What's fun about watching a zillion stupid-looking flying robots blow up for like seven hours while people (straight-faced) recite insipid cliches and do that war-movie yell?
what's NOT fun about that? "i've had sex before but not in THAT position/with THAT person/wearing THOSE things..."
Neo's 'magical' persistence in the Matrix is surely just the next progression of his capabilities - I don't think there's any real need for a specific explanation there.
You make the idea of 'robot magic' sound like a BAD thing? jeez. let's see more cyborg warlocks I say. Science IS magic.
Machine Godhead/Robot King/whatever was fine - what the hell do you want?
Post apocalyptic dystopia is a mainstay of the genre so complaining about it in this film is pretty stupid as well.
― stevem (blueski), Thursday, 6 November 2003 13:40 (twenty-two years ago)
Whine, whine, whine, whine, whine!
Jesus Christ, you people are pissed off because you didn't get what you wanted there to be! Accept that you didn't write the fucking thing and just let them tell you the story as they want to! Most of the things that I've heard people complaining about "not being resolved from Reloaded" were eithera) totally irrelevant, orb) answered in the story, but not to your satisfaction - which is to say to a completely quibbling and/or literal-and-physically-possible-in-the-real-world level, orc) answered in the story, but you didn't get it.
Sorry, but that's how it is in my eyes. Some people just couldn't sit down and suspend their disbelief. But really, there are a ton of answers and a lot of resolution - just because not all of it was specifically delineated doesn't mean that you can't figure out the parts that matter. So you either believe that, yes, by him going to the Source in Reloaded, it fundamentally changes his interconnection to the Machines (and thus the Matrix), or you don't. So many people just can't cope with this one - let it go. Smith copies himself because he no longer is taking orders from the Machines and is power hungry. And because he's the complete opposite of Neo. To sum up the whole fight scene: 1 + (-1) = 0
Burned out techno-apocalyptic Robot Cityscape. Hmm. Well, what were you expecting, the city at the bottom of the ocean in The Abyss?
Again, sorry if I'm being kinda pissy myself, but I just don't get what you people wanted (or if you really would have wanted that anyway). It seems that you want a bunch of silly stuff answered (or didn't see the answers that were obviously there for the stuff that was answered), you seem to magically believe that there was no cheese factor/hammy dialogue/wooden delivery in the first one, and you were all psyched for a Zion battle that you expected would somehow transcend the entirety of massive sci-fi battle scenes. I believe I wanted to say something else here, but I'm forgetting it at the moment. I'll get back to you.
― Girolamo Savonarola, Thursday, 6 November 2003 13:48 (twenty-two years ago)
― stevem (blueski), Thursday, 6 November 2003 13:51 (twenty-two years ago)
― adam (adam), Thursday, 6 November 2003 13:59 (twenty-two years ago)
Was there any question in our minds that the ammo kid was gonna get to do something extraordinary? I'm guessing no.
The funniest moment wasn't in the goofy dialog, but when Neo tried to get out of the train station. Okay, and when Niobe calls dude's ship she's piloting back to Zion "a fat bitch" or whatever.
All in all I'd say it was a really good film, quite engaging and just on this side of the border of too-corny, but not quite what it could have been (and assumed itself to be)...revolutionary.
x-post I'm not an apologist, I agree with Stevem that this tops just about everything of it's 'genre', but I personally am still a little disappointed in the execution. I wonder if, had they not rushed to get these films (Reloaded incl), they might have been something much more exemplary.
― nickalicious (nickalicious), Thursday, 6 November 2003 14:02 (twenty-two years ago)
The city is clean (I would presume). I don't know if it's happy - neither do you, for that matter. Why should it be well-lit?
BTW, you people all would have hated Return of the Jedi had it been released today, but still remember that despite ROTJ's weaknesses, we still lovably accept it as part of the Holy Trilogy. That was a much weaker film than Revolutions.
― Girolamo Savonarola, Thursday, 6 November 2003 14:04 (twenty-two years ago)
I can name a slew of people off the top of my head who will challenge this assertion until the day they die. And some of them post here.
― Ned Raggett (Ned), Thursday, 6 November 2003 14:05 (twenty-two years ago)
in other words you went to see this film because you KNEW you were going to hate it and you wanted to...
I didn't hear a diatribe about love, just a half-assed gesture toward semiotic bullshit. And Neo's abilities do need an explanation--The Matrix and sequels are positioned as science fiction and I was thrown when they trashed the sf/fantasy background, abandoning self-consistency and internal logic for Robot Magic, as were other people I've talked to. I like SF and I like fantasy and I like chocolate and I like garlic but unless you tip me off right at the start that we're going to be mixing them I'm gonna be pissed off.
well i have no problem with SF and fantasy being mixed together like that and I don't need to be warned beforehand.
King of the Robots spoke with a deep voice with crazy echo. Come on.
deep voices with echo never go out of fashion. it's a black jacket.
Why isn't Robot City all clean and happy and well-lit? It's not like they have Robot Bums and Robot Criminals and Robot Cockroaches.
BECAUSE the machines clearly prefer not to spend time and effort cleaning up the skies (or perhaps this was a process underway but not completed yet) when they can cope fine without the Sun and other niceties. nor do they require much light. also it spooks the humans foolish enough to venture out there enough which works to the machines advantage a little.
― stevem (blueski), Thursday, 6 November 2003 14:19 (twenty-two years ago)
― Enrique (Enrique), Thursday, 6 November 2003 14:20 (twenty-two years ago)
― stevem (blueski), Thursday, 6 November 2003 14:24 (twenty-two years ago)
And, um, then let me have a hit - God knows I'm tense now.
― Girolamo Savonarola, Thursday, 6 November 2003 14:34 (twenty-two years ago)
― Pete (Pete), Thursday, 6 November 2003 15:08 (twenty-two years ago)
― Enrique (Enrique), Thursday, 6 November 2003 15:10 (twenty-two years ago)
― Pete (Pete), Thursday, 6 November 2003 15:20 (twenty-two years ago)
― Enrique (Enrique), Thursday, 6 November 2003 15:22 (twenty-two years ago)
― nickalicious (nickalicious), Thursday, 6 November 2003 15:23 (twenty-two years ago)
― stevem (blueski), Thursday, 6 November 2003 15:40 (twenty-two years ago)
― Girolamo Savonarola, Thursday, 6 November 2003 15:48 (twenty-two years ago)
doesn't mean
― Girolamo Savonarola, Thursday, 6 November 2003 15:49 (twenty-two years ago)
Who needs Merovingian when you have MERV GRIFFIN!
http://www.brntwdmagazine.com/may-june-2000/merv/Merv.jpg
― Ned Raggett (Ned), Thursday, 6 November 2003 15:50 (twenty-two years ago)
― stevem (blueski), Thursday, 6 November 2003 15:56 (twenty-two years ago)
― Girolamo Savonarola, Thursday, 6 November 2003 16:23 (twenty-two years ago)
― anthony kyle monday (akmonday), Thursday, 6 November 2003 18:01 (twenty-two years ago)
― nickalicious (nickalicious), Thursday, 6 November 2003 18:02 (twenty-two years ago)
― teeny (teeny), Thursday, 6 November 2003 18:02 (twenty-two years ago)
― adam (adam), Thursday, 6 November 2003 18:16 (twenty-two years ago)
― nickalicious (nickalicious), Thursday, 6 November 2003 18:22 (twenty-two years ago)
Just because you don't like what you heard doesn't mean you didn't hear it, nonetheless.
― Girolamo Savonarola, Thursday, 6 November 2003 18:23 (twenty-two years ago)
― teeny (teeny), Thursday, 6 November 2003 18:24 (twenty-two years ago)
http://www.utc.fr/~macret/cine/realisateurs/boorman/photos/zardoz3.jpg
No, really.
― Herbstmute (Wintermute), Thursday, 6 November 2003 18:34 (twenty-two years ago)
I've seen hardcore Christians defending it as a Christ story, Buddhists claiming that it showed Neo the true path to enlightenment. Jews have claimed that no, it's an allegory of the Exodus. Hindus, Gnostics, Satanists and Atheists have all claimed that the movies symbolized their own worldview. They got from the movies a look at their own beliefs through another lens.
Likewise, I've seen people who were only looking for an action movie, or who loved pure philosophical discussion. Big Surprise, they walked out of the movie babbling about how awesome the special effects were or how deeply meaningful they found the dialog.
Finally, there are some people who walk into the theater thinking "this movie is never going to live up to the hype, or be nearly as good as (insert movie 'x' here)." Lo and behold, they spend the entire time searching for flimsy plot holes and whining about how there was too much action, or too little action, or too much CGI, or the CGI wasn't used enough, or there wasn't any cool philosophical discussions, or that they spent too much time talking. Meanwhile, they forget to actually watch the movie.
The people in the final group don't even deserve my contempt; their ability to watch a supremely entertaining set of movies and not derive any pleasure from the experience is punishment enough. Some of you fell into this trap for Reloaded; I hope for your own sake that you don't make the same mistake if you haven't seen it yet.
― Thanny, Thursday, 6 November 2003 18:39 (twenty-two years ago)
So long as you're not implying it's only these films in particular that act as a mirror in such cases, you're probably onto something.
― Ned Raggett (Ned), Thursday, 6 November 2003 18:45 (twenty-two years ago)
― Thanny, Thursday, 6 November 2003 18:47 (twenty-two years ago)
― stevem (blueski), Thursday, 6 November 2003 18:49 (twenty-two years ago)
Also, nice to see that even the architect of the Matrix couldn't improve on good ol Technics SL-1200s
― Tracer Hand (tracerhand), Thursday, 6 November 2003 20:58 (twenty-two years ago)
― cinniblount (James Blount), Thursday, 6 November 2003 21:02 (twenty-two years ago)
That was a good browny.
― nickalicious (nickalicious), Thursday, 6 November 2003 21:03 (twenty-two years ago)
― cinniblount (James Blount), Thursday, 6 November 2003 21:05 (twenty-two years ago)
― nickalicious (nickalicious), Thursday, 6 November 2003 21:08 (twenty-two years ago)
― cinniblount (James Blount), Thursday, 6 November 2003 21:08 (twenty-two years ago)
― teeny (teeny), Thursday, 6 November 2003 21:09 (twenty-two years ago)
― Tracer Hand (tracerhand), Thursday, 6 November 2003 21:09 (twenty-two years ago)
― cinniblount (James Blount), Thursday, 6 November 2003 21:16 (twenty-two years ago)
― cinniblount (James Blount), Thursday, 6 November 2003 21:18 (twenty-two years ago)
Blount I think you are nostalgic for that feeling that the movie was just a LEETLE cleverer than you. By the second Matrix it was dubious. You either gave it the benefit of the doubt or you didn't. By Revolutions we're five steps ahead and like "hurry up, movie!!!"
― Tracer Hand (tracerhand), Thursday, 6 November 2003 21:23 (twenty-two years ago)
― cinniblount (James Blount), Thursday, 6 November 2003 21:32 (twenty-two years ago)
― mitch lastnamewithheld (mitchlnw), Thursday, 6 November 2003 23:09 (twenty-two years ago)
But please, someone, please explain what happened at the end? Why did Agent Orange blow up? "Everything that has a beginning has a second and third installment..." If it's above, I didn't see it. I don't understand! //stamping foot and frowning// Have I forgotten something from the first 2 that would explain it? I just didn't get it! Forgive me. But help me!
HATED machine god.
― Skottie, Thursday, 6 November 2003 23:20 (twenty-two years ago)