The Matrix: Resurrections

[Asura]

To revisit this...

I hated films 2 and 3. I try not to think about them. I liked the robot defence scene in the third one, but that's just because I really like anime robots. I thought it was a terrible fit for the movie.

... in anticipation of the 4th movie, I rewatched 1-3 last week, and my opinions on 2 and 3 have softened a bit.

I saw the first movie on-release, when I was in my mid-teens and pretty much the perfect age for it. I liked everything in it. I was a kid who was a huge fan of cyberpunk fiction, did karate and loved anime, in particular Akira and Ghost in the Shell, so it was practically made for me. I got totally swept up in the hype. I didn't go all mallninja like some people, buying a black coat and getting cybergoth dreads, but it definitely affected my music taste at the time.

I think, consequently, I had built it up in my mind to be subjectively better than it objectively was; so when I saw the 2nd and 3rd a fair bit later, I felt they were pale imitiations of the original.

Watching them again, in 2021... I still think the first film is the best of the bunch, and that the sequels maybe expanded the lore a bit far in a very different direction to what I feel is suggested in movie 1. However, I don't think the movie holds up anywhere near as well as it does in my memory, and as a result I don't see it as a "holy text" anymore. In particular, I enjoyed Revolutions much more this time around (still not a fan of the sequence with the French aristocrat guy).

Though I would say, it's a shame the movies don't really clarify the "matrix in a bigger matrix" concept, i.e. the idea that the entire movie trilogy takes place in an even larger matrix, and that none of the characters are ever in the "real" world, to explain why Neo is able to control things in the real world - that he might be "the one" in a greater sense than his predecessors.

[wakka]

Interesting. I'm not sure I was into as much as you were, but I definitely totally loved the first film, and then was tremendously disappointed by 2 and especially 3.

I might do the same as you. It'll be interesting to revisit after all these years. I watched my DVD of the first film TO DEATH so it's a long term since I've sat down and watched it, as I basically got so familiar with it that it became boring.

[Dogg Thang]

I rewatched the first two very recently and haven't been able to bring myself to rewatch the third yet. I found the second to be a bit of a chore but my main issue with it is that it doesn't deliver on the setup of the first. It undoes that ending in such a cheap and throwaway way that it feels like such a waste. And the very thing that made the original exciting for me (what if the rules you thought applied to your world don't actually apply?) is gone in the second because not once is there a sense that anything is happening in any kind of working world. There is an emptiness to it. No sign that other people are going about their normal lives in this Matrix unaware.

One thing that is interesting about that trailer description is that it sounds like a rewind. Almost like an attempt to redo the first one, take it back to the initial concept and maybe that's not a bad thing. At least for me.

[Neon Ignition]

I still enjoy Revolutions more than Reloaded. Reloaded is saggy, there's a lot of expanding the lore etc but little of weight because there's an element of the plot spinning its wheels because they already had the third film in the bag. Revolutions is a far cry from the original but there's some momentum to it, a sense of direction that makes it a livelier experience because it needs to be. It should have always been commissioned for just one sequel though, to force the Wachowski's to continue the story in a more controlled and concise manner as they wouldn't be able to guarantee a third when making it.

For this new one, the idea of a Matrix within a Matrix would make a lot of sense. It would quickly explain how the same characters can return as well as tying into the lines about past One's in the previous entries. It's not The One if the Matrix keeps making them... unless it's the same One every cycle. It then means all the powers stuff outside the Matrix make sense and would also contextualise the world they're experienced. The dystopia in the original trilogy was so far gone that it begged the question why anyone would want to be released, something the original film touched on but things never went far with it. It'd make sense for the dystopia to be like a firewall the Matrix has to keep those who become aware from truly escaping and then the actual real world to be something more salvageable. There's a definite need to avoid making this feel like too much of a retread but also a route there to make this feel like a proper fourth entry rather than an unnecessary epilogue

[Asura]

I rewatched the first two very recently and haven't been able to bring myself to rewatch the third yet. I found the second to be a bit of a chore but my main issue with it is that it doesn't deliver on the setup of the first. It undoes that ending in such a cheap and throwaway way that it feels like such a waste. And the very thing that made the original exciting for me (what if the rules you thought applied to your world don't actually apply?) is gone in the second because not once is there a sense that anything is happening in any kind of working world. There is an emptiness to it. No sign that other people are going about their normal lives in this Matrix unaware.

Yeah, I felt this too.

The original was about how people were bound by a series of rules associated with a computer system that depended on ignorance, and how Neo could break those rules.

So the sequels... Introduced a ton more rules. Like fate as a mathematical concept. Power structures codified into digital life. Almost representative of this is the part in the sequel where Neo is "trapped" at that train station.

I get that Neo, at the end of The Matrix is almost set up to be some kind of god, and that's difficult to explore for a movie, because his problems threaten to transcend the human condition and might not be relatable to most people. But I kinda felt that was what was suggested, and what we didn't really get.

[Cassius_Smoke]

Trailer out on Thursday

https://youtu.be/wdskyfJtyt8

Also some cool snippets here. Press a pill.

https://thechoiceisyours.whatisthematrix.com/uk/

[Neon Ignition]

Snippets collated:

[Neon Ignition]

Preview screening feedback is said to have come back as very divisive because the film gets weird and it's whether the audience member is up for it or not.

[QualityChimp]

*squeal*

[fishbowlhead]

Whats the point?

[Cassius_Smoke]

No green tint means it's probably set after Revolutions

[QualityChimp]

Whats the point?

->Open Spoiler<-

Cynicism aside, maybe they felt there was more story to tell.

[Neon Ignition]

The original trilogy leaves the door open for this so I'm okay with it on that front, I'm mostly mindful of two things:

01 - That on one end of the scale it's overly similar
02 - That on the other end of the scale it gets overly convoluted and we end up with more Reloaded trudge

If this isn't in the same vein as the original film then it shouldn't exist.

[Dogg Thang]

Cynicism aside, maybe they felt there was more story to tell.

Or an opportunity to make a more worthy sequel than the two we got?

Is it weird that it bothers me that Reeves just looks like John Wick? I mean, I get why he looks like John Wick - there is a very good reason for that. But in that one shot, I just see John Wick. I don't in any way see Neo from The Matrix.

[QualityChimp]

But in that one shot, I just see John Wick. I don't in any way see Neo from The Matrix.

Strange he looks like a character in a more recent film rather than one from 22 years ago.

EDIT: Reads more aggressive than it sounded in my head.
I totally get your point.
I like Reeves without a beard, but he looked strange in B&T3 without it!