| Author |
Message |
Barry Brien
Dark Trooper Phase 1
Joined: 26 Sep 2003
|
 Posted: Nov 10, 2003 02:43 Post subject: The Matrix Revolutions |
    |
|
Here's a review of the movie that I wrote for my college newspaper.
Last week saw the eagerly anticipated release of the final instalment of The Matrix Trilogy. The Matrix: Revolutions picks up from where the last movie, Reloaded, left off. We find the franchise's hero Neo (Keanu Reeves) trapped in a place between the Real World and The Matrix, a sort of cyber-limbo. Needless to say he manages to escape with the aid of his love interest Trinity (Carrie-Anne Moss) and mentor Morpheus (Laurence Fishbourne). This first act of the movie leaves a bad taste in my mouth. The cliffhanger we were left with at the end of Reloaded is dealt with in a poor, untidy manner. From here on in the movie just gets steadily worse, the final scene of a sunrise/sunset (it's unclear which) ushering in a new era of peace and harmony being an insipid smack in the face to any self-respecting movie lover.
In terms of story the plot is full of holes and needless convolutions. This movie differs from the previous two in that the majority of action is set in the Real World, and not the Matrix. We watch the inhabitants of Zion defend their city against the onslaught of machines. These battle scenes are not so bad, they just go on for a long time, and many of the characters are new to us, which makes it hard to relate to them. Meanwhile Neo is travelling to the City of the Machines to try and put an end to the war. Why or how he hopes to achieve this is not really too clear, but unsurprisingly it's done in the silliest way possible.
The movie's script is absolutely uninspired, with lots of hackneyed clichés and the type of cringe-worthy one-liners only a Hollywood Cash Cow is capable of delivering. Coupling this is pathetic acting, and by pathetic I mean it's about as dramatic as a hole in your sock. Reeves is consistent in his mannequin-esque delivery, displaying little emotion throughout the movie. What he tries to exude as cool, calm detachment comes across as imbecilic bemusement. It would be easier to empathise with a leather-clad mackerel in designer sunglasses.
With regard to special effects and eye candy I was also disappointed. While Reloaded was an extremely average movie, it did have its fair share of mind-boggling special effects, like the Highway chase and the Fight between Neo and the ever-multiplying Agent Smith. This movie hardly even tries. We do get one or two references to the earlier films, but nothing really new. Even the climactic duel between Neo and Smith at the end of this movie is drawn out and dull.
Fans of the series will be disappointed with this movie, while non-devotees will be stifling snorts, and cursing it underneath their breath. Revolutions not only has nothing to offer, but it takes away from the first two films as well. The army of Matrix disciples on the internet will be scrapping their philosophical musings and theories of political analogy in utter disappointment. It turns out they were wrong. This movie is about as deep as Reeve's acting range. The final resolution of the saga makes no sense, and what's worse there's even space left for a possible fourth movie. A little solace can be gained from the fact that Trinity is killed off (again) and Neo dies at the end of the movie. Did I just spoil the movie for you? Why no, I'm doing you a favour!
Having mentioned the online fan-base of The Matrix I should bring up the fact that this film feels like it was written by one - your typical overweight, Spock-ear clad, acne ridden, lightsaber wielding, ring bearer with delusions of talent. The movie references other sci-fi 'greats' such as Aliens and Superman, and the template of the movie, it could be argued, was lifted directly from next month’s The Lord of the Rings: Return of the King. No wonder Revolutions was released a month beforehand.
If even after reading this you still want to satisfy your morbid curiosity, take this advice. Don't. The Matrix: Revolutions goes beyond being comically bad, and is just a chore to endure.
Who agrees with me?
|
|
Tom Resnick
Trandoshan
Joined: 30 Sep 2003
|
|
Barry Brien
Dark Trooper Phase 1
Joined: 26 Sep 2003
|
|
Taylor
Gamorrean
Joined: 25 Sep 2003
|
| Posted: Nov 10, 2003 15:35 Post subject: |
|
|
I actually liked the movie, it had excellent special effects, but it was kind of a disappointment too. I did think the actor who played Bane did a great job of acting "possessed" by Agent Smith. The vocal tone and eyebrow movements were identical to Smith. He impressed me. The rest of it was pretty mundane. Too much time outside the Matrix, and that battle scene in Zion got overdone.
|
|
Casey Neumiller
Trandoshan
Joined: 24 Sep 2003
|
| Posted: Nov 10, 2003 15:54 Post subject: |
|
|
I agree with BB's review.
After all, why is it called "The Matrix" when so little action occurs in the matrix?
And yes, I didn't like it.
|
|
Barry Brien
Dark Trooper Phase 1
Joined: 26 Sep 2003
|
| Posted: Nov 10, 2003 18:09 Post subject: |
|
|
I really couldn't stomach the movie. My least favourite bit has to be the bit where Trinity and Neo break the cloud cover in their ship and see a beautiful sunny sky and Trinity says 'beautiful'. I just can't deal with that kind of corniness.
I didn't want to hate this movie. I really liked the first one, and I thought the second one was alright. I really wanted this to be a great movie. Oh well.
As for the guy who played Bane, yeah maybe his portrayal of Smith was cool, but I'm pretty sure it was Hugo Weaving's voice they used, so he can't really take credit for that.
|
|
Fish
Gamorrean
Joined: 29 Sep 2003
|
| Posted: Nov 10, 2003 18:34 Post subject: |
|
|
Mom, when I grow up I want to write like Barry Brien.
Grrreat review. I couldn't agree more with it.
|
|
Matt K
Dark Trooper Phase 1
Joined: 27 Sep 2003
|
| Posted: Nov 10, 2003 21:12 Post subject: |
|
|
The best I can say is that I was pretty disappointed with it.
|
|
Matt K
Dark Trooper Phase 1
Joined: 27 Sep 2003
|
| Posted: Nov 10, 2003 21:14 Post subject: |
|
|
In addition: Ian Bliss (the actor who played Bane) was not dubbed in the film. That was his true voice imitating Hugo Weaving's Agent Smith.
|
|
Barry Brien
Dark Trooper Phase 1
Joined: 26 Sep 2003
|
|
japh
Gamorrean
Joined: 30 Sep 2003
|
|
japh
Gamorrean
Joined: 30 Sep 2003
|
| Posted: Nov 10, 2003 22:27 Post subject: |
|
|
Taylor wrote:
I did think the actor who played Bane
Darth Bane? Was he called Darth Bane before or after being possessed?
Taylor wrote:
The vocal tone and eyebrow movements were identical to Smith. He impressed me.
I don't recall Reloaded in enough detail to tell, but are you sure it wasn't Smith with a goatee?
Taylor wrote:
The rest of it was pretty mundane. Too much time outside the Matrix, and that battle scene in Zion got overdone.
No one else has an urge to sing "Rivers of Babylon"?
|
|
Matt K
Dark Trooper Phase 1
Joined: 27 Sep 2003
|
| Posted: Nov 11, 2003 15:16 Post subject: |
|
|
The character of Bane (who was named that before his Smith possession -- though he was only onscreen unpossessed in Reloaded for about 5 seconds) was played by Ian Bliss, while Smith was played by Hugo Weaving.
I have no doubt that when they cast the part of Bane they looked for someone who not only resembled Hugo Weaving in appearance (albeit with more hair) but also could mimic his voice and the traits he gave to the character of Agent Smith.
I'm sure he was named Bane on purpose too -- the word "bane" is defined as "a fatal injury or ruin; a cause of harm, ruin, or death; a source of persistent annoyance or exasperation; a deadly poison", all of which apply to Agent Smith.
And yeah Barry, I think it was an excellent performance on the actor's part (as well as an excellent performance by Hugo Weaving), but it wasn't enough to keep me from being extremely disappointed in the movie.
Japh -- I watched Reloaded again the other day, and as far as I can tell, Bane doesn't do a lot of imitation of Smith in it like he does in Revolutions.
|
|
XDelusion
Ree-Yees
Joined: 18 Oct 2003
|
| Posted: Nov 11, 2003 18:59 Post subject: |
|
|
Hmm no one seems to like this one. Well if you think it is a little Hollywood, go back and watch part 1 again, it is Hollywood deal with it, but on the good note, it is one of those Hollywood classics that are injected with a message. 
I liked Matrix part 1, though part 2 kind of sucked just for the fact that Neo and Morpheus did not seem that very good actors in that one, infact Morpheus seemed less present, and Neo less Human. The sex sceen and rave were pointless, and though they did not ruin the film, they also post poned the action, and the act of getting on with the REAL story at hand.
That aside Matrix 2 was a very good movie, that showed of many effects and left one a little confused after leaving the theatre, definatly one you had to pay MUCH attention to, or else you would not see where the story is going. Oh ya, when Neo brought back Trinity, that was gay, she popped up TOOO quickly!
Ok so part 1 ruled, part 2 was pretty koo, but a bit over board on the Hollywood bull crap, lame cheeseynes, and lack of Mystic element that made part 1 so addicting (Starwars cough cough).
Then part 3 comes about and for me, totally turned it all around! Neo was Human again, Morpheus, more potent, and loosing his faith, Trinity is Trinity, the messsage and the Mystic element is back, but now more channeled and focused, like Buddhism compared to Christianity, one is Knowing, the other is blind faith in some random theology.
I do not understand the part about Smith taking upon Human form, but I suppose that all ties in with Neo rubbing off on him, allowing him to trancend his programming limitations...
...but that is strange.
The guy doing the role did a great job, and it is good to see that they did not hint to that in part 2.
There was less action, and more story, which I liked, though Matrix action is always kool too!
Of course little of this film took place in the Matrix, but rather in reality, where the war inevatibly had to be fought anyhow.
The film connected with the Animatrix, and if you have not seen the Animatrix, then you will not understand how Robots and Humans can be friends, or why they are enemies in the 1st place.
Trinity pulls one on the French man, which was very kool indeed, the film would not be complete without that sceen.
Trinity dies... note from moderator: highlight for the spoiler, didn't want to ruin it for anyone who hasn't seen it yet. MK
...its about time, all life ends in sarrow, part of the Message to the film (but by CHOICE we go on).
Mr. Smiths last stand was FUNNY as hell, and his questions to Neo broaght back answers which perfectly describes today's holy man, not a man who does acts to gain acess to heaven, or to be devine, but a man who acts divine, by choice. That is why we are called Creatures, taken from the word Create ors.
I dunno, it's Hollywood and all, but I LOVED it, prolly just as much as part 1.
Think I'll pop in the ANimatrix again.
|
|
Fish
Gamorrean
Joined: 29 Sep 2003
|
|
darth bane
Gamorrean
Joined: 18 Nov 2003
|
|
Tom Manning
Trandoshan
Joined: 27 Sep 2003
|
| Posted: Nov 19, 2003 01:14 Post subject: |
|
|
I suppose I will watch it when my brother gets it on DVD eventuly, I didn't have high hopes for it to begin with, not after the second. Though I cant wait till Lord of the Rings!
_________________
Tom Manning
For all that you hold dear on this good Earth, I bid you, Stand, Men of the West!
Aragorn: Return of the King |
|
Malleus Maleficarum
Dianoga
Joined: 29 Sep 2003
|
| Posted: Nov 25, 2003 06:09 Post subject: |
|
|
I was there when Barry saw it with my brother. Jesus, it is a seriously disturbing example of how blockbuster holywood is falling completely out of pace with western intelligence. Could this be the middle of the end for Holywood? Could it end up being as mocked and laughed at as Bolywood?
|
|
Tom Manning
Trandoshan
Joined: 27 Sep 2003
|
| Posted: Nov 25, 2003 19:39 Post subject: |
|
|
Just wait for Return of the King
_________________
Tom Manning
For all that you hold dear on this good Earth, I bid you, Stand, Men of the West!
Aragorn: Return of the King |
|
ShadowCell
Dianoga
Joined: 23 Oct 2003
|
| Posted: Nov 29, 2003 19:30 Post subject: |
|
|
I'm not going to bother watching Revolutions, or Reloaded. Having just seen The Matrix yesterday, I don't really want to sour the good taste of adrenaline and action and general arse-kicking it left in my mouth.
|
|
Zev
Ree-Yees
Joined: 30 Sep 2003
|
| Posted: Dec 01, 2003 03:54 Post subject: |
|
|
*shrug* I liked it. But then, I'm one of the few humans I've met who has no need for judgement.
|
|
Malleus Maleficarum
Dianoga
Joined: 29 Sep 2003
|
|
Jackson
Dark Trooper Phase 2
Joined: 24 Sep 2003
|
|
Patrick Haslow
Trandoshan
Joined: 25 Sep 2003
|
| Posted: Dec 30, 2003 02:41 Post subject: Re: The Matrix Revolutions |
|
|
Alright, Barry finally got around to "reviewing your review"...
Barry Brien wrote:
Last week saw the eagerly anticipated release of the final instalment of The Matrix Trilogy. The Matrix: Revolutions picks up from where the last movie, Reloaded, left off. We find the franchise's hero Neo (Keanu Reeves) trapped in a place between the Real World and The Matrix, a sort of cyber-limbo. Needless to say he manages to escape with the aid of his love interest Trinity (Carrie-Anne Moss) and mentor Morpheus (Laurence Fishbourne). This first act of the movie leaves a bad taste in my mouth. The cliffhanger we were left with at the end of Reloaded is dealt with in a poor, untidy manner. From here on in the movie just gets steadily worse, the final scene of a sunrise/sunset (it's unclear which) ushering in a new era of peace and harmony being an insipid smack in the face to any self-respecting movie lover.
In terms of story the plot is full of holes and needless convolutions. This movie differs from the previous two in that the majority of action is set in the Real World, and not the Matrix. We watch the inhabitants of Zion defend their city against the onslaught of machines. These battle scenes are not so bad, they just go on for a long time, and many of the characters are new to us, which makes it hard to relate to them. Meanwhile Neo is travelling to the City of the Machines to try and put an end to the war. Why or how he hopes to achieve this is not really too clear, but unsurprisingly it's done in the silliest way possible.
The movie's script is absolutely uninspired, with lots of hackneyed clichés and the type of cringe-worthy one-liners only a Hollywood Cash Cow is capable of delivering. Coupling this is pathetic acting, and by pathetic I mean it's about as dramatic as a hole in your sock. Reeves is consistent in his mannequin-esque delivery, displaying little emotion throughout the movie. What he tries to exude as cool, calm detachment comes across as imbecilic bemusement. It would be easier to empathise with a leather-clad mackerel in designer sunglasses.
With regard to special effects and eye candy I was also disappointed. While Reloaded was an extremely average movie, it did have its fair share of mind-boggling special effects, like the Highway chase and the Fight between Neo and the ever-multiplying Agent Smith. This movie hardly even tries. We do get one or two references to the earlier films, but nothing really new. Even the climactic duel between Neo and Smith at the end of this movie is drawn out and dull.
Fans of the series will be disappointed with this movie, while non-devotees will be stifling snorts, and cursing it underneath their breath. Revolutions not only has nothing to offer, but it takes away from the first two films as well. The army of Matrix disciples on the internet will be scrapping their philosophical musings and theories of political analogy in utter disappointment. It turns out they were wrong. This movie is about as deep as Reeve's acting range. The final resolution of the saga makes no sense, and what's worse there's even space left for a possible fourth movie. A little solace can be gained from the fact that Trinity is killed off (again) and Neo dies at the end of the movie. Did I just spoil the movie for you? Why no, I'm doing you a favour!
Having mentioned the online fan-base of The Matrix I should bring up the fact that this film feels like it was written by one - your typical overweight, Spock-ear clad, acne ridden, lightsaber wielding, ring bearer with delusions of talent. The movie references other sci-fi 'greats' such as Aliens and Superman, and the template of the movie, it could be argued, was lifted directly from next month’s The Lord of the Rings: Return of the King. No wonder Revolutions was released a month beforehand.
If even after reading this you still want to satisfy your morbid curiosity, take this advice. Don't. The Matrix: Revolutions goes beyond being comically bad, and is just a chore to endure.
My problem with this review is that the most biting criticisms lack citable examples of the particular faults being mentioned. Your first paragraph sounds like an outright dismissal of the story from beginning to end, and as I read through the review I expect to see a reason why it is such a bad story, and yet I do not, instead I read raw opinion. It then continues on to claim the presence of "holes and needless convolutions". Examples, please?
Of course, on the basis of simple opinion I disagree as well. I didn't see the continuation of Reloaded's "cliffhangar" ending as poor. To me, the three films form a continuous story, with The Matrix providing a premise for humanity's struggle in a dark future, and the two remaining films forming the chronologically continuous story of the complications and resolutions of that struggle.
I didn't think the trilogy had a particularly hopeful ending- as it stood, it was remarked upon as being shaky during the closing discussion between the Oracle and the Architect. It was just enough to show a spark of promise for things to change on Earth, and I saw the sun in the Matrix as a sign the system would not exist there as an oppressive prison anymore.
I see your boredom with the defense of Zion, but I don't share it. I felt a lot of drama in those scenes, and it was presented impressively enough for me to feel the weight of a horrific battle against machines that was certain to spell the end of humanity, and I thought the horror was underscored by the knowledge that the end was humanity's own doing. I did actually feel much empathy for many characters defending Zion, as there stories and existence had been introduced in the previous film. Many may have been disappointed that so much of the film centered around these events in the Real World- surprised even- but after The Matrix and especially Reloaded, it was fairly clear that this was an eventuality, and a logical one at that.
Where I find fault with the movie is more in it's lack of attention to the story where Neo and Trinity are concerned. Since the previous films placed so much emphasis on a theme of faith over all else, and also in the strength of the connection between Neo and Trinity, it seemed strange the movie neglected them too often in the last act of the movie. It's not a tremendous sense of neglect, but it is enough to make this movie the weakest of the three.
I see the clearest example of your cynicism in your critique of the movie's acting, script, and special effects. There was no difference in this film's acting from the previous two. And what would you say if you saw the sun for the first time in your life? This seemed like a great dynamic juxtaposition of emotions after Trinity dies in the ensuing crash! I also fear that maybe you too are fast becoming one of those people who has seen so many special effects that nothing short of a mind-altering drug trip of an effects films will elicit even a dull response. Poster Boy!
My biggest point of contention with not only you, but almost everyone I witness discussing these films is the notion that there was some deep underlying message in the story of The Matrix. While the science fiction revealed in the first film was thought-provoking, and Morpheus' clever philosphical observations about the cerebrally constructed world of the Matrix echoed Eastern thought, metaphysics, and the like- it was pure coincidence. Once the Matrix was revealed for what it was, it was clear to me that all of the notions were there just to convince a sleepwalking man that he was sleepwalking. How others drew a religious significance from it all was beyond me! I think that may be the reason for so many people's disappointment- I saw this coming and they did not. They wanted a film that was never there in the first place, while I eagerly anticipated watching the conclusion of a truly epic science fiction story which has no parallel to date on screen.
|
|
Barry Brien
Dark Trooper Phase 1
Joined: 26 Sep 2003
|
| Posted: Dec 30, 2003 03:49 Post subject: Re: The Matrix Revolutions |
|
|
Patrick Haslow wrote:
My problem with this review is that the most biting criticisms lack citable examples of the particular faults being mentioned. Your first paragraph sounds like an outright dismissal of the story from beginning to end, and as I read through the review I expect to see a reason why it is such a bad story, and yet I do not, instead I read raw opinion. It then continues on to claim the presence of "holes and needless convolutions". Examples, please?
Well you're right there. It was my first ever movie review. I gave my opinion, I felt I did a good job. I didn't delve into the holes and needless convolutions because (a) it would have taken too long to explain in a review that was supposed to be quite short, and (b) There were so many I simply couldn't remember them. My criticisms were biting, but I honestly felt that the movoe was that bad. As I said before, I didn't want to hate this movie. In fact I really, really wanted to like it, and I tried very hard. I guess the fact that Iw as so disappointed obviously added venom to my inkwell.
Patrick Haslow wrote:
Of course, on the basis of simple opinion I disagree as well. I didn't see the continuation of Reloaded's "cliffhangar" ending as poor. To me, the three films form a continuous story, with The Matrix providing a premise for humanity's struggle in a dark future, and the two remaining films forming the chronologically continuous story of the complications and resolutions of that struggle.
Yes, but when working within the medium of popular cimema, there are rules to adhere to. Now I had only seen Reloaded for the first time a week previous to the release of Revolutions. I really liked the cliffhanger at the end. "Great," I thought "this'll be something powerful to open the third movie with". I just don't really feel that the cliffhanger was resolved in a good way. I felt it was sloppy, rushed, and out of pace.
Patrick Haslow wrote:
I see your boredom with the defense of Zion, but I don't share it. I felt a lot of drama in those scenes, and it was presented impressively enough for me to feel the weight of a horrific battle against machines that was certain to spell the end of humanity, and I thought the horror was underscored by the knowledge that the end was humanity's own doing. I did actually feel much empathy for many characters defending Zion, as there stories and existence had been introduced in the previous film. Many may have been disappointed that so much of the film centered around these events in the Real World- surprised even- but after The Matrix and especially Reloaded, it was fairly clear that this was an eventuality, and a logical one at that.
As I said in my review, the battle wasn't bad, it just went on for too long.
Patrick Haslow wrote:
Where I find fault with the movie is more in it's lack of attention to the story where Neo and Trinity are concerned. Since the previous films placed so much emphasis on a theme of faith over all else, and also in the strength of the connection between Neo and Trinity, it seemed strange the movie neglected them too often in the last act of the movie. It's not a tremendous sense of neglect, but it is enough to make this movie the weakest of the three.
To be honest now, I was glad of the lack of attention to their story. I think they made a horrible couple, and they had absolutely no chemistry between them.
Patrick Haslow wrote:
I see the clearest example of your cynicism in your critique of the movie's acting, script, and special effects. There was no difference in this film's acting from the previous two. And what would you say if you saw the sun for the first time in your life? This seemed like a great dynamic juxtaposition of emotions after Trinity dies in the ensuing crash! I also fear that maybe you too are fast becoming one of those people who has seen so many special effects that nothing short of a mind-altering drug trip of an effects films will elicit even a dull response. Poster Boy!
I was not reviewing the other movies though Patrick, was I? And as for your 'great dynamic juxtaposition', I wish somebody would teach you Americans about subtlety. That scene just made me cringe. Not becuase I'm cynical, but because I have taste. It was so badly done. To answer your question, what would I say if I'd seen the sun for the first time, the answer is probably nothing. I'd say nothing. Another thing Americans don't understand. Keeping your mouths shut.
So what you call cynicism is just my better judgement and taste. The acting is bad, and has been consistently bad throughout the trilogy. The script full of one-liners (yet another thing you Americans lap up, but the rest of the world despise) and the special effects were just boring. As for special effects, I merely commented that nothing new was presented, which was a pity as the other two Matrix movies offered revolutionary new effects in spades. To be perfectly honest, I'm not really the type of person who is into special effects anyhow. Generally they are used to substitute good storyline/acting/writing etc.
In fact most of my favourite movies boast absolutely no special effects. I was just commenting that the absence of any new tricks in this movie was disappointing.
Patrick Haslow wrote:
My biggest point of contention with not only you, but almost everyone I witness discussing these films is the notion that there was some deep underlying message in the story of The Matrix. While the science fiction revealed in the first film was thought-provoking, and Morpheus' clever philosphical observations about the cerebrally constructed world of the Matrix echoed Eastern thought, metaphysics, and the like- it was pure coincidence. Once the Matrix was revealed for what it was, it was clear to me that all of the notions were there just to convince a sleepwalking man that he was sleepwalking. How others drew a religious significance from it all was beyond me! I think that may be the reason for so many people's disappointment- I saw this coming and they did not. They wanted a film that was never there in the first place, while I eagerly anticipated watching the conclusion of a truly epic science fiction story which has no parallel to date on screen.
Well give yourself a pat on the back, Pat. But just becuase you 'got it' and nobody else did does not justify the endless convolutions. I'm not ashamed to admit that by the end of the movie my head was spinning. I know I'm not a stupid person, but all this crap aobut the architect and the different versions of the Matrix. Blah blah, who cares. It just got boring, to the point that I didn't care who was what any more. It srted out great with the first movie, I don't know why they had to change it. Maybe that's just sheer ignorance on my part, but that's how I felt.
I can see where you're coming from Patrick. And you are right. My review could have been a bit better. But I do feel that you are dismissing me as cynical a little too unfairly. Obviously the Anti-American sentiments are simply reactions to you constantly calling me Poster Boy, so before anybody get's on their high horse, shut up, I was joking.
|
|
Patrick Haslow
Trandoshan
Joined: 25 Sep 2003
|
| Posted: Dec 30, 2003 23:05 Post subject: |
|
|
Hey I know, I meant to be a wiseass with the "Poster Boy" comments.
And if I was generalizing there, it was probably more a criticism of the University or Art School mindset than of any nationality. Even there, just kidding!
I can spot a few "one-liners" in the script, but I wouldn't say it was full of them. I too appreciate subtlety, and I can point out other films in this genre that are true examples of a lack thereof. Armageddon? Deep Impact? Independence Day? Those are films worthy of slamming for their lack of subtlety.
While Americans may not appreciate subtlety, at least they hated Alien3 with the passion it deserved!
|
|
Fish
Gamorrean
Joined: 29 Sep 2003
|
| Posted: Dec 30, 2003 23:46 Post subject: |
|
|
Here is a link to a very interesting (and somewhat entertaining) review of the Matrix Revolutions. This is what you get when a bunch of physicists analyzes a movie without mercy.
It might be a bit too scientific for a usual review, but take a look.
http://www.intuitor.com/moviephysics/matrix3.html
And, mentioning Armageddon, it is (in my opinion) still a zillion times worse than any of the Matrixes. Armageddon´s plot and conversations are sooo cheap, cheaper than trash.
|
|
Darth Oosha
Trandoshan
Joined: 24 Sep 2003
|
|
|
