Oh the batteries were pretty damn silly (and unnecessary), but they weren’t really central to the plot, and easily forgiven since everything else was generally pretty solid.
Forget the real world powers, I was waiting for his Matrix powers. He was supposed to reshape the Matrix “as he saw fit.” This seems to imply a lot more than being a martial arts master and moving extremely fast. More on the course of, “I don’t like this building” and ,poof, Disneyland appears.
Keep in mind that the prophecy regarding the man who could reshape the Matrix as he saw fit was spread by the Matrix itself. It didn’t have to be true.
There’s an interesting version of the second and third films you can find in torrents called The Matrix - Dezionised. A film editor took the two films, spliced them together, and removed every scene in Zion. It makes for a more interesting film, but sadly he didn’t edit down the far too long fight scenes.
I think it’s the same guy who did The Phantom Edit cut of The Phantom Menace, but I’m not certain.
I’m not sure you can blame the Matrix sequals on “Marketing”, the Wakowski Siblings seem to have been given a lot of control. Indeed, if the Studio had told them to scrub the original script and come back with something that made sense it might’ve been a lot better. I agree that they made the mistake of just taking what people liked about the first film and just layering it on the sequels without much thought, though.
You think “Marketing” told George Lucas what to put int the Star Wars prequels? The world would be a better place if this were true, but Lucas is famous for not taking other peoples good advice about his films, and he’s certainly got the money to make the movies he wants without having to listen to any suits.
There was a review of the films that made a good case that hidden within the two movies was one pretty decent film, but having to streach it out over twice the length caused the train-wreck they ended up being.
Simplicio is dead on. If anything, it was marketing and lack of creative control that made the original Star Wars films amazing. But when it was time for the prequel trilogy to come out, Lucas was already viewed as a god and he was able to just throw in whatever the hell he wanted without being checked by studios. I’m not sure if this is applicable to the Matrix films, though. Have the creators ever bitched about being creatively stifled in the original film?
I found the first movie shallow but slick. It was a good popcorn movie, if nothing else.
I saw the second one at the cinema, and it was (without exaggeration) the most painful movie-going experience of my life. The first movie was dumb, but it was paced well enough that you really didn’t notice; the second lingered on its stoner-level philosophy as if it were meant to be taken seriously. Dull and insulting.
Furthermore, the action scenes went twice as long as they needed to and lacked any kind of tension. And there was so many of them.
And the rave scene was self-indulgent crap.
At best, you had enough good material for 30 minutes worth.
I saw the third movie at home and remember not a thing from it.
I’m not projecting: I’m observing. I’m also discussing the audience in general, not the handful of people who thought otherwise.
It’s pretty obvious that’s a factor; a movie with a good ending overcome weaknesses elsewhere. What surprised me about the Matrix was how boring most of it was. The first half hour was ok, the next hour and fifteen minutes deadly dull, and the final 45 minutes an excellent action sequence. People remember the last 45 minutes and forget the dull parts. Then, they decide the entire film was good. They convince themselves that the boring parts were really exciting.
It just “The Testing of Eric Olthwaithe” all over again.
??? Suspense and excitement were what made me love the first movie. The trailers never told you what the Matrix was, so except for the stupid humans are batteries part it was really interesting to find out. Also, until he found out, you never quiet knew who to trust. Sure agent Smith seemed like a bad guy, but I didn’t know if Morpheus could be trusted either. Maybe you did and maybe you’re the type who could see everything coming a mile away, but nothing seemed predictable to me, and so that and the suspense is why I loved it. And yeah, the fight scenes were good, but it isn’t what drew me in or held my attention.
Observing who? You’re one of the first people I’ve heard express this sentiment and I’d be willing to wager you’re grossly over-estimating how many share your feelings.
All the Zion stuff in the 2nd movie was pretty stupid, but overall I liked the 2nd film. In the 1st film, Neo is The One; in the 2nd, Neo finds out his actual purpose is much different than what the humans believed. It’s the 3rd movie, where they resolve the conflict in an over-the-top CGI orgasm, that it became clear that the Wachowskis hadn’t quite fleshed out their story.
I agree that the idea of using humans as batteries is just dumb. But it’s like saying that Star Wars is a bad movie because it had FTL travel and that’s bad physics. The human batteries were kept logically consistent and worked within the framework of the story.
The movies’ problems were other logical gaps like Neo having powers in Zion - this violated the internal consistency of the story. We were told there were two seperate worlds and you can have powers in the fake one and no powers in the real one. Okay, we’ve got that - now frame the story within that boundary. Don’t make this “fact” a major plot point in one movie and then abandon it in another - that’s bad story-telling.
If it was going to be necessary for the plot at some point for Neo to have powers in Zion then the Wachowski brothers should have included that possibility way back early in the first movie when Morpheus was explaing how the universe worked. They should have made up some plausible bullshit and put it in there so that when Neo got powers in the next movie we could look back and say “okay, that makes sense.”
I’ve also heard that drugs may have become a factor in the second and third Matrix movies. The first was a huge success and opened a lot of opportunities to the Wachowskis. Unfortunately, Larry/Lana chose some bad opportunities. Leaving aside the more unconventional issues he went through, he apparently took a lot of drugs and this affected his creative abilities.
My problem was the ending of the second one (whichever one that was). The Architect’s plan just didn’t make sense to me. The whole thing should have been about false choice. Instead, there was still a choice to shut down the Matrix. Why wouldn’t Neo take it? He’s not some altruistic guy who cares about every bluepill. He honestly seems to want them to die.
I have to fanwank it to make it makes sense. The whole “we have other ways of staying alive” had to mean–once we delete you, and kill everyone, we’ll restart the Matrix with clones. The choice was just there to make it more likely he’d pick the other one, since it’s less work for them.
In fact, I find I have to fanwank a lot to make the movies work. The end of the first movie specifically said that Neo now had the power to do whatever he wanted. But, in the second, they had to strip him of most of his powers. I have to fankwank that into saying he can only use them when his or (someone he loves) life is in danger. He or Trinity had to be close to death. His Matrix-raised mind would not let him completely ignore the restraints. It’s a pretty common trope (see Superman Returns, for one) to get your best powers only in emergencies (especially after near death.)
The only thing I disliked from the first movie was the whole “kiss brought him back to life.” Funnily, that already sets up his power to overcome real world restrictions, as he was clearly dead. No amount of willpower will bring you back from that. And love definitely won’t. I know from experience.
(I fanwank only by saying he was just almost dead, and used his mind to override the rule that, if you die in the Matrix, you die in real life. The kiss was just a reminder that he had something to live for. It gave him the will to fight.)
Oh, he’s not so bad, once you get to know him.
I’m not sure that requires fanwanking, as that’s always how I thought it was meant to be intended.
Say what you want about the sequels, “Me too!” is one of the bestest lines ever said on film.
… Or, quelle horreur, they just didn’t think the same as you – that the middle parts were boring. Just because you were bored by it doesn’t mean others were. Personally, I wasn’t bored at all by the middle bits. I enjoyed learning the basics of the Matrix, and seeing Neo’s training, and the visit to the Oracle. Even when rewatching, as much as I dig the fights, it’s still the ‘this is how the universe works’ stuff that really catches my fancy.
I’m disappointed to read that the sequels were that awful. I’ve never seen them and kinda hoped I’d find at least one of 'em a fun follow-up. Doesn’t seem likely, though I’ll still give them a try.
Another thing I should have mentioned is that the second one doesn’t really go anywhere. They’re not really any better or worse off at the end of it. While the exposition was nice, the plot didn’t go anywhere. I know some people who recommend just skipping it and going straight to the third one.
And I must admit that I enjoyed the movies for what they were. But, then again, I enjoyed the “Lost in Space” movie.