Down with Evil Critics!!

Movie critics are JUST movie critics.
They’re not hard-core fans, who’ve seen The Matrix and Reloaded countless time, seen Animatrix and played ETM.
Imagine being a movie critic and NOT having played ETM or seen Animatrix.
“Huh. What’s Niobe and that Asian guy doing there? Last we saw them in Reloaded Niobe was watching a power plant blow up.”
“Why is that guy there given a line about windshields?”
“Why’s that kid still in the movies?”
“What’s up with the Oracle changing her appearances. NOTHING gets explained.”
“The… trainman??? Where’d he come from?”

And then take a hard-core fan.
“Aha! Well, Niobe did SAY they’d find them.” (And cudos to the W-brothers for that little Alien tribute there with the dead sentinel 😄).
“Hahha. Sparks is still his good old self.”
“ ‘Neo, I believe’. Omg, just as in Animatrix Kid’s story.”
“Oracle new shell. Well, THAT was to be expected, and I know why, I saw Niobe meet the Oracle in ETM.”
“Oh, so THAT’s who that 72-hours guy is.”

Hail Omega! As always! 😄 😉

The fact is, if in order to understand the entire story of the matrix, and to like the movies you have to play a bad game, watch the movies numerous times, and over analize every little bit of it...then the critics negative reviews are completely just

The critics review movies on how strong a movie is without any other criteria other then the film itself, this is their job. They are reviewing the movie for people who aren't already in love with the series and who haven't played the bad game or seen the animatrix, the general public, and if you have to do all these things to enjoy the movie, then it indeed is not a good movie.

Backfire> The Wachoski’s themselves presented “the sequel” as all of the aforementioned. We were told that the excellent game ETM and Animatrix were part of the sequel, just as Reloaded and Revolutions were one single movie, not two.
It’s just evolution of the entertainment industry.

Evolution is a strange word, since ETM is a very poor game with many bugs and typical action sequences. Basically, take away the matrix setting, you have a generic action game.

But, I still believe that if in order to enjoy a movie, you have to indulge yourself in other mediums to learn more about the movie, then the movie itself can't be that strong. If it were, people would be feeling alot more satisfied by it.

double post, sorry.

Backfire> You’re entitled to think ETM was “poor”. It wasn’t, in my opinion. I was very much entertained by it, by the fun of PLAYING the Matrix and seeing the movie-clips.
Revolutions is part of the “sequel” Universe. It’s like reading seeing “Return of the Jedi” without seeing “The Empire Strikes Back.” Or the Twin Peaks movie without the series.

I call it “evolution” because I think others may copy the concept. The “tale” will not be presented, cut out and served on a dish to us, as is the problem with mainstream Hollywood. It can become a hobby. Something that evolves and doesn’t end with “The End” on the silver-screen.

of course the difference between the matrix finale and return of the jedi, is that return of the jedi answered all questions and gave a sense of closure to the series, and from what I've heard about revolutions, it does not.

A finale should wrap up the story, give a sense of closure, leave you feeling somewhat satisfied in the story, since revolutions doesn't do this for people who haven't gotten deeply into the story of the matrix and gone off to other mediums to try to expand their knowledge, the complaints of the critics are just in my eyes, since they are reviewing the movie only, not the game, or the spinoff anime sequences.

Also, ETM was indeed a poor game in it's own right, granted it may have served up some useful information to the matrix story, the gameplay, levels, and engine was mediocre at best.... I ask you this, would you have liked the game were it not set in the matrix world?

Originally posted by BackFire
of course the difference between the matrix finale and return of the jedi, is that return of the jedi answered all questions and gave a sense of closure to the series, and from what I've heard about revolutions, it does not.

A reason I did not like ROTJ, which was far too neat, and a positive boon to Revolutions which was NOT part of a series that in any way would benefit from total explanation.

Sorry, I didn't mean that ALL questions should be answered, bad choice of words on my part.

But it should still give a sense of closure to the series in some way or another, which from what I've heard it doesn't do.

It closes the story it started; it does not wrap up the entire setting. Of the many criticisms I can give Revolutions I really don;t see that being one.

From what I've heard, you're in the minority there. That's the main cricism I've been hearing from people, critics and the general public.

Just people wanting everything answered- their own mistake, in my opinion.

As I wrote someplace else, most people disliked Matrix because the didn't get the answers they were expecting.

Sorry you've paid 8,5$ to see the film, I've paid 5EU to see the film, the W. bros paid around 100 mil$ to make it.

They have explained almost everything.

If you don't like gather the money buy the rights of the film and make the real Matrix end as you like it.

I give a 9,5/10 to the film and the half point is lost because the explanation wasn't easy to get.

There's the rub. The explanation WAS NOT easy to get. Fine. The movie was for the 'intellectuals' among us. A really good movie reaches a broader base of people. they COULD of given more closure but still left some doubts or possibilities. They COULD of added some depth to the CHARACTERS themselves. Neo, who was suppose to free minds - turned into a NORTON-ANTI VIRUS program. My bet?? This 'finale' won't last 3 months in the theatres. Theory's and deep revelations are all the rage for die-hard KILL-THE-CRITICS matrix nuts. Keep reaching for the blue pill. But history's a *****. This will go down as a loser.
- Not Evil, I just didn't like the movie.

Originally posted by mindbugaling
some critics think theyre cool to diss on a movie as big as the matrix. its really become a fad in the film industry. like roger ebert, he thought star wars ep. 4 was the worst movie of that decade, and look whats happened to that franchise!

Whoa -- this Ebert comment is waaay off base.

Has it ever occurred to your people that to a movie critic with 40 years of experience, the Matrix is just a trilogy that started out with some of the most intriguing sci-fi to hit the screens in a long time, only to cop out to cliche land?

First, not only did he NOT choose "A New Hope" as the worst movie of that decade, but it is in his list of "great movies" (see the entire list at the suntimes website)

Second, Ebert did not "diss on" Revolutions, he gave it three stars out of four - a very good review.

Third, Ebert is often the champion of little known movies, because he seems to judge them for what they are, not for how close they come to Citizen Kane. Case in point: a three star review for "Bubba Ho-Tep"

To paraphrase your comment - I think that some Matrix fans think they're cool to diss on a critic who dares to diss on the Matrix, because it makes them feel superior. Remember, someone else not liking your favourite move doesn't mean they didn't "get it", it means they didn't like it.

Personally, the first movie was one of the best I'd seen, in any genre, ever. Would it make my personal top 10? Maybe not, but it did blow me away. The next two? Good, but not great.

As for comments on the Star Wars franchise - if rampant commercialism in lieu of interesting story development is the measure of success, I hope the Matrix franchise fails.

The Matrix movies are for more youthful, open minds. Liek Morpheous said, once a mind gets past a certain age, it is hard to understand the truth, or something like that. My point is the Matrix should be rated by Matrix fans. Most of the people that watched or will watch are near-die-hard fans of it. Some Joe Shmoe won't not go see it because it recieved a poor rating, it becaus ethe movie doesn't apply to him. Now, if Matrix fans thought it sucked, then maybe it did. It takes a certain level of openess to understand the meaning of it. Once reason why it think the Matrix is so good is that for every time it anwers one ?, it creates two more for debate. So, for all the those people who said that Revolutions didn't have good closure is that there will be more. Maybe not in another movie, but perhaps in another form. It's the ? that drive us and if they are all answered, then what fun would there to discuss it further

i have a message for the critics...

sit and spin assholes!!

I just saw Revolutions this Sunday and it was amazing. There are no words that can describe it. Anybody who said it sucked desevres to die. Moswt likely they never saw the other two movies or watched the Animatrix and played ETM. This is the only way for them to get the full story. Some people said the ending also sucked. I believe it to be a perfect ending. At first glance, you think you have closure, but at a second runthrough, you find old and new unansered q's that are part of the Matrix legacy. Anybody over the age of 50 most likely wouldn't of gotten it.