I liked all 3 movies. I've already been publicly flogged so no need to do it again. I also love NASCAR, beer and feeling up my sister.

The sequels had some great scenes in them - they just tried too hard with the symbolism and obscure references. The first one had enough of them to keep it interesting but the sequels went over the top.

But 'sucked'? That seems a little strong. They're still very watchable sci-fi/action movies with some very cool scenery and ideas. 

they suck. 

I like the Matrix movies a lot! The second one made me go cross-eyed for 3 and a half weeks, and the 3rd one made me vomit at the end, but it was all worth it for the rest.... 

they do suck, they became very stupid and silly.

right, ghosts and vampires are 'rogue programs.' They wore the concept too thin (plus the original concept had a rather gaping plot hole). I remember one reviewer commenting of part 2, "Yes, there is a rave scene. Yes, it is stupid."

I also think the original was overrated (but still good, and great compared to the sequels). 

I also love NASCAR, beer and feeling up my sister.

I also like NASCAR, beer, and feeling up your sister. 

Ghosts as rogue programs was cool, IMO. I also loved the concept of the Smith program deciding it didn't want to be deleted and learning to replicate itself. A very cool concept which gave us one of the best fight scenes in the series! 

"(plus the original concept had a rather gaping plot hole)"

There were many I'm sure but which one specifically are you referring to here? 

 

of course it's mentally insulting to anyone with the slightest scifi reading background but what can you expect.
Whatever. I don't buy movie tickets anymore. 

Fuckin' ell, you snooze you lose around here, bastard :P

P.S. I mostly agree with Willem. Matrix films = cool, internet hype heralding them as Christ V2.0 = uncool. 

1) The marketing campaign, lol, "WOO THIS IS CRAZY INTELLIGENT, STEPHEN HAWKING COULD HARDLY UNDERSTAND IT." That's damned retarded.

2) Aforementioned plot hole. I've heard that originally the machines were harvesting humans for computing ability, which would make sense. However, that was apparently too intellectual for their CRAZY BRILLIANT MOVIE, so they dropped it and said they were harvest humans for - uhh - POWER. We today have better methods of getting power than this, and these machines have like amazing AI and all these elaborate abilities - lol, the sheer stupidity of this is amazing.

Despite the fact that it was utterly style over substance, it was good for a mainstream action movie. 

"The marketing campaign, lol, "WOO THIS IS CRAZY INTELLIGENT, STEPHEN HAWKING COULD HARDLY UNDERSTAND IT." That's damned retarded. "

Example link? I don't remember the trailers being like that at all. 

As movies go the first one wasn't bad but didn't really have anything new to offer to the non-trenchcoat wearing rubber pants fetishist crowd.

People as batteries was indeed the stupidest plot point there's been for a while.

I also wonder how many times Keanu Reeves had to say "Woah!" until they had a good take. The twat.

The sequels just rehashed more of the same, in the long-standing tradition of sequels, and were even worse for it in that the original didn't have much substance. 

No offense meant to anyone here but I've always held the belief that most complaining about the Matrix is done to make the complainer feel smarter. "I'm FAR too well read and educated to be able to enjoy such a SIMPLISTIC and RIDICULOUS set of movies". Frankly, get over yourselves.

Again, this doesn't apply to anyone here. You guys are awesome. 

Don't worry.

In terms of films it wasn't so bad, but I gave up on films around about when it came out, so maybe it helped push me towards that.

Now blasting demons, hacking stuff up with chainsaws or reading a book is enough for me.

Films rarely, really. 

wouldnt be so bad if they didnt have that smug, ponderous, this is so intelligent vibe to them. The first one worked because although it was style over substance, it knew that and generally stuck to that.

With (especially) reloaded and also many parts of revolutions, there was too much sense of "this isnt just your normal popcorn movie folks, we have something deep to offer". Except they didnt.

I have time for both sorts of films, popcorn and pretentious arthouse, as long as they play to their tune. 

especially 3

not because of the story. just cos they had guns & fighting & stuff 

The disease of modern society are the matrix movies? 

"With (especially) reloaded and also many parts of revolutions, there was too much sense of "this isnt just your normal popcorn movie folks, we have something deep to offer". Except they didnt. "

Admittedly, there was far too much blah-blah in the sequels but I really enjoyed some of those scenes. Like when Neo encounters the Architect. I thought that scene was great. 

no, all the people claiming it is are just pricks. Yeah, sure.

It had some nice stuff but the overall thing was a big stupid mess. If they had done the original coherent scifi stories and not ripped everything (right down to the red and blue potion choice), mixed and ruined it with stupid fights and rock and roll that don't really relate to anything, it could have worked many times better.

Great material and ideas not seen on the screen before (although having existed for decades in writing), badly spoiled in the end.

Science fiction is very often criticism of the state of affairs at the time of writing, thought experiments lighting up the mechanisms of society, and people's motivations by taking them to absurd extremities.

Matrix took those and blended it with a jesus saviour figure shooting guns in nonsensical action scenes. They almost never make any remote sense at all. First the hero hides behind a pillar and the baddies shoot like mad, with stone chips flying everywhere. Then the hero just steps out and starts shooting, with absolutely no regard for cover. And of course is never hit.

The suspension of disbelief required. Uhh. Why won't Neo turn pink and expand to fill the whole room, suffocating everyone. It would at least be a bit more unexpected. Same level of realism.

No. Really. The themes that movie could have handled were numerous. The whole illusion issues for one.

All thrown away.

Sad really, and completely expected. 

*adjust monocle*

Quite! 

 

Don't worry, I saw Freddy vs Jason in theatres twice (the second time drunk) and thought it ruled. My view is, if you're going to make a smart movie, make it smart. If you're going to make a dumb movie, make it dumb.

Also, I agree with Nitin on #108. This is also what I hate about M Night Shamylan. Condescending preachiness on the part of some asshole who isn't even saying anything all that "deep-etc," and in spite of gaping plot holes (again, M night's got tons).

Re: bambuz on 112. LOL. Yeah I love that, that happens in like every action movie too. If I ever get hired to be a bad guy, I'll try to have better aim. 

who was it that said that people are like bacteria? (me a few posts back)

I'm sure that it wasn't that Matrix I was thinking of (heh - a virus).

I vaguely recall a conversation I once had with someone who was saying that it was in part of one of the religions (Hindu possibly?), or it could have been a very famous author. I think it was a religion.

Cant remember though, I must have been wrecked. 

I agree that this makes no sense if taken literally. However, if you take it metaphorically, you could look at the entire movie as an allegory for modern life -- a world where huge, artificial and autonomous human-built entities (corporations in real life) run the show, and have constructed an elaborate fantasy world for humans (consumers) who provide their fuel supply. In the movie the fantasy world is the matrix, in real life it's the comfortable bubble that we mostly live in, where meat comes shrink-wrapped from the supermarket, toys and clothes come from department stores, and diamonds from the jeweler, and the reality, the actual machinery that runs the whole thing, is largely hidden. There's no slaughter of cows, unsafe labor conditions, or exploitation of civil war in our bubble, all that is hidden behind the glossy lines of luxury car, and the cool, sterile lighting of the shopping mall.

All of this could be my own invention, of course, but I think that generally when something doesn't make sense in a movie, book, or song, it's an invitation by the author to look more critically. Like when a narrator says something clearly wrong, that's usually the author saying "hey, pay attention, this narrator can't be trusted in general."