The Matrix is generally well-regarded, and it's spot within the top 20 films of the Top 250 list establishes this notion. However, the sequels to The Matrix are very far from it, in terms of ratings and general reception. Why is this?
The Robots, 1978, by Kraftwerk:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9DXdJrGhaVo
The Matrix is generally well-regarded, and it's spot within the top 20 films of the Top 250 list establishes this notion. However, the sequels to The Matrix are very far from it, in terms of ratings and general reception. Why is this?
[deleted]
Wachowskis wrote the second/third film(s).
Someone else wrote the first one.
2 and 3 felt more like philosophy papers with cool color photos in between, whereas the 1st was a sci-fi action movie with lots of philosophical ideas.
That being said, 2 and 3 are still awesome for me.
The Matrix is an ENTERTAINING movie, with a beginning, a middle, an end, and hope for something glorious for possible sequels.
The other movies you mention are boring, pretentious, tedious crap that no rational human being can care about. They are slow-moving, they are convoluted, have overly-long rave scenes, their 'action-scenes' are as fake as can be, plus completely meaningless and boring, despite being so over-the-top (or maybe because of it). There are so many problems, errors and faults in those movies in all possible levels, that it's amazing that ANYONE paid to see either of them. They are also filled with monotonous, incoherent babbling and are confusing to the max. Even when you figure out what is happening, you realize not everything was explained at all, and that it wasn't really worth knowing in the first place.
The so-called 'sequels' are like textbooks examples of how to do everything WRONG when making a movie (let alone two).
A true sequel could still be made, but so far, the only even passable movie of those three is "The Matrix". The rest shouldn't even be considered movies, but some kind of crappy art projects at best.
I never felt they were failures. I DID think that 'Reloaded' was a bit overdone, but that's about it, and I really liked all three movies.
.
The sequels really laid the philosophical jargon on thick, to the point that we can hardly understand what characters are saying, which isn't helped by the deadpan, monotone acting of EVERYBODY in the trilogy (the first one had this problem too). The worst example of this is the Architect scene in Reloaded. Seriously, do this day I have no idea what the *beep* that guy even talking about!
Also, numerous plot inconsistencies are present, like:
- Why can Neo save Trinity in Reloaded but not in Revolutions?
- Why do humans meet in the Matrix, a dangerous place full of agents, when they could meet at Zion?
- Why can Neo put his hand up and create in invisible barrier to block sentinels when in the real world? He's only human in the real world and so he can't bend the laws of physics here. Also, why can he see in a flame-like vision when blinded in the real world?
Can't think of any more at the moment, but they're all over in these movies. Oh, and the rave scene was really off-putting. That's probably the moment when most people really start to take issue with Reloaded, and consequently the trilogy as a whole.
The first one had no expectation, it was a compelling story with groundbreaking effects and concepts.
The sequals are pre-packaged with expectations to not only deliver more of the same but to top it.
The moment that stood out to me like 'I can't believe this is The Matrix' was seeing Morpheus,Trinity, and Neo being led through a restaraunt kitchen like it was some 90's detective movie.
The first one had no expectation
The moment that stood out to me like 'I can't believe this is The Matrix' was seeing Morpheus,Trinity, and Neo being led through a restaraunt kitchen like it was some 90's detective movie.
There are problems with the movies, (like the nonsense about the machines needing to use humans as an energy source once the sun was blocked out - have they never heard of nuclear energy?) but these are not among them.
- Why can Neo save Trinity in Reloaded but not in Revolutions?
- Why do humans meet in the Matrix, a dangerous place full of agents, when they could meet at Zion?
- Why can Neo put his hand up and create in invisible barrier to block sentinels when in the real world? He's only human in the real world and so he can't bend the laws of physics here. Also, why can he see in a flame-like vision when blinded in the real world?
God I love reading your posts, no sarcasm intended. I love getting an insight into how other people analyse and break these things down.
That being said, unfortunately not many have the time or the capacity to comprehend a story as large as this, even though the 2 b2b sequel movies can feel a little tacked on, they (all 3 movies) only paint about 65% of a portrayal that they may have given the audience not enough clues toward.
Once you factor in the short films of The Animatrix, the stories and ideas behind each, and put them into context and chronological order within the 3 live action movies, a much clearer (and bigger) picture starts to emerge.
It takes several (I'd even say hundreds) of re-watchings, including the Animatrix, for this to happen though, something I don't think others have the time or patience to sit through. I personally think this is the downfall to the 2 sequel movies, yes they were heavy on ideas, but the payoff's just kept on coming. Writing like this also sadly lends itself to over-analysis in areas where it not supposed to be. (For what is seen, and not heard)
Continuity errors can also overshadow the underlying message, and there are some parts that even seeing each of these movies more than 100 times each still to this day puzzle me. But the mystery itself is what keeps me re-watching, that and, I believe the entire story arc can be viewed like a window into the future, or a terrifying look into the present.
If, and/or when, real world scientists discover that our entire reality or possibly our entire universe, is just an illusion, this movie and the lore surrounding it may not be as silly to some as it was once perceived.
Ultimately, each to their own, but I have been in love with these movies since day 0, and even though I know they are fictional, they get more plausible as each year passes. Sometimes, I feel as if the story of the universe of The Matrix has a great amount of connections to The Terminator and Skynet. The idea itself may have even been inspired by it, but I still view the first Matrix as the single greatest science fiction movie ever made, and I've seen hundreds, possibly even thousands of them in the past. Somehow, it combines the best ideas, the best theories, philosophy, filmmaking, acting, sound design, score, visual effects, hell even the costumes, lighting, prop and set design are among the best, even 16 years later, and I don't think anything will change that for the next 16, 32 or even 48 years (at least for me).
Being the "best" doesn't mean perfection though, as nothing truly is. What this movie was to me, was a turning point for all forms of entertainment, it has affected everything from technology, to the way movies and TV is made, to the way the audience is treated, especially concerning Sci-fi.
We have only scratched the surface as to what is possible in this universe, and this movie was the first thing to actually make me seriously pontificate towards that possibility. While just a plot device and story element, the actual movie itself, to me and my life, was absolutely 150% a red pill. It changed my life and the way I view it, forever. There aren't enough words in any language to describe how much I feel about this, even if my re-watchings of it have dwindled over the years, I still hold this movie in the highest regard, and nothing has had this effect on my previously, or since.
And when I say "this movie", I really mean "this story". Apart from the first few years, ever since Reloaded and Revolutions and The Animatrix were released, I watch them all in sequence, in order of events, and consider ALL of the material to be essential to the concept of "this movie".
The only real shame about the sequel movies, is that they don't stand alone like The Matrix can, although there are too many unanswered questions for viewers who don't watch the others, including the Animatrix, especially the Second Renaissance.
Had a similar experience. The Matrix was transformative. Morpheus unlocked my early existential concerns with:
You're here because you know something. What you know you can't explain, but you feel it. You've felt it your entire life, that there's something wrong with the world. You don't know what it is, but it's there, like a splinter in your mind, driving you mad.
The sequels are strange bloated affairs, but contain some of the most stunning sequences ever put to film, and bravely subvert much of the narrative of the first film. I wonder if the Wachowskis felt that terrorist 'heroes' who machine gun hoards of innocent security men needed to tone down their righteous mass murder post 9/11, and needed some hard lessons in following corrupt ideologies...
The rest of the film more than delivered on such an intriguing premise, in a way I hadn't seen before, and likely never will again. The sequels are strange bloated affairs, but contain some of the most stunning sequences ever put to film, and bravely subvert much of the narrative of the first film
I wonder if the Wachowskis felt that terrorist 'heroes' who machine gun hoards of innocent security men needed to tone down their righteous mass murder post 9/11, and needed some hard lessons in following corrupt ideologies...
The film has lost little of its power, although I've come to realise the Wachowskis are batshít insane Marxists who have cut their dicks off, but they are masters of film, and in The Matrix made a timeless classic that will speak to generations, especially as we inch closer to the wonder/nightmare of A.I.
I've just watched the first "Matrix" again after a looooong time and now I'm gonna watch the sequels again.
"The Matrix" is first of all technically speaking a milestone of cinema for most of the following action/sci-fi movies.
The premises and the story (we live in fake world) are amazing, but the conclusion and the final message in "Matrix Revolutions", "love will save the World" (which is already present in the first movie, when Trinity "resurrects" Neo with a kiss), is just naive and disappointing.
The same exact thing happens with "Interstellar": amazing premises, and poor (the same!) conclusion.
I'm Winston Wolf. I solve problems.
...And no dream is ever... just a dream...
THERE ARE NO SEQUELS.
Proof: https://xkcd.com/566/
The first movie was about humans conquering machine intelligence. We (the human audience) like to see that. [...]The what now ?!? Wrong.
The sequels failed because the Wachowski Bros got greedy. [...]Wrong.
Wachowskis wrote the second/third film(s).Sadly that sounds about right, though saying it the other way around would work just as well.
Someone else wrote the first one.
I never felt they were failures.Good for you, I guess.
The sequels really laid the philosophical jargon on thick, to the point that we can hardly understand what characters are saying, which isn't helped by the deadpan, monotone acting of EVERYBODY in the trilogy (the first one had this problem too).Except the underplayed acting wasnt a problem at all in the original.
Also, numerous plot inconsistencies are present, like:
The first one had no expectation, it was a compelling story with groundbreaking effects and concepts.Wrong. The sequels did NOT deliver ANYTHING.
The sequals are pre-packaged with expectations to not only deliver more of the same but to top it.
"Neo, we have to go"
Neo " Something's different"
Neo " I can feel them"
Neo raises his hands to the sentinels, who look at each other in confusion
Neo " I've got WiFi, bitch "
zapppp zaaap zap zaappppp
When I first saw The Matrix it had such a mystique about it, totally exciting and engrossing. When I saw Reloaded in theatres, I was slightly impressed by the effects, but it wasn't as exciting anymore. And it didn't have that cyberpunk feel to it anymore that was a big part of The Matrix charm. When I saw Revolutions in theatres it was just a complete mess, and I was yawning throughout the movie.
The sequels weren't needed at all.
When I first saw The Matrix it had such a mystique about it, totally exciting and engrossing. When I saw Reloaded in theatres, I was slightly impressed by the effects, but it wasn't as exciting anymore. And it didn't have that cyberpunk feel to it anymore that was a big part of The Matrix charm. When I saw Revolutions in theatres it was just a complete mess, and I was yawning throughout the movie.
The sequels are fundamentally different from the original. They're simply not the same movie, just like the Star Wars prequels aren't the same as the originals.
The Matrix was a brilliant movie that was heavy on creativity. The sequels are plodding, Hollywood blockbusters. It's not just the cumbersome mythology stuff that the other commenters have noted; there's also a ton of boring filler crap (divisions within the Zion high council - who the frack cares?!?) as well as a bunch of clumsy product placement. The moment in Reloaded when I knew I was no longer watching the Matrix was when the big car chase through LA emphasized that all the SUVs were Cadillacs. The whole thing was a car commercial.
The two sequels actually would have made one good movie if you'd cut out most of Zion except the final fight, shortened the pompous speechifying from characters like the Merovingian and the Architect, toned down Agent Smith a little, and then otherwise combined what was left. But not before you had somebody not named Wachowski take a final rewrite to the script.
The two sequels actually would have made one good movie if you'd cut out most of Zion
shortened the pompous speechifying from characters like the Merovingian and the Architect, toned down Agent Smith a little,..
The sequels are plodding, Hollywood blockbusters. It's not just the cumbersome mythology stuff
You make some fair points, though I'd argue that you're really describing the theory behind the films rather than the quality of the product on the screen. I think for a lot of viewers the sequels just boiled down to a series of hugely expensive, but shallow, scenes bookended by a lot of really obtuse rhetoric. Bigger explosions, more Agent Smiths, longer fights, and in between blah blah blah.
So while I agree that the Merovingian and the Architect (and the Key Master, and Oracle, and her assistant) are fascinating, I think they'd have been more effective if they had spoken in somewhat plainer English. We already know they're important; they don't need to try to convince us of that by sounding so . . . artsy-fartsy, as you put it.
That's also a good point about Zion; I'd never quite thought of it exactly that way. These people really are largely irrelevant in the final understanding of things, so their daily mundane quibbles really are besides the point. The Zion scenes, for me, are like extended scenes showing us how everyone goes to the bathroom on the Nebuchadnezzar.
Speechifying is George Lucas style filmmaking. No one should ever do that. The universal rule is to show, not tell, and the Matrix sequels did way too much telling.
I'm not sure a Wachowskis personal philosophy exists. It's just a bunch of disparate things brought together and thrown at the wall to see what sticks. It's condescending and utterly incoherent.