Anyone seeing The Matrix reloaded tonight?

My Son's review of The Matrix Reloaded....It was truly amazing! It was Action packed! Every part of the movie had you on the edge of your seat waiting to see what happens next! It had awesome graphics detailing a lot like the first but much more involved! Keanu Reeves does a fantastic job of playing Neo. Non-Stop action packed, definitely one you need to see in the movies! Don't wait for the DVD! Five Star!

 

I do like very much the special edition with all the extras... I'm sure the producers will do the same with Reloaded... they will show the scenes which were not used for the movie and much more... the fans will buy the DVD again... incl. me!

 

I thought Matrix Reloaded was great! A notch below the first one, but still pretty good. And of course the special effects were outstanding. Four stars.

 

The Matrix Reloaded should easily be the top grossing R Rated film ever.

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tm...9&e=1&u=/ap/20030517/ap_en_mo/matrix_reloaded

 

Seen it twice already. Review pending. In a nutshell:

1. Noisy as hell

2. As you'd expect, great action and SFX

3. Makes no coherent story sense whatsoever

4. It never will make any sense whatsover

5. #3 & 4 don't matter and nobody will care--it's loud, frenetic, visually mesmerizing and sure to kick up your adrenalin.

That's it for now. The deeper meanings of the film will have to wait. Saturday nite's no nite for analysis.

ED

 

The one thing that I liked from the second Matrix, was the one thing that I liked from the first Matrix! CARRIE-ANNE MOSS!

 

What don't you understand? It's laid out so simple?

 

A hot girl...

 

The MatrixMan loves Carrie-Anne Moss! HEY, CARRIE-ANNE!!

 

Well, it looks like $93 million for the 3-day weekend, $135 overall. Not bad, especially for an R-rated film.

 

Just saw the film and have to agree with Ed on all counts. Really cool action and effects, but I have no idea what this story's about. The world the W. Brothers have created is so alien and unreal (video game-like) that there's not nearly enough emotional connection between me and the characters for me to care one bit about what happens to them. I wasn't a big fan of the first film, but respected it as innovative. This one wasn't boring, but it was frustrating because it's all so meaningless. I may actually skip the next one.

Still, I think it would be cool if Warners could land the brothers to direct Superman.

Ray

 

I'll be dragged to see this, probably next week. I thought the first MATRIX was dull, like watching my nephew play a video game or something. To me, it seemed like TWISTER; that is, a movie constructed around newly created special effects with no real reason to exist without them. And the S&M outfits just reduced it to kitsch.

Obviously, $135 million of paying customers disagree.

 

To be dreadfully honest, if you didn't follow the 1st Matrix, you won't be able to follow the 2nd one very well.

If you could follow the 1st matrix but couldn't follow the Reloaded one, you've either forgotten the plot entirely or you weren't paying attention to Reloaded.

Simple.

 

Well... I never saw the original. That makes me completely unqualified to review it but I'm going to give a short one anyway seeing how I just got home from seeing it an hour ago.

It seemed to me that the oratories by some of the characters were REALLY long winded, but the rest pretty much escapist fun. Easily worth the matinee price I paid to see it. And I'm usually a harsh critic.

Don't go to a summer movie and expect Hemingway.

 

Oh, please. The first movie was written first, separately, standing alone. It made all the sense it needed to make.

The 2 sequels were written later, after the colossal success of the first movie.

This means that your quote is more relevant to the scamming movie makers than to the observant movie goers - if you follow my point.

Simple enough?


FFF (as always, just MHO)

 

That WOULD be, uh, SUPERCOOL!! Not least because the visual reference is there. In fact, for all its sturm und drangand occasional humor, Ray, you've hit upon the key problem with this series to date: not much in the way of emotional connection to the characters, which cannot be said for the films it steals from: 2001, the Terminators, BLADE RUNNER(hell, the warped Philip K. Dick reality concept in general), ALIEN, STAR WARS and LETHAL WEAPON(the interminable and needless freeway carnage). Even the biblical references are so forced and obvious DeMille might have been just a twee ashamed at being so direct about it.

Speaking of which, the real letdown for me is the LACK of carnage! This film was meant to drag in parents and their children(which it did, judging by the two crowds I viewed it with), yet this is very bloodless nonsense in more ways than one. My point being, with all the replicant villains and vacuous heroes, it doesn't matter who lives or dies, so nothing is at stake: what we're left with is an adrenalin rush and nothing more. In better sci-fi, the characters' fates MATTER; they don't here, sorry to say, though at least Keanu & Carrie-Anne Moss make a great, great couple(we're even robbed of a really hot sex scene, to let the ten-year-olds in. Cripes!) As weird as it sounds, this SHOULD be a bloodletting mess of a film, but instead is a compromise to satisfy the box office. Fun, but so overloaded visually that there is practically no story to hang its coat to. Others may think differently, but if so, you're reading things into this that don't exist. That is, a plot: there isn't one. There is nothing to save: this film is for SFX and and loud noise and NOTHING ELSE. To suggest anything different is to miss the crass cynicism of it all. And Keanu Reeves has the charisma of a house plant: he's even less involved than he was in SPEED, which is saying something(another reference), yet there you had Sandra Bullock to root for.

Still, it's always great fun to hang with a crowd and get a kick out of all the noise and mindless visuals. As long as you know going in it's all mindless.

ED

 

The movie did seem like an advertisement to create another Superman movie. I doubt it was taken seriously, but who knows?

 

The WB connection is there, the third movie's being readied for November....why not? A chance to do the Man of Steel--WITHOUT Keanu Reeves, one hopes --would be killer if the spirit of the old comic were retained. No knock on the '78 Reeve film, which is better than it's been given credit for, but the potential to make a stunning visual Superman with some emotional depth--provided the brothers are capable of emotional depth, something they've yet to display anywhere--is an enticing concept, one many of us would embrace if executed with more than a nod to the audience. Let Michael Bay play those stupid games; the Bros. are capable of better, as they've already shown.

ED

 

You want a Superman film with heart, choose Paul Dini. As I think about it, J. Michael Straczynski could do a great job, too.

 

Yeah she's reason enough to see this picture!

 

And Straczynski(had to go the Season 2 BABYLON 5 box to get the spelling right on his name--tough one!)would be a great choice for SUPERMAN, as he has been writing for comics in recent years. And he proved with B5 he could write a really long yet compelling story arc and make it all work. An underrated achievement, I think.

ED

 

I saw this one this morning. The 10am showing was PACKED!

It was worth the money, but I'm a bit let down.

1) Too long. The first 1/3 of the movie seemed to drag as weren't "getting" anywhere.

2) Special effects were all nice, but it's almost like eating too much candy on Halloween. C'mon, Neo fights like 50 Agent Smiths? I would have rather 3 agents chase him around different venues than he fight 'em all for 10 minutes standing in the same spot.

3) Lots of preaching, very little dialog. The first film had some witty dialog where people actually talked to each other. Real conversations are a good thing.

See if you liked the first one, but I like the conciseness of the orginal.

 

Ed, a BIG thank you for removing the spoiler!

 

Anytime, Robert. And thank YOU for pointing it out!

ED

 

Gee, Ed, I saw the movie tonight, and I think differently! Am I hallucinating and therefore in the matrix, or seeing something real because I'm unplugged?

Seriously, I understand why you think the way you do, but I don't think the movie warrants such a categorical dismissal. It's not flawless by any means, and it's not as charming as the first one (when the first one isn't playing at Sam Peckinpah, that is), but I don't think any movie that risks its core audience the way this one does is merely crass and cynical. There's some real ambition here, and while it's anyone's guess whether the payoff in #3 will be worth it, I will certainly be interesting in seeing this trilogy through.

I'm truly sorry you've made your mind up about this one, my friend.