The Matrix 4

V F · 31 Dec 2021 at 12:05

DrToffnar said:
I don't really know what you're point is. By their very nature Hollywood and the AAA industry have to be as broad and inclusive as possible to make the most amount of money. Even then we're disregarding a large percentage of the product coming from both industries that DOESN'T pander. Regardless, you already said that the most universally praised material doesn't cater to everyone and does well regardless so what's the issue?

I don't really get Nashers point either. Who cares what AAA developers are doing so long as quality product is still coming from the industry in general, which it almost certainly is thanks to the prolific rise of the indie scene.

Nasher said:
But most of it is trash now especially the high budget stuff, maybe every 5 years we'll get something actually good or innovative from them.

The AAA developers used to raise the bar, but now they are the ones holding things back because they don't take any risks with new ideas and they buy out the successful small developers. So now they hold a lot of the IPs and patents, but don't use them and no one else can.

There is a huge degree in truth of that.

Glanza · 31 Dec 2021 at 14:32

Compared to the original this was never going to live up to the hype or steal it's spot unless it did something different which they failed to do, I mean the whole meta 'WB forced us to make it' comments felt like Lana was hitting us over the head with why this was made, still they could've made something good here but they didn't.

Jada Smith walking as a old women was nearly as bad as De Niro beating someone down in The Irishman

MrRockliffe · 31 Dec 2021 at 14:36

Watched this recently, and it wasn’t a bad film, but it’s quite forgettable.

Bit weird too, more so than I expected from Lana. Not sure on the fairytale style ending either?

6/10 for me, would watch again for amazing visuals and sonic performance.

MrRockliffe · 31 Dec 2021 at 14:37

Glanza said:
I mean the whole meta 'WB forced us to make it' comments felt like Lana was hitting us over the head with why this was made

I scoffed when I heard that part - did make me chuckle, but also it completely disengaged me from the film. It was like being told by a teacher they don’t want to be there but they have to be - all interest disappears.

V F · 31 Dec 2021 at 15:32

So what did Lana and Warner Brothers see that they thought this could have been a success? Obviously apart from money. I mean how could they not see or have known it wouldn't have topped the first. How can people be in this industry for decades and not see how you can or cannot top what came before then act surprised it's getting a hammering?

Or is success to these people today as long as it generates income it's a success even though it's getting hammered by the critics?

arknor · 31 Dec 2021 at 16:03

V F said:
So what did Lana and Warner Brothers see that they thought this could have been a success? Obviously apart from money. I mean how could they not see or have known it wouldn't have topped the first. How can people be in this industry for decades and not see how you can or cannot top what came before then act surprised it's getting a hammering?

Or is success to these people today as long as it generates income it's a success even though it's getting hammered by the critics?

I honestly dont think they care what the viewers think any more...

movies are like budgets for pushing agendas and change rather than investments or something

V F · 31 Dec 2021 at 17:49

Then they cannot be calling it the entertainment industry. :cry:

timebomb26 · 3 Jan 2022 at 08:46

Wow this is so bad. I don’t think I’ve ever hated every single part of a movie as much as this. As far as I’m concerned the whole thing is a middle finger to fans of the first movie.

Then seeing how many people on Reddit liked it (to be fair an equal amount hate it), is depressing as well. I don’t see how anyone who remembers seeing the first film when it came out can like this. It’s so bad, it makes me nostalgic for the third.

ianh · 3 Jan 2022 at 10:56

timebomb26 said:
I don’t see how anyone who remembers seeing the first film when it came out can like this. It’s so bad, it makes me nostalgic for the third.

I'd suggest that many of the younger folks on "Reddit" giving it positive reviews never got to see the Matrix when it first came out and have only seen it years later where it was "just another cool film" in a sea of post-Matrix films. As such they aren't as attached to the film as those of us who saw first hand just how genuinely game changing it was when it first came out and just how much it changed Action/Sci-Fi films afterwards, I mean even TV adverts had bullet-time effects added afterwards!

I know it sounds like gate keeping - "you didn't see it when it first came out so you don't like it as much as I do" etc - but with a film like this which literally changed cinema, I just don't see those who've only seen films in the post-Matrix age being able to truly understand how much of an effect it had on those of us who lived through that change in cinema.

God I sound pretentious

adam cool dude · 3 Jan 2022 at 13:48

It is like watching Toy Story when it first came out. You look at it now and it has dated really badly but still watchable but it was such an omg moment in cinema history. T2 was pretty similar in that aspect.

You could also say the same with the move from 2d to 3d gaming. Zelda OOT and Mario 64 are more than likely pretty basic to play now but it was the biggest technological change of my generation in gaming without a doubt.

V F · 3 Jan 2022 at 14:23

I saw this on Youtube the other day and how poor the money that came in.

"Resurrections, which received a mixed response from both critics and audiences, opened to a disappointing $22.5 million during its five-day holiday frame at the domestic box office."

https://www.cbr.com/matrix-resurrections-no-more-sequels/

adam cool dude · 3 Jan 2022 at 15:30

V F said:
I saw this on Youtube the other day and how poor the money that came in.

"Resurrections, which received a mixed response from both critics and audiences, opened to a disappointing $22.5 million during its five-day holiday frame at the domestic box office."

https://www.cbr.com/matrix-resurrections-no-more-sequels/

Covid has a lot to do with it plus the new age of streaming = a lot more piracy I would have thought. I was quite surprised how easy it is to get a perfect quality version. Last time I can remember that was when all those Oscar movies were leaked on a DVD.

Stu999 · 3 Jan 2022 at 15:35

V F said:
I saw this on Youtube the other day and how poor the money that came in.

"Resurrections, which received a mixed response from both critics and audiences, opened to a disappointing $22.5 million during its five-day holiday frame at the domestic box office."

https://www.cbr.com/matrix-resurrections-no-more-sequels/

I think with it being on HBO Max at the same time that won’t have helped, along with being panned by critics and audiences. That said it’s currently only on $100m worldwide, which is pretty abysmal.

FlamBango · 3 Jan 2022 at 17:28

i think it was an interesting idea that should have been followed through with. Someone just losing their mind and the 3 original films were him slowly losing touch with reality. But it would have needed a director of equal "abstract" levels along the lines of David Lynch to pull that off.

Gerard · 3 Jan 2022 at 18:55

Stu999 said:
I think with it being on HBO Max at the same time that won’t have helped, along with being panned by critics and audiences. That said it’s currently only on $100m worldwide, which is pretty abysmal.

Especially when the budget was almost $200 million, though factor in Hollywoods weird "accounting" and it'll likely need to make $500 million plus to start making money. And right now theres as much chance of that as the pope starring in a porno.

Ali195 · 4 Jan 2022 at 01:30

Like that God awful Picard series, I'll pretend this movie doesn't exist.

Also, wtf..that has to be the cheapest looking 200mill ever. I assumed it was something closer to 60mill based on the effects. Eeek.

V F · 4 Jan 2022 at 04:25

Gerard said:
Especially when the budget was almost $200 million, though factor in Hollywoods weird "accounting" and it'll likely need to make $500 million plus to start making money. And right now theres as much chance of that as the pope starring in a porno.

How do these people spend so much money for the best of the best supposedly and somebody does something like this as a hobby project?

EddScott · 4 Jan 2022 at 14:35

Have to be honest, I didn't dislike it. Felt like a love letter to the original films.

Don't feel it deserve quite such vicious hatred.

Gerard · 4 Jan 2022 at 14:43

V F said:
How do these people spend so much money for the best of the best supposedly and somebody does something like this as a hobby project?

Probably half the budget spent snorting coke off high end hookers butts. The money spent on some of these movies and the end result doesn't tally at all.

timebomb26 · 5 Jan 2022 at 02:08

EddScott said:
Have to be honest, I didn't dislike it. Felt like a love letter to the original films.

Cramming the film with awkward references to the original does not make it a love letter. If they actually cared about the original they wouldn’t have changed the style and completely dismantled the world they had created.