, but to say it’s bad for that reason is like saying the bell tower of Pisa is messed up because it’s tall, it’s quite simply not. It’s messed up because it’s tilted and shaped like a banana so that it is impossible for it to ever be straight up and down. If you want to talk story then you have to understand story, and the story is the next step, the sensical next step, and one that definitely has some quite large philosophical under- and overtones.

As KYOBONITSUKI said the story was unremarkable, but not bad. I tend to agree, the story wasn’t anything that hasn’t been told before, if it was it wouldn’t have fit. I disagree with the rave scene though, that is a quite visible detail, and like it or not it’s true. Every time any significant population has been faced with death there has been a very large party, the only major difference here than most recorded instances is that in this case almost everyone participated. Form a cultural standpoint that is one of the most realistic things they could have done.

TRAGICSTORY I can’t and wont argue with you, if you think that the only part of the movie that extended the plot was the last few minutes than I’m sorry for you. Maybe it’s because I’m an author (admittedly unpublished and for the most part not even good) but I could see plot progression for the captions meeting in the beginning on. Lots of it, it was subtle, as it should be, if you can look at a book or movie and say this is where the plot progresses, and be right that it happens only here, here and here than that is a bad book or movie, if it progresses most visibly there then that’s another thing.

As for people wanting to see black and white and not gray, I think you’re wrong there have been very successful movies about only gray, Schindler's List was a whole movie built on gray. There was a great movie called the gray zone, and I’ll let you guess about the gray in that. Gone with the Wind, a movie that I hate, didn’t have one bit of black and white morals in it. Much to my distaste Gone with the Wind is regarded as one of the greatest movies of all time, as is Citizen Kane.

I can look at a movie and say, “It was good, I hated it,” or “It was crap, I loved it.” Some people would say that makes me truly intelligent, I think it shows that I can see from other points of view, others would say that I’m full of shit. Regardless I think that people are wrong, the movie wasn’t as bad as they thought it was whether they liked it or not. The reason that I can say this with almost one hundred percent confidence is that the reasons that people have said it was bad aren’t factors that would make this particular movie bad.

If you don’t like a movie that doesn’t make it bad, if you do that doesn’t make it good, I could give example but I don’t think that people care, but to attack the quality of this movie for the reasons that have been presented is like saying an orange is bad because it’s orange. Now that I’ve come full circle back to the orange my rant is done. I’ll close on this, I have no problem with anyone saying that this movie is bad, but please give pertinent reasons. So far it’s been like someone getting angry at High Sierra beaches it had criminals in it, or Bill and Ted because it had bad acting. How about Public Enemy because of the fact that it was a moral driven story, or The Princess Bride because it wasn’t serious?

On a totally different note KYOBONITSUKI what does, “matrix presents itself in the manner of a serious manner,” mean? Are you saying that it presents itself in a serious manner? If you are why didn’t you just say that?

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, May 20, 2003 12:57 PM

INVISIBLEGREEN

"The Matrix Reloaded" was a good movie, exactly on the same quality level as the first film (3 out of four stars, IMO). Sure, some elements were better, and others were worse, but it was no better or worse than the original. The fight scene in the middle wher Neo fights all the Smiths has got to be one of the most boring and pointless fight scenes of all time, but the freeway chase scene is definitely one of the most thrilling. And the part where Neo talks to the Oracle is another pointless scene: he goes there, and all that happens plotwise is he has a piece of candy. Sure, the audience gets a lot of side information, but nothing relevant.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

YOUR OPTIONS

SHARE THREAD

NEW POSTS TODAY

USER

POST DATE