Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all! We have been experiencing an issue on site where threads have been missing the latest postings. The platform host Vanilla are working on this issue. A workaround that has been used by some is to navigate back from 1 to 10+ pages to re-sync the thread and this will then show the latest posts. Thanks, Mike.
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

The Matrix Resurrections (with Keanu Reeves, Carrie-Anne Moss and Lana Wachowski)

1235711

Comments

  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,253 ✭✭✭Sonics2k


    Funnily enough I actually just finished Revolutions like an hour ago, and pretty much felt the same. It's a bit over long but I actually enjoyed it a lot more this time around. Still nothing on the original Matrix movie, but that was such a new thing at the time, and honestly I think a lot of people (including myself) had no real clue about just how far that movie would go.

    However, each time I watch Reloaded I always remember that skit from the MTV awards years ago with Justin Timberlake and Sean William Scott.

    The MTV Movie Awards Reloaded - YouTube



  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 36,711 CMod ✭✭✭✭pixelburp


    This was my theory too: Neo was inserted back into the Matrix at the end of Matrix 3, either as reward or punishment for his actions in the original trilogy. To give him what they thought might be a fulfilling life - but the malaise has slowly caused him to question his worth/ existence.

    To the last point

    Morpheus is around; he's who Yahya Abdul-Mateen II  is playing. Or at least, that's what Abdul-Mateen inferred in a recent social media post.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,007 ✭✭✭Mr Crispy


    So maybe he's been put back in to the Matrix to live the life of an actor á la Cypher's wishes in the first film. The flashbacks in the trailer that look like reshot scenes from the first movie are actually memories of the films he thinks he has been in. And when he starts confusing his real life with that of the roles he has played, he goes to see NPH. Or something even more meta that I can't even...



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,461 ✭✭✭Acosta


    I'll have to watch the first 3 again. I've not seen them in years and can't really remember all that well. The trailer looks class. White Rabbit helps.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 32,017 ✭✭✭✭~Rebel~


    I could totally buy that the machines kept both Neo and Trinity alive and in stasis after TM3, and even that they were inserted back into the Matrix as a sort of 'break glass in case of emergency' that they kept control over in case another 'Smith' type bug cropped up. Like an external superuser in case the machines themselves lost control. As said with that flash of 'old Keanu', I could believe that this is even 100 or so years later, with the machines keeping them alive that long. And the next rotation of cloned characters can be the trigger for things starting back up, as the new iteration of Morpheus comes through.

    Speaking of which, it does make sense to me that the machines would use cloning rather than going through the hassle of artificial insemination to create new unique humans. From the point of view of using them as batteries, you don't care if they're unique, you just need the bodies, and cloning seems the simpler way to achieve this. Every time someone dies, a baby version of them just takes their own place again. This kind of feeds into the existing mythos of the whole cycle running through over and over again too.

    As an aside, I rewatched 2 and 3 a few weeks back, and enjoyed them a lot more than I had on first viewing. Certain things in particular stood out as quite clever and innovative for the time, especially in the second one - everything that takes place in-matrix is written as if our gang are conscious players in a game. Same as when we ourselves play computer games, we know the whole thing is already written, but we have to go through it without knowing the outcome - but we know there IS a scripted outcome. The narrative feels just like that, that the characters are pushing through the in-world challenges against the programs from the perspective of 'players' (which of course they are, being humans against programs). All the challenges feel like scripted in-game puzzles, like just when they hit a dead end, Neo is given the challenge to kiss Monica Bellucci like he loves her. 3 is more annoying alright though, with so little fun-time Matrix stuff and far too much Zion, but I still enjoyed it more than I had previously.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,206 ✭✭✭✭B.A._Baracus


    If you freeze frame at the start of the trailer with the flashing images you can see neo's body being readied to be inserted into the matrix. But if you pay extra attention you can see that his eyes are burned from the fight he had with smith in "human" form in matrix revolutions.

    Also, when neo and trinity are in the apartment you can see trinity cry "matrix" code. Very subtle.



  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Entertainment Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 22,682 CMod ✭✭✭✭Sad Professor


    Good trailer. I am intrigued by this where as previously I couldn’t have cared less.

    I assume Priyanka Copra (the young Indian woman will big glasses) is the Oracle reborn? Or maybe the young Indian girl now grown up from the third film?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,206 ✭✭✭✭B.A._Baracus


    Here's another tidbit:

    If you freeze on Trinity when she is screaming you can see multiple versions of herself but not all are actress Carrie Ann Moss. Some are of an Asian actress wearing the same clothes.



  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 36,711 CMod ✭✭✭✭pixelburp


    The Burly Brawl didn't even convince on release, at least for me anyway. I had a watch of the scene last night and it's so, so very bad. A very good example of why a larger budget and fewer limitations or oversight don't equate to a superior final product. Maybe the FX studio promised more than they could deliver but after The Matrix's lauded physicality the rubbery nonsense of the Burly Brawl was like whiplash.

    And while I wouldn't normally crib about that sort of thing, the design of the human mechs in Revolutions really annoyed me for their total impracticality; between the dangerously exposed pilot, or the idiotic way of reloading - done purely as a lazy excuse for a set piece.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,465 ✭✭✭corcaigh07


    Can someone bookmark this post for post of the year? Brilliant



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 23,934 ✭✭✭✭Kermit.de.frog


    Was a huge fan of the first Matrix movie.

    The sequels are what stopped it being a Sci-fi cult classic.

    For example, I can watch the first two Alien or Terminator movies and separate them from the dross that came next.

    I don't feel the same way about the Matrix. In my mind the sequels harmed the whole thing in a way they didn't for other franchises. I'm not sure why. Maybe it is simply they are so god damn awful, messing up and confusing the whole premise, in every possible way? 🥴

    So I have no expectations here as the franchise is ruined. I'll give it a try though.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,090 ✭✭✭jill_valentine


    For me a big chunk of that is that the first did some really fascinating stuff framed around the idea that we, the viewer, might be in the Matrix. Neo was in our world, how would *we* know our world isn't a simulation? It was 1999 then - but were we sure it hadn't been 1999 for years?

    When the sequels came along they abandoned that. The world the movies were in was clearly not the one I was living in, this wasn't all taking place just out of sight of my day to day life, and that made some of the questions M1 posed way less interesting.

    The other part is that in M1 we're told "the one" would be able to essentially rewrite reality once they understood the nature of it. But, again, once the sequels come along they narrow that down into "Oh he can stop bullets and fly".



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,492 ✭✭✭EltonJohn69


    Just watched the first again today… and it really holds up.. the pacing is relentless… just non stop tension and action…. Plot constantly moving forward…edited perfect… all killer no filler

    currently watching the second…. And jaysus… they really blew it… this whole 40 minute trip to Zion can be cut or at least cut in half….


    Also they all look noticeably older.. must have been a 5 year gap between filming



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,206 ✭✭✭✭B.A._Baracus


    Just looked it up and Matrix 1 filmed March 1998 to August 1998. Matrix 2 and 3 filmed March 2001 to August 2002. 3-4 years difference.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,994 ✭✭✭✭expectationlost


    the Matrix Rethread?



  • Advertisement
  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 36,711 CMod ✭✭✭✭pixelburp


    I think that was just the classic problem of a story never intended to be written into sequels, despite what the authors might have claimed. As you say the framing of the first made it fairly clear Neo would become a functional god by the film's end, and did! That end was that perfect little encouragement for the audience to take the story onwards into their heads. But then the studio said more!, along came the sequels, the original cast coming back but there would be little tension if its returning hero had no limits. Really, it was a problem familiar to anyone who wrote a Superman story. Instead the Wachowkis Sisters got lost in their own script and overcomplicated everything (huh; I wonder is that where we can blame the modern blockbusters trend towards convolution?)

    Maybe a better sequel story would have been one that emphasised just how vulnerable and brittle Neo was outside of the Matrix; his fight with "real life" Smith in #3 was a good example of this working well, albeit briefly. The ostensible god struggling cos in our world, he's just a man. Instead the Matrix scenes had to sideline Neo at every turn, with the actual fights became deeply bleh. Or perhaps better again, had Neo just disappeared after the first film, the sequels an attempt to continue the fight while also searching for Neo; then he'd have been a literal Deus Ex Machina.

    It's funny cos had The Matrix remained a single film, maybe even underwhelmed at the box office and became a cult classic instead: perhaps now we'd be getting a true second film, rather than a fourth after the creator's struggle with their follow-up projects.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 34,283 ✭✭✭✭Penn


    I think another issue with the sequels was they went the wrong way with Agent Smith. Rather than have him becoming more powerful in a way that complimented the fight scenes, they just made a whole lot more of him. The fight scenes then had to go from well choreographed fights to CGI-fests. By the time the final fight in Revelations comes around, they're gone so far past fights that it's just two Supermen bouncing off each other (and doing the "impact from flying at each other causes strong force which dispels rainwater" about three times).

    The best fights in the sequels were Trinity's, and maybe Neo's fight in the Merovingian's mansion.



  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Entertainment Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 22,682 CMod ✭✭✭✭Sad Professor


    I do think they planned for sequels. I just think that because they didn't know for sure if they would get make them they ended up concluding a lot of the story in the first movie. I recall an earlier draft of the script in which Smith wasn't destroyed at the end and Neo didn't become all powerful. It was fairly close to the final version too.

    That many feel the sequels hurt the first film is interesting and shouldn't really be the case. I suppose the sequels made obvious that the Wachowskis weren't as smart as people gave them credit for and unlike SW there was no Gary Kurtz or Irvin Kershner to hold up as the actual geniuses.



  • Moderators, Arts Moderators, Regional Abroad Moderators Posts: 11,078 Mod ✭✭✭✭Fysh


    The other half stuck on Reloaded last week, and I ended up watching most of it (missed the first 40 minutes, lucky for me).

    The Merovingian is really a terrible excuse for a character, the sort of assembly of clichés that would have the writers of 'Allo 'Allo pause and say "no, that's a bit too much". And yet, the Mansion fight was great. But the other Neo fights were just dull, particularly when contrasted with Morpheus and Trinity fighting agents or the Virus Twins. Morpheus on top of the truck was a great fight, full of tension becauase we know he can't possibly win against an agent, and yet what else can he do to try and buy time for the others to rescue the Keymaker? By contrast, the Burly Brawl was boring because there wasn't really any tension, it was just Neo-As-Goku beating up a load of Smiths, with neither side displaying any inventiveness to their fighting technique.

    I am in two minds about wading through Revolutions again, I remember it being long and boring, but perhaps time will have softened some of the harshness of being compared to the original film.



  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Computer Games Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 29,748 CMod ✭✭✭✭johnny_ultimate


    What surprised me about Revolutions on a revisit was how high the stakes are. There’s a desperation to the fights, and a sense that none of the characters are safe. Obviously it’s being a convoluted Matrix film on top of all that - wrapping up all the lore and adding more jargon - but every victory in the thing feels hard-won and even bittersweet.



  • Advertisement
  • Moderators, Arts Moderators, Regional Abroad Moderators Posts: 11,078 Mod ✭✭✭✭Fysh


    Funny thing, but the comparison with Alex Proyas and Dark City comes to mind. It's a great little film (though the theatrical cut was meddled with and given an opening voiceover that spoils half the story) that got swept away by The Matrix on release, and while Proyas had previously had success with the Crow his subsequent films haven't done so well. Then earlier this year we got word of a new short film by Proyas which is set in the Dark City universe, and which may be followed by a series.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,090 ✭✭✭jill_valentine


    Imho Revolutions is better than Reloaded, and has aged significantly better than it too. Not least because there is some actual tension in some of the fights now you don't know if people actually *might* die.


    The focus on the real world makes for some fresh visuals too. The knock down drag out brawl with Bane/Smith is a really lively contrast to all the Dragonball zooming etc because there's a sense that somebody actually could - and then does! - get seriously hurt, and seeing our heroes scramble around trying to fight with real world physics for once is great. The first movie has a grimeyness at times than Reloaded lost, but there's a touch of it back in Revolutions.

    I also think Trinity getting to see the sun for the first time is lovely.



  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Computer Games Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 29,748 CMod ✭✭✭✭johnny_ultimate


    While the ‘Super Burly Brawl‘ or whatever it’s called does double down on the ‘more Smiths / no gravity’ approach of Reloaded, it also gets away with much more because it’s at night and set against rain and lightning. The harsh light of day isn’t present to accentuate the two-decade old CG (that wasn’t even good two decades ago). And ultimately it’s a one on one fight, despite the scores of Smiths on display.

    Also, it’s some of the wettest, squelhiest cinematic rainfall you’ll find this side of Back to the Future 2 ☔️



  • Registered Users Posts: 369 ✭✭sekiro


    I already hate the trailer so I don't think I'm going to have much fun with this movie.

    The idea of Neo taking blue pills is just daft. Taking what is really a throwaway thing in the original and turning it into a plot point in the sequel is so typical of these blockbuster movies trying to hard to wink and nod to the audience.

    The Alice in Wonderland references? Oh, please. Subtle.

    Check it out:


    For me the original has a very distinctive style. Maybe that's just a part of the time when the movie was made but to be honest the new movie looks like it was made by someone who has been told about the original Matrix movie and is trying to copy it. It feels inauthentic. Which kind of makes no sense as it's the same directors? Maybe they are less involved in the creative process or something.

    New one looks too clean, too formulaic, too much winking and nodding to the audience. Trying to tell a story that has already been told. Or trying to needlessly add to a story that has already been fully completed.

    The new Star Wars trilogy ended up really feeling like fan fiction rather than an authentic expansion of the Star Wars universe. This kind of feels like it will be the same. Maybe they have some massive surprises to drop. We'll see.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 34,283 ✭✭✭✭Penn


    The trouble with comparing the new trailer/film with the original is that the original was an unknown, whereas now going into the new movie, we know so much about the world already. I think the mirroring of elements of the first film is just how the movie will start off, then it'll become its own thing in a somewhat new direction since it is following the events of a previous trilogy (and possibly the extended universe in terms of the games too).

    So things like the Alice in Wonderland stuff (which seems more obvious in this trailer than the first movie which still had similar references in terms of follow the white rabbit etc) or the blue pills are designed to show familiarity, but also allows them to create a jumping-off point as to how the new movies are going to be different. For me the most interesting shot of the trailer is Trinity screaming and the kind of reverberations coming out of her. It strongly signifies it's not just "old character returns", but significantly differently.

    The new Stars Wars trilogy ultimately failed because The Force Awakens emulated A New Hope too closely and didn't deviate enough from it, but did leave the potential to do so in the following films. The Last Jedi went in a brand new direction (and was the best of the three imo but let's not start that debate), and when there was backlash to it, the studio decided to then just erase the changes and emulate Return of the Jedi for the third film. So long as Matrix Resurrections uses the framework of the first Matrix movie but to then take things in a brand new direction, I don't mind rethreading some old ground.



  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 36,711 CMod ✭✭✭✭pixelburp


    You could write a whole book on that new Star Wars trilogy: but for all its faults, that new series showed the ultimate dead-end of indulging in a vocal, sometimes rabid fan-base for creative directions. Last Jedi wasn't such a story swerve that even if it wasn't popular, couldn't be "corrected". I loved its choices but yeah, that war gas been fought.

    Instead, episode 9 was the apotheosis of Fan Service; a chaotic combination of franchise self-immolation and masturbation. It took a spin-off TV show to restore some faith in the series (and even it's own second season has seen a pronounced increase in nostalgic wànkery).

    The Matrix has none of that cultural baggage really; it can spin off into any direction it wishes, because there's no cabal of fundamentalists with purchasing power, waiting to sabotage things if (say) it turns out The Matrix isn't even on Earth or whatnot.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,090 ✭✭✭jill_valentine


    They can justify a lot of fan service with the meta angle they seem to be going for anyway, imho, without that necessarily restricting whatever new story they're trying to tell overall.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,492 ✭✭✭EltonJohn69


    How did the same people make matrix 1 and matrix 2 ???

    Their first film Bound was amazing… then the matrix was even better… one of the best films of the decade… and matrix 2 is like they lost all objectivity… too much drugs ? Too much money ??? What the hell happened ? Is their an explanation ? There are some good moments in it but huge chunks are like a really bad episode of Star Trek…


    matrix 3 tomorrow



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,339 ✭✭✭Markus Antonius


    I can foresee little more than cameo roles from Keanu Reeves and Trinity with 95% of the film featuring the oracle and morpheus



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 20,989 ✭✭✭✭2smiggy


    I watched the original Matrix and loved it. Never bothered watching the next 2 after seeing all the negative reviews. Any reason to watch them now ?



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 34,283 ✭✭✭✭Penn


    They'll definitely lead into the new one. They both have a lot of great scenes and moments, and a lot of the more practical-looking fight scenes are amazing. Some great new characters too. But there's also a lot of big expositional scenes talking about the concept of the Matrix, free will etc etc, and a lot more of the real world/Zion side of things which doesn't always work.

    I'd say if you're interested in watching the new one, best off just watching 2&3 to be on the safe side. If anything, trying to just read a Wikipedia synopsis or short video recap of them to try and catch up would probably leave you more confused.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 15,115 ✭✭✭✭loyatemu


    I doubt you'll need to know anything about the sequels - the producers will be fully aware that most people watching this new one won't have seen 2&3 (probably plenty of people will go to see this without having even seen the first film).



  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Entertainment Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 22,682 CMod ✭✭✭✭Sad Professor


    There's shots in the trailer that clearly deal with the aftermath of Revolutions. I really don't see how this is going to make sense unless you have watched the sequels. Even if it is a soft reboot and/or they spend the first 20 minutes reminding the audience what happened in the previous 3 films, there's no reason not watch the sequels. They are fine, they just don't live up the ridiculous level of hype, praise and analysis that was heaped (undeservedly imo) on the first film which was far too popular to ever be a cult film.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,967 ✭✭✭Chris_5339762


    IMO The first Matrix film was an excellent, standalone film that was perfect for its time. It wouldn't work now as CGI can do everything that made THAT film special.

    Reloaded and Revolutions aren't as good, but I always feel people are two harsh on them. The 40 minutes in Zion at the start is a bit long and the music bit there is stupid, but if you consider the 40 minutes as part of a 4+ hour film is not too bad. They are still a good watch, and the Architect never gets enough praise



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,492 ✭✭✭EltonJohn69


    That so much of it ( matrix 1) isn’t cgi is what makes it special and still hold up and unique…. The 2nd has way too much cgi… all those cgi agents and and cgi flying Keanu reeves/superman… cgi does not age well



  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 36,711 CMod ✭✭✭✭pixelburp


    Matrix 1 had loads of CGI, it just had the smarts not to lean on it as a crutch for every stunt the production wished to perform. If they could, they would do it as a practical, on-set moment then accentuate with CGI. As always with this topic, the tool itself is not the problem - David Finchers movies often contain dozens (hundreds?) Of CGI shots - but it's never used to distracting excess. And you'd never think of him as a CGI heavy director either. Conversely, the MCU films positively swim in post production as a fist response (via the infamous pre-vis method of production).



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,090 ✭✭✭jill_valentine


    Yeah. M1's budget limitations made for some tricks that made for a more visually creative movie in a lot of ways too.

    Shots of people morphing into Agents are far less interesting imho than clever little set ups where the camera work alone has to make it clear that a random person in a cardigan who was there a second ago is a suited and booted Agent now, eg the old lady in the last foot chase.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,492 ✭✭✭EltonJohn69


    All the Zion stufff should have been cut from 2 and 3 it’s like a completely different (generic and awful) film. I think if you combined all the inside the matrix stuff from 2 and 3 you might have a decent movie. All the new characters in Zion are awful.

    it’s like they tried to cram an awful aliens/terminator clone movie into the matrix…


    i hope matrix 4 has no Zion



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 15,282 ✭✭✭✭MisterAnarchy


    Agreed, it was the Zion stuff that weakened the sequels especially the third.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 194 ✭✭Atticus Jung


    21 years since ive seen it and that trailer still looks incredible



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,492 ✭✭✭EltonJohn69


    Is the reason Matrix 4 is being made because basically everything else the Wachowskis made flopped ? It’s unlikely any studio would give them money anymore other then for a matrix sequel



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,492 ✭✭✭EltonJohn69


    Joe Pantoliano features a lot in the trailer… he was really great in the movie



  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 36,711 CMod ✭✭✭✭pixelburp


    Only Lana is involved with this, Lilly went elsewhere and from her comments, was very much of the thinking, "I don't want to return to something that was a huge emotional deal for me".

    We can't know for sure, but I could see a few scenarios: one was any future projects were under the condition of making a new Matrix film (something Warners have probably wanted for years now); or Lana wanted to return to the world, a comfort project after noted wobbles like Speed Racer or Jupiter Ascending. Wouldn't be the first artist to do that.

    Or maybe the license reverted to WB if she didn't make a new movie, who knows. In any case, WB were probably gagging for some nostalgia mining, it just came down to how enthused Lana Wachowki was to do it.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,492 ✭✭✭EltonJohn69


    Having just re watched 2 and 3 my excitement levels for Matrix 4 have gone way down.

    I dont know how anyone didn’t stop them and say these scripts are garbage… full of incomprehensible babble and boring scenes/characters…. There was potential if someone reworked the script and edited mercilessly.


    Hopefully the studio has Lana W on tight leash because success and free reign was not beneficial.


    at least we didn’t get sequels to fight club or being John malokviech or American beauty



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,206 ✭✭✭✭B.A._Baracus


    Long post warning!

    Imo, it feels like matrix 2 and 3 were written and created by different people compared to the first. That much of a shift.

    But you can see where the Wachowski's where coming from. Sure we don't know what came first - Warner Brothers saying that they want to make 2 and 3 together now go off and write it or the Wachowski's wrote 2 and 3 and that's what kicked off doing both. But in any case 2 sequels were made to one of the greatest movies of all time. So how do you write such a thing?

    Do you play it safe and just rehash the first or offer something new like they did? The first matrix ends pretty closed. Sure enough room to make a sequel but what would the story be about to span 2 and 3?

    The most obvious road to go down is to have the machines attack Zion given it's build up in the first. Also means we have to get alot of Zion scenes tho (which weren't great) as theres no threat without seeing Zion in a movie. But it's a matrix movie, how do you create a need for people to go in the matrix if the real threat is outside in the real world? So que all this key maker guff etc. You can see where the Wachowski's where going.

    You almost had to bring back Hugo Weaving as he was amazing as Smith so having him go rouge and cloning himself was a nice element.

    But the biggest thing is how do you end the story of 2 and 3. I always felt having peace between the machines was an easy cop out to end the series. Its more clean. Because if the humans won more questions would be raised. Suddenly a few billion people wake up from their pods? Can't move because of their muscles. How would zion cope with billions needing shelter etc. It wouldn't be a clean ending and explaining all that would be a borning LONG ending.

    So you can see the challenge the Wachowski's faced. How do you write two more movies. Rehash the first movie two more times some how or try to expand. Sadly imo I think they made some wrong choices.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,206 ✭✭✭✭B.A._Baracus


    Delete me :p



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,206 ✭✭✭✭B.A._Baracus


    Do not click on this spoiler unless you want this certain aspects of movie to be spoiled for you. I just watched this trailer for the 10th time and spotted something. But it's not a little "oh hey, I seen that" - It's a bit more than that.

    Clicking fingers appears to be a thing. Like changing reality at a click.


    # At the 15 second mark we see someone (who knows) click his fingers and with the edit of the trailer we cut back to Neo in the Shrink's (Neil Patrik Harrick Harris) Room.

    # At 1:54 Neo is trying to click his fingers as a gun is in his face.

    # At 2:22 you see Neo on the bike with Trinity 'scarfing' his hand around her neck which seems to be clicking his fingers






  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,480 ✭✭✭AllForIt


    I didn't know this was actually happening.

    Having looked at the trailer, the One looks exactly like John Wick, with the beard and long hair.

    Why would they do that?



  • Posts: 11,614 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Its a bit like how did the same people who made the first season of Lost, make, well, all the other seasons of Lost. The number one answer - pressure from the networks/film studios to make more. And quick!



  • Registered Users Posts: 2,909 ✭✭✭Gwynplaine


    I watched the first one again at the weekend. Love it, hadnt seen it for a few years. As I looked at the 3 in the bluray box set, that I got about 12 years ago, I realised the 2nd and 3rd one have never been taken out of the box. Trailer for the new one looks okay. Wont be in a rush to go see it. For a start, Neo needs to be clean shaven, with the long black coat.



  • Advertisement
Advertisement