Did "The Matrix" had to be a trilogy?

The legacy of a great film ruined by two medicore sequels.

The old adage is always leave em wanting more. And that's how it should be. Giving us more was vastly underwhelming because really, they didn't give us the explanations we wanted or particularly needed in the end.
 
I can happily watch all three films but the 1st is the only great film out of the three. I think the 1st had a(?) unique appeal that the two sequels failed to live up to.
 
Yes, should have been just one film. The sequels tainted the matrix name imo!

Sometimes it's better to have an open end to a film that leaves the rest up to your imagination
 
The sequels were simply abysmal, tribal dance scene/orgy, massive long fights where you knew the winner before hand, and were simply dull anyway, the complete and utter removal from the main basis of the first film... agents who basically work along the "matrix's" rules, and a once in a generation special guy who could bend the rules further than anyone else.

The second and third films just made a mockery of the whole limits imposed on the first film, which is what made the story work. If everyone can just make a super dude whenever they want with uber powers.... what the hell is the point?

From weirdo twins who despite a basically unbeatable power, can't kill anyone, to Neo who goes from long fight to long fight, taking ages to beat anyone for no reason. The story was worse, the fights were awful hollywood over the top nonsense, the scenes inside the docking area, the love sick gay kid, the terrible Smith stuff, and the often awful acting.

The first film worked, and was fantastic, the other two were first film + bigger budget + remove the story + add stupid story + add boobs + add orgy/tribal scene + over the top action that removes everything that made the fight scenes so good in the first film + **** cgi + **** end.
 
The first film set a universe and a protagonist, but it had a beginning and an end. Neo obviously beats the agents and thus has control of the Matrix.. end of the story.

What the second films should have done is NOT continue his story, but to choose a completely new story; Making the the Matrix could have been a world of stories and yes in the end we might have wanted to know what happened to Neo and they could have continued the story from there many years later.

A good story teller always leaves the story open and the first Matrix film created a world/universe, it was up to them to expand it with more stories.
 
scottomus0 said:
the first was epic. The sequel and prequel could have been even more epic! I felt as though the story was rushed and let down with the last big time.

Still, great films!
Click to expand...

There was a prequel? If there was I must have blocked it from my consciousness as a preservation mechanism.

I don't think the Matrix really needed to be a trilogy, the first film was good but it was essentially a complete article in and of itself (although the storyline itself is not as novel as it is sometimes mooted to be). The sequels were perhaps reasonable films if they stood alone but in the context of the whole story they can't help but detract from the overall. They seemed confused, rushed and most importantly as mentioned started breaking the rules of the universe they'd set up to try and accomodate the convoluted story - if a film sets up a universe with definite limitations then I don't care too much what those limitations are, I'll buy into them normally, provided it sticks to them.

The best thing about the sequels for me was Monica Bellucci, most of the rest I could happily have done without.
 
Castor said:
I used to frequent a Matrix forum and the general consensus was that the first was epic because the Wachowski brothers copied the story from someone elses work
Click to expand...


This one is actually a self propelled internet myth on it's own. Sophia Stewart never gone through with her lawsuit and despite numerous internet pages, never won her case against Wachowskis and Silver. She failed to turn up to hearing and her case was thrown out of courts by Judge Margaret Morrow because Stewart's attorneys failed to present any kind evidence including the said story. Many things didn't really work in her claims that she submitted her story to a national competition organised by Wachowskis and they copied her work, not the least of which was the fact that Wachowskis would be two nobodies in their late teens, early twenties at the time of alleged competition.

But as much as story of Sophia Stewart and her manuscript didn't pan out, everything in Matrix merchandise does feel like the idea for the first movie was ghost written. It was smart, it was well told and wrapped up, it had multilayer story and depth with roots in literature. The sequels were just high budget versions of what far eastern knock offs would look like. It was incoherent drivel bridging repetitive and too long martial arts duels. It is quite possible that after success of the first movie Wachowskis simply overdosed on fame, drugs and rock and roll lifestyles, and therefore the sequels were written by tripping burnouts and that's why they blew so much. But then again, it's not like Assassins or Bound or anything they wrote solely since then was the work of genius.
 
Last edited:
"Did "The Matrix" had to be a trilogy? "

Yes I agree there should be a fourth movie.
 
v0n said:
But then again, it's not like Assassins or Bound or anything they wrote solely since then was the work of genius.
Click to expand...

Thats something I've always found odd - watch the matrix and almost every time you will see things in a new light, theres a massive amount of layered depth to the philosophy, etc. watch any other movie by the Wachowskis and its completely lacking in most cases and nothing like the same level of perception if present.
 
People writing one great film then a load of bad ones is nothing new.

Stallone, m night shamalanadingdong.... To name but two.
 
Never saw the 'epic-ness' of the first film tbh. Second was a bit of a mess (I think that's probably fair to say?) and the third was simply there to wrap everything up with a final fight scene which IIRC was far too long

I'd give the films and the trilogy itself no more than a 7/10
 
If you've seen a lot of movies, especially those that draw on it, that have come out since the first one, before seeing the first one, it doesn't have quite as big impact as watching it when it came out.

And not to be condescending but theres a lot of layered meaning, etc. in the first one which if you don't catch onto does leave less of an impression on you - which is why find it odd because the philosophy, etc. in other Wachowski movies is school boy like imitation compared to the level thats in the matrix.
 
Haha I remember the awful set pieces with video game music blasting out each time there was a fight I didn't care about. Neo was the invulnerable super hero which without any vulnerability is basically very boring.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom