PDA

View Full Version : The Matrix Revisted:



Simon
05-26-2003, 07:39 PM
Just saw the Matrix Revisited and loved it. I had read some dodgy reviews stating that it was overcomplicated, but that's simply not the case , as long as you understood part I, part II, is relatively easy to understand, but they really do through you some curve balls, but the script is very clever and only in the smallest of parts are you left pondering.

That part over, Special Effects baby!! There has never been a better time to be at the movies, what can be acheived now even blows tech heads away.

It's just plain awesome, some of the fight scenes, the car chase and the scene where he flyes with the cars and rubble in a malestrum behind him are out of this world.

Just plain fantastic, watch it. 8/10

Simon

torelli
05-27-2003, 06:37 PM
I agree!!

I saw it a couple of days ago and will probably go and see it again. It was not to difficult to follow, and like the first one really gets you thinking. For modern movies that is often hard to find.

Great special effects, good plot, and a thinker! That is what art is all about.

Remember, when lifting "be one with the muscle and weight!"

Simon
05-27-2003, 06:43 PM
Here, Here.

Can't believe the diservice all these so called film critcs are doing to that film, just because you actually have to apply yourself a little.

Not only that, it's really only the section with the creator that's requires a little lateral thinking and even then, they spell it out pretty clearly.

I actually really enjoyed that scene, so many basic elements of philosophy and a few great script curve balls, loved it.

And as you say the special effects, how gawd damm amazing were they, I can't remember the last time I was blown away by sheer 'wow' factor.

If your into martial arts as well, then the film is like 2hrs 20 of pure bliss from every perspective.

While they didn't have the benefit of the incredibly original core storyline that part one had, I think over all, 2 is actually the better film.

Cannae wait for P III

Simon

ps The clips for Terminator III looked pretty damm amazing as well.

spook248
06-21-2003, 09:22 AM
Sorry guys I totally dissagree.

It was awful. The special effects were fantastic but that aside there was nothing in that movie of any real substance (in my opinion of course).

The writers were jerking off and tring to make it like it was some sort of 'star wars jedi mystical journey'. The acting (particularly from Fishbone) was unbelievably bad. He is trying to be something he is not (a British shakespherian actor). I thought it was over the top in the 1st but he was just plain overacting and was worse in the second.
The scene where he spoke to Zion was just embarrasing. It lacked passion, truth, skill or substance and i'm afraid anyone who thought that was good acting clearly does not know anything about acting. Truely awful.
The scene where Neo ( and that was a really lame name. In the 1st matrix...they kept going on about "is he the one?" well Neo is an anagrame of one!...awful!) Anyway the scene where Neo speaks to the Architect was too complicated. And the writers knew it. Every time this character spurted off his technical jargon...Neo responded by saying stuff like "so you mean it was all a lie?" they had to do that cause they KNEW people would struggle and that my friends is poor scriptwriting. I'm all for plots that make you think and need brain input, but this was just plain over indulgance. The plot had so many holes in it they just threw technical jargon around and hoped you would'nt notice...unfortunately a lot of people (including the critics) did.

The 2nd matrix has been breaking all sorts of box office records. I predict (because of how poor this one was) the 3rd will do well...but not nearly as well because people were dissapointed in this one.

For the record this is a professional opinion as I studied acting at Londons Royal academy of Dramatic Art and have also studied script writing.

Simon
06-21-2003, 11:05 AM
Originally posted by spook248
Sorry guys I totally dissagree.

It was awful. The special effects were fantastic but that aside there was nothing in that movie of any real substance (in my opinion of course).

The writers were jerking off and tring to make it like it was some sort of 'star wars jedi mystical journey'. The acting (particularly from Fishbone) was unbelievably bad. He is trying to be something he is not (a British shakespherian actor). I thought it was over the top in the 1st but he was just plain overacting and was worse in the second.
The scene where he spoke to Zion was just embarrasing. It lacked passion, truth, skill or substance and i'm afraid anyone who thought that was good acting clearly does not know anything about acting. Truely awful.
The scene where Neo ( and that was a really lame name. In the 1st matrix...they kept going on about "is he the one?" well Neo is an anagrame of one!...awful!) Anyway the scene where Neo speaks to the Architect was too complicated. And the writers knew it. Every time this character spurted off his technical jargon...Neo responded by saying stuff like "so you mean it was all a lie?" they had to do that cause they KNEW people would struggle and that my friends is poor scriptwriting. I'm all for plots that make you think and need brain input, but this was just plain over indulgance. The plot had so many holes in it they just threw technical jargon around and hoped you would'nt notice...unfortunately a lot of people (including the critics) did.

The 2nd matrix has been breaking all sorts of box office records. I predict (because of how poor this one was) the 3rd will do well...but not nearly as well because people were dissapointed in this one.

For the record this is a professional opinion as I studied acting at Londons Royal academy of Dramatic Art and have also studied script writing.


I look through the eyes of a film fan, your like a friend of mine who spends the entire movie discussing the fact that the shadow should be falling on the other side of the character because when the scene started it was morning.

I agree with some of your points in the Matrix issue, but in general none of those issue bothered me, and I think the Neo/Creator scene was great stuff, perhaps they wanted it to work on both levels so used Neos 'subtitles' for the hard of thinking.

I don't really care, I enjoyed it and it's really not about agreeing or disagreeing, it's about whether you liked the movie, you can disagree with me , in relation to quality of script and other issues, but I didn't see a problem although I will agree the Fishburne speech was weak , and came across badly.

Neo=One, you know how sad this is ? I never actually noticed that, perhaps that's why I enjoyed it at face value.

I agree there are some holes in that script, I remember thinking a few times, well hold on.... But at the end of the day I don't watch a film like the Matrix for gritty tue to life performances and perfect continuity (althogh that would be a nice bonus), I watch it for cool effects, a pretty funky concept/story, some shallow humour and some damm funky set pieces and martial arts.

For the record, this is far from a professioanl opionion, but I do have 20 years exerperience of watching movies, a DVD collection to die for, a great big projector telly and I can make great popcorn, which is infintly more usefull than doing that studying stuff :-)


That's just me...

Simon

spook248
06-21-2003, 11:44 AM
Yep point taken and noted.

The one thing I forgot to say in my post was...at the end of the day it's about what YOU (as in the person watching it) think. And whatever you get out it, be it enjoyment, inspiration or just plain adrenalin from the effects, then thats a positive thing.

I only think its a poor movie in comparison to the first which i loved.

I'm not the kind of person that is looking for mistakes in any movie. I want everything to just flow and engrosse me in the story/moment. It's when things stick out like sore thumbs and make me think"hang o a minute" thats when I think the makers have failed because it hasn't totally engrossed me in the moment.
It's like incidental music. Incidental music is not there for your enjoyment per say...it's there to highten the emotional content of the scene. You are not supposed to really take it on board cause when its being used correctly, it will totally engrosse you in the moment.

And you are right. 20 years of movie watching experience is just as valid as any drama traing cause at the end of the day we (the performers) do it for you guys to enjoy.

I just think that a lot of audiences are spoon fed crap and brainwashed to the point that when you see an actor blowing some one away on the screen with a gun, it washes over you. In actual fact if you were to witness someone being shot in the street in real life you, would probably need councinling. Thats why movies like Goodfellas are brilliant. Death scenes really hit the mark.

That said and done I didnt mean to include the Matrix in this section of thought as I know thats not what it is about.

I didnt like the movie but the quality of the effects, editing, lighting, costume camera work and surprisingly the acting of Keanu (i was a disgrace in Dracula) Reeves were brilliant.

just the overall scrip and Fishbone I was dissapointed in.

thanks for the reply..

p.s. put in more recipes!
:-)

spook248
06-21-2003, 11:50 AM
Whoa! some bad typos there!

Spell check Will!!???

Simon
06-21-2003, 12:06 PM
Originally posted by spook248
Whoa! some bad typos there!

Spell check Will!!???

Hi Spook248 ??

Question for you why Spook248, why not just like Spook? I always wonder why some of the odd scree names, but I digress

It's me you need to nag not WB about the spell checker as I look after the forums, but unfortunately vbulletin does not have a Spell Checker option. Older versions did but the d/b Spellworld, that used to provide the backend database for the function fell of the face of the planet so vbulletin removed the feature in v2.x.x

There is apparently an add on from a 3rd party but it costs loads of $$$ to have installed and it's a hack and when you have something like vbulletin actually working, the last thing you want to try is allowing a third party to run hacks, so unless many people ask for the spell checker, I'd have to give it a miss but I agree would be a nice feature.

BTW, On this forum I don't think spelling is the highest priority, in fact I look back at some of my posts and wince how badly they were put together, but as long as the message gets across.

See it's all that top London education you got, all the other members can spell check in their heads ;-)

Simon

spook248
06-21-2003, 12:21 PM
Originally posted by SIMES
Hi Spook248 ??

Question for you why Spook248, why not just like Spook? I always wonder why some of the odd scree names, but I digress

It's me you need to nag not WB about the spell checker as I look after the forums, but unfortunately vbulletin does not have a Spell Checker option. Older versions did but the d/b Spellworld, that used to provide the backend database for the function fell of the face of the planet so vbulletin removed the feature in v2.x.x

There is apparently an add on from a 3rd party but it costs loads of $$$ to have installed and it's a hack and when you have something like vbulletin actually working, the last thing you want to try is allowing a third party to run hacks, so unless many people ask for the spell checker, I'd have to give it a miss but I agree would be a nice feature.

BTW, On this forum I don't think spelling is the highest priority, in fact I look back at some of my posts and wince how badly they were put together, but as long as the message gets across.

See it's all that top London education you got, all the other members can spell check in their heads ;-)

Simon

haha er yeah...can't spell to save my life!

spook248 because when I started to use ICQ on the net there was already a spook. I added a 245 cause I used to be a high jumper and 2.45m was the world record. I then had problems with my computer...had to have the hard drive recovered and lost my ICQ details! I couldnt relog as 245 because of this and so became 246. Well the amount of times I have ballsed up should be apparent because I'm now 248!

And 'spook' because spooks are members of the intelligence service MI5/MI6/CIA etc and I love spy novel. Am in the middle of writing a TV script with this theme.

Hopefully one day you'll be slagging MY scripts!

:-)

Simon
06-21-2003, 12:23 PM
Originally posted by spook248
haha er yeah...can't spell to save my life!

spook248 because when I started to use ICQ on the net there was already a spook. I added a 245 cause I used to be a high jumper and 2.45m was the world record. I then had problems with my computer...had to have the hard drive recovered and lost my ICQ details! I couldnt relog as 245 because of this and so became 246. Well the amount of times I have ballsed up should be apparent because I'm now 248!

And 'spook' because spooks are members of the intelligence service MI5/MI6/CIA etc and I love spy novel. Am in the middle of writing a TV script with this theme.

Hopefully one day you'll be slagging MY scripts!

:-)

Spooks was as top show, really enjoyed it

Simon

PatS
06-21-2003, 01:37 PM
Originally posted by SIMES
Can't believe the diservice all these so called film critcs are doing to that film, just because you actually have to apply yourself a little.

While I agree I think they went a little overboard, they have a lot of valid points. Overall I didnít think it was all that great. Donít get me wrong, I still enjoyed it, but a masterpiece it wasnít.



Originally posted by SIMES
Not only that, it's really only the section with the creator that's requires a little lateral thinking and even then, they spell it out pretty clearly.

I actually really enjoyed that scene, so many basic elements of philosophy and a few great script curve balls, loved it.

Gotta agree with the spook on this one. This couldíve been done better. But, did add a new dimension to what I thought wouldíve been the outcome.


Originally posted by SIMES
And as you say the special effects, how gawd damm amazing were they, I can't remember the last time I was blown away by sheer 'wow' factor.

If your into martial arts as well, then the film is like 2hrs 20 of pure bliss from every perspective.

Yep, it was what kept the movie going.


Originally posted by SIMES
While they didn't have the benefit of the incredibly original core storyline that part one had, I think over all, 2 is actually the better film.

Nope, other than the fight scenes, the first one was much better. There were parts in this one that had me laughing at the absurdity of it all. They couldíve done a better job.


Originally posted by SIMES
ps The clips for Terminator III looked pretty damm amazing as well.

Yep, but thatís the thing about trailers, you can get hyped up and then be disappointed. I hope not though. I really want to see that one.



Originally posted by spook248
Whoa! some bad typos there!

Spell check Will!!???

Use an offline editor.

PatS.

spook248
06-21-2003, 05:18 PM
You kind of summed up my feelings on the second movie pat.

I've already explained why I didnt like it above, but the only thing I can add is that a truly awesome movie will remain in your thoughts for a long time and you will remember just about everything about it.
Sadly theres a lot about the Matrix revisited i've forgotten already cause I was just not interested when watching.

But you never know. Matrix revelations has already been shot and is due to be released in November. I sincerely hope it's a blinder cause bottom line is that the matrix movies are very origional in concept and deserve (on the strength of the first one) to be movie al time classics.

spook

randeh
07-05-2003, 08:15 PM
Having loved the first movie, I was a bit disappointed with the second. But as a review I just read of it stated, the second film in a trilogy is usually off, the first catches us off guarda nd we are blown away and the third has a huge climax, the seoncd has to try and carry the wow from the original to the final movie and that is not always easy to do.
The twins were awesome, the dialogue got a bit wordy, and some of the fight scenes just didn't sit right. I cannot explain it they just did not grab me the way the first movie did. Maybe my expectations were raised to a level that is not attainable, I don't know.
I do have a question, why is this titled "The Matrix Revisited"? The title of the movie is Matrix Reloaded. THe third being Matrix Revolutions. But is it a different name in the UK?

Simon
07-05-2003, 10:02 PM
Originally posted by randeh
Having loved the first movie, I was a bit disappointed with the second. But as a review I just read of it stated, the second film in a trilogy is usually off, the first catches us off guarda nd we are blown away and the third has a huge climax, the seoncd has to try and carry the wow from the original to the final movie and that is not always easy to do.
The twins were awesome, the dialogue got a bit wordy, and some of the fight scenes just didn't sit right. I cannot explain it they just did not grab me the way the first movie did. Maybe my expectations were raised to a level that is not attainable, I don't know.
I do have a question, why is this titled "The Matrix Revisited"? The title of the movie is Matrix Reloaded. THe third being Matrix Revolutions. But is it a different name in the UK?

Nah, I just got the title wrong. Hey, here's some geeky movie snippet for you. The two twins , used to be a pair of odd job men on a TV program in the UK, where they do up houses. They used to be a carpenter and a electrician.

They are both in fairly good shape and always appeared in tight t-shirts and so forth to keep the housewifes watching.

They literally went from cheesy prime time home decoration programs to the Matrix

Nice work if you can get it

Simon