Kevin's Watch

Ur-Vile wrote:I loved the development of Neo - he was ordinary and became something special. In the sequels he is too 'super-hero'. There is no development.

Smith also lost it for me in the sequels. Having him become a renegade took away the appeal of him representing the machines. For me, Smith was their face and voice. He represented authority in such a powerful way. Then in 2 and 3 he becomes just another power-hungry villain. He became too human. in the first film, he was odd and alien - a program that was trying to be human.

I agree on both points. I quite liked Reloaded, and I thought Revolutions was about as good a conclusion as I could have hoped for, but they obviously had their flaws, one of which was the Neo/Smith characters, as you say. I suppose there's only so much development Neo can do once he's got a handle on his Superman abilities. As for Smith...in the first film, he was one of the near-identical, impassive Agents, but with just a touch of suppressed humanity. Smith hated humanity and all its trappings, but he hated it in a very human way. He was a cold, mechanical enemy, but with just a hint of instability, a touch of barely-controlled mania, and that's what made him interesting.

In any case, we're talking mainly about revolutions here... I found that film to be much darker than the others. Not since the first panorama of the fields of humans has this series so chilled me. A lot of the scenes, seemed to be stripped of the glossy, stylised aspects of the first two, particularly Reloaded. It was almost a Wounded Land moment, IMO. We had our minds blown by the first Matrix; the second one exposed us further to this artificial world, then the third took the things we had learned and threw them away, or twisted them into unpleasant shapes. IMHO, of course. I found Revolutions very bleak, and after the gleaming Reloaded I welcomed that.

I didn't mind the Architect replacing Smith as the machines' representative in Reloaded. He was scarier in that he wasn't particularly angry at humans. His willingness to eradicate humanity was merely a logical choice. His power and manner made our fear of him insidious in a way that Smith's "physical" abilities couldn't match.

But things changed in Revolutions. The Architect was absent, Smith was evolved beyond them, Merv was only out for himself. The machines are now represented by good programs. Of course, the Oracle was always there, but, now that she's joined by Ram-Kendra & his daughter, Sati, she's not as much a rebel as a voice for many programs who want peace.

I think alot of people's opinions on the third Matrix films boil down to the simple matter of: People expect far too much from sequels.

But why not? If one film is good then the sequels should be as good; if not then suffice to say something has gone wrong.

But if the first film is as groundbreaking as the Matrix was, there's no way the sequels can compete, unless they continue to break further new ground, and that must be very difficult.

CovenantJr wrote:In any case, we're talking mainly about revolutions here... I found that film to be much darker than the others. Not since the first panorama of the fields of humans has this series so chilled me. A lot of the scenes, seemed to be stripped of the glossy, stylised aspects of the first two, particularly Reloaded. It was almost a Wounded Land moment, IMO. We had our minds blown by the first Matrix; the second one exposed us further to this artificial world, then the third took the things we had learned and threw them away, or twisted them into unpleasant shapes. IMHO, of course. I found Revolutions very bleak, and after the gleaming Reloaded I welcomed that.

I agree - it was very bleak. But I love the fields of humans being manufactured and harvested. I wrote something like that years and years ago; everytime I see the matrix films I get goosebumps. dark and disturbing.

Ur-Vile wrote:

CovenantJr wrote:But why not? If one film is good then the sequels should be as good; if not then suffice to say something has gone wrong.

But if the first film is as groundbreaking as the Matrix was, there's no way the sequels can compete, unless they continue to break further new ground, and that must be very difficult.

True. At least if the first film is self-contained. Kill Bill, LOTR, and others are different. There must be sequels to the first, and they aren't intended to break further new ground. They just finish the story. (Although the fact that KB 2 is SO different from Vol 1, and incredible in its own right, says quite a lot, imo.) But since the original Matrix was, as you say, so groundbreaking, where do you then go? Our (the collective audience) expectations were too high because we didn't consider this.

Still, I'm very happy with Reloaded and Revolutions, even if some questions were not answered. Ah well...

Yes, all in all I think the trilogy was as good as I could have expected

Just when CovJr thought he had the last word...the Matrix is not a trilogy in my mind. I think of it really as two movies: the original, and a monstrous sequel that was basically chopped in half to obtain two bleeding chunks.

yup

I don't think Reloaded really fits with either of them. It's a little segue from 1 to 3...necessary, but not that smooth. But there are 3 films, so it's a trilogy

Reloaded is good.

So is pie.

CovenantJr wrote:I don't think Reloaded really fits with either of them. It's a little segue from 1 to 3...necessary, but not that smooth.

Two gigantic things happen in Reloaded:
-Smith returns, with some rather extraordinary abilities, which are instrumental to Reloaded and Revolutions.
-The Architect clues us in on a lot of serious information.

I won't argue how smooth it was, but "little"? heh

Oh, I agree there are some immensely important events in Reloaded, but the whole film seems to be way of letting those events happen in order to get to Revolutions, rather than being a film in itself. Does that make sense?

yeah but that's because they filmed it as one long film. Keanu pulled out for the third so they split 2 into 2 & 3.

Really? I've never heard that before... I don't suppose you could link me to a source? (no, not the Source, I don't want to meet the Ergoitect )

Bought Revolutions last weekend....this thread has gotten huge! Took several minutes to weed through it.

Even after watching Revolutions on DVD I don't have much to add, only more questions which will probably never be answered.

What was the deal with Sati? With Seraph? With Merv? so on and so forth.....

And doesn't it seem as if the ending, with Neo "accepting" Smith into himself, was similar to the way that TC defeats LF in WGW and LA conquers the Sunbane? Maybe the brothers are SRD fans?

Yes, you're not alone in noticing that. I made a similar observation in passing, in Fist's "Matrix Opposites" thread in the Flicks forum: kevinswatch.ihugny.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=3355

Ill try and find it. I know I heard it on the net, so it is suspicious. But I'll get it for you soon, Ergoitect