Matrix Revolutions

Ok, it's been out for a few weeks now. Loved it? Hated it? Indifferent? Conclusive or head scratcher? Because I've been a Matrix geek from the beginning, I'm interested in people's take on the third and final(?) installment of the MatrixTrilogy. For the sake of those who haven't seen it yet, I'll refrain from any spoilers (although once comments come in...if they do...you're on your own). At any rate, Isobal and I really enjoyed it for the most part despite some pretty major plot holes. I don't think the Wachowskis so much dropped the ball on Revolutions as they did left them hovering right in front of us. Opinions?

Comments

I haven't had a chance to see it, and as the reviews haven't been all that positive, I've been saving my moviegoing karma for the third "Lord of the Rings" installment. (With two kids, my wife and I are lucky to catch any first-run movie in the theaters, unless its a cartoon.) I can barely remember "Reloaded," frankly. The first film was just too new, too deliciously digestible to top.

That said, when "Reloaded" left me scratching my head, this essay helped me make some sense of it. Looking now, I see the author has also tackled "Revolutions."

I think I liked the basic feel of the first film, and the questions raised by the second. My thoughts on the third will probably have to wait for the DVD!

I saw The Matrix Revolutions on opening night and I can say without a doubt it was the worst. Matrix. Ever.

Worst. Ever.
[/comic book guy]

Jon, It's too bad that Revolutions didn't work out for you at the theatre. You must have felt like a chump for not trusting your instincts and waiting a bit...you know..in a "fools rush in" sort of way. How unfortunate for you. Ryan, yes, I always check Rotten Tomatoes before I see a film but certain movies are a must see despite a less than 60% rating over there. It seems as if a lot of people are judging/comparing Reloaded and Revolutions against the first Matrix instead of looking at it as one long movie. It's typical of the shortened attention span and top this generation. I guess I just feel that certain movies should definitely be seen on the big screen, regardless of quality quotient; the Matrix and LOTR trilogy's are must-see's in a theatre....as opposed to a hipster's choice, such as, say.....Lost in Translation which wouldn't necessarily lose anything on a TV screen as opposed to the Matrix or LOTR trilogy's.

I'm one of those who disliked the second (somewhat) and third (verily) parts of the Matrix Trilogy. Along with comparing the second and third parts with the first Matrix, I also seem to compare the entire set to the Lord of the Rings Trilogy. Right or wrong, this be what I've to say about it...

So far, the first two movies of LOTR has been well done. Story-wise as well as visually. A great balance of these two in BOTH movies. Whereas the Matrix series seems to lack that balance. The first Matrix had a great combination of both story and eye-candy. With Reloaded, it seemed to me that the story was beginning to be submerged in special effects. There was less dialogue in the film, and I don't count the Architect's lecture as dialogue. Enter Revolutions. Zero dialogue, a lot of one liners and a massive battle ala Dragon Ball Z.

Maybe the story was hidden in the minute details. Maybe it was explained only in implications. If so, then I guess the Matrix became too intelligent for me. Maybe not. One thing is certain, I never left the theatre thinking "What if?" from Reloaded and Revolutions. Had I wanted to see battles that were displayed in them, I would've popped in Max Payne 2, Dead to Rights, Dragon Ball Z: Budokai or a million other like video games. At least I'd then be able to control the fights instead of being bored and wondering when the next "Stage Transition" scene is going to come up. And that "To Be Continued" part in Reloaded was just lame. That kind of ending is norm on T.V. shows, NOT movies. The ending of LOTR, and even Kill Bill, was much better than Reloaded.

I suppose it's just that, personally, Reloaded and Revolutions work as being purely entertaining action movies, while the first was more story prominent and I expected that [quality] to continue.

I loved the first Matrix but had not seen the second one, Reloaded. I've been wanting to see the third, Revolutions but wanted to wait until I saw the second. I borrowed the Reloaded DVD from a a friend and just watched it today. I thought it was good, a little long and some of the fighting scenes were kind of boring. I'm still a little confused by the part when Neo meets the Architect but I'm going to watch it a few more times. Tomorrow I'm going to see Revolutions at Ward Theatre to see how it all ends.

R-Lan,

Interesting perceptions, especially regarding your take on Revolutions supposed lack of dialogue. More than a few people I've talked to seem to think that Revolutions has too much dialogue. Personally, I felt like it was balanced in that area. My biggest gripe was the muddy connections between Mr. Smith, the machines and the Architect. There's just waaay too much unexplained symbolism. In this sense, the Matrix didn't become too intelligent for you, it became too pedantic for it's own good.

Agreed about the "to be continued" on Reloaded. Embrace the lameness, right?

And yes, I think a lot of people are comparing the Matrix trilogy with the LOTR trilogy. I think what makes LOTR so much more cohesive than Matrix is the simple fact that it's based on a very well crafted piece of literature whereas at times it seems like the Brothers Wachowski are making stuff up as they go while showcasing the latest CGI effects along the way.

James,

You're not the only one who is baffled by the Architect and his mind-numbing monologue. I suggest you check out this thread for some interesting surmisings about that.

I hope you enjoy Revolutions! :)

Post a Comment