Action-Adventure New Matrix Movie in the Works with Drew Goddard Writing, Directing

Resurrections is my favorite Matrix sequel, but I 100% get why most people didn't vibe with it. If you were there for the action or "epicness," it would've absolutely been a miss. And it started as an action franchise full-stop, so it's totally valid for most people to be there for the action, or at least have high expectations on that front. But Reloaded and Revolutions burned me out on the action so badly, that I was pretty much only still interested in the franchise for its concepts/ideas. And on that front Resurrections delivered so much, imo.
 
The original will never be topped as far as another sequel goes. It's a lightning in a bottle movie where every element of the film hits perfectly and they all work together to make something special. And part of what makes it so great is that while you have great action and an interesting sci-fi story that will appeal to a lot of people, it also has interesting themes, ideas, layers and you can rewatch that film and find new things to appreciate. Whether you like or dislike Reloaded and Revolutions I think they did a good job of continuing down that path. The highway sequence of Reloaded is still an action set piece that is of a higher level than most action set pieces of today - and that movie is 20 years old! Revolutions loses me at times because I don't find the Zion set piece to be as interesting as maybe it could have been, but you still have great scenes like Neo at the subway in the beginning.

I know Resurrections was very divisive but I like how it poked fun at the legacy sequels and people expecting the same things again but not delivering that. I feel like it's probably going to get better with time considering Matrix 5 is in the works now and that scene of Groff telling Keanu that "WB is gonna do this with or without us" is going to age like a fine wine. I mean you even get the Merovingian calling Keanu out for returning to the Matrix again. It's pretty funny honestly. I still can't believe WB let that movie happen considering the shots fired but I do appreciate it. Even if it's my least favorite of the franchise I appreciate a movie calling out how bad of an idea it is to make a sequel.
 
The original film is iconic. And still so watchable.

2 & 3 got bloated, and cgi heavy. However I do like some of the directions they took and don’t think they deserve some of the vitriol they received. Some of the philosophical aspects they touched on were interesting.

Part 4? A hugely disappointing pile of steaming crap. Neo felt like a shadow of himself, they had Groff trying to imitate the inimitable Hugo Weaving, we had a new but less charming Morpheus cosplayer, the meta storyline felt flat and forced, and the whole thing looked like it was shot with an iPhone.

With that said . . if someone can do it properly, the Matrix still has great potential. Even as prequels. There’s been multiple iterations of the matrix and The One, right?
 
I just loved how deeply personal Resurrections felt. It is my least favorite Matrix sequel, but i was unexpectedly moved by it. Sure the action is nowhere near the level of the first 3, but i found the meta aspects, and the focus on neo saving trinity to be refreshing. Lana made an epilogue that centered on love, while also poking fun at its own legacy and how studios treat franchises.

I get why people were turned off by it, but I've honestly watched the film about 5 times now since it's release, and I think it fits beautifully into the rest of the franchise. If you choose to embrace what it's doing, that is.
 
Last edited:
Thanks, and just to clear...in no way am I saying "people who didn't like it didn't get it", or implying anything like that. To be perfectly honest, it may still be by least favorite Matrix sequel in terms of pure enjoyment. I totally prefer the sleek and precise style of the first three. I think for me it's a mixture of appreciating the overall story Lana chose to tell with it, the go for broke/punk rock kind of swing it took, and her choice to allow the movie to be a product of the filmmaker she is today vs. any sort of attempt to recapture the style of the original films. For me it was a matter of meeting the movie on its own terms and respecting the way it was approached even if it was intentionally quite different than the Matrix I remembered. What the movie might've been had Lily come back as well... that's a big "what if" that we'll never know, but something I've wondered about as well.

The thing about the first Matrix is it was just lightning in a bottle. I think the Wachowskis knew there would be no point in trying to recreate that back when they made Reloaded/Revolutions and Lily definitely knew that when she made Resurrections. And that's one positive thing I can confidently say about this franchise. Regardless of what anyone thinks about any of the sequels, each one of them has its own identity and is adding something new vs. just trying to rehash the first movie. Whether or not it all works, that's up for debate, but I think that alone is quite admirable compared to a lot of other franchises. So I'm just hoping that trend continues with this fifth installment, even if it's a direction that the Wachowskis disagree with. I just hope it's interesting.
Ironically enough though, to me, Resurrections felt in many ways reminiscent of the first Matrix film and not necessarily in a good way. The themes, the main plot points were basically a repetition of the first film's story, just with a twist and without focusing 100% on Neo's pov. Neo was living in the Matrix again and he had to choose to take the red pill to learn the truth again, he was being helped to see the light by another Morpheus, he found Trinity and fell in love again, learned how to be powerful and stopped agent Smith and the bad guys. Again. Of course they were changes in that but the whole premise of the movie was kind of a retelling but from a different perspective and maybe for modern sensibilities.

So I can't say that I totally agree with you on it overall being unique and different, even though it tried unique and different elements. But it's a fair opinion you have and in a way I can see it from your perspective too.
Resurrections is my favorite Matrix sequel, but I 100% get why most people didn't vibe with it. If you were there for the action or "epicness," it would've absolutely been a miss. And it started as an action franchise full-stop, so it's totally valid for most people to be there for the action, or at least have high expectations on that front. But Reloaded and Revolutions burned me out on the action so badly, that I was pretty much only still interested in the franchise for its concepts/ideas. And on that front Resurrections delivered so much, imo.
I can't speak for everyone but it was never the action per se that drew me to the first movie. It was a mind blowing science fiction concept and world-bulding, along with the unique filmmaking style that inspired and changed cinema. Of course I loved the action too but it was never the main reason behind my love for it. Which is one of the reasons I wasn't extremely fond of the next two sequels, because they were too focused on the action, scope and spectacle and didn't feel as personal.

Why I mentioned the lackluster action in Resurrections is because the rest of the film didn't resonate with me in anything else, so I at least expected the one thing that every Matrix entry prior to that had done consistently. Kick-ass extravaganza. And I didn't even get that. But it was never the main thing I was looking for. If I had liked the story and themes as much as you guys, I doubt I would care all that much about any of that.
 
I honestly think another "Animatrix" should have came first, and maybe built some good will and hype for another Matrix live action. I'm hoping for the best with this, Matrix has always been one of my favorites. I even came around to enjoying Resurrections after a few viewings. I just wish the action was better in it. The constant "force push" got a little old after awhile.
 
Ironically enough though, to me, Resurrections felt in many ways reminiscent of the first Matrix film and not necessarily in a good way. The themes, the main plot points were basically a repetition of the first film's story, just with a twist and without focusing 100% on Neo's pov. Neo was living in the Matrix again and he had to choose to take the red pill to learn the truth again, he was being helped to see the light by another Morpheus, he found Trinity and fell in love again, learned how to be powerful and stopped agent Smith and the bad guys. Again. Of course they were changes in that but the whole premise of the movie was kind of a retelling but from a different perspective and maybe for modern sensibilities.

So I can't say that I totally agree with you on it overall being unique and different, even though it tried unique and different elements. But it's a fair opinion you have and in a way I can see it from your perspective too.

The overall structure is mirrored for sure (which is kind of part of a legacy sequel structure, even Blade Runner 2049 does it), but I still think it ultimately tells a very different story. It’s not about Neo learning how to be The One so he can fulfill a prophecy or end the war. It’s very simply about Neo and Trinity reuniting, which is ultimately still very true to the core of the originals and is sometimes easy to forget. I don’t think emphasizing the love story aspect of it made it more suitable for modern audiences, if anything I think the opposite. I also appreciated how the movie takes the care to illustrate how things have changed in Zion post-Revolutions, how there are machines on the humans’ side now, etc. How and why this version of the Matrix is different than the previous Matrix. Even if the structure is similar, to me it does a much better job at feeling like an authentic and earned continuation of the story than something like The Force Awakens, where it just basically resets to the status quo of the original trilogy without really making much of an attempt to establish how that happened. That’s something that counted for a lot with me.

That said, I can totally see how Resurrections was more of a retelling than anything else in the franchise. I see where you’re coming from. Just for me, I still think the stark differences in tone, style, and the overall focus of the story was enough to strike a healthy balance of new and familiar. And I also think the meta angle wasn’t just about Lana trying to be cute and take the piss. If you read what the Wachowskis have said about the original films, they’ve always talked about the inherent irony of trying to make a movie about an artificially constructed reality as a means to give audiences that “awakening” moment, when movies themselves are artificially constructed realities. So I think leaning into that and commenting on that aspect of it adds a whole new layer when you’re looking at the films as one big ongoing philosophical conversation— which I know not everybody is. But I ate that s*** up, lol.
 
Last edited:
I'm someone who loves the Matrix franchise overall, but was disappointed with Resurrections. As interesting as some aspects of that movie were, I really disliked how it looked and how it was shot in many places. Whether you love or hate the original sequels, the bar was set very high in terms of the action and cinematography -- and we know those things are big reasons why people love this franchise. Resurrections was very subpar in that regard, and I understand that the action may have not been as crucial of a component to Resurrections compared to the other films, but it was still jarring that everything looked so much worse than 20-year-old films. Also hated NPH as the villain.

Hoping that fresh eyes and a new creative team can maybe inject some fresh blood into the franchise, and maybe raise the bar further in terms of the aesthetics.
 
I'm someone who loves the Matrix franchise overall, but was disappointed with Resurrections. As interesting as some aspects of that movie were, I really disliked how it looked and how it was shot in many places. Whether you love or hate the original sequels, the bar was set very high in terms of the action and cinematography -- and we know those things are big reasons why people love this franchise. Resurrections was very subpar in that regard, and I understand that the action may have not been as crucial of a component to Resurrections compared to the other films, but it was still jarring that everything looked so much worse than 20-year-old films. Also hated NPH as the villain.

Hoping that fresh eyes and a new creative team can maybe inject some fresh blood into the franchise, and maybe raise the bar further in terms of the aesthetics.

I too thought NPH was woefully miscast. He’s not a bad actor per se, but he completely lacks any kind of intimidation or menace. Got more Social Network kinda vibes from him than the mysterious kind of cold logic that made the Architect in the original trilogy so memorable.
 
I too thought NPH was woefully miscast. He’s not a bad actor per se, but he completely lacks any kind of intimidation or menace. Got more Social Network kinda vibes from him than the mysterious kind of cold logic that made the Architect in the original trilogy so memorable.

Yes, agreed. Also, the special effects surrounding his character when he would "freeze time" and be walking/zipping around were very poorly done. Looked cheesy.
 
I'm someone who loves the Matrix franchise overall, but was disappointed with Resurrections. As interesting as some aspects of that movie were, I really disliked how it looked and how it was shot in many places. Whether you love or hate the original sequels, the bar was set very high in terms of the action and cinematography -- and we know those things are big reasons why people love this franchise. Resurrections was very subpar in that regard, and I understand that the action may have not been as crucial of a component to Resurrections compared to the other films, but it was still jarring that everything looked so much worse than 20-year-old films. Also hated NPH as the villain.

Hoping that fresh eyes and a new creative team can maybe inject some fresh blood into the franchise, and maybe raise the bar further in terms of the aesthetics.

I totally get this, although I actually didn't mind the overall 'look'. I think it was a smart move to move away from the green hue of the originals into more of the golden, bathed in sun looking Matrix, in terms of honoring where things left off at the end of Revolutions and making it feel fresh. And just from a standpoint of visualizing what the 2020s look like as a Matrix, I even think shooting digital and having that glossy look kind of reflects the overall modern aesthetic in a way that worked for the commentary the movie was going for. I think it's a gorgeous-looking movie in 4k HDR. Do I prefer the look of the originals though? Without question, 100%. Although I still wish the original transfer of the first movie before they green'd it all up was available.

And when it comes to the staging of the action...yeah, it's much looser, and that was inevitably disappointing. If Goddard wants to bring back wire fu and intricate choreography, I certainly would be down for that. As long as it's serving the ideas and story.
 
Resurrections looking like it was shot on an iPhone is spot-on. Where the hell did that gigantic budget go towards?
 
Resurrections looking like it was shot on an iPhone is spot-on. Where the hell did that gigantic budget go towards?

Covid protocols. Keep in mind, it just started filming when covid hit. So, it was essentially shut down for 6 months before they could finish it, and that kind of delay costs money.
 
I remember walking out of the theater after seeing The Matrix Revolutions, feeling really pissed off that both Neo and Trinity died.

After watching The Matrix Resurrections, I realized maybe they should have stayed dead.

Just like this franchise.
 
If Smith is really in the reboot, then this franchise is truly dead. Should have stopped at Revolutions despite the Dragonball Z ending.
 
Last edited:
If Smith is really in the reboot, then this franchise is truly dead. Should have stopped at Resurrections despite the Dragonball Z ending.
Ah yes when Goku sacrificed his life to a baby faced Shenron. :o
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Staff online

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
202,301
Messages
22,082,441
Members
45,882
Latest member
Charles Xavier
Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"