Matrix Trilogy

[_liam_]

yep, i know this is old old old, but i'd love to know you guy's opinions on this trilogy.

i didnt make the poll "which is your favourite" cos it's kinda obvious which one would come out on top.

watched these movies back to back for the first time. first time i've seen the first movie in about 5 years.

first one is excellent, of course. totally brilliant. ok so it rips off "the invisibles" a bit, but guess what, the invisibles was a load of airy fairy sub-alan moore rubbish and nowhere as believable as the matrix.

i have to say, what the hell is up with the third one? i mean the second was a bit of a letdown but then apart from the sheer silliness of the rogue programs subplot (erm, surely the agents would just slaughter them all?), i was prepared to cut it some slack on account of the tought act it had to follow.

but the third one? total dumbness. how do trinity & the gang get from the merovingians nightclub to the train? did she have a gun to his head the whole way? i just can't see it working. he didnt seem to be on the train when it arrived, so why would he keep his word like that?

the gunfight when they entered that club was the most boring thing ever, and it looked kinda fake. ah well.

also HOW did neo kill those sentinels at the end of the 2nd one? i dont think it was ever fully explained.

and when the sentinels attack zion, why do they travel in a condensed stream? those weird "Aliens" style armoured suits can only shoot one or two sentinels at a time, if the sentinels spread out they could have taken them all out in a few minutes (after all, theres about 40 of those suits and 250,000 sentinels!), instead they sorta lineup to get shot at.

the big machine face at the end was dumb too. why did it shout at neo? didnt strike me as the sort of thing the figurehead of a super advanced machine race would do, bellowing "WE NEED NO ONE" (or whatever) like a teenager

although i did like the ending, thought that was great, and the bane/neo getting blinded thing was cool. "i can see you" - liked that.

music was good!

oh yeah - and i loved the machine city, looked like the covers of the old editions of asimov books that came out in the 70s/80s.

[HLS]

Well the first was the best. i loved the series. The other two was a big letdown but we all know sequels are not made to be quality films, they are just made to milk money from us for all its worth *sigh*

[EvilNed]

I love the first one. And it's definetly not a rip-off of anything. You know why? Because it borrows and is influenced by so many styles, movies, books, philosophies that to say that it's a "rip off" of something else just doesn't cut it. It's so heavily influenced by everything that, by being so, it becomes a work of art.

The second one I like just as much. The third one also. I seriously cannot see why people hate those two. I love them. They're great. The third one is mostly action, but let's be realistic: Action is a heavy part of ALL the three Matrix films. Plus the ending in Matrix Revolutions is just... perfect.

As for the machines travelling in streams, if you didn't notice they used their "mass" to destroy various larger objects around them. For instance, a horde of those sentinels tore down the defence tower. It's pretty logical to me.

And the machines have developed emotions and a lifestyle just like the humans. Hence the Deus Ex Machina screaming at the end.

[capncnut]

Bored me s**tless! :barf:

[_liam_]

mm i guess they used their combined force to destroy things, but split up and take out the threats before you do, seems more logical than assuming a formation designed to take out inanimate structures first...

i loved the full circle elements of the third one, the humans find themselves in this situation because the machines they created to do things for them turn against them, and now the machines find themselves in a similar situation because of smith, a program created to do things for them...

the ending is beautiful (if youll pardon my emo), with that sunset and the triump

i did like the sequels, but i just thought they didnt seem as finely tuned as the first one, apparently the matrix was written in the mid 80s and they spent years being rejected &honing the script, whereas they bashed out the 2nd two in the years following the first one's release.

but, i can totally see why they get slated, the first is a classy dame on a par with taxi driver, godfather, one flew over the cuckoos nest etc. it transcends its geekiness by being so damn good.

the other two, and particularly the third, do have this sorta stargate sg1 fanboyness about them - i feel anyway.

[Neil]

The first was utterly fantastic, but the sequels were just not as strong....

[DVW5150]

Liam wrote :"and when the sentinels attack zion, why do they travel in a condensed stream? those weird "Aliens" style armoured suits can only shoot one or two sentinels at a time, if the sentinels spread out they could have taken them all out in a few minutes (after all, theres about 40 of those suits and 250,000 sentinels!), instead they sorta lineup to get shot at."

They were all coming through a single hole , so they were concentrating firepower on the incursion point ... I agree that it gets so unbelievable ... But I must say , I love the first one . The premise (that all around you is a simulation) is something I imagined as a young lad . Re-loaded was pretty good , the highway chase is kingsh!t . Revolutions was erm , ok . I liked Bruce Spence (gyro-captain from Road Warrior) ...

[Danny]

the first is brilliant, the sequels were lacklustre at best, it just kinda fizzled out at the end y'know?, not enough closure i think.
though there was a guy in my art class at high school who swore it was real and if you bad mouthed the second one or said the 1st was better he'd just throw a total **** fit throwing paintbrushes at people and making wierd yodelling noises.

good times:lol:

[MinionZombie]

I liked them. The first was and still is the best, it was fantastic. The sequels had good action scenes, but the bollocks in between was complete tosh, the brothers disappeared up their own 'intellectual' twat arses and there was no need - they're friggin' action movies, enough with the philosphy and all that crap - Matrix 1 got the mix right, 2 and 3 (back to back - never a good idea, unless it was BTTF 2 and 3) just lost the mojo...

Still have them all on DVD though...

[Danny]

so do i but mine cost me a quid off a dodgy block in a car boot sale:D


oh **** ,now the mans gonna be after me cus im "funding terrorism":rolleyes:

[Rottedfreak]

The sequals suffered from the innocent protagonist of the first film becoming a smarty pants. Plus some rules were bent, theres Morpheus telling Neo everytime anyones gone up against a agent they died in part one, in part two Trinity seemed to be evenly matched when she fought a agent.

[bassman]

The sequals suffered from the innocent protagonist of the first film becoming a smarty pants.

That's one of the main things that hurt the sequels the most in my eyes. I couldn't relate to Neo anymore. He wasn't having experience new and "out there" things anymore.....he somehow had a grip and seemd to know about EVERYTHING.

If the audience is supposed to be following the main character into this fantastical world for the first time, everything is still "wtf???" to them. The character(Neo) should be in the same boat with the audience because even though he's been there for a while(like the audience had been there for the first film), he still experiences things that should be new to him. He shouldn't act like an all-knowing "god", if you will.

You could argue that they plugged the thing in his head and it taught him everything and all that.....but I just flat out couldn't relate the main character anymore. A good example of how the protagonist should have been handled is Luke Skywalker in the orginal "Star Wars" films. Even though he learns about his inheritance of the Force andhis great powers, he's still experiencing new twists and emotions as the two other films unfold.