The Dark Knight TDK has only ONE screenwriter and a new reviewer arrives??

[fabman]

Well, 'V for Vendetta' is directed by James McTeigue, give him some credit

But, well, the 'Matrix' sequels aren't good. Especially the third one. To me the Nolan Bros. are more talented!

 

[GeoffTheArtist]

Well, 'V for Vendetta' is directed by James McTeigue, give him some credit

But, well, the 'Matrix' sequels aren't good. Especially the third one. To me the Nolan Bros. are more talented!

Ah, right. Some people tend to forget that because it's often cited "from the guys that gave you 'The Matrix'" or "from the Wachowski Bros., directors of 'The Matrix'". Even I forgot it.

 

[JackBauer24]

I think people are too harsh on the Matrix Sequels - I agree that narratively they may stumble quite a bit. Stuff like having no good new characters for the sequels and hence none of the people we care about at the battle of Zion. Big problem. But I believe they are very much a part of the Matrix as the original. And do have great merits, which people tend to overlook because pop culture tells them to hate it. Like the whole Titanic debacle (don't get me started... suffice to say I love Titanic).

My official opinion is. Matrix 1 is overrated. Matrices 2 + 3 are underrated. But Matrix 1 is still by far the best of the three .

 

[GeoffTheArtist]

^Hells yeah.

 

[Two-Face]

Well, it was interesting to me, I thought Chris had a credit also. You've hurt my feelings now.
*goes to cry in corner*
*opens drinks cabinet again - no rum. Starts to cry again*

Oh sorry

 

[itsthebatman]

I think people are too harsh on the Matrix Sequels - I agree that narratively they may stumble quite a bit. Stuff like having no good new characters for the sequels and hence none of the people we care about at the battle of Zion. Big problem. But I believe they are very much a part of the Matrix as the original. And do have great merits, which people tend to overlook because pop culture tells them to hate it. Like the whole Titanic debacle (don't get me started... suffice to say I love Titanic).

My official opinion is. Matrix 1 is overrated. Matrices 2 + 3 are underrated. But Matrix 1 is still by far the best of the three .

I can categorically state that pop culture has nothing to do with my hating Matrix 2 and 3. Man, I came out of Reloaded feeling mugged. My expectations were so high, and I was so disappointed. And Matrix 3? I went in with low expectations, and was not disappointed.
The Matrix 1? Pure class, the last half hour is one of the most exhilirating pieces of action cinema ever.

 

[itsthebatman]

Oh sorry

So you should be.
t:

 

[fabman]

'The Matrix' is a very good movie. With that movie the Wachowski managed to get the right mix between action, 'cyber-punk,' philosphy and science-fiction. It's mind-blowing, it's visionary, it's somewhat disturbing, it has a bit (in the sequel they just tried too hard) philosophy. You care about the character Neo, he's one of us, he gets introduced to the Matrix, etc. - and he's bad**s.

'The Matrix Reloaded' just tries to be more intelligent and to offer better action scenes, which seem too much like a parody of the first action scenes, and finally it didn't manage to get one of those things right. It was neither deep nor it had mind-blowing, spectacular or deep. They just want to make the movie seem too intelligent and, well, it isn't. It really doesn't get one of the great aspects of the first movie right.

'The Matrix Revolutions' doesn't try as hard as the sequel but it's... it's a battle. Just a two-hour long CGI-battle. You don't really care for the characters and they don't even seem to care for themselves (- 'Oh. Your eyes' - 'It's OK', everyone's happy), the dialogue is cheesy and, to me it's really just a CGI battle and... it's too much.

There's a really big difference between the original and the sequels as you can see. The first one is very well written and has lots of suspense - that's where the sequel lack, too. The first one was a terric sci-fi action thriller, with the sequels they really tried to do something better and bigger and more intelligent but they failed to even make them as good as the first one. But the 'Reloaded' marketing campaign was much fun in 2003, I liked the 'Matrix Powerade.'

 

[mcflytrap]

Neeson as Lincoln has been around for at least two years now.

After TDK, the Nolan Bros. might take over the Wachowski's - we'll see. V for Vendetta was damn good, but the Matrix sequels didn't deliver for most people.....Speed Racer should be interesting.....

The Wachowski's didn't direct V, though. It's not really a Wachowski film.

 

[Katsuro]

Anyone who's read Alan Moore's V for Vendetta and seen the movie should realize that the Wachowski Brother's do deserve credit. They're almost two different movies, and they're both great. So they may not have come up with the basic concept, but after that they pretty much wrote the whole thing.

And I enjoyed the Matrix sequels. That's all i'll say, as I got tired of defending them years ago. I swear, liking those is more taboo than liking Star Wars Episode I.

 

[Agentsands77]

Anyone who's read Alan Moore's V for Vendetta and seen the movie should realize that the Wachowski Brother's do deserve credit. They're almost two different movies, and they're both great.

I disagree with that. Moore's V FOR VENDETTA is a thought-stimulating, edgy, well-made piece of art. The Wachowski's V FOR VENDETTA is a heavy-handed, palatable, popcorn movie that thinks it's deeper than it really is.

And I enjoyed the Matrix sequels. That's all i'll say, as I got tired of defending them years ago. I swear, liking those is more taboo than liking Star Wars Episode I.

It is more taboo. Those Matrix sequels get more fanboy hate than is really deserved. For what it's worth, I enjoy the Matrix sequels too, Katsuro. They're hardly great films, but they were fun for what they were.

 

[Milkman95]

The Wachowski's didn't direct V, though. It's not really a Wachowski film.

Well, at least IMO, they wrote the screenplay and were involved a ton with the overall feel of the film - I'd say that's more than enough.

 

[Katsuro]

I disagree with that. Moore's V FOR VENDETTA is a thought-stimulating, edgy, well-made piece of art. The Wachowski's V FOR VENDETTA is a heavy-handed, palatable, popcorn movie that thinks it's deeper than it really is.

Oh dont get me wrong, the book was better. But i enjoyed the film. My main point was that they are different. Dialogue and several story elements were changed around, enough so that you could say the Brothers did more than just adapt a book to the screen.

I mean take 300. Great movie, Snyder did an awesome job directing, but I'd never credit him and his other writers with "writing it". Almost all writing credit for that goes to Miller.

 

[Agentsands77]

Dialogue and several story elements were changed around, enough so that you could say the Brothers did more than just adapt a book to the screen.

Sure. They pretty much wrote an entirely new film. In fact, I daresay they did. Aside from character names and the concept of a vigilante with a V mask, it might as well have been an entirely different work. So yeah, the Wachowski's deserve credit for what the film was.

But unfortunately, the film they produced wasn't really anywhere as brilliant or interesting as the source material that inspired it. Hugo Weaving was good, though.

 

[Monkey Chops]

It is more taboo. Those Matrix sequels get more fanboy hate than is really deserved. For what it's worth, I enjoy the Matrix sequels too, Katsuro. They're hardly great films, but they were fun for what they were.

Co-sign.