Quote:
Originally posted by Moskie
But I get impression that people ignore the fact that, after the first movie, the Matrix series lacks good scripting, plot, and characters (see my previous posts in this thread).
|
Many critics give the trilogy good reviews because of these main aspects. I believe that the script (especially in Reloaded and Revolutions), plot, and characters were all the best aspects of the trilogy. I'd like to include a quote from one of my co-posters on a website I update:
Quote:
|
I personally thought it was amazing, a great end to everything, with many great moments. I am truely baffled by the amount and verocity of some reviews and opinions of the movie, and after discussions with XXXXX and XXXX think at least a large part of it is people wanting it to be terrible. It seems in large part to be 'cool' to completely and irrationally bash the recent Matrix movies, while deifying the first one. While I know many people do have real criticisms and are not like that, I do believe that the number of the irrationally negative reviews is directly impacted because of this. In a way I almost feel sorry for those who gave it a chance and wanted it to be good and simply didn't like it on some level or had serious criticisms of it, as they are often lost in the anti-matrix furvor which has taken over. I find it incredibly sad that two of the greatest sci-fi movies of all time have fallen victim to this mass bandwagon of hating what was once 'cool', as being cool in and of itself. It is through these movies, and through many others recently, that I have realized that one of the problems with the majority of the movie critics is that they try to write what they hope people want to read. The reviews for Reloaded were much better than the ones for Revolutions on the whole, and I fully believe this to be a direct consequence of pandering to the expectations of readers. Before Reloaded, the anti-matrix sentiment was not as loud, not as much in the limelight, and on the whole people were hoping for a good movie. Thus, a tomatometer reading of 74%. In between then, when the anti-matrix crowd took control of media and blew out of proportion, reviewers realized that there were now more people wanting it to fail than the other way around, and thus a movie equally good and in fact half of the same movie got an astounding tomatometer reading of 37%. Consistancy is not in their vernacular. Perhaps worst of all is the anti-matrix crowd's declarations that their viewpoints are not only their own, but that they are complete and utter fact. So many times I have read that anyone who disagrees with them are only 'fanboys' who do not think of anything on their own, and that 'everyone' thinks the movies 'suck' and are terrible. If only half of the people making these statements would just listen to themselves sometime, I think they would realize they themselves are making the sort of statements that would usually infuriate anyone, including themselves, if they heard others saying the same thing. It truely is a sad situation, but I also fully believe time will bear it out and those of us who very much enjoyed the films and consider them to be great pieces of film will hold out and more will share our opinion over time. As it stands, this summer and fall, I saw two damn good fucking movies.
|
I couldn't have said it better myself. The only thing that I would like to add is the fact that the amount of time spent outside of the Matrix is constant to how much people liked the movies. The first movie was about 90% Matrix, and everyone loved it. Reloaded was about 60-70% Matrix, and there was controversy over whether it was good or not. Revolutions has about 15-20% Matrix in it, and the general population hated it. Maybe the general population wants to see whirly special effects and doesn't really care about the plot of the trilogy? Just a theory.
And for the record, an OVERWHELMING MAJORITY of the professional critics that didn't like Reloaded and Revolutions simply didn't understand the plot. I've seen countless reviews saying Revolutions was bad because Smith was more powerful than in the first one, and "agents are based on rules!" No shit, go watch Reloaded, Smith isn't an agent anymore. Little facts like these can change opinions on the trilogy. The only critic that gets all of the plot information correct and has rated these movies what they deserve to me is Roger Ebert. The first Matrix and Revolutions got 3 stars out of 4, and Reloaded got 3.5 stars out of 4. I have to agree -- Reloaded was my favorite. I don't care if critics or readers didn't like the last two movies, but don't say they suck based on false information...that's what most of those that hated them are doing.
-Lasereth