The Matrix Re-Reloaded 640
derGoldstein writes "According to Keanu Reeves: ' Matrix 4 and 5 are coming.' At an event that took place at the London International School of Performing Arts, 'Reeves revealed that he met with the Wachowskis around Christmas. They told him that they completed script treatments for two more Matrix installments. They are planning to make the films in 3D and have already met with James Cameron to discuss the advantages and disadvantages of the technology. Reeves added that he's excited to return as Neo and promised that the treatments will truly revolutionize the action genre like the first Matrix film did.'"
No. (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:No. (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Something that was a crime against humanity occurred two episodes ago. Please tell me this is a bad joke
Re:No. (Score:5, Funny)
I'm just hoping for a Bill & Ted / Matrix Crossover movie....
Re:No. (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:3)
I've always thought that the one thing The Matrix franchise needed is more cowbell.
Re: (Score:3)
Re:No. (Score:5, Interesting)
Ever since the end of Reloaded, I had hoped that's where the story would go. Neo had powers "outside" of the Matrix? His powers just branched out into the "real world" layer of the Matrix, where all who thought they were free were still enslaved. He has to re-learn his skills in this second layer, which was built just to contain "the anomaly" of the one and all the destruction he could inflict. The prophecy, the real world et all are a bunch of programs created to guide and distract the anomaly and in part to study it, to learn how best to keep it under control.
In the moment that Neo died, he finally saw through the Matrix, and he awoke in the real world. Now the prophecy is all bunk and Neo is in control of his own destiny, but he is finally able to do what Morpheus said he would do, free us all. Morpheus was still enslaved, and perhaps deep down inside he knew it. Neo is more than the prophecy ever foretold and the path before him now is new and fresh.
Re:No. (Score:5, Funny)
Neo will be the Blue Ranger, Adama the Black, Kirk the Pink, Frodo the Yellow and Arthur Dent the Red. They will ride a big Cylon mecha called Sauron.
They will find out that the Matrix true purpose is not energy generation, but to discover the Ultimate Question of Life, the Universe, and Everything.
In the end, we all die of boredom.
Dear Mods, Taco, anybody (Score:5, Insightful)
PLEASE erase this post before someone from Hollywood reads it. PLEASE.
Re: (Score:3)
Dang. I was going to go see it.
Re: (Score:3)
They will ride a big Cylon mecha called Sauron.
Your description is epic and I would gladly pay ten bucks to see it. However, you need something dinosaurish. Therefore, I think they should ride a Sauronisaurus Rex, instead. It could stomp around emitting Polish sausage farts and flatten on Ewoks with impunity.
Re: (Score:3)
Kirk the Pink.
Kirk: Pink Ranger sounds like Pussy Ranger. How 'bout if I'm Purple Ranger? That sounds good to me. I'll be Purple Ranger.
Matrix was not bad (Score:5, Interesting)
The matrix left high concept Sci Fi and became more comic gothic and set piece action oriented as it went along. The reason people hated it was because people who like physics based sci-fi are not comfortable with meta-physics and fantasy sci-fi or at least don't like it when expecting one and get served the other.
The original compelling mystery and challenge were exposed so new meta physical plots and myth had to be injected. Perhaps the problem was they invented these in a way that tried to hold the patinia of hard core physical sci-fi but was utterly transparent and ill fitting. For example I like Larry Niven and I liked watching Lord of the RIngs. But I'd not like both in the same soup.
People had similar complaints about the evolution of Battelstar gallactica, though there it the conversion was not so complete.
But if you stand back and just look at these gloriously filmed movies all you can say is Wow. No matter how the story morphed the results were just screen filling action mayhem. And I want to see more for sure. I'll still complain the Reeves is a wooden pole of an actor, though to be fair he's hamstrung now by the deification. We all liked him better when he was less of a god and more of a confused apprentice. But he's just a prop. I don't have to like him to like the movie.
These will be fantastic in 3D.
Re:Matrix was not bad (Score:5, Insightful)
"The reason people hated it was because people who like physics based sci-fi are not comfortable with meta-physics and fantasy sci-fi..."
The idea of an ultra-sophisticated system able to enslave the human race that can only be defeated by virtual-reality karate fighting was what did it for me.
Re:Matrix was not bad (Score:5, Insightful)
The reason people hated it was because people who like physics based sci-fi are not comfortable with meta-physics and fantasy sci-fi or at least don't like it when expecting one and get served the other.
I disagree. People didn't dislike the sequels because of the metaphysics and fantasy elements, but because it was an incoherent mess that took random elements of various religions and mythologies, threw them all into a blender and turned them into an undigestable pinkish-grey loaf of eschatological babble.
That's the BEST part about it (Score:5, Insightful)
I hated the first movie because it tried to present some sort of metaphysical philosophy to it, which was nothing new compared to Dark City, Bladerunner, Ghost in the Shell, etc.. (in fact, it was originally inspired by Ghost in the shell). Nice special FX, but no new ideas.
When the second and third installments came out, i figured out that it WASN'T meant to be a preachy philosophical rant, and that it was only meant to lightly touch on the various ideas, as if you were going through a Philosophy 101 class, or shopping at a mall of Philosophy. Instead, it used anime inspiration as a vehicle for creating a just plain kick-ass action trilogy - a bit of existential philosophy from Ghost in the Shell, futuristic motorcycle racing like Akira, giant drilling machines attacking underground cities like Neon Genesis, high-flying fighting like Dragonball Z, and so much more.
It wasn't meant to be taken as seriously as all the nerds took it. It was a light-hearted anime series in 3 movies. That is all.
That's why the whole series was so brilliant.
If you wanted a single philosophical narrative, there are plenty of other traditional, non-edgy sci-fi movies for that.
Re: (Score:3)
See, I have to disagree. If it weren't meant to be taken seriously, why was it so confusing and laden with (even buried in) symbolism.
If it weren't taking itself so seriously, I think there would have been a whole lot less talking... not that any of them lacked for action.
However, I have to say your theory makes a lot more sense.
Re:Matrix was not bad (Score:5, Insightful)
The reason people hated it was because people who like physics based sci-fi are not comfortable with meta-physics and fantasy sci-fi or at least don't like it when expecting one and get served the other.
You guys keep talking about the philosophy in the movies, and don't seem to touch base on the films themselves. As far as I am concerned, they were just poorly made films. What about the fact that the plot started making no sense? That from one scene to the next, it became difficult to follow the motivations of any of the characters? That concepts were introduced that had no grounding in anything the viewer already knew, but we're expected to understand anyways. The increasingly arbitrary plot points were harder and harder to get behind. It became more of a chore to understand why Neo did the things he did, or why some of it even mattered. What about the fact that the main "bad guy" from the first movie made a reappearance against all logic, just because he would be a recognizable character, that we already know is bad?
How about the pacing? Between all these arbitrary plot points was a lot of fighting that didn't always make sense. I mean, obviously they are fighting because that guy punched Neo, but beyond that, it's just a fight scene. There is such a thing as an action scene taking TOO long. The Matrix 1 was impressive because they did so much with so little. A simple dodging a bullet shot taken with still cameras was a cultural icon for years to come. A motorcycle chase that went on too long just got boring.
The reason I hated Matrix 2 and 3 had nothing to do with metaphysics, and everything to do with the fact that as films, they were poorly made. In my opinion: they tried too hard to capture what made the Matrix 1 great, and ended up ruining it.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
I'm not sure what you're talking about. There was only one matrix movie. There were some movies on the docket, but everyone held true to their artistic values and didn't make them. Good men I tell you; good men.
While we're at it: I'd like to clear up the rumors around Star Wars. There were some very terrible people suggesting that Lucas do some very terrible things including a prequel trilogy. As far as I heard, ideas were drawn up and they were so bad that some of Lucas' inner circle pursuded him no t
Re:No. (Score:5, Funny)
I know what you mean. Saw this really great movie in the 80's called Highlander. It's a good thing Hollywood isn't so corrupt and bankrupt of ideas as to attempt a sequel with that! I mean really, how dumb would that be? The tagline for the movie is "There can be only one!"
A sequel to that wouldn't make any sense at all. I'm so glad they never tried.
I agree, how could they be at 4 anyway? (Score:5, Funny)
I thought they only ever made 1 movie, and it was good.
Wouldn't this technically qualify as a second? I sure hope they don't dirty the concept with some crazy machine war, or an oddly pointless death of Neo's love interest.
-Matt
Re:I agree, how could they be at 4 anyway? (Score:5, Funny)
Dude, I thought at the end of 2 that they were going to go with a "you idiot, they're still in the matrix, the solution to people not being able to handle it was just to fool them into thinking they had escaped so they'd stop fighting it" approach.
After all, THAT would at least have explained better why Neo was able to sense the damn squidbots and blow them up.
But no, then they take the 3rd movie and bash you in the head with "Neo=Jesus" crap and a goddamn Dragonball Z-ish fistfight. The only thing missing was Neo's hair turning bright fucking yellow and standing on end when he Goku'ed out.
Re:I agree, how could they be at 4 anyway? (Score:5, Interesting)
Dude, I thought at the end of 2 that they were going to go with a "you idiot, they're still in the matrix, the solution to people not being able to handle it was just to fool them into thinking they had escaped so they'd stop fighting it" approach.
After all, THAT would at least have explained better why Neo was able to sense the damn squidbots and blow them up.
yeah, I had egg on my face after convincing people about this. It also explained the "cyclical" pattern that was described. My personal theory was that the machines won a long time ago, felt bad about killing all the humans, so created a bunch of programs to mimic them for study.
Re:I agree, how could they be at 4 anyway? (Score:5, Funny)
My personal theory was that the machines won a long time ago, felt bad about killing all the humans, so created a bunch of programs to mimic them for study.
That would nicely explain the acting.
I agree - they're still in the Matrix (Score:5, Interesting)
That's what I thought too. They were still in the matrix. How else could Smith move from one to the other? HE'S A FUCKING COMPUTER PROGRAM.
And it only makes sense. The mystery guy they refer to in the first Matrix who "freed the first of us" and could "reshape the matrix to how he wished". Remember him? When he freed the first of the resistance fighters, who was piloting a ship to catch them and keep them from drowning??? You've got a chicken-and-the-egg problem there. I thought it was a given that they were still in the matrix.
My third movie would have had Neo be the first guy to figure that out - the "outside world" is still the matrix. The matrix does nothing but generate realities to keep you from questioning where you are. And the reason why the matrix is doing this? What's the point?
Earth was destroyed in a war with the machines and the machines won. But they're not the bad guys. We got scared and fired first, nuked them and made the world inhospitable to humans. The machines hold no animosity towards us. The situation saddened them, they understand how we could be scared and do such a thing, and they don't hold it against us. In a way they think of us as parents and believe we are worth saving. So they made a colony ship to send the surviving humans to another habitable world. They don't want us to die, but they realize we can't live together because of human nature. But unfortunately it will take eons to make the trip. So they made a people farm, and a matrix to keep us from going bonkers on the long trip to our new home.
Re: (Score:3)
Mmmm it seemed to me that the need to find "exit points" within the matrix implied that the humans were being digitized into programs that were then inserted into a running simulation. If you can convert a human into a computer program, download the program into a computer system and then later upload the program along with all the data it has accumulated back into the
Re: (Score:3)
At the end of Reloaded, The Architect tells Neo that the whole thing is a cycle where the machines repeatedly destroy Zion and whoever is The One at the time chooses a small group of people to start repopulating Zion with... I would assume that th
Highlander (Score:5, Interesting)
Recall that _Highlander_3_ opened with our hero sitting in an ornate chair, looking straight at the audience, and flatly stating (in so many words) that the previous movie* didn't exist and they were starting this sequel about 10 minutes before the original film ended.
(* - aka _Highlander_2:_The_Sickening_)
Re: (Score:3)
"We blew all our money on hookers and coke and need another quick bit of cash?"
I certainly hope that was the reason. Otherwise, someone might have thought it was a good idea. Who wasn't on coke.
Re:No. (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
Oh... (Score:5, Insightful)
For the love of the great fire cactus.
Sad thing is, even though most people equate the two existing sequels to the experience of having a lightly chilled olive fork rammed into your eye this movie will get its audience. The first matrix was just that damn good that they can keep cranking out shitty sequels and people will watch them, knowing full well that they are going to suck.
Sequels not that bad (Score:5, Interesting)
The idea that the machines want humans as batteries is just what Morpheus claimed. It may be true in the inner Matrix world, but may not be for the outer matrix worlds. Remember even in the first movie the question was asked: "What if when you woke up, you didn't know the difference between the dream world, and the real world?"
So my interpretation is the Oracle is trying to upgrade herself- she believes humans have something the machines don't. Think of the whole thing as a "hybrid/breeding program".
Neo is likely at least partly a machine[1] (and a special one). The Oracle gives Neo cookies to add features/upgrades at critical moments.
After each world iteration (you can see the previous Neos try and fail etc), Neo has a chance of becoming more human but crucially retaining the abilities of machines. Smith goes about merging with all the humans and other machines, including the Oracle (who still _somehow_ retains enough of herself to prompt Neo), and Neo merges with Smith.
If things go fine, the Oracle gets her upgrade... If things go wrong, as the Architect said, the Oracle is playing a dangerous game.
As you can see, there's still plenty of room for reasonable interpretations.
Of course the upcoming sequels could prove that it really was stupid
[1] FWIW, in the first movie the humans themselves mention "he's a machine" they weren't serious of course, but the film writers might be dropping hints.
Re:Sequels not that bad (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
I don't need my stories handed to me on a silver platter, but the level of alternate meaning you're suggesting would require far more obvious clues to be believable for me.
The paranormal abilities of Neo in the purportedly "real" world (the "non-Matrix") should be a very clear and explicit clue. But for some reason, most of the audience just seems to have rejected that clue. Maybe because Matrix 1 created a universe which was very consistent, and the audience just can't switch away from that.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
The fact that there have literally been hundreds of Neos is enough to convince anyone.
Nah, the Architect said something about "This will be the Nth time we've destroyed [Zion.]" It was a single digit number, something like 4, 6, or 7.
Re:Sequels not that bad (Score:5, Insightful)
Now, if we could just get them to hire you to write it, I'd be more optimistic. Whoever wrote 2&3 should under no account be allowed to write 4 & 5.
Just my $0.02 worth
Re:Sequels not that bad (Score:5, Interesting)
At the end of Matrix 2, I honestly thought we were seeing "hey dummy, they're still in the matrix, they're just fooled into thinking they are out so that they'll stop resisting."
After all, Neo's "I can alter the Matrix" powers make sense in the matrix, but there's no rational basis whatsoever for him being fucking telekinetic in the real world. Therefore, as I saw it, the easiest explanation was just that he was starting to get a sense of the second matrix layer and play with it when he made all the squidbots explode.
After all, that makes more logical sense (at least according to the previously relatively internally-consistent rules as established in the movies till that point) than "Neo is fucking jesus, the chosen one gets to have powers in the real world too, he's going to blow up in a cross shape, fuck you", which is what they did with the third movie.
Re:Sequels not that bad (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3)
I would hunt down and publicly execute the Wachowski brothers^h and sister if they did this.
Note to lawyers: This is not a serious threat on anybody's life, I hold no ill-will towards the Wachowski's, it's just a joke. Just a terrible, terrible joke.
Re:Sequels not that bad (Score:4, Interesting)
Great comment. Everyone loves to hate 2 & 3. Thought I was alone in liking the entire series.
2 was rich, complex and nuanced. After 1 my thinking was, Neo is now a bad-ass, the Matrix is now understood and mastered, what can possibly happen in 2? Alot happens; the world turns out to be substantially more complex and nuanced, with many complex and powerful antagonists and friendlies and uncertainty as to whom are who. The matrix world in 2 I found to be far more frightening and intimidating place than in the first film.
3 is a weak film, mainly because it takes 45mins of story and plot and tries to stretch it into a feature length film. Definitely a sin which weakens the film, but the plot is still sound and interesting.
Re:Sequels not that bad (Score:5, Funny)
That's all fine, but am I the only one who had hoped the next movie by the Wachowski brothers would be a documentary about their personal lives?
Re: (Score:3)
Re:Sequels not that bad (Score:4, Interesting)
I don't see the sequels as bad or stupid.
A lot of people actually don't outside the nerdverse. They were just big, dumb sci-fi action flicks and worked on that level. It's just become one of those geekdom memes. You must hate the two Matrix sequels to the point of comparing them to torture like the OP did. You must hate season 5 of Babylon 5. Any show that includes human interest and drama to science fiction must be derided as a soap opera. And so on. It goes the other way, too. You must worship Joss Whedon, for example, and continue to quote Monty Python forever. Yeah, it's tiresome. Personally, I liked Reloaded, but was "meh" about Revolutions. I was hoping for the nested multiple Matrix like a lot of others.
Re:Sequels not that bad (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Oh... (Score:5, Interesting)
The thing is that as action movies in their own right, the 2nd and 3rd movies were fine. They just didn't have the epic mindblowing nature of the first. After a few years of not watching them and the whole Matrix hype dying down, I don't mind them so much. I'd definitely give the Matrix 4 and 5 a chance, maybe the Wachowskis have learned something from 2 and 3. Then again, maybe they're just the next George Lucas.
Re:Oh... (Score:5, Funny)
maybe the Wachowskis have learned something from 2 and 3. Then again, maybe they're just the next George Lucas.
"Meesa save da humans in da Matrix! Whoah."
Re: (Score:3)
The thing is that as action movies in their own right, the 2nd and 3rd movies were fine.
The second movie extended the pointless action sequences so much that they became... boring. I don't need to watch thirty minutes of actors in front of a green screen being superimposed onto a moving truck on the highway, thirty seconds would be plenty.
The second movie was so bad that I had no desire whatsoever to see the third. I can only imagine they're making the 4th and 5th becuase the Wachowskis either do that or get a job flipping burgers in McDonalds.
Re: (Score:3)
I don't need to watch thirty minutes of actors in front of a green screen being superimposed onto a moving truck on the highway, thirty seconds would be plenty.
Good, because that sequence wasn't shot in front of a green screen [imdb.com].
Re: (Score:3)
Maybe people said the same about the 1st trilogy of Star Wars and the shitty 2 first sequels before the 3rd came out. Maybe, with a bit of hope, they fix the damage done in the sequels.
In the other hand, if they are considering 3D for it, or finally do a movie where 3D makes sense, or they just plan to leech a bit more money of the series knowing how much people paid to see quality films like Transformers 2.
Awesome! (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Awesome! (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:3)
IF the 'reality' of the last two movies turns out to be yet another layer of the onion, cool. If not, not so cool.
The underlying truth of the man-machine war could remain, but the other stupid stuff could be written off as simply being the way a particular simulation was set up.
Hell - have Neo find out there are a hundred layers of simulation, and you could turn it into a Saturday morning cartoon series where every week he escapes another level.
ObXKCD (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:ObXKCD (Score:5, Interesting)
IMO, the second two were better than the first.
I don't know what people were expecting and didn't get from them. I find it as puzzling as the people who complained about Transformers 2. What did they expect from that? It was two hours of robots kicking the crap out of each other.
Matrix 2 and 3 were what you expected -- special effects, Keanu saying "woah" and pop-philosophy.
I think the problem is people read way too much into the first one.
yawn (Score:2)
the first one was cool for the 1990's when computers were still kind of new and the tech was pretty cool. come middle of the next decade they will really have to have a good story to keep people interested. special effects won't do it anymore
Re:yawn (Score:5, Interesting)
Computers were not exactly "new" a decade ago. Even as far as movie CG, it was about 25 years old. It was the use of new camera and filming technology and techniques that really set the first Matrix apart - aside from a really great story. What Matrix accomplished was doing something amazing in a post-Jurassic-Park time period, when special effects had finally reached the point where it could realistically accomplish anything and we should have otherwise not have been impressed by anything that we saw, anywhere.
I could go for more Keanu. I could go for more cyber-punk type of stuff. I just don't see the need to make it more Matrix stuff. Do two or three whole new movies independent of the franchise. They don't need to have anything to do with it. Sometimes it's good enough to just have one singular great self-contained story. Not sequels. Not game DLC. Not prequels. Just more good stories.
Also, I really just wanted to reply to this whole story with a single post that just said "Whoa....".
I welcome the chance to fix what screwed up (Score:2)
The end of the last matrix was so bad most people pretend it doesn't exist (see Jar Jar). I think they realize everyone was left with a bad taste in their mouth as if they were expecting chocolate and got Mr Hanky.
Cypher (Score:5, Funny)
I got the script for 4 & 5 (Score:4, Insightful)
Matrix 4: Scene: City streets
Neo and gang fight and shoot up the place.
Hot chick with pushup bra kisses Neo, Trinity looks disgusted.
More fighting and shooting.
Matrix 5: Scene: City streets
Neo and gang fight and shoot up the place.
Hot chick with pushup bra kisses Neo, Trinity looks disgusted.
More fighting and shooting.
Re:I got the script for 4 & 5 (Score:5, Funny)
Matrix 4: Scene: Suburbia
Neo and gang mow lawns and clean pools.
Hot chick with pushup bra babysits for Neo, Trinity looks disgusted.
More mall shopping.
Matrix 5: Scene: Rural Farm
Neo and gang plant corn.
Hot chick with pushup bra milks a cow, Trinity looks disgusted.
More square dancing.
Re: (Score:3)
Neo clicks on a cow.
Re:I got the script for 4 & 5 (Score:5, Funny)
Matrix 5: Nebuchadnezzar struck by lightening, taken back to 1885, Neo must travel back in time to rescue Morpheus
Didn't he die at the end of 3? (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Didn't he die at the end of 3?
Yes, but the art of crappy sequels is beating a dead horse.
Re:Didn't he die at the end of 3? (Score:4, Interesting)
Yes, but the machines never gave his body back to the humans. This was somewhat explored in the short-lived MMO, I get the feeling if there are more movies they will build on this fact.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:3)
Well, Spock died at the end of Star Trek II, didn't he? Dying is no problem in science fiction.
Obligatory XKCD comic (Score:2, Informative)
Folks? Get the clue, it's over. (Score:5, Insightful)
Matrix 1 was a revolution. Bullet time was new and exciting, the whole "green rayban tint" throughout the movie gave it an eerie air (seriously, put on Raybans in the night, presto Matrix feeling), mix in hacker and kung-fu elements and presto instant geek movie.
The second was a weak copy (seriously, the alleged original script was better). The third was ... let's not talk about it, ok?
If they want to be revolutionary again, it has to offer more than "IN THREE DEE". This feature got very stale very fast, being too overused already after not even two years of existence.
Also, how do you want to continue this story? The rise of the machines again? Or are we going to get a moral story about how humans and machines should coexist, even more of a snorer than the third?
Re: (Score:2)
Not that making more Matrix movies can really make sense in any universe...
Re: (Score:2)
Also, how do you want to continue this story?
I just hope they don't make a prequel.. I really hate those. Or cover some time period that was glanced over (I hate those too). Stories have a start and end. Going back and telling some part of it in the middle or before the origional start always feels weird, and in the worst cases can wreck the original story.
The fact that Neo kinda like.. dies.. at the end of the third one kind of limits the possibilities of the character. They can always do the lame "he wasn't really dead" thing.. but people hate that.
Re: (Score:2)
The second was a weak copy (seriously, the alleged original script was better). The third was ... let's not talk about it, ok?
I think I would have actually been totally OK with the second movie if the third had actually gone anywhere meaningful with the story. The wild speculation after the end of the 2nd movie of layered virtual worlds as seen in "The Thirteenth Floor" had me somewhat hopeful. Still felt like the series could go somewhere exciting before the 3rd movie sunk it completely.
Re:Folks? Get the clue, it's over. (Score:4, Interesting)
You know why studios love 3D? Because it is impossible to pirate while it is in the theatre. It gives them a larger window of exclusivity. It is an incidental form of DRM.
Re:Folks? Get the clue, it's over. (Score:4, Informative)
Re: (Score:3)
rubbish jsu tadd a polarized lense over the lense and you are good to go for 2D, others here mentioned using 2 cameras, suppose that works as well, but weems like a lot of work
In other news.... (Score:5, Funny)
2012 (Score:5, Funny)
Sweet?!?!?! (Score:2)
Comment removed (Score:3, Interesting)
New and exciting uses of technology #327 (Score:2)
Flogging a dead horse in 3D bullet time.
Whoa
Re: (Score:3)
A fully CGI horse with twitching so realistic you'd swear it was a live-action horse.
Critics suck the life out of movies (Score:3)
I just want to be entertained by an action flick. If I want to be moved, I'll see The King's Speech again.
There's all kinds of room for a Matrix prequel. We really don't quite know how Neo begins to question the Matrix, and of course who got out first. Or if they were just survivors from the initial enslavement. Which means another prequel to explain the rise of the machines. Oh, wait, that's another movie. No, wait, plot is pretty much the same, just change a few things and it's fine. After all, how many action plots are there? Four? Gimme another big-budget Bond movie anyways, the weapons are actually better and the villains much more believable.
If these turn out to be sequels instead, well, then they will probably explore life outside the Matrix in more detail. Grime and clever hacks sounds like another installment of Riddick, but it will be beautiful. Prequels mean more intellectualism. Sequels mean more action effects.
I'll see them. Hell, they remade Tron and nobody died out here in meatspace because of it. So far as I know.
Oh, when do we get the nedt two Star Trek movies? They need to put Vulcan back together, for starters. And Chris Pike needs his close-up.
people loved matrix 1 (Score:3)
people loved the original star wars trilogy
so they go into subsequent movies with very high expectations. the second trilogy of star wars, or matrix 2&3: these were ok movies, no big deal
but if you go into these movies with almost religious ecstatic expectations, you are severely disappointed, and then proceed to howl about it
and so normal folk, who just want to be entertained, and are not worried about a matrix 4, must suffer the fanboy and his practically religious fundamentalist denunciations
in short: matrix 4? ok, whatever, says the well-adjusted person
the fanboy basement dweller: the idea of matrix 4 gets you rabidly upset
GET. A. LIFE.
How about Matrix Re-Imagined? (Score:3)
Just pretend 2 & 3 never happened and tell the story again. Only this time, try to find a way that people who, at one point, could speak along with all roles in Matrix 1 by heart, can watch them more than approximately 1.5 times each.
Re:Sad Keanu Is Nostalgic (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
He's notably turned down Constantine 2, Speed 2, a 3rd Bill & Ted movie...
Did you read the article?
Spoke briefly about the possibility of Bill and Ted part 3 - ( Audience started laughing) but he assured us he's committed to the project.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
No, no, no.....
The first was "Bill and Teds Excellent Adventure", while the second was "Bill and Teds Bogus Journey"
Clearly, there isn't a "2" in the second title. Additionally, a sequel to an excellent adventure would be another excellent adventure. The second B&T movie was a bogus journey, which is the converse of an excellent adventure.
If anything, "Bill and Teds Bogus Journey" is an anti-sequel.....with death, aliens and robots.
Re:Sad Keanu Is Nostalgic (Score:5, Interesting)
Mr. Reeves is a sequel whore committed to leaching money off of success or even moderate success
If he was really doing anything to "leech money", why would he give millions to charity, take millions in pay cuts to allow other big budget actors to be cast when he thinks they'd really suit a certain part? What about when he gave £50,000,000 to the cast and crew of the Matrix movies [hellomagazine.com]. Give the guy some credit where it's due. If he's making a movie, it's most likely for other reasons than money.
Read up on the actual story of Sad Keanu [knowyourmeme.com] and maybe you'll think differently of him. I only read all that last week. I've never thought of him as a douche, but now I think he's one of the nicest guys in show business, perhaps even the nicest guy.
Re:Sad Keanu Is Nostalgic (Score:5, Interesting)
You are an idiot. The stuff he's doing obviously hasn't been publicised much, or everyone would know about it and eldavojohn wouldn't have been being such a dick.
He gives away lots of money to cancer charities as his sister has leukemia. You could make the case that that's vaguely self serving, but it's still a good thing to do.
From the Sad Keanu page:
In his career, Keanu turns down big roles if he believes the character he would portray is too violent. He took a 90 percent pay cut on The Replacements just so Gene Hackman could be cast. Previously, he had deferred 2 million of his salary so that Al Pacino could be cast on The Devil’s Advocate. Even then, he gives most of his earnings to charity and the backstage crew/people who help on the set.
Emphasis mine. He consistently gives away his earnings despite no need to do so, and no need for more publicity. The guy is nothing like Bill Gates or Steve Jobs, he is not about the limelight and appearances. As others have said, he turned down big movies like Speed 2 and Constantine 2 (that would have made him a metric fuck-ton of money and publicity), just so he could work on smaller movies that he thought were more worth making.
In TFA he also says he's doing The Matrix 4 and 5 "to give the fans the sequels he feels they deserve", so hopefully they'll be a lot more like the first movie. Likewise I doubt he'd be doing B&T 3 unless it's going to be a great movie. From what I've read he often used to wish that people would forget he was in Bill & Ted and take note of his more serious work!
You can continue being cynical if you wish, but from all the stuff I read last week and today, he sounds like a very humble, admirable and down to earth (as much as it's possible to be when you're that famous) guy.
Re:Sad Keanu Is Nostalgic (Score:5, Informative)
Mr. Reeves is a sequel whore committed to leaching money off of success or even moderate success
Keanu Reeves has been in 49 movies in his career so far and the only sequels I see that he's been in are Bill and Ted's Bogus Journey and the Matrix sequels. I think that hardly qualifies him as a "sequel whore".
If you want to talk sequel whores there are others that are worse such as Eddie Murphy (Beverly Hills Cop 1-3. Dr. Doolitle 1&2, The Nutty Professor 1&2, 48 Hours 1&2), Mel Gibson (Lethal Weapon 1-4, Mad Max 1-3), Sylvester Stallone (Rocky 1-6, Rambo 1-4) the main cast of Harry Potter and most of the cast of the Police Academy movies (#8 is in development, even Guttenberg stopped after 4).
Re:Sad Keanu Is Nostalgic (Score:5, Insightful)
Sequels vs. serials (Score:3)
If you want to talk sequel whores there are others that are worse such as [...] the main cast of Harry Potter
Do you really think a 7-year story like this could reasonably have been condensed into one 2-hour film? You might as well call the actors in The Lord of the Rings films sequel whores. And you might as well call the cast of any TV series sequel whores.
Re:Which religion next? (Score:5, Funny)
Matrix 4: Spaghetti Code.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Here's an idea. . . (Score:3)
If you're going to make movies, make movies. Requiring people to go to multiple other media to understand the movies is a recipe for failure. Most people expect the series of movies to form a coherent storyline without any important 'missing bits'. I don't mind video games, comic books, or short animations, but they should add to the universe in such a way that it doesn't leave holes in the main story told in the 'primary media'.