Matrix Rev: What did YOU think?

Not anywhere near as good as the first but a lot better than the second film. The Trinity, Neo and Agent Smith pieces were totally lack lusture and the final fight is one long CG hell :sleep: that said, the zion invasion is pretty great (although it won't fare as well on the small screen of DVD I fear) and probably worth the
 
At the time of the 1st film the brothers stated quite clearly it was part of a trilogy. Reloaded and Revolutions were always two films and it was Joel Silver, around this time last year, who described them as one big film cut in half. Having seen both it is quite clear that they are two different films, the end of reloaded removes the 'security' of the prophecy from the main characters and they respond accordingly in Revolutions.

From the moment it became clear that the Matrix was a success and Warners greenlit the sequels, they were submitted as two films, written as two films, produced as two films and marketed as two films. They were, however, filmed together. Kill Bill was split into two quite late into the production and editing process.
 
I think I would disagree with the "totally different" films, different directions yes but not totally different films, also I would point out that these were filmed at the same time with presumably much the same crew. Lord of the Rings 1 and 2 were filmed at the same time but have a different feel to them but are part of the same story.

I definitely remember seeing someone from Matrix (Joel Silver perhaps) being interviewed who said that the complete story was presented right at the very beginning but that funding was only given for the first Matrix. If this is the case the ending to this particular trilogy may have been decided years ago.

Oh and hi Ark - I do know who you are LOL finnfrenz
 
Critics gave it such a bad review because Warner Brothers overhyped it, and because the ending was complete and utter rubbish. There was so many better ways to end it, it just seemed like a half assed attempt at it.
 
I don't care much for critics. The same critics slated the original Matrix, slated Shawshank Redemption (my favourite film), Jurassic Park (another of my favourites) but they loved Titanic and Chicago. What do they know what I like and don't like? They only know what they like. Reloaded was overhyped, I'd say expectations were low for Revolutions (not for me but most others). Personally I thought the ending was brilliant, the perfect mix of Hollywood optimism and Indie pessimism. I've heard many say they can't understand it, or it leaves so many questions unanswered, I reckon they should go back and watch Reloaded again, very few questions are left open.
 
I actually don't agree with you about the ending - I feel that there is more to the whole thing than a cop-out. It has interested me that there has been so much debate about the 2nd film and "what it all means" - there is another thread on RAB about the meaning behind with an awful lot of disecting of the "meaning" behind the film and whether there is a matrix within a matrix etc etc and gives an awful lot of references to symbols and conversations that back this theory up - however I believe that these are deliberately placed to create the discussion and are there as "red herrings". For me the end provides simple answers - this is not what people expect. As I have said in a previous post this film is about survival, and it is also about everyone (human or whatever) having to survive together. There are no "winners" or "losers" just "survivors" - which at the end of it all is what we are all just trying to do, be allowed to get on with our own "lives" and do our own thing, unfortunately often "our own thing" runs counter to someone elses "own thing" - the W Bros are saying maybe we should all be trying to get along with each other and respect each others point of view or way of living.
 
Actually Reloaded and Revolutions where originally submitted as one big film but it was so big it was split into two parts hence the 'To Be Concluded' at the end of Reloaded
 
i thought the film was great except i thought the ending the last bit not the fight was poor and left one big unanswered question what happend in the future. Others may disagree with my and they have their opinion still one of the best trilogys ever im waiting to see if a box set comes out of all 3 what do u think will there
 
I thought it was amazing I didnt listen to the critics and headed off to the cinema on Wednesday in high antiscipation of a great film and I wasn't disappointed. I got confused onn the first matrix but I thought Re-loaded was amazing!! This was just as good!
 
Actually I think you're thinking of Kill Bill. Yes 2 and 3 were one story filmed back to back and released very close together, but they were never intended to be one film. One story yes, one film no. Besides this wasn't my point. The feeling of the two films is totally separate.
 
ditto - the ending was slap dash and dumb (I honestly don't understand why people think that it is so intelligent :confused: I thought it was plainly simple :( )
It's not like I hated the film or anything, I just thought that it was alright - nothing that I hadn't seen in some way before.
 
The movie isnt bad, in fact its really good. It's just not ecellent or amazing like most people are saying. There was too many cheesey bits in it and the end took the piss. The sunrise and "I done it for Neo" ruined the ending. The original matrix never had any of the extended love scenes or anything in it which is why I think it was the best one. Number 3 was really good though.

Another thing that bugged me is that they left it open for sequels when they should have closed it over. They never said in it Neo was dead. Everyone is just under the assumption that he did. The only major character thats dead is Trinity.
 
I don't think it is intelligent necessarily - in fact I think the ending is very simple. If the W bros were trying to be clever they might have come up with an ending that followed a lot of the threaRAB on the net over the last 6 months (matrix within a matrix etc etc) instead they took a simple ending. However what is interesting is that I may be entirely wrong and may be interpreting it incorrectly, hence there is quite a bit of discussion on this and the other thread about the meanings behind the ending. I am sure this is a debate that is going to run and run.

At least when Lord of the Rings comes out we'll all know exactly what the ending is (at least those of us who have read the book will and then we can explain it to everyone else!!) - phew!!
 
Back
Top