One word review: "avoid".
Five word review: "At least it's the last."
It explains nothing, has ratshit pacing (about 45 minutes in, the action jumps to 11 and doesn't stop), steals from Gyruss and Beachhead, has a tediously overlong final death battle, and insists on ramming Christian bullshit imagery down our necks. I mean, crucifixion, the rising sun, free will, ... I felt used.
And did I mention that it explains nothing? The Wachowski Brothers are cheap hacks. They're no better than Chris Carter, who also ended up with self-contradictory ambiguous metawank. The difference is that Carter was trying to keep an open-ended show going, and by the time he knew he had to wrap it up, he'd already gone in too many different directions for there to be anything left to make sense. The Matrix, on the other hand, was allegedly planned as three movies. If so, the Brothers Dubya should be the fucking laughing stock of Hollywood for being unable to keep their shit together for a mere THREE episodes.
I've now seen part 3 twice, and it made no more sense the second time. So much for the benefit of the doubt. Oh yeah, if you do go and see it, play my drinking game: quaff every time a Zionista says "goddamn". You'll be shitfaced in no time.
--Nat
Too bad.
The greatest Hollywood sequel fiasco ever
rafael on 2003-11-14T18:28:20
Not everyone has the talent of Whedon. Or is it that "money" thing that perverts everything ?That said, I'd rather be distracted from plot holes by overcomplex stories à la X-Files than by giant bots with giant guns and a whole collection of clichés à la Matrix 3. Nat, how did you manage to see that movie twice ? I can understand that you can give the benefice of doubt to the last few seasons of X-Files, but honestly, Matrix 3 destroyed even the few possibilities for a good 3rd episode that were present in the 2nd one.
Re:The greatest Hollywood sequel fiasco ever
gnat on 2003-11-16T16:18:27
I saw it twice because I watched it once with Orwant on the weekend, then when I got back my wife wouldn't take "it's crap!" for an answer. Now she knows to trust my judgement.I passed the time by trying to figure out the camera placement. Oh, and Milk Duds. Lots of Milk Duds.
--Nat
As far as I'm concerned, the series is 0-3. The only saving grace was that the first movie invented bullet time and the green Kana scrolling down the screen motif. And that second piece has dubious value.Whoa! I know Karate!
Unless you're looking for MST3K material, in which case all three are totally priceless.
Hollywood would be much better off it stopped reinventing Arthurian legend and the story of Christ and started developing truly inventive stories. Like something Phildickian for example.Neo: But...you're wrong!The Architect: Contradiction is the most predictable of all human reactions.
Piers Cawley: No it isn't!
Re:Three part wankfest
chaoticset on 2003-11-18T00:38:44
Y'know, I've always wanted to do an homage to the work of Nelson, Murphy, and the rest...perhaps...Matrix Stinkfest Theatre?Unless you're looking for MST3K material, in which case all three are totally priceless.;)
There was Christian imagery in there? If so it was so obscured this Christian could barely make it out.
(Yeah, I see it, but it ranks horribly on the "Christian allegory" scale. I found this review from a religious perspective interesting; the author addressed whether or not the allegory consituted a reason to see the movie, while I never once thought of the movie as "a Christian allegory.")
In the end, considered from the Christian allegory perspective, the Matrix is a tragedy like Christmas: too Christian for the pagans; too pagan for the Christians.
Re:Christian imagery
rafael on 2003-11-14T19:13:28
I haven't noticed that much Christian imagery in it either. For example I completely missed the crucifixion part (was I asleep ? maybe). Note that Christian imagery doesn't make bad movies at all ; what makes bad movies is bad storytelling. The first Matrix was full of Gnostic imagery, in which it got close to the latest novels of P.K.Dick, but that trend got completely lost in the sequels, where that was replaced by good old Hollywoodian clichés. I suppose that nobody would define Gnostics as Christians nowadays that they've disappeared. (BTW I wonder what your definition of "pagan" is -- my dictionary gives the definition I'm familiar with : One who worships false gods; an idolater; a heathen; one who is neither a Christian, a Mohammedan, nor a Jew. Which implies that atheists aren't included either.)Re:Christian imagery
jdavidb on 2003-11-14T20:45:28
I was using sort of a vague definition of pagan, but playing off the fact that Christmas was originally a pagan holiday.
Re:Christian imagery
hfb on 2003-11-14T21:19:00
Maybe 21 years of Catholic education and mind-numbing dogma would help see all the christianity shovelled into this movie like a cement truck in Sicily working overtime. Nearly everything in these movies could be distilled into some nugget of judeo-christian something or other I've worked hard over the years to forget.
I agree with gnat about the feeling of being used...it's the same feeling I had when Anakin Skywalker revealed he was borne of an immaculate conception. I managed to avoid Battlefield Earth with its scientology slant. I'm starting to think that sci-fi movies are the new propaganda medium for religious nuts. I guess door-to-door with the bibles and pamphlets wasn't working fast enough and they've figured out that they can get paid while reaching a far larger audience with movies.
Re:Just proof for me that...
ziggy on 2003-11-18T00:43:43
You must mean "Not all that bad" as in I didn't demand my money back within the first half hour.
