|
|
|
#1
Well I just downloaded the large size theatrical trailer of Matrix: Revolutions http://www.thematrix.com and I must say it is quite impressive. Beautiful visually and the looks of some amazing fight scenes (those mechs are damn sexay).
I just hope this third installment rounds off the trilogy well and makes some doubters into believers again after Reloaded. What do you think will happen in Revolutions and what do you think of the trailer?
#2
Okay, honestly- what was so freaking bad about Reloaded? I thought it was fine. The only real advantage The Matrix had over the 2nd was that it still could use the element of mystery.
Look at it this way. Okay, so the universe has been defined, so now what? Instead of merely making the second one a cash cow, they actually decide to make an interesting plot! Yes, there was more skin and explosions to please the masses, but it still was interesting enough. I've seen many worse movies.
As for the trailer, I'm all the sudden very impatient about Revolutions arriving
TheGeneral
[The Guide] says that the effect of a Pan Galactic Gargle Blaster is like having your brains smashed out by a slice of lemon wrapped round a large gold brick.
- The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy
#3
Problems with reloaded? A few excusable ones, and then a load of really big ones. The main one that comes to mind is the stupid 7 minute sex/dancing scene with neo and trinity. If its as important to the plot as they say it was, then I'm looking forward to seeing how it applies to revolutions, because it was damn boring and unnecessary in reloaded. Who'd have ever thought a matrix film would nearly put me to sleep... I went out and took a mud and when I came back it was still going.
As for the CGI, they really couldn't afford to do all those facial clsoe ups of Neo fighting Smith, because I could practically see the polygons. Very unconvincing.
The plot however wasn't that great (reasonable as general said, but not great), but was excusable simply because its part two of a trilogy, and was really meant to be a filler between the first and last ones.
On to the new trailer, it looks really good. Mechs of course are great, and the graphics look sweet enough. And the element of mystery has been brought back now that Neo can control the real world with his mind... or is it the real world? We'll have to wait and see.
#4
hey, i loved the orgy scene!...
Mostly because i wanted to be in it SOOO badly...
my main peeve with matrix so far is that after you've watched either of its films once...twice...thrice you kinda don't feel like popping the disc in your DVD player anymore, and that's kinda sad: Terminator 2 managed to get me press the play button on my VCR HUNDREDS of times, and i still wanted to see a-nuld kicking the t-1000's liquid ass.
Then again, i was 7 at the time, so i guess i was pretty easily entertained.
I'm hoping that Revolutions will be a movie i'll keep watching again and again and for years to come.
judging from those trailers though, it looks like i might get my movie.
Last edited by IgnusDei; 30th Sep 03 at 11:39 PM.
My problem is that they had years to write and refine the first movie. They had all the religious meanings and symbolism in the first one. Then they were given like 6 months or something like that to write both sequels. Reloaded really didn't have any of that meaning/symbolism in it.
Also, I agree with others that some parts were too long:
The party/sex scene could have been shorter, Neo vs. Agent Smiths could have been shorter
the Mansion fight could have been shorter
the highway part could have been shorter
...all of those with out losing any story...it's just that they were cool at first, but then lost their appeal when they kept going...and going...and going.
Also, how is it that everyone can fight agents now? In the first movie anyone who fought them died...except Neo, but he's The One. Now Morpheus and others can fight an agent...an upgraded/stronger agent and could last a while.
I still plan on seeing Revolutions though, it should be good.
#6
Vijil, you'd be the only person I've met who thought that the Neo vs Agent Smith fight scene was unconvincing. You exaggerate severely. The orgy scene was also fairly important; it was intended to emphasise the difference between humans (feeling) and machines (unfeeling). Unfortunately, all it achieved in my view was a whole lot of audience goodwill for the machines' agenda. Who wouldn't want to wipe out such a primitive, animalistic and pitiful species?
Additionally, please state your reasoning for believing that Reloaded is merely intended to be filler between the first movie and the last. All movies in a trilogy should be equally important.
Reignfire, unless someone was smoking crack, don't you think that they worked out the entire plot of The Matrix Trilogy when it was first written, and not just the first movie? Come on.
The problem with The Matrix is simply that it's a clumsy, pseudo-philosophical movie which attempts to address some old and well-worn philosophilcal concepts in a modern way which will appeal to the masses. But guess what? The masses aren't interested in philosophy. So, it's no big surprise that, in its success in appealing to the masses, it completely failed in its attempt to address philosophical issues in a meaningful way. It turned into a fumbling, incoherent jumble of a whole lot of theological and philosophical concepts, with no real direction or intelligence behind them.
As an action movie, it's fun. Its plot is even reasonable. But as a movie triology, judged on all its merits, it is already mediocre, even before the third movie has come out.
Don't get me wrong, I know they had to of have the idea of the whole triology worked out, but they were originally only making the first movie and they had years to work out that script to what it came out as. But just because they have the idea doesn't mean every single thing is worked out and giving them a lot less time to work out the scripts of two movies didn't allow they to give as much attention to them. I just think if WB gave them the as much time on Reloaded and Revolutions as they did the original, they could be much better.Originally posted by Bnonn
Reignfire, unless someone was smoking crack, don't you think that they worked out the entire plot of The Matrix Trilogy when it was first written, and not just the first movie? Come on.
Last edited by Reignfire; 1st Oct 03 at 10:14 AM.
The philopshy of the matrix series will only suck if they ignore it in the third film. My take on all that seemingly pointless mumbo jumbo (after seeing it the second time and thinking about it) was that no one had ever left the matrix - The rebels/resistance were in their own little matrix, potentially a very dark ending.
Time will tell.
Blah I am going to find my copy of Dr.Strangelove nothing better then a Model B-52 in front of a Screen now those where effects.But about the Matrix ya I was let down by reloaded but there will be another one so maybe it will be better and I dont really think much about these types of movies they are popcorn flicks after all
I got to see it before all of you because I waited until after the credits on Matrix: Reloaded.
Reignfire, I think the idea with everyone fighting the agents now is that Neo game them the will and the courage to do it, where as in the past they were simply too afraid.
I saw it in theaters too, and just like an hour ago I saw what I think to be the first TV commerical for Revolutions. Can't wait to see what the answers to all the questions are going to be
They're probably going to be botched, just like they were in Reloaded.
The Wachowskis are snot-nosed psuedo-intellectuals. Almost like Frank Herbert, they threw that garbage in there so that you would think they were somehow intelligent.
The crux of the argument that The Matrix: Reloaded is a bad movie wasn't the fight scenes and the action scenes (though, to be fair Bnonn, the Agent Smith fight scene looks and plays out like it was thrown in there just to say LOOK AT US, WE CAN HAVE ONE DUDE FIGHTING 100!!! ISN'T TECHNOLOGY GREAT?!), it was the retarded Philosophy 101 lessons inserted into it. Like the bullshit with the French guy over Causality. Trim that off of the Matrix: Reloaded (along with that extremely tasteless and needless shot of digital genitalia), and the only thing you've deprived me of is a restroom break.
I have a hard time taking anyting in the Matrix trilogy seriously considering that it's base concept is so outrageously flawed. I could spell it out for you, but Mac Hall already did such a fine job...
http://www.machall.com/index.php?strip_id=193
http://www.machall.com/index.php?strip_id=194
-Keiichi
Yeah, I was kind of staring in slack-jawed horror at the Animatrix
Spoiler
When the dude was pimping the plan...."Operation Dark Storm will deprive the enemy of their source of power!!! Nevermind that there is also Hydro-electricity, Oil, Gas, Nuclear, Wind, Geothermal........etc."
(Everyone at the conference) WHOOOO!! *APPLAUSE* YEAH!!!! GOOD PLAN!!!!
I thought of that and I agree that that's why they started fighting agents back, but technically agents should win everytime because they can move faster than bullets and everyone else (except Neo) can't...and that's not even considering that these are upgraded agents.Originally posted by jmu
Reignfire, I think the idea with everyone fighting the agents now is that Neo gave them the will and the courage to do it, where as in the past they were simply too afraid.
Speaking of which, what the fuck is an Upgraded Agent? Apparently they're on par with Neo, but that means that eventually he'll be.....OBSOLETE.
#18
Dune is one of the best pieces of sci-fi works out, so you best watch your tongue boy.Originally posted by YeehawMcKickass
The Wachowskis are snot-nosed psuedo-intellectuals. Almost like Frank Herbert, they threw that garbage in there so that you would think they were somehow intelligent.
"Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former." Albert Einstein
You've never dealt with cowboys before, have you?Dune is one of the best pieces of sci-fi works out, so you best watch your tongue boy.
And yes, Dune is a great book. However Frank Herbert seems to insert a bunch of junk simply so he can read it and say "Goddamn, I am smart."
I liked the movies (and games, Dune 1 from Cryo Entertainment was awesome, and it taught me more than the book did) better than the book.
I don't really care about the philosophy or realism in the Matrix movies. I'm thankful that it can pass as philosophy so we can watch it in school; this morning we watched the scenes where Morpheus explains that the world they lived in was only what was perceived, the philosophy bit, and then the lobby shootout, for no reason other than that we enjoyed the gratuitous violence. Really, the point of the movies seems to be that there are a few heroes fighting epic battles for the fate of the world and philosophy is relegated to no more than a tertiary level of importance.
In short: I want Revolutions to have more physics-defying fights and less talking since it doesn't really matter.
Hopefully the 3rd in the trilogy will have the same effect on me as the first, which is basically something thought provoking, a kinda "well, yeah it's far fetched, but you never know" sorta thing.
Thats what grabbed my attention.
I'm kinda hoping it's gonna be a psychological thing, wherein the plot of the film not only becomes entertaining but something that can create discussion between a large group of people.
The idea that we are living in a matrix is kinda lame, but the idea that the world we are living in is not quite what we percieve it to be is quite a good one, and i think the brothers actually thought long & hard before writing the films.
The way morpheus described the world in how we see it is actually an old greek philosophy, i forget the name of it but it's *insert greek philosophers name here* Cave.
By which his idea was, that if you were to have a community spent there whole lives in a cave with the opening covered by a veil or sheet of sorts, that cave became their world, they couldn't see their world any other way because they knew no different, so they would make assumptions based on the shadows on the veil and create their own 'matrix'
#22
Plato's Allegory of the Cave?
yeah thats the one (good ole google)
Plato realizes that the general run of humankind can think, and speak, etc., without (so far as they acknowledge) any awareness of his realm of Forms.
The allegory of the cave is supposed to explain this.
In the allegory, Plato likens people untutored in the Theory of Forms to prisoners chained in a cave, unable to turn their heads. All they can see is the wall of the cave. Behind them burns a fire. Between the fire and the prisoners there is a parapet, along which puppeteers can walk. The puppeteers, who are behind the prisoners, hold up puppets that cast shadows on the wall of the cave. The prisoners are unable to see these puppets, the real objects, that pass behind them. What the prisoners see and hear are shadows and echoes cast by objects that they do not see.
Such prisoners would mistake appearance for reality. They would think the things they see on the wall (the shadows) were real; they would know nothing of the real causes of the shadows.
So when the prisoners talk, what are they talking about? If an object (a book, let us say) is carried past behind them, and it casts a shadow on the wall, and a prisoner says "I see a book," what is he talking about?
He thinks he is talking about a book, but he is really talking about a shadow. But he uses the word "book." What does that refer to?
Plato gives his answer at line (515b2). The text here has puzzled many editors, and it has been frequently emended. The translation in Grube/Reeve gets the point correctly:
"And if they could talk to one another, don't you think they'd suppose that the names they used applied to the things they see passing before them?"
Plato's point is that the prisoners would be mistaken. For they would be taking the terms in their language to refer to the shadows that pass before their eyes, rather than (as is correct, in Plato's view) to the real things that cast the shadows.
If a prisoner says "That's a book" he thinks that the word "book" refers to the very thing he is looking at. But he would be wrong. He's only looking at a shadow. The real referent of the word "book" he cannot see. To see it, he would have to turn his head around.
Plato's point: the general terms of our language are not "names" of the physical objects that we can see. They are actually names of things that we cannot see, things that we can only grasp with the mind.
When the prisoners are released, they can turn their heads and see the real objects. Then they realize their error. What can we do that is analogous to turning our heads and seeing the causes of the shadows? We can come to grasp the Forms with our minds.
Plato's aim in the Republic is to describe what is necessary for us to achieve this reflective understanding. But even without it, it remains true that our very ability to think and to speak depends on the Forms. For the terms of the language we use get their meaning by "naming" the Forms that the objects we perceive participate in.
The prisoners may learn what a book is by their experience with shadows of books. But they would be mistaken if they thought that the word "book" refers to something that any of them has ever seen.
Likewise, we may acquire concepts by our perceptual experience of physical objects. But we would be mistaken if we thought that the concepts that we grasp were on the same level as the things we perceive.
edit* gotta love copy and paste
The bishop Berkeley of Ireland, actually.
The first was new, and it had soo many things that we had never seen before, like the slowmotion 3d stuff. The second one we had seen all that there really wasn't anything really new or inovative, so it really wasn't as good as the first. I'ts kind of like after the very first starwars came out back in the day, it was amazing and innovative, and when the second came out it just didn't have that same touch.
Actually, a majority of people think Empire was the best in the original Trilogy.
I know people that put the first matrix in and play it. But they won't put the seccond it ... It's not coz it doesn't have anything new in, it's got the same stuff the the first one has but it's not as good a movie, plain and simple truth.Originally posted by Higaran
The first was new, and it had soo many things that we had never seen before, like the slowmotion 3d stuff. The second one we had seen all that there really wasn't anything really new or inovative, so it really wasn't as good as the first. I'ts kind of like after the very first starwars came out back in the day, it was amazing and innovative, and when the second came out it just didn't have that same touch.
And the First SW came out and not everyone went to watch it, infact people were able to go to the second showing and ahve the cinema to themselves. It was only when the second one came out that you had to book in advance. It took a while for it to catch on, but when it did it was good.
All three of the SW (First Tril) were great. They didn't use CGI and yet the effects are better then some movies today that glow with CGI. It's not the effects that I go to see when I go to the movies, I go to see the movie as a whole.
It takes a lot of argument
to convince most people
that they are lying.
#28
Bnonn: It was easy to tell the difference between the cgi neo scenes and the real ones, and I have met several other people who think so. The texturing on neos face and cloak didn't seem right, and his movement was awkward. "Could practically see the polygons" is my way of saying that without typing too much... and getting the general idea across. Being concise is not something I'm particularly concerned about in an informal discussion such as this.
The orgy scene may have been important, but seven minutes? For such a simple concept that was conveyed in other parts of the movie it seems like overkill.
"Who wouldn't want to wipe out such a primitive, animalistic and pitiful species?"
Indeed, although I think you just dont like techno
Its a filller in that it isn't much of a film on its own merits, like the first one. It is important of course, but the plot comes across as rather disjointed at times. It'll probably make a lot more sense when seen with the third movie as well.
Frankly I think the entire series is a great success. The idea was to make lots of money (regardless of what its creators may have said), and that it has done and will continue to do. I'm not going to judge it by some goal it never intended, like philosophical exploration or something.
As mac hall said: "For now, we have some matrix humor. Really, all these little 'what-about-this' questions involving the backstory of the Matrix,I really don't care. Matt and I agree that it all boils down to is an excuse for high-powered ass-kicking, and I'm down with that."
I'm down with that.
Last edited by Vijil; 2nd Oct 03 at 12:20 AM.
#29
- The idea was to make lots of money (regardless of what its creators may have said)
I guess you would know better than the people who made it...
"Matt and I agree that it all boils down to is an excuse for high-powered ass-kicking, and I'm down with that"
Fair comment.
But thats why the entertainment industry can make so much money from these things, one movie appeals to a huge audience for several reasons, you and matt were in it for the ass kickin, where as i loved it for the concept and it's ideas, the ass kickin helped it easier to digest.
Admitted, the second film was weakish, but it wasn't that bad, it stuck with the ideas of the 1st, but i think the main downfall of it was the fact that the wachowski brothers set such a high standard in the 1st it couldn't be beaten.
#31
the idea was to create a film that the producers (WB) would think good enough to put on screens worldwide... in other words make lots of money.
Doing that requires making up a cool film, sure, but the ultimate goal of the producers and supporting companies is to make money. At this it did admirably.
#32
I personally thought that there was too much fighting going on. I actually grew kinda sick of it towards the end.
#33
So the creators' goal has nothing to do with the goal of the film itself?
#34
Well to clear some things up.
- The trilogy was written before the first movie was made.
- The second and third movies are to be considered one movie but they had to cut it in half because of length.
- One of the Wachowski's is actually thinking about getting a sex change (true!)
Now I must say that the first matrix was much better movie-wise and much more coherent than the second movie, but the second matrix had some damn cool fight scenes and I don't see how you can disagree with that. Vijil, you are right that in the big fight scene with 100 Smith's that Neo looks quite digital (especially when he is spinning on stick his movements are very fake for example his head turning) but the digital Agent Smith's in my opinion were done VERY well, they get the illusion down right and it is better than any other digital people I have seen yet.
Let us go over some cool parts of the second matrix:
- Two trucks hitting eachother, ridiculously fun to watch side's of truck ripple and then explosion burst out from underneath.
- 100 Agent Smith's battle, Neo has some sweet moves in that and it is damn funny to watch him bat Smithy's away with a large pole (as in object not Polish person).
- Neo flying through clouds, kinda dumb looking in some cases but when he makes the clouds swirl around him it is a nice effect.
- The architect has a nice TV room. And he says 'ergo' a lot.
#35
What the hell does that have to do with anything?One of the Wachowski's is actually thinking about getting a sex change (true!)
#36
I was wondering the same thing.
It is a testament to his mental state.
#38
Or an explanation for Keanu's ass.
#39
Oh I just threw that in there for some random humor and I just felt like it, a lot of people don't know about it. Starfisher may have a point, or maybe he has just been studying that scene far too much (I kid...I kid!).
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
