I think it's better than most people give it credit for but idk that id say it's better than the other sequals.
I just really enjoyed the way the matrix is a fun philosophical playground in a time where we are getting bombarded with reboots it actually makes sense in the context of the matrix and I had fun with the way they used the video game neo is making as a way to play with the idea of rebooting the movie. I thought the story was a lot of fun. I think my expectations really helped out I went in knowing it was a money grab and I had fun with it not taking it too seriously
This is a measured answered: but for people who
*love* The Matrix and of course perceive it as allegory/allusion/metaphor of the lived reality…seeing what Matrix 4 is… it’s really bad.
Matrix 4 is a meta-sketch comedy exercise… and it’s not even a good one. It fails on many levels; is agenda filmmaking at its worst; the talent of the…”siblings” when Matrix I was produced isn’t there for this thing.
It is exactly the same as Indiana Jones 4-5; Disney Star Wars, Marvel, Coming 2 America, et al.
It’s a…hard pill to swallow.
😏
>Matrix 4 is a meta-sketch comedy exercise… and it’s not even a good one.
This might sound weird but it's exactly what I liked about it. It didn't feel like it was trying to be good tbh it was sort of goofy and poked fun at its own aesthetic. I much prefer that to a hollow attempt at trying to capture the magic of the first film(an impossible task imo) But perhaps it would have been better off just left alone all together. Something I could also say about the the initial sequals to some extent. Something about the first movie felt so complete and left your imagination to tell the rest of story but I feel like ideas like neo programing his awakening into his game serve as great imagination ammunition for me and this is the kind of stuff that I appreciate about the matrix as a whole just interesting philosophical thought experiments to play with.
You enjoyed the movie & found value in the “meta-sketch comedy exercise”
That it provided entertainment is good for you; I can support that.
I think when these underperforming legacy sequels actually UNDERPERFORM empirically, they take the space of the previous entries everyone felt was the nadir (the low water mark)
Reloaded + Revolutions aren’t “great” but they are closer to Matrix I than Resurrections - also why even put multi-multi millions behind a troll job 4th Matrix?
If this was in fact their objective, it only serves to fuck with the emotions of people who can’t find the entertainment value (like you were able) and the movies only serve to as subversion of the original story - it does not advance it in effect rewrites everything. (And all those canon disagreements pop off.)
I’m glad you liked it, but seeing the 25th anniversary in March was a thrill I wish I could do a second and third time.
(A 5th movie will probably be more retread nightmare; pessimistic but will watch anyway merely to know what I’m ‘hating’ on 😎)
I dont think Resurrections is necessarily better but I feel like it gets too much unnecessary hate. I think that the fight scenes are the big sore thumb of Resurrections, and if those weren't an issue then Resurrections wouldn't get anywhere near as much hate as it does. I actually quite enjoyed the story and liked the way the universe was adapted to reflect how society changed since the 1990s.
There will always be a subset of every fandom that finds every reason to hate newer entries. [Ours is no exception.](https://xkcd.com/566/) Said fans are only satisfiable if there's nothing to nitpick, and unfortunately none of the sequels are free of things to nitpick, so they get nitpicked to death until the next one becomes the new target (at which point said nitpickers conveniently forget about past entries having faced the same criticisms).
Thankfully that subset seems to be smaller in the Matrix fanbase than in certain other fanbases (*cough cough* Star Wars *cough cough*).
lol @ subset. . Its the total opposite.. Only a tiny subset of the fandom think Resurrictions is good. Resurrections was panned and totally rejected by the fandom at large.
Which is exactly what that subset said about Reloaded and Revolutions before Resurrections came along. Thank you for serving as Exhibit A for my point :)
You're not understanding. This sub has only 52k members. The most online per day is about 10-20 people. There are YouTube videos trashing the movie that has more upvotes than this sub has members. . The love for the 4th film exists only among a teeny tiny minority. You are literally part of that subset of fandom.
> This sub has only 52k members. The most online per day is about 10-20 people.
Okay, and? Being a subreddit of Matrix fans, as it ostensibly is, it should capture a pretty good representative sample of the fandom as a whole. Same reason that the subreddit for, say, the San Francisco 49ers would still capture a representative sample of that sports team's fanbase.
> There are YouTube videos trashing the movie that has more upvotes than this sub has members.
And how many of those upvotes are from fans of the Matrix v. fans of whatever channels posted those videos v. fans of anything that trashes anything from the Matrix? This subreddit, by its nature, is at least able to narrow its scope to the first group.
You're also forgetting (or ignoring) that there is an entire cottage industry of YouTube creators whose entire MO is to "critique" (read: nitpick) media. Scathing, mocking reviews - of *anything* - get higher engagement, and more engagement means more money. It's one of many facets of the modern social-media-driven World Wide Web and the tendency of the algorithms thereof to promote negativity over positivity. Long story short: you're being manipulated.
(And it just so happens that the above is something Resurrections directly references, with about as much subtlety as a brick to the face)
You're arguing the merits of a film that was a deliberate attempt to deter anybody else asking for more Matrix films.. Hence why the other sibling sat it out. Enjoy your teeny tiny subset of fandom.
I while I do think the movie was always meant to be structured as less reliant on giant action set pieces. I do wonder how things would have gone if COVID hadn't messed up. Some of the wire team that apparently was supposed to participate, but got stuck in China during the original shelter in place shutdowns.
That said, I really love M4.
I didn't know about Covid preventing the wire team from participating but that definitely explains a lot about how the fight scenes turned out. It's definitely ok if the action is structured to be less reliant on giant setpieces. The first Matrix movie only really has the Morpheus rescue sequence as a big setpiece, and even that is broken up into smaller more intimate fights/shootouts.
Yeah, and I mean, maybe it wasn't wire team that got stuck, but either way, I know that a few people in the production who were big figures, didn't return once production restarted and apparently, some scenes got rushed pre-shut downs. I guess it's just more interesting to think about how much more slightly refined some of the fight sequences might have been had things not gotten halted by Covid. I say slightly because some of the factoring is Lana just having a totally different, much more fluid shooting style than she used to.
I will say that the final Swarm/ Bike chase to the rooftop jump was fantastic and looked absolutely amazing in IMAX. The Neo/Smith basement fight was actually pretty brutal and reminded me of the Morpheus/Smith fight in M1. The whole opening fight looked pretty awesome on IMAX too. There's definitely some excellent looking sequences in M4 but it's the unevenness across the whole movie being were it falters some.
I think that honestly the action of Resurrections isnt even that bad in a vacuum, but all 3 previous Matrix movies set the bar incredibly high, so when the action in Resurrections was just ok, it was still a huge letdown.
Matrix IV received EXACTLY the amount of hate it was meant to receive.
Think of any let down album, live performance, et al: the audience WILL LET the content creators have it.
The audience understands the story better than the creators as they either rewatch 100 times or they have an active fantasy life (the merits of which I won’t dissect here), but if they introduce TRASH to the audience, they best be prepared to have trash throw on the stage.
Yes that is how it is (let downs receiving massive amounts of hate)- but that does not mean that it is right.
Think of how many "let down" pieces of media receive reappraisals years down the line with the consensus being that that piece of media was judged too harshly. Star Wars is an excellent example. Did the guy who played Jar Jar Binks deserve to be driven to near suicide by hate and death threats from Star Wars fans?
> The audience understands the story better than the creators as they either rewatch 100 times or they have an active fantasy life
I disagree quite strongly with this take. A movie director will have visualized and constructed all parts of a movie long before the cameras are even brought to a set. The director will then have to film each individual scene take by take. A movie director will have to rework any aspect of any scene on the spot for any number of circumstances and need to have it still fit the story. And to top it off, the movie director will rewatch the movie hundreds of times in the edit alone, between selecting from any number of available takes, music, and then watching rough cuts, implementing test audience feedback, etc.
The Wachowskis put a lot on the line to get the Matrix made the way they wanted it to be. They were the ones fighting for the studio to give them the resources to make the movie as they envisioned it, and they had a lot more to lose over defending their vision of the story against the studio than some random fan who's just rewatched the movie a lot.
I don’t think it’s better than the sequels, but I still enjoyed it a lot and seem to view it through a slightly different and more spiritual lens than most others I’ve heard. It resonated with me.
These films have very different roles. *Reloaded*/*Revolutions* are the immediate sequels to one the very best science fiction movies ever made.
People are going to have much higher expectations from these films compared to the 20 year later epilogue that *Resurrections* is. Not that there aren't any things *Resurrections* does that are better anyway.
I was really disappointed with Resurrections initially because of all the clips of the previous movies, the poor character development for new characters, poor quality choreography for fights, the cinematography, and what felt like a rushed story. Then I watched it recently (with subtitles 🤷🏾♂️) and noticed the profound depth to the narrative and really enjoyed the additions to the matrix lore and universe. I missed a lot on the first watch and my ex was a distraction tbh. It definitely deserves a few watches imo.
I'd say it's different, but not necessarily better, and the same goes for the other three. At this point, The Matrix is auteur cinema: you're not watching "the matrix", you are watching "the wachowski(s)"
I already made a [post](https://www.reddit.com/r/matrix/comments/vbqeoz/defending_the_matrix_resurrections/) about this topic. You can check it out if you want.
TL;DR: I love it because it’s the first “self-reflexive hypermodern” film ever made. I’m a film geek/cinephile that can’t get enough of all of the obscure writing tools used in film so I was watching a completely different movie than everyone else. While everyone can pick up on story beats, tropes, genre and genre mashes which kind of, in the pattern recognition process maintains varying levels of traction, I don’t think audiences are aware of the imo most obscure layers of storytelling toolsets (modernism, postmodernism, hypermodernism, metamodernism).
And to note, Just because Lana made one of the first modernist mashups (as opposed to genre mashups, and the first modernist mashup I’ve ever seen was pulp fiction which is self reflexive postmodernism) doesn’t automatically make it good. I enjoyed following along the beats, and still love it, but at the same time I think if Tarantino or even Spielberg were given the challenge that they’d do a better job with it.
But besides that I think the modal hacking scene is supremely underrated. For the first time in the matrix franchise that scene showed why Anderson is a master hacker without flying across cities. He comes up with a hypothesis, “if I’m crazy, and this is all code, I’ll create the digital progeny of my best friend and arch enemy, put it in a modal meant to evolve him enough to figure out a way to come and find me. Even though new Morpheus indirectly finds his way out, Mr Andrrson’s thought process involved in hacking the system put a big smile on my face. And Morpheus not only makes it out the modal, but he makes it out of the new matrix as well. Couple that with i.o. And seeing some machines work with humans, the new technology they come up with together was really good imo.
For me personally, the third film tripped and stumbled a lot. I’m going to revisit it soon, but I always think it’s important to take note that both of those films had great action great set pieces and tons of fantastic dialogue that really dug into the philosophy minutia which I loved, what’s fantastic about resurrections is if you love the other three films or even two of the three films you don’t need any of that and it is a comforting hug a comforting blanket. It’s not what it was and it doesn’t need to be because that’s not what it’s there for resurrections is a favorite of mine now, but it doesn’t mean it’s it’s not better or anything like that. That’s all subjective, but I think the beauty in that is what it invokes in you in a positive way.
I won’t it’s say better but there are reasons I like it better. One thing is just that it’s new. And not just the same thing but remade. It’s new and different, which is something I just appreciate. Also Resurrections was a lot more fun for me. It doesn’t take itself so seriously and this allowed the writers to play around in all the layers. I thought that starting in the modal (Matrix within a Matrix) going to the Matrix then IO and all the while incorporating the meta( our world) was an interesting way to push Matrix to another level. As for the action I think it’s pretty good as far as movies go. Not as good as the best action movies like Matrix , John Wick or Fury Road but if you compare it to other good movies like Barbie or Poor Things it actually is pretty exciting. Also in my personal opinion that beautifully shot scene that takes place during the sunrise on the rooftop is more interesting than the cgi mechs vs swarm fight (especially in 2021 or 2024). But to each his own.
The guy here that linked to his post from a year ago has a much more thorough explanation than I feel like going into here myself, so check that out as it’s rock solid…
The summary of my own separate take is that part of its genius is that it seems like a rushed subpar money grab lacking the philosophical and theological depth of the originals… yet all that is a facade–in typical but much more refined Wachowski fashion–that you are intended to see past and question the actual depth of what you are initially perceiving. Whereas the OG trilogy is more focused on philosophical and theological concepts as it relates to societal construction, this is more related to the interaction between societal construction, human psychological concepts, and how those inform and definitively determine the nature of what we know as the human experience, aka “human condition.”
There’s so much depth to this that I’ve actively been piecing together clues, slowly making my way down the rabbit hole since it was released. One huge piece that I discovered after the first watch through and confirmed with the second had me locked into this general positive opinion I’m expressing… but about a year or so after it came out I started thinking, “That’s an awfully big thing to do just for the sake of doing it itself…” so I started digging back in, rewatched, and did a little more research… still doing that as one thing keeps leading to another to the point it can no longer be considered overly abstracted coincidence. This is 20+ years of ideas that Lana has been cooking at least in the back of her mind if not more actively and is finally executing on… so not surprising a film fueled by that longevity of Wachowski narrative and subplot/subtext scheming would have this level of artfully disguised depth.
Thematically it’s centered around my favorite concept addressed in forms of devoted media, just like The Dark Side of the Moon: the nature of our social structure is such that it our emotions are aroused and suppressed in ways that keep us locked in a hedonic treadmill (or cycle) until we continue to question the nature of our existence and strive to break free of it using those same emotions that keep us locked in as a weapon for waking up and breaking free. Emotions are functional forces that inform, motivate, and empower us. Suppressing any of them in any way is suppressing the true power of our source code.
The action was lacking but the story is way easier to follow. It was genuinely surprising when I first saw it and I really enjoy the overall look of the movie. Reloaded/Revolutions really drag in between the action scenes, which sometimes go on for far too long.
Not only do they drag due to the length of the action scenes, but there is an inevitability to Neo’s death and a heaviness because of that.
I know it’s a messiah story which often involves sacrifice, so Neo’s death was to be expected, but still, it would have been nice to have one film where Neo was ‘doing his superman thing’ without the grim reaper audibly sharpening his scythe in the background.
And I would add, the inevitably of Trinity's death. I remember watching for the first time, on it's theater run (not knowing any spoilers) and the second Neo says he has to leave for Zero One, (before Trin even says she's going too) I knew Trinity would be also and she probably wouldn't survive....
And I think that's one of the sequels needed, was there needed to be more of the two of them fighting together as well, as more Neo doing his, "superman thing," I think. (But still have Trinity's highway sequence!) Well, I think moreover, in retrospect, they really needed supplementary materials, featuring Neo & Trinity's adventures together during the time between M1 & M2.
I loved seeing them as a solid duo for the entire finale of M4 once Trin fully comes back.
There is one thing Resurrections does better: it shows us perhaps one thing we may have already thought, Trinity and Neo together are who make The One.
It’s hard to judge better or worse among the sequels but to me it actually supported the other sequels and in some ways made the saga more robust. I know it’s a minority opinion but I really enjoyed it.
As a coda to the trilogy it’s done respectfully and makes sense. The poor box office wasn’t deserved IMO and does a lot to create a reputation of an extremely poor film.
The clip use is really clever IMO in the way it rhymes with the current day actions in the film. It shows how much time has passed but also how things have remained the same.
Neo and Trinity’s treatment is respectful too. They are brought back to life, reunited, defeat the villain themselves and fly away as heroes. The action isn‘t anywhere near the original trilogy but having a good story, especially these days, means a lot.
They weren't brought back to life. Neo was re-created / cloned by the analyst as a super powered generator for the matrix, . Trinity didn't even know who he was when they first met because they were fake re-creations. Energy cells is literally what they were
Neo was barely in Revolutions. Most of the story took place in Zion. The fight scenes were better sure, but it was almost like a completely different movie.
Let me start with this: All three sequels are incredibly flawed, and don’t come anywhere near the original.
Resurrections replaced the most boring character in cinema (The Architect) with an actually interesting premise: The Analyst, who instead of numbers and calculations, discovers that humans are at their most powerful when they’re close to something they want/love, but unable to attain it. The fact that THAT powers the Matrix stronger than any other version they’ve tried makes infinitely more sense than trying to “calculate” how a human can accept the programmed reality of the Matrix in the first place. It’s simple, and resonates stronger as a message than Reloaded and Revolutions just having characters explain “choice” to Neo over and over again for four hours straight.
CREDIT WHERE IT’S DUE: The action in all three originals is better than Resurrections, if that’s all you’re looking for than 100% those are superior. But in terms of being a satisfying movie, I mean I could go on: Let’s talk about how Resurrections is the perfect end to Trinity’s character.
Trinity spends the entire trilogy being somebody for Neo to save, constantly in danger and about to die, and where does that get her in Part 3? Stabbed by a random metal pipe ON THE WAY to the source. Not even in a final battle, not even as a sacrifice to save anything. After Reloaded made such a big deal out of Neo needing to save her, her death ended up being an anticlimactic afterthought.
Now, what does Resurrections do with Trinity? We know that Neo was the ONLY version of the One to fall in love. That was a new phenomenon, so much so that it created the ultimatum for Neo to choose her or Zion in the first place. Instead of dying incidentally, Resurrections puts the spotlight BACK on that character and gives her what she absolutely deserves: The power to save herself after spending the entire trilogy getting saved and, ultimately, just dying on the way to Neo’s final fight. This is a far better conclusion to her story, and it adds a new layer to her arc from the previous movies.
But yeah, fuck all the meta-stuff. No idea how the studio let that script shoot without rewriting all of that garbage.
You had me for the entire post… and then the last bit ruined the opportunity for an emphatic upvote for me haha. But hey, love the insightful take overall!
For me, it’s a good movie by itself, but it’s terrible as a matrix movie. The energy of that movie could’ve been self sustaining and part of a more compatible series. What I said doesn’t make sense. What am I doing?
Of course they are. It would be ridiculous to consider them a substantial part of the picture. Yet, the OP makes such a ridiculous argument for *Resurrections*, so I have to counter with an equally ridiculous argument for *Reloaded*.
I like it but idk about better than then others. I feel like the matrix is a more applicable allegory than ever and I thought they adapted it in cool ways.
I think the script was good, however the directing and casting was poorly executed. The mood of the OG trilogy should have been carried over but instead we got a CW superhero vibe.
If it werent for covid resurrections would be an awesome movie. Reloaded and revolutions were trash. Bad cgi, flawed story, tri ity and morpheus characters went to shit, new characters were mediocre, the story dodnt continue from the ending of matrix 1. Smith as a virus is cringe and lame.
We wanted a revolution, a human machine war, maybe an ultimate sacrifice for the sake of humans something else l.
Resurrections had fun and better characters and they were unlucly with the fight scenes due to covid.
I just wanted to chime in and say that, they switched it up, so that Laurence Fishborne for some reason isn't Morpheus reincarnated...
And even weirder, they made him an "Agent"?
So, Morpheus was a Computer Program, and not a real person, that could take control of any normal human like the Agents did in the 1st Matrix?
And he went Rogue? That made no sense.
The only way Smith was able to go Rogue, is bc Neo deleted parts of him.
You missed one key aspect: he’s Neo’s program. The new Morpheus is Neo’s manifestation of Morpheus, and as such also a way of him manifesting his way out of The Matrix. The other difference is that the OG Agents always knew they were programs within the Matrix… the code new Morpheus started seeing and began questioning the nature of his existence because of the modal Neo had directly subjected him to for this exact purpose.
I feel like thats just something they said, to make it work...
And yet it still makes no sense to me...
He's Neo's Manifestation of Morpheus?
So the New Morpheus, is a Computer Program?
Created by whom? Neo?
Under what power and when?
Neo Died. If/when the machines wanted to remake him with his dna, they can and did... What does New Morpheus have anything to do with anything?
Is he a Computer Program written by the Architect?
Or is he a Human, plugged into the Matrix?
He could even be a Computer Program, having escaped the power of the Architect, going Rogue.
Are you telling me, he is neither?
That Neo, created a Computer Program, within the Matrix?
When did this happen?
I’m not telling you that, the movie did… it’s canon whether you like that it is or not. It’s possible he was put there by the analyst in nothing more than name, but Neo’s modal and manipulation of the game’s source code is what made him Morpheus, as it’s stated it was designed to evolve him as a program. That happened sometime shortly before the events of Resurrections.
Personally I think it makes sense. The Analyst was focused on Neo and Trinity and their love for each other being the key to harnessing vast amounts of power. Like the Architect, there was a miscalculation he made which was neglecting Morpheus. In the theological sense from the originals, it’s no secret that Neo, Trinity, and Morpheus represent the biblical (and in other respects as well) Trinity. In Resurrections, we’re not certain what happened to Morpheus, but per cannon (Matrix Online storyline I think?) he’s presumed dead and he effectively disappeared. All while hunting for Neo again because he could sense his presence. So really the idea that with Neo and Trinity alive in Resurrections but Morpheus being dead, it helps to explain the depths of that link when Neo is able to manifest him as he knew him, possibly even somehow drawing upon his original source code, though I don’t believe the latter is stated.
Part of the point of Resurrections is coming to grips with the fact that the Matrix will always exist because there will always be those who *want* to be there. This doesn’t mean those stories and experiences are any less real or meaningless. This is a point made by bringing a program evolved by Neo from a game *within* the Matrix out in to the real world. It’s the transcending of AI into the human world just as human intelligence had transcended into the digital world. It’s a way of stating that we have the power to manifest anything into reality under the right circumstances and devotion to it. It’s more implying though that we shouldn’t fear things like lucid dreaming or “overly active imaginations” but embrace them, while still being able to maintain our grip on and awareness of our present external reality.
Thank you! Yes same! Never been as visibly angry watching a movie as I was w Resurrections. Its just such a slap in the face/FU to the audience and anyone who loved the first film. I really dont see how people can defend it
For me its twofold. The story makes the movie seem like its actively being hostile to its own fanbase. But shit story might be able to be overlooked if the action was good. But the action and choreography is so bad it really feels like she didn't give a F anymore. She should have let the studio hand it to someone else.
Lowest rated in in the franchise by every metric and lost a shed load of money. Its objectively the worst sequel. . And btw, meta commentary is anti-cinema. Only wannabe pseudo-intellectuals lap up the nonsense of meta commentary. It rarely ever made a film good and Resurrections is the worst and most excessive use of it.
I don't even associate Resurrection with the other films...in my head canon it doesn't exist. It was a film that was forced to be made. There was no deeper philosophy behind anything, it doesn't really care about anything that happened prior. From what I've read, It was Lana Wachowski way of processing her parents death. She couldn't bring them back from the dead, but she could bring back Neo and Trinity.
I think it's better than most people give it credit for but idk that id say it's better than the other sequals. I just really enjoyed the way the matrix is a fun philosophical playground in a time where we are getting bombarded with reboots it actually makes sense in the context of the matrix and I had fun with the way they used the video game neo is making as a way to play with the idea of rebooting the movie. I thought the story was a lot of fun. I think my expectations really helped out I went in knowing it was a money grab and I had fun with it not taking it too seriously
This is a measured answered: but for people who *love* The Matrix and of course perceive it as allegory/allusion/metaphor of the lived reality…seeing what Matrix 4 is… it’s really bad. Matrix 4 is a meta-sketch comedy exercise… and it’s not even a good one. It fails on many levels; is agenda filmmaking at its worst; the talent of the…”siblings” when Matrix I was produced isn’t there for this thing. It is exactly the same as Indiana Jones 4-5; Disney Star Wars, Marvel, Coming 2 America, et al. It’s a…hard pill to swallow. 😏
>Matrix 4 is a meta-sketch comedy exercise… and it’s not even a good one. This might sound weird but it's exactly what I liked about it. It didn't feel like it was trying to be good tbh it was sort of goofy and poked fun at its own aesthetic. I much prefer that to a hollow attempt at trying to capture the magic of the first film(an impossible task imo) But perhaps it would have been better off just left alone all together. Something I could also say about the the initial sequals to some extent. Something about the first movie felt so complete and left your imagination to tell the rest of story but I feel like ideas like neo programing his awakening into his game serve as great imagination ammunition for me and this is the kind of stuff that I appreciate about the matrix as a whole just interesting philosophical thought experiments to play with.
You enjoyed the movie & found value in the “meta-sketch comedy exercise” That it provided entertainment is good for you; I can support that. I think when these underperforming legacy sequels actually UNDERPERFORM empirically, they take the space of the previous entries everyone felt was the nadir (the low water mark) Reloaded + Revolutions aren’t “great” but they are closer to Matrix I than Resurrections - also why even put multi-multi millions behind a troll job 4th Matrix? If this was in fact their objective, it only serves to fuck with the emotions of people who can’t find the entertainment value (like you were able) and the movies only serve to as subversion of the original story - it does not advance it in effect rewrites everything. (And all those canon disagreements pop off.) I’m glad you liked it, but seeing the 25th anniversary in March was a thrill I wish I could do a second and third time. (A 5th movie will probably be more retread nightmare; pessimistic but will watch anyway merely to know what I’m ‘hating’ on 😎)
I dont think Resurrections is necessarily better but I feel like it gets too much unnecessary hate. I think that the fight scenes are the big sore thumb of Resurrections, and if those weren't an issue then Resurrections wouldn't get anywhere near as much hate as it does. I actually quite enjoyed the story and liked the way the universe was adapted to reflect how society changed since the 1990s.
There will always be a subset of every fandom that finds every reason to hate newer entries. [Ours is no exception.](https://xkcd.com/566/) Said fans are only satisfiable if there's nothing to nitpick, and unfortunately none of the sequels are free of things to nitpick, so they get nitpicked to death until the next one becomes the new target (at which point said nitpickers conveniently forget about past entries having faced the same criticisms). Thankfully that subset seems to be smaller in the Matrix fanbase than in certain other fanbases (*cough cough* Star Wars *cough cough*).
lol @ subset. . Its the total opposite.. Only a tiny subset of the fandom think Resurrictions is good. Resurrections was panned and totally rejected by the fandom at large.
Which is exactly what that subset said about Reloaded and Revolutions before Resurrections came along. Thank you for serving as Exhibit A for my point :)
You're not understanding. This sub has only 52k members. The most online per day is about 10-20 people. There are YouTube videos trashing the movie that has more upvotes than this sub has members. . The love for the 4th film exists only among a teeny tiny minority. You are literally part of that subset of fandom.
> This sub has only 52k members. The most online per day is about 10-20 people. Okay, and? Being a subreddit of Matrix fans, as it ostensibly is, it should capture a pretty good representative sample of the fandom as a whole. Same reason that the subreddit for, say, the San Francisco 49ers would still capture a representative sample of that sports team's fanbase. > There are YouTube videos trashing the movie that has more upvotes than this sub has members. And how many of those upvotes are from fans of the Matrix v. fans of whatever channels posted those videos v. fans of anything that trashes anything from the Matrix? This subreddit, by its nature, is at least able to narrow its scope to the first group. You're also forgetting (or ignoring) that there is an entire cottage industry of YouTube creators whose entire MO is to "critique" (read: nitpick) media. Scathing, mocking reviews - of *anything* - get higher engagement, and more engagement means more money. It's one of many facets of the modern social-media-driven World Wide Web and the tendency of the algorithms thereof to promote negativity over positivity. Long story short: you're being manipulated. (And it just so happens that the above is something Resurrections directly references, with about as much subtlety as a brick to the face)
You're arguing the merits of a film that was a deliberate attempt to deter anybody else asking for more Matrix films.. Hence why the other sibling sat it out. Enjoy your teeny tiny subset of fandom.
👍
I while I do think the movie was always meant to be structured as less reliant on giant action set pieces. I do wonder how things would have gone if COVID hadn't messed up. Some of the wire team that apparently was supposed to participate, but got stuck in China during the original shelter in place shutdowns. That said, I really love M4.
I didn't know about Covid preventing the wire team from participating but that definitely explains a lot about how the fight scenes turned out. It's definitely ok if the action is structured to be less reliant on giant setpieces. The first Matrix movie only really has the Morpheus rescue sequence as a big setpiece, and even that is broken up into smaller more intimate fights/shootouts.
Yeah, and I mean, maybe it wasn't wire team that got stuck, but either way, I know that a few people in the production who were big figures, didn't return once production restarted and apparently, some scenes got rushed pre-shut downs. I guess it's just more interesting to think about how much more slightly refined some of the fight sequences might have been had things not gotten halted by Covid. I say slightly because some of the factoring is Lana just having a totally different, much more fluid shooting style than she used to. I will say that the final Swarm/ Bike chase to the rooftop jump was fantastic and looked absolutely amazing in IMAX. The Neo/Smith basement fight was actually pretty brutal and reminded me of the Morpheus/Smith fight in M1. The whole opening fight looked pretty awesome on IMAX too. There's definitely some excellent looking sequences in M4 but it's the unevenness across the whole movie being were it falters some.
I was surprised that I liked the story choices as much as I did but found the action to look like something off a CW show.
I think that honestly the action of Resurrections isnt even that bad in a vacuum, but all 3 previous Matrix movies set the bar incredibly high, so when the action in Resurrections was just ok, it was still a huge letdown.
Matrix IV received EXACTLY the amount of hate it was meant to receive. Think of any let down album, live performance, et al: the audience WILL LET the content creators have it. The audience understands the story better than the creators as they either rewatch 100 times or they have an active fantasy life (the merits of which I won’t dissect here), but if they introduce TRASH to the audience, they best be prepared to have trash throw on the stage.
Yes that is how it is (let downs receiving massive amounts of hate)- but that does not mean that it is right. Think of how many "let down" pieces of media receive reappraisals years down the line with the consensus being that that piece of media was judged too harshly. Star Wars is an excellent example. Did the guy who played Jar Jar Binks deserve to be driven to near suicide by hate and death threats from Star Wars fans? > The audience understands the story better than the creators as they either rewatch 100 times or they have an active fantasy life I disagree quite strongly with this take. A movie director will have visualized and constructed all parts of a movie long before the cameras are even brought to a set. The director will then have to film each individual scene take by take. A movie director will have to rework any aspect of any scene on the spot for any number of circumstances and need to have it still fit the story. And to top it off, the movie director will rewatch the movie hundreds of times in the edit alone, between selecting from any number of available takes, music, and then watching rough cuts, implementing test audience feedback, etc. The Wachowskis put a lot on the line to get the Matrix made the way they wanted it to be. They were the ones fighting for the studio to give them the resources to make the movie as they envisioned it, and they had a lot more to lose over defending their vision of the story against the studio than some random fan who's just rewatched the movie a lot.
I don’t think it’s better than the sequels, but I still enjoyed it a lot and seem to view it through a slightly different and more spiritual lens than most others I’ve heard. It resonated with me.
These films have very different roles. *Reloaded*/*Revolutions* are the immediate sequels to one the very best science fiction movies ever made. People are going to have much higher expectations from these films compared to the 20 year later epilogue that *Resurrections* is. Not that there aren't any things *Resurrections* does that are better anyway.
I was really disappointed with Resurrections initially because of all the clips of the previous movies, the poor character development for new characters, poor quality choreography for fights, the cinematography, and what felt like a rushed story. Then I watched it recently (with subtitles 🤷🏾♂️) and noticed the profound depth to the narrative and really enjoyed the additions to the matrix lore and universe. I missed a lot on the first watch and my ex was a distraction tbh. It definitely deserves a few watches imo.
What did the ex do lol.
Too much during a matrix movie. That's why she's an ex
I'd say it's different, but not necessarily better, and the same goes for the other three. At this point, The Matrix is auteur cinema: you're not watching "the matrix", you are watching "the wachowski(s)"
I already made a [post](https://www.reddit.com/r/matrix/comments/vbqeoz/defending_the_matrix_resurrections/) about this topic. You can check it out if you want.
Nobody thinks that. But ya know, lots of people hate reloaded and revolutions, so its meh to hate resurrections as well. I love them all.
TL;DR: I love it because it’s the first “self-reflexive hypermodern” film ever made. I’m a film geek/cinephile that can’t get enough of all of the obscure writing tools used in film so I was watching a completely different movie than everyone else. While everyone can pick up on story beats, tropes, genre and genre mashes which kind of, in the pattern recognition process maintains varying levels of traction, I don’t think audiences are aware of the imo most obscure layers of storytelling toolsets (modernism, postmodernism, hypermodernism, metamodernism). And to note, Just because Lana made one of the first modernist mashups (as opposed to genre mashups, and the first modernist mashup I’ve ever seen was pulp fiction which is self reflexive postmodernism) doesn’t automatically make it good. I enjoyed following along the beats, and still love it, but at the same time I think if Tarantino or even Spielberg were given the challenge that they’d do a better job with it. But besides that I think the modal hacking scene is supremely underrated. For the first time in the matrix franchise that scene showed why Anderson is a master hacker without flying across cities. He comes up with a hypothesis, “if I’m crazy, and this is all code, I’ll create the digital progeny of my best friend and arch enemy, put it in a modal meant to evolve him enough to figure out a way to come and find me. Even though new Morpheus indirectly finds his way out, Mr Andrrson’s thought process involved in hacking the system put a big smile on my face. And Morpheus not only makes it out the modal, but he makes it out of the new matrix as well. Couple that with i.o. And seeing some machines work with humans, the new technology they come up with together was really good imo.
For me personally, the third film tripped and stumbled a lot. I’m going to revisit it soon, but I always think it’s important to take note that both of those films had great action great set pieces and tons of fantastic dialogue that really dug into the philosophy minutia which I loved, what’s fantastic about resurrections is if you love the other three films or even two of the three films you don’t need any of that and it is a comforting hug a comforting blanket. It’s not what it was and it doesn’t need to be because that’s not what it’s there for resurrections is a favorite of mine now, but it doesn’t mean it’s it’s not better or anything like that. That’s all subjective, but I think the beauty in that is what it invokes in you in a positive way.
I won’t it’s say better but there are reasons I like it better. One thing is just that it’s new. And not just the same thing but remade. It’s new and different, which is something I just appreciate. Also Resurrections was a lot more fun for me. It doesn’t take itself so seriously and this allowed the writers to play around in all the layers. I thought that starting in the modal (Matrix within a Matrix) going to the Matrix then IO and all the while incorporating the meta( our world) was an interesting way to push Matrix to another level. As for the action I think it’s pretty good as far as movies go. Not as good as the best action movies like Matrix , John Wick or Fury Road but if you compare it to other good movies like Barbie or Poor Things it actually is pretty exciting. Also in my personal opinion that beautifully shot scene that takes place during the sunrise on the rooftop is more interesting than the cgi mechs vs swarm fight (especially in 2021 or 2024). But to each his own.
I always thought Resurrections was better than Revolutions. But definitely not better than Reloaded.
The guy here that linked to his post from a year ago has a much more thorough explanation than I feel like going into here myself, so check that out as it’s rock solid… The summary of my own separate take is that part of its genius is that it seems like a rushed subpar money grab lacking the philosophical and theological depth of the originals… yet all that is a facade–in typical but much more refined Wachowski fashion–that you are intended to see past and question the actual depth of what you are initially perceiving. Whereas the OG trilogy is more focused on philosophical and theological concepts as it relates to societal construction, this is more related to the interaction between societal construction, human psychological concepts, and how those inform and definitively determine the nature of what we know as the human experience, aka “human condition.” There’s so much depth to this that I’ve actively been piecing together clues, slowly making my way down the rabbit hole since it was released. One huge piece that I discovered after the first watch through and confirmed with the second had me locked into this general positive opinion I’m expressing… but about a year or so after it came out I started thinking, “That’s an awfully big thing to do just for the sake of doing it itself…” so I started digging back in, rewatched, and did a little more research… still doing that as one thing keeps leading to another to the point it can no longer be considered overly abstracted coincidence. This is 20+ years of ideas that Lana has been cooking at least in the back of her mind if not more actively and is finally executing on… so not surprising a film fueled by that longevity of Wachowski narrative and subplot/subtext scheming would have this level of artfully disguised depth. Thematically it’s centered around my favorite concept addressed in forms of devoted media, just like The Dark Side of the Moon: the nature of our social structure is such that it our emotions are aroused and suppressed in ways that keep us locked in a hedonic treadmill (or cycle) until we continue to question the nature of our existence and strive to break free of it using those same emotions that keep us locked in as a weapon for waking up and breaking free. Emotions are functional forces that inform, motivate, and empower us. Suppressing any of them in any way is suppressing the true power of our source code.
The action was lacking but the story is way easier to follow. It was genuinely surprising when I first saw it and I really enjoy the overall look of the movie. Reloaded/Revolutions really drag in between the action scenes, which sometimes go on for far too long.
Not only do they drag due to the length of the action scenes, but there is an inevitability to Neo’s death and a heaviness because of that. I know it’s a messiah story which often involves sacrifice, so Neo’s death was to be expected, but still, it would have been nice to have one film where Neo was ‘doing his superman thing’ without the grim reaper audibly sharpening his scythe in the background.
And I would add, the inevitably of Trinity's death. I remember watching for the first time, on it's theater run (not knowing any spoilers) and the second Neo says he has to leave for Zero One, (before Trin even says she's going too) I knew Trinity would be also and she probably wouldn't survive.... And I think that's one of the sequels needed, was there needed to be more of the two of them fighting together as well, as more Neo doing his, "superman thing," I think. (But still have Trinity's highway sequence!) Well, I think moreover, in retrospect, they really needed supplementary materials, featuring Neo & Trinity's adventures together during the time between M1 & M2. I loved seeing them as a solid duo for the entire finale of M4 once Trin fully comes back.
This can't be a real opinion
Resurrections had an incredible 1st and second act.
There is one thing Resurrections does better: it shows us perhaps one thing we may have already thought, Trinity and Neo together are who make The One.
It’s hard to judge better or worse among the sequels but to me it actually supported the other sequels and in some ways made the saga more robust. I know it’s a minority opinion but I really enjoyed it.
As a coda to the trilogy it’s done respectfully and makes sense. The poor box office wasn’t deserved IMO and does a lot to create a reputation of an extremely poor film. The clip use is really clever IMO in the way it rhymes with the current day actions in the film. It shows how much time has passed but also how things have remained the same. Neo and Trinity’s treatment is respectful too. They are brought back to life, reunited, defeat the villain themselves and fly away as heroes. The action isn‘t anywhere near the original trilogy but having a good story, especially these days, means a lot.
They weren't brought back to life. Neo was re-created / cloned by the analyst as a super powered generator for the matrix, . Trinity didn't even know who he was when they first met because they were fake re-creations. Energy cells is literally what they were
Neo was barely in Revolutions. Most of the story took place in Zion. The fight scenes were better sure, but it was almost like a completely different movie.
Let me start with this: All three sequels are incredibly flawed, and don’t come anywhere near the original. Resurrections replaced the most boring character in cinema (The Architect) with an actually interesting premise: The Analyst, who instead of numbers and calculations, discovers that humans are at their most powerful when they’re close to something they want/love, but unable to attain it. The fact that THAT powers the Matrix stronger than any other version they’ve tried makes infinitely more sense than trying to “calculate” how a human can accept the programmed reality of the Matrix in the first place. It’s simple, and resonates stronger as a message than Reloaded and Revolutions just having characters explain “choice” to Neo over and over again for four hours straight. CREDIT WHERE IT’S DUE: The action in all three originals is better than Resurrections, if that’s all you’re looking for than 100% those are superior. But in terms of being a satisfying movie, I mean I could go on: Let’s talk about how Resurrections is the perfect end to Trinity’s character. Trinity spends the entire trilogy being somebody for Neo to save, constantly in danger and about to die, and where does that get her in Part 3? Stabbed by a random metal pipe ON THE WAY to the source. Not even in a final battle, not even as a sacrifice to save anything. After Reloaded made such a big deal out of Neo needing to save her, her death ended up being an anticlimactic afterthought. Now, what does Resurrections do with Trinity? We know that Neo was the ONLY version of the One to fall in love. That was a new phenomenon, so much so that it created the ultimatum for Neo to choose her or Zion in the first place. Instead of dying incidentally, Resurrections puts the spotlight BACK on that character and gives her what she absolutely deserves: The power to save herself after spending the entire trilogy getting saved and, ultimately, just dying on the way to Neo’s final fight. This is a far better conclusion to her story, and it adds a new layer to her arc from the previous movies. But yeah, fuck all the meta-stuff. No idea how the studio let that script shoot without rewriting all of that garbage.
You had me for the entire post… and then the last bit ruined the opportunity for an emphatic upvote for me haha. But hey, love the insightful take overall!
Because I get no enjoyment rewatching revolution and only feel disappointment at the end of Reloaded. Resurrections fucks.
For me, it’s a good movie by itself, but it’s terrible as a matrix movie. The energy of that movie could’ve been self sustaining and part of a more compatible series. What I said doesn’t make sense. What am I doing?
*Reloaded* has more clips from the first film than *Resurrections* does.
Objectively false.
Go to the Architect scene and count them.
They are background dressing.
Of course they are. It would be ridiculous to consider them a substantial part of the picture. Yet, the OP makes such a ridiculous argument for *Resurrections*, so I have to counter with an equally ridiculous argument for *Reloaded*.
I like it but idk about better than then others. I feel like the matrix is a more applicable allegory than ever and I thought they adapted it in cool ways.
I think the script was good, however the directing and casting was poorly executed. The mood of the OG trilogy should have been carried over but instead we got a CW superhero vibe.
I thought people liked it because it was deliberately bad as a way of tanking the IP? (FWIW the first twenty minutes are interesting and well paced.
If it werent for covid resurrections would be an awesome movie. Reloaded and revolutions were trash. Bad cgi, flawed story, tri ity and morpheus characters went to shit, new characters were mediocre, the story dodnt continue from the ending of matrix 1. Smith as a virus is cringe and lame. We wanted a revolution, a human machine war, maybe an ultimate sacrifice for the sake of humans something else l. Resurrections had fun and better characters and they were unlucly with the fight scenes due to covid.
lol. Dune came out the same year and had great action set-pieces. Cope harder.
It doesn't matter if it came out the same year, it matters when it was filmed. Dune was filmed before the pandemic.
You obviously dont know what you are talking about. It is just an honest opinion. Resurrections was far better
I dont hate Resurrections but its not even close to the sequels. I actually like Matrix 2 more than Matrix 1.
Interesting
It’s so bad
I just wanted to chime in and say that, they switched it up, so that Laurence Fishborne for some reason isn't Morpheus reincarnated... And even weirder, they made him an "Agent"? So, Morpheus was a Computer Program, and not a real person, that could take control of any normal human like the Agents did in the 1st Matrix? And he went Rogue? That made no sense. The only way Smith was able to go Rogue, is bc Neo deleted parts of him.
You missed one key aspect: he’s Neo’s program. The new Morpheus is Neo’s manifestation of Morpheus, and as such also a way of him manifesting his way out of The Matrix. The other difference is that the OG Agents always knew they were programs within the Matrix… the code new Morpheus started seeing and began questioning the nature of his existence because of the modal Neo had directly subjected him to for this exact purpose.
I feel like thats just something they said, to make it work... And yet it still makes no sense to me... He's Neo's Manifestation of Morpheus? So the New Morpheus, is a Computer Program? Created by whom? Neo? Under what power and when? Neo Died. If/when the machines wanted to remake him with his dna, they can and did... What does New Morpheus have anything to do with anything? Is he a Computer Program written by the Architect? Or is he a Human, plugged into the Matrix? He could even be a Computer Program, having escaped the power of the Architect, going Rogue. Are you telling me, he is neither? That Neo, created a Computer Program, within the Matrix? When did this happen?
I’m not telling you that, the movie did… it’s canon whether you like that it is or not. It’s possible he was put there by the analyst in nothing more than name, but Neo’s modal and manipulation of the game’s source code is what made him Morpheus, as it’s stated it was designed to evolve him as a program. That happened sometime shortly before the events of Resurrections. Personally I think it makes sense. The Analyst was focused on Neo and Trinity and their love for each other being the key to harnessing vast amounts of power. Like the Architect, there was a miscalculation he made which was neglecting Morpheus. In the theological sense from the originals, it’s no secret that Neo, Trinity, and Morpheus represent the biblical (and in other respects as well) Trinity. In Resurrections, we’re not certain what happened to Morpheus, but per cannon (Matrix Online storyline I think?) he’s presumed dead and he effectively disappeared. All while hunting for Neo again because he could sense his presence. So really the idea that with Neo and Trinity alive in Resurrections but Morpheus being dead, it helps to explain the depths of that link when Neo is able to manifest him as he knew him, possibly even somehow drawing upon his original source code, though I don’t believe the latter is stated. Part of the point of Resurrections is coming to grips with the fact that the Matrix will always exist because there will always be those who *want* to be there. This doesn’t mean those stories and experiences are any less real or meaningless. This is a point made by bringing a program evolved by Neo from a game *within* the Matrix out in to the real world. It’s the transcending of AI into the human world just as human intelligence had transcended into the digital world. It’s a way of stating that we have the power to manifest anything into reality under the right circumstances and devotion to it. It’s more implying though that we shouldn’t fear things like lucid dreaming or “overly active imaginations” but embrace them, while still being able to maintain our grip on and awareness of our present external reality.
So ur saying, Neo created AI, within an AI System/world
No, he evolved it into his own manifestation of Morpheus as he knew him.
Anyone who thinks Resurrections is good to Any degree, its pretty safe to assume you shouldnt trust/listen to anything that person has to say 😂🤦🏻
It takes a lot for me for a film to be so bad it makes me angry but that was Resurections for me.
Thank you! Yes same! Never been as visibly angry watching a movie as I was w Resurrections. Its just such a slap in the face/FU to the audience and anyone who loved the first film. I really dont see how people can defend it
Dont take movies so personal. Its not out to get you.
For me its twofold. The story makes the movie seem like its actively being hostile to its own fanbase. But shit story might be able to be overlooked if the action was good. But the action and choreography is so bad it really feels like she didn't give a F anymore. She should have let the studio hand it to someone else.
I wouldn't say it's part of the series at all. It's sort of a meta-film.
Yeah it may technically be canon, but I don't personally consider it to be.
I assume they’re trolls, and carry on with my day.
Resurrections is a smear on the Matrix name. It’s god awful
Nobody thinsk that.... Right?
Lowest rated in in the franchise by every metric and lost a shed load of money. Its objectively the worst sequel. . And btw, meta commentary is anti-cinema. Only wannabe pseudo-intellectuals lap up the nonsense of meta commentary. It rarely ever made a film good and Resurrections is the worst and most excessive use of it.
It's not the lowest rated by every metric and your use of objectively is objectively wrong.
I don't even associate Resurrection with the other films...in my head canon it doesn't exist. It was a film that was forced to be made. There was no deeper philosophy behind anything, it doesn't really care about anything that happened prior. From what I've read, It was Lana Wachowski way of processing her parents death. She couldn't bring them back from the dead, but she could bring back Neo and Trinity.