Poll of the Day > How interested are you in seeing the new Matrix movie?

(+) Yeah! (+)

eh ?

---

we've already seen it dude. don't you remember?

Fam_Fam posted...

we've already seen it dude. don't you remember?

He took the blue pill, he doesn't remember anything.

---

not very

---

Ill watch it

---

Seems interesting, i'll watch it, kinda cool that he might've imagined everything

---

Another pointless sequel to a film that finished a long time ago. I certainly won't be watching it. I'm getting kind of bored of all the rubbish Hollywood is producing now.

---

Lonewolf80 posted...

Another pointless sequel to a film that finished a long time ago. I certainly won't be watching it. I'm getting kind of bored of all the rubbish Hollywood is producing now.

what a unique and interesting perspective

---

i'll probably watch it, not particularly excited for it though. It didn't really need any sequels.

---

I'm undecided at the moment, but there's a chance I may see it at some point relative to its release.

---

Don't give a fuck at all. Saw the first film once nine years ago and didn't watch any of the sequels.

I'm not interested. The last two movies were a disappointment to me, and now it's just been so long that I don't even remember where the overall plot stands.

---

DevilSummoner1 posted...

not very

---

I'm interested in that I want to see if they doing anything new action wise. Instead of just ripping off John Wick or copying the original Matrix style. Beyond that it's obviously going to be a hot mess but I don't care I want cool action.

---

I loved the first movie so much (that I didn't watch its sequels).

---

I view The Matrix as following the exact same path as Pirates of the Caribbean.

A "franchise" that was originally only planned as a single movie, which had two sequels tacked on afterwards to form a "trilogy", with both sequels being filmed at the same time to create a linked narrative (in conscious imitation of Star Wars and LotR). Making enough money to justify future sequels, but with fan interest growing weaker and weaker after every successive film, and the critical view being that each movie winds up being worse than the one before.

About the only difference between the two is how long they waited to do Matrix 4 versus how quickly they rushed to do Pirates of the Caribbean 4. So Matrix is going to have more nostalgia-hype behind it, at least at first.



__starsnostars posted...

I loved the first movie so much (that I didn't watch its sequels).

This is probably the best possible scenario.
---

my son is really excited. probably going to take him opening weekend now that hes 10 and its more socially acceptable to take him to r rated movies at the theaters

I'm about as interested as with the Star Wars sequel trilogy

---

I'll watch it at home probably but I do that with most films.

---

wwinterj25 posted...

I'll watch it at home probably but I do that with most films.

It's probably a telling indictment of the state of Hollywood today that the first movie I'm planning to see in a theater post-lockdown is the 35th anniversary showing of Transformers: the Movie.

I honestly don't see anything on the horizon worth dragging myself to a theater for. Even the MCU has sort of gone cold for me.
---

Trailer looks interesting but I'll see what the reviews are like first.

It's not like the Matrix movies have an excellent track record after the first one, and most IPs companies dust off to try and squeeze more money out of it don't fare well as a result.
---

I haven't even seen the 1st one so I'm not excited at all

---

As interested as I am in seeing the original Matrix movies, which I still haven't seen to this day... actually scratch that, I think I saw the original on tv just because it was on when I was flipping between channels. I think that's the same context under which I might be willing to see any other Matrix movie... and, considering I don't have cable now...

ParanoidObsessive posted...

I view The Matrix as following the exact same path as Pirates of the Caribbean.

A "franchise" that was originally only planned as a single movie, which had two sequels tacked on afterwards to form a "trilogy", with both sequels being filmed at the same time to create a linked narrative (in conscious imitation of Star Wars and LotR). Making enough money to justify future sequels, but with fan interest growing weaker and weaker after every successive film, and the critical view being that each movie winds up being worse than the one before.

About the only difference between the two is how long they waited to do Matrix 4 versus how quickly they rushed to do Pirates of the Caribbean 4. So Matrix is going to have more nostalgia-hype behind it, at least at first.

Yeah, but at least the Pirates franchise has *one* fun movie.

Granted, I was okay with some of the sequels, even though the continuity issues were even more distracting than the original (sometimes they're skeletons in moonlight, sometimes they're not vs "I gave Jack Sparrow his nickname despite never talking to anybody and winding up trapped in a magic world", where I didn't pick up on the first but it was impossible to miss the second)

ParanoidObsessive posted... A "franchise" that was originally only planned as a single movie,

Aren't *most* franchises like that? Somehow I don't think there was any planning in the Fast & the Furious, for instance.

---

Muscles posted...

I haven't even seen the 1st one so I'm not excited at all

Any reason for that? I enjoyed the first the most.

---

Maybe i should re-watch it again but I hated the first one to be perfectly honest. So my answer at the moment is no but upon if I re-watch it and change my mind it's possible.

The first Matrix movie is one of the best action movies of all time, and it was revolutionary for it's day. Shit the series was so influential that you saw bullet time stuff in tons of action movies in the following 10 years.

The sequels had some issues but they still had some good moments.

wwinterj25 posted...

Any reason for that? I enjoyed the first the most.

Never had the desire to see it nor did I come across it through friends, flipping through channels, etc.

I wouldn't be opposed to seeing it but I never was

---

I want to have sex (with a woman) while riding an ostrich and watching that movie.

Also pizza will probably be involved.

---

Zeus posted...

Aren't *most* franchises like that?

Less so now, when there's a desperate urge to monetize everything into multi-part franchises and disincentive to invest real money into new ideas or stand-alone projects.

But it depends. For some IPs, there's definitely an obvious hope that the first movie will do well enough to spur sequels, to the point where sequel-bait is built right into the first movie (which then becomes ironic if the movie tanks and no sequels are ever made). And especially for novel-to-screen adaptations, there's often an expectation of multiple movies (LotR, Harry Potter, etc). Even when multiple movies aren't necessarily justified (The Hobbit).

In some ways it's a trend that already kind of poisoned creativity in the book market long ago - for most genre titles, there's an expectation that EVERYTHING is going to be at least a trilogy (if not more), so every time you see a new book come out by a writer you've never heard of, it usually has something like "BOOK ONE OF THE PRETENTIOUS NAME SAGA" slapped on it. Multiple writers have actually mentioned taking stand-alone one-off novels to a publisher and being asked if they could turn it into a series instead.

But yeah, as film budgets rise, the risk of films failing becomes more catastrophic, so studios are far more inclined to only invest in "proven" IPs and to try and monetize the fuck out of past successes until they run them so far into the ground they can't draw another penny. Because the alternative is taking a risk on a creative an original idea that might cost your studio millions. It's why a lot of the interesting and original ideas these days are mostly only coming out of smaller or indie studios where the budgets are lower and they're more able to take risks and absorb losses.
---

Monopoman posted...

The first Matrix movie is one of the best action movies of all time, and it was revolutionary for it's day. Shit the series was so influential that you saw bullet time stuff in tons of action movies in the following 10 years.

It's more a matter that the effects were revolutionary, the movie was kinda meh, and centered on a nonsensical gimmick.

And bullet time was a terrible meme.

---

Zeus posted...

It's more a matter that the effects were revolutionary, the movie was kinda meh, and centered on a nonsensical gimmick.

And bullet time was a terrible meme.

Yeah, keep telling yourself that the vast majority disagree but Mr. Contrarian himself thinking the movie was lame is fine. Bullet Time got overdone because everyone imitated it, but it was very cool for it's day.

I have a feeling the vast majority here didn't see The Matrix on or near release.

Keanu looks the same in every movie these days and it bugs me.

---

Strangely it actually doesn't look bad. Which is surprising because the last 2 weren't very good.

---

Veedrock- posted...

Keanu looks the same in every movie these days and it bugs me.

Yeah this, it's really off putting when John Wick, Johnny Silverhand and now old Neo look EXACTLY the same.

Pretty "meh". The 2nd and 3rd Matrix movies weren't very good, and honestly the first one doesn't hold up all that well.

I wasn't aware there was another one. I will almost certainly watch it when it comes to one of the many streaming services.


---

Monopoman posted...

Yeah, keep telling yourself that the vast majority disagree but Mr. Contrarian himself thinking the movie was lame is fine. Bullet Time got overdone because everyone imitated it, but it was very cool for it's day.

I have a feeling the vast majority here didn't see The Matrix on or near release.

The problem with everything imitating it, as well as being used for a cheap laugh in tons of comedy movies around that era is when you go back, it retroactively makes it look kinda silly. Then the sequels got too far removed from what made the first one cool to begin with. Then you had all those techno thrillers in the 90s where computers were treated like magic mystery boxes and the internet was new and also "magical" in those damn movies, the whole genre is super dated and doesn't really work anymore.

Monopoman posted...

Yeah, keep telling yourself that the vast majority disagree but Mr. Contrarian himself thinking the movie was lame is fine. Bullet Time got overdone because everyone imitated it, but it was very cool for it's day.

I have a feeling the vast majority here didn't see The Matrix on or near release.

Pretty much everybody has acknowledged that the movie's story is stupid and riddled with holes, but that's not why people went to see the fucking thing (and if you're pretending otherwise, I'm going to question if you saw it at the time).

Literally the whole appeal was that it's a special effects-fest, some of which have aged better than others.

Cruddy_horse posted...

Yeah this, it's really off putting when John Wick, Johnny Silverhand and now old Neo look EXACTLY the same.

Moving past the look, I think his most "human" performance was as Klaatu in The Day the Earth Stood Still >_>


---

DeathMagnetic80 posted...

Pretty "meh". The 2nd and 3rd Matrix movies weren't very good, and honestly the first one doesn't hold up all that well.

Is there something about this board that makes people have awful movie opinions?

I wasn't a big fan of the original Matrix movies so there is that.

---

100%

---

Only if Johnny Utah is in the movie.

---

Dmess85 posted...

Only if Johnny Depp is in the movie.

---

Zeus posted...

Pretty much everybody has acknowledged that the movie's story is stupid and riddled with holes, but that's not why people went to see the fucking thing (and if you're pretending otherwise, I'm going to question if you saw it at the time).

Literally the whole appeal was that it's a special effects-fest, some of which have aged better than others.

Moving past the look, I think his most "human" performance was as Klaatu in The Day the Earth Stood Still >_>

So many action movies have the problem, story is stupid if you analyze it deeply. Shit the Matrix story has more innovation than most random action movies. You can poke holes into almost every big budget movie, it's very easy. Cinema Sins does this on a regular basis, the fact is people love the movie it has a 8.7 on IMDB which is extremely high, and even the Critics back this up with 88% of them approving of the movie on Rotten.

You acting like the movie sucks doesn't change that. You want to call the sequels bad, that is fine though even there I think people go out of their way to really pick on those films.

SomeUsername529 posted...

Is there something about this board that makes people have awful movie opinions?

The action scenes are still fun, but I dunno, it's very much of its time. As a trilogy is pretty mediocre because you can only stretch the gimmick so far, and the story is fairly underwhelming.

SomeUsername529 posted...

Is there something about this board that makes people have awful movie opinions?

Like loving the Matrix movies? Maybe there's something in the water.

Monopoman posted...

So many action movies have the problem, story is stupid if you analyze it deeply.

I'm not even talking about analyzing it deeply, it's surface-level stupid half the time. Human batteries? Seriously?

Monopoman posted...

Shit the Matrix story has more innovation than most random action movies.

When it comes to bad storytelling, Troll 2 has a lot of innovation, too. Doing something bad differently for the same of variety doesn't change it being bad. I'd rather see a functional average story than... well, maybe I do enjoy the occasional goofily-stupid movie. Of course, the difference between something like Hobo with a Shotgun and the Matrix is that the Matrix takes its goofiness seriously, whereas something like Hobo plays it for laughs.

Monopoman posted...

the fact is people love the movie it has a 8.7 on IMDB which is extremely high, and even the Critics back this up with 88% of them approving of the movie on Rotten.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argumentum_ad_populum

You acting like the movie sucks doesn't change that. You want to call the sequels bad, that is fine though even there I think people go out of their way to really pick on those films.

The story sucks, and the effects haven't aged particularly well in many cases.

Oh, and Cinema Sins is garbage.

---