(saved from a sinking thread)


While not as bad as Time Cop or one of the later Police Academy installments, The Matrix Reloaded was largely a load of steamy, moist donkey poop.

• Horrible acting. Just horrible. Even thinking about it makes me feel like two-thousand ants are crawling straight up my asshole.
  
• Awful dialogue (almost Lucas bad).
  "Bomb? Did he say 'bomb?'"
  "Yes."
  
  "She used to be with Morpheus. Now she is with ___(whatever his fucking name was)."
  
  "Because I love you too damn much." (This last line was indeed from The Matrix...I know it sounds like it might be from Full House, but I swear I'm telling the truth!)
  
  "No...I need you."
  "But they need you."
  
  
• Way too many movie cliches. The over-eager young kid who wants to "join the team?" The woman handing her man an amulet for "good luck?" The crew-member who just has to learn to trust his commander? The last-minute rescues every four seconds? The choice between saving the world and saving a woman? The self-doubting, somewhat reluctant hero? I could go on and on. This movie was written by idiots. Idiots who are apparently recent members of the Brotherhood of the Incompetent. The first movie wasn't full of cliches like this.
  
  
• The ridiculous Philosophy 101 approach that treated the audience like a bunch of fucking boobs. I see people pretending like free will vs. predestination is some sort of new theme in entertainment. It's one of the oldest. You can even find it in the Bible (if you enjoy fairy tales). Even if you wanted to pack a movie full of cheesy philosophical messages, couldn't you find a creative way of getting those points across that didn't involve characters merely staring at each other and speaking in monotone? Maybe the writers should have brushed up on Kant's Theories on Lazy Scriptwriting or Burke's Reflections on Mediocrity in American Cinema.
  
  
• The meaningless, arbitrary fight scenes. "I will let you go to tell my husband...so that there can be another cool fight scene..." They may as well have just looked at each other and said, "Hey, wanna fight?" Go back and watch the first movie. None of the fights there seemed forced. That movie pulls you along...drags you closer and closer to the excitement. This ass-dumpling of a sequel pushed you the whole time, using CGI to numb your brain so that you won't stop and think, "Wait, why are they all fighting again?"
  
  
• That stupid, stupid, stupid rave/sex scene. One of the lamest scenes in cinema history. I think I'd rather watch Steve Gutenberg, Ted Danson, and Tom Selleck play with another goddamn talking baby than to sit through that party scene again. I had imagined Zion being really cool...a great update on the classic theme of a dystopian hellscape. Instead, it all just looks like MTV Spring Break. Great. If that's what it's like, then hand me the BLUE PILL!
  
  
• Way too straight-forward exposition. Everything was just in-your-fucking-face right until the end, and in a bad way. Give the audience some credit.
  
  
• Bad pacing.
  
  
• Fake looking CGI, even compared to crap like the Star Wars prequels. The 100 Agent Smiths battle was the entertainment equivalent of finding out the girl you've lusted over for years and years has a fucking penis.
  
  
• All that crap about ghosts, angels, werewolves, and vampires. I almost barfed into my popcorn.
  
  
• A stream of boring new shallow characters. Were we really supposed to give a fuck about those people?
  
  
• Lame romantic scenarios like love triangles all over the place, or Trinity getting jealous because Neo kisses someone (how trite is this???).
  
  
• Horrible explanations of things that happened earlier (think of Agent Smith's re-introduction. The writers have him just flat out telling the audience what went on. It may as well have been a silent film with title cards!).
  
  
• Smack-you-across-the-face telling and re-telling of the movie's major points...free will vs. destiny, man vs, machine, etc. The writers couldn't find any creative way to SHOW these things, so they just spell it out. Awful. Pathetically awful. We've all seen this shit before. If you want some REAL man vs. machine shit, check out Kino's recent DVD remaster of the film Metropolis. And that motherfucker's from like 1927!!!
  
  
• Couldn't the writers have created a good speech for Morpheus? That shit was painful to witness...I've taken shits that were more inspiring.
  
  
• That woman needing a kiss from Neo. That scene was so ear-fuckingly ridiculous, I can't even decide what to write about it. Maybe if I could somehow type out the sound of a crippled goat being sodomized by a rusty shovel, then I'd accomplish my task.
  
  

I did, however, thoroughly enjoy the highway battle. Which shows that the writers DO UNDERSTAND what makes a sci-fi action movie good, thus making their failures even more tragic. But, a few cool fight scenes does NOT make a good movie. If having high standards is a fucking crime, then I'm glad to be guilty.

I'm sick of hearing that bullshit about "oh, your expectations were too high blah blah blah." Eat it. That's the same cowardly, bullshit defense I myself gave people a year ago when they didn't like Attack of the Clones. It's a fucking lie. We SHOULD have high expectations of a movie. I went in to the theater expecting a good action movie, and got poop. A couple weeks before that, I entered the theater for X-2 expecting a good action movie, and got blown away by its excellence. I was bored by Matrix Reloaded...fucking BORED for damn near the first hour and a half!

People also say, "Well, it's part two of a trilogy...it's not supposed to be good on its own; it's only a bridge between the beginning and the end." Well, fuck you. Look at The Two Towers. That shit was near perfection. Don't give me excuses.

it sucked period..


carrie ann moss was underutilized...


and i dont say that cause she is my friends best friend

classic post ...

my sis in law and bro in law were raving about it the other night ...

... and i just said "hey , i didnt think the first one was all that " ... i didnt even realize they were making 3 for a looonnnggg time ...

i am copying this post ... have to save it ...

classic.

I liked it. It had some problems but it was better then any other action movie I've seen since the last Matrix.

lovemachine said:

Really? Not a fan of X-2??? I'm trying to think of other action movies to compare it with, but it's tough. You're right, the first Matrix was one of the last greatest entries of that genre...but I still maintain that the second Matrix sucks a fat, greasy, carnival worker's she-cock.

KingSausage said:

I haven't seen X-2 yet (I plan to see it Saturday) so I'll let you know.

You almost make me dislike it KS!

I liked it but I agree it's not as good as the first installment. The fight scenes are a bit forced and the Zion dance/rave party sucked.

The acting was no worse than the original though.

Still, I liked it, but your review is a classic!

bkw said:

I will co-sign on this review.

Thanks...I thought it was a terrible movie, but it could have been even worse. It certainly doesn't detract from my fondness for the first movie, and won't prevent me from seeing the third. I will give the folks behind these films the benefit of the doubt, and hope that the third movie is satisfying.

Speaking of The X-Men, I HIGHLY recommend checking that movie out. It's been a long, long time since I found a movie franchise that I enjoyed so much. Well, aside from LOTR that is. But that's a given. Look at the strength of the dialogue and characters in X-Men, and compare it to The Matrix. There's a big difference.

The writers of X-Men clearly know how to write a captivating story...how to take something as cheesy as comic book mutants and make it fresh and relevant in today's jaded world. The writers of The Matrix got lucky, in my opinion. I think they had ONE good concept, and were able to translate it succesfully into the first Matrix. They may have had some fine germs of ideas re: sequels, but nothing nearly as strong as it should have been.

This wasn't just a sequel to some run-of-the-mill action movie starring Arnold and a bunch of fucking explosions. It was the sequel to one of the most refreshing, inventive sci-fi/action movies of all time. That's not to say that it's being set up on a pedestal so high that no mortal could possibly achieve those heights again. But, this shit should have had stronger foundations. It should have had good dialogue. It should have had good acting, and characters that really made an impact.

A couple of good action sequences and some last-minute plot twists is NOT enough the justify an entire film. You could catch only the last 30-45 minutes of this shit, and still not miss a beat with the Matrix trilogy. All that shit they showed before the story really kicked in didn't need to be seen. That's the kind of shit that can take place BETWEEN movies, and can be filled in with context.

interesting that u like the X2 ...I too liked that one ...

just curious what did u think of "spiderman" ... i have watched that about 15 times this month (on HBO- my daughter loves spiderman) ... and i am still sooo applauding the peter parker selection of tobey macquire ... probably the best comic book charactor selection ... but i am still ... so confused with the kirsten dunst as mary jane ... sheesh ... ugh ... what were they thinkin ...

still laughing at the carnival workers she-cock ... classic ...

dagodfather said:

I loved the choice of Tobey and Dafoe, but not much else about that movie. The first part of it was GREAT, but it then dives into pure formula and nothing more, starting from the point when he rescues that baby from a fire. Overall, it was average. However, I hold very high hopes for a sequel.

(I like Tobey because he looks quite a bit like me. It was like watching myself at points! )

KingSausage said:

I want that trenchcoat.

@ rd for quoting that whole review and then just saying "I want that trenchcoat"!

Welcome back KingSausage!

I think that once someone has a certified "hit" such as the original Matrix, then no matter what is done with the sequal, there will be many who won't like it. It will either be critized for being "too much like the original" or it will be critized for "straying too far from the original formula".

It should be noted however, that the original Matrix was trashed by many professional movie critics and the movie really only gained "cult" status once it hit the video stores. But it's not as if the first Matrix was filled with brilliant acting so it really makes me scratch my head when people say the second Matrix has terrible acting. I'm like WTF did you expect?

The bottom line is that once a movie is hyped the way The Matrix Reloded was hyped, it will rarely if ever live up to those expectations.

FutureShock said:

I agree.

To use a Prince analogy, The Matrix was like Purple Rain and Reloaded is like Around the World in a Day. There are many gems in the follow up but alot of people are scratching their heads.

It'll grow over time imho.

FutureShock said:

Hello! This is so sensible and I thought common sense that everyone had..99% of its detractors writing from vendetta-personal issues etc. Its funn-ay.

Well, I liked Reloaded and thought X-men 2 was lame and forgetful.

So you thoroughly enjoyed the movie KS

[quote]

I really liked Reloaded,

it answered a lot of questions from the first movie, and threw up even more questions of it's own. I also thought the acting and dialogue was very much in keeping with the original. Can't wait for Revolutions.

The main problem I have with Reloaded was that it really didn't have a plot until the last 15 minutes or so. Most of it was truly pointless. At least with the Star Wars prequels, Lucas has the excuse that he was doing a modern-day take on Saturday Morning serials, so the cliches and bad dialogue are at least a part of that. The Matrix was built on a rather high concept of man vs. machine, and reality not being what we perceive, not on bad hollywood cliches.

I had low expectations, for the simple reason that I knew it couldn't live up to the hyep, but somehow I still wound up being dissapointed. It was massively substandard compared to the original, and most of the human characters acted more like machines than the programs did.

Bottom line, what little story was actually in this flick could have been whittled down to about 30 minutes. Why is it that we just HAVE to have a trilogy. I would have preferred to see a 2 & 1/2 to 3 hour sequel that had an actual plot, rather than see two, 2 hour films that were nothing but filler.

sabaisabai said:

Perhaps you should think about rehab for your crack problem?

TheGillman said:

You havent even seen the third, quit being so presumptuous etc. You all act like you watch Citizen fucking Kane on the daily.

I got a question? What's with the The Oracle? Is she w/ the humans or she w/ the machines? She mentioned that she loves candy and pulled out what looked like a red pill and swallowed it. Oh yeah she offered it to Neo first.

PhilG said:

I want to ask the oracle where to get one of dem trecnhcoats..fuck a matrix

Oh, she brings forth the one

rdhull said:

How am I being "presumptious"? I didn't feel there was enough of a story in the second film to merit an entire two hours. Regardless of how good the third installment is, what little story there was in the second could probably have been tagged onto the beginning of the third, thus making a duology, instead of a trilogy. No, I haven't seen the third, and it may very well rock the house (I truly hope so, and I will say that the preview looks fantastic). But even if the third is Citizen fucking Kane, the fact is that the second was really weak when it comes to plot, characterisation, etc. I wasn't even really impressed with the effects, since they just retreaded the first film.

To me, I thought Reloaded could have started when they were going to visit the Merolvingian, and I would have rather seen that as a three hour movie with what is in Revoloutions (regardless of whatever that is). I feel that the plot really didn't show up until the movie was well over halfway through. Look, I loved the first film ,and I even went to see this one a second time to see if it would improve on a second viewing (it does, but only slightly). I'm not a "hater", and I truly hope when its all said and done that the trilogy winds up being fantastic. I truly hope that this winds up being the weak link in the series.

As for your comment about me acting like I watch Citizen Kane daily, well it should tell you something about the way I watch these films. To me, the first Matrix was a work of art, and it wasn't just mindless light sci-fi. I felt like much of this film was, and I think its a shame. I wanted the entire film to be on the level with the stuff near the end involving the Architech. That is the kind of stuff I love, and I hope the thrid installment delivers (if nothing else, I know that much of the Animatrix stuff does).

I didn't loathe the film the way KS did, but I didn't love it like I did the original either. I just felt it was lackluster, and that's a shame.

TheGillman said:[quote]

rdhull said:

that's how



Now this makes more sense rather than immediately dimissing something you have not seen yet..same as if you said it may suck etc.




he didn't really loathe it like he professed. His viewing-thoughts were tainted

rdhull said:

RDhull...I've "known" you on this site for a long time now. We've always got along just fine. I don't understand why you're being such a jackass now, and taking my criticism of Matrix Reloaded so seriously. Settle the fuck down; it's only a movie! You have NO IDEA what my true "viewing-thoughts" were. I really liked the first one, but it isn't near one of my favorite films. As I mentioned in my first post, I went into this movie expecting nothing more than a good sci-fi/action movie. I got shit instead. To say, "Oh, well the first one had bad acting too" is no defense. Ever heard of a concept called IMPROVEMENT?!? I like "mindless" action movies; I'm no movie snob. Why can't you actually state what you liked about the movie instead of playing Junior Fucking Psychologist and trying to tell the world how I think? I didn't buy into the hype. I didn't expect much. The movie was still a let down.

Why not try to show me things that WERE good about this movie that I may have missed? Why just spout out that same "you were expecting too much...you bought into too much hype...there's no way they could've matched the first one" bullshit? Guess what -- that's the SAME bullshit I tried to throw at people about The Phantom Menace and Attack of the Clones. It's a weak defense. Not only does it not address the REAL, ACTUAL points of criticism, but it reeks of geekly whining. And it displays a shocking level of taking shit personally.

I like action movies. I like sci-fi. But I also enjoy good scripts. And strong plots. This has nothing to do with hype. And the "go watch Citizen Cane then..." bullshit you were saying...what the fuck is that? Are you getting on people's cases for liking good movies? Is anyone who likes good movies a fucking sucker then? If that's the case, call me a sucker. I'll leave you alone to enjoy your plebeian entertainment. Tell Jerry Bruckheimer I said hello.
.
.
.
.
[This message was edited Thu May 22 12:56:31 PDT 2003 by KingSausage]

FutureShock said:

Hmm...what about the criticism of lacking good acting, strong plot? Meaningless fight scenes? Cliches left and right? Boring exposition? Weak philosophy? Fake-looking CGI?



Improvement. It isn't like they didn't have enough time. But, be my guest to keep on lowering your standards. When every movie someday consists of a computer-generated image of Martin Lawrence being kicked in the nuts by Scooby-Doo, don't come crying to me.





Blah blah blah blah. Same old excuses. I like The Godather: Part Three, even though Sophia Coppola (sp) sucks ass. Am I just being betrayed by the hype, or is my criticism valid? Are movies that are hyped beyond criticism then? Leave your excuses at the door.

KingSausage said:

Hey, Im not the one who wrote a dissertation on it
Belkieve me I know its only amovie and thats what I took it as such..and wrote my lil humorous review on it.
Its others who are "rabid" in hteir distatste..

I have never promoted it as being a great film. I even said they shot their was in my header of my review.

but u cant tell me you didnt writew that stuff you did with no n\bias from what you have read..your answer in this one shows that..see I KINDA do know what youre thinking..and "jackass"? Come now..was that necessary? Its "only a movie"