The Matrix Resurrections

[psylockolussus]

which Marvel Studios movie looked as cheap as this movie though? and why does it need to be brought up?

Marvel Studios movies aren't the go to for cinematography, but the vfX, set pieces, stunts, even if they were green screened looked like they had a big budget. The MatriX Resurrections looked unfinished, and compare to the previous matriX films, it doesn't look as polished and stylized. It almost looked like a Lionsgate production than WB.

Shang-Chi and the Legend of the Ten Rings had dodgy vfX Imo but that looked 3 times more eXpensive.

 

[henzINNIT]

Shang-Chi and the Legend of the Ten Rings had dodgy vfX Imo but that looked 3 times more eXpensive.

Hard disagree on that one. Shang Chi looked awful to me, and basically got worse as it went along. It's amazing how so many colourful elements could add up to grey, grey and more grey.

Resurrections certainly had some dodgy shots but it had some very nice ones too. Some beautiful colour work and photography. My biggest issue with the visuals is the much looser approach to shooting action. I missed the intricate planning, both in choreography and composition.

 

[Deck Rickard]

Lol every time a movie from a formerly beloved franchise comes out and it bombs, people always will play the “Yeah but it looks better than a Marvel movie!” card. Just stop. I don’t even care if the effects in this movie did look better than (some) MCU films. The goal of your movie shouldn’t be “just make it look better than whatever is popular right now.” How about just making a good movie that connects with audiences? They failed at this. And I say that as someone who always roots for the Wachowskis (just Lana, in this case).

This movie had some cool moments and visuals at times but not enough to keep it from feeling like a wasted effort. And yes, some of it did look really bad. The fight choreography is mediocre at best, some of the effects are just as dark and gray as every MCU movie you hate, and the makeup on Jada Pinkett (or maybe it was CGI) made her face look like it was crumbling. I hope whatever Lana does next is much better than this.

 

[GothamCity]

It didnt look better then mcu, even worse actually.

 

[I Am The Knight]

I still can't get over this rant.

 

[Brother Jack]

The weak points of this movie were the action and how cheap the movie looks.

That is what I couldn't get over with this movie. Despite the narrative problems with the previous Matrix sequels there was always a sense of spectacle that I could latch on to with how well it was shot and how good the action was (even if it went too over-the-top at times). That wasn't the case with this film for the most part and it made the story issues stand out that much more. Some really bold and fascinating ideas that were fumbled in the execution.

 

[Deck Rickard]

That is what I couldn't get over with this movie. Despite the narrative problems with the previous Matrix sequels there was always a sense of spectacle that I could latch on to with how well it was shot and how good the action was (even if it went too over-the-top at times). That wasn't the case with this film for the most part and it made the story issues stand out that much more. Some really bold and fascinating ideas that were fumbled in the execution.

Yeah. Even the machines in the real world looked bland and/or silly. They looked like a cyberpunk nightmare in the original films but here, the designs were so meh.

 

[I Am The Knight]

The movie did look cheap, which I think is a first for a Wachowski? I haven't seen all their films, mind you, but The Matrix trilogy and Speed Racer look amazing. Not sure what happened here. They certainly had a big budget.

 

[Deck Rickard]

The movie did look cheap, which I think is a first for a Wachowski? I haven't seen all their films, mind you, but The Matrix trilogy and Speed Racer look amazing. Not sure what happened here. They certainly had a big budget.

Yeah, that zombie car chase at the end especially looked like crap. And it felt like like half the movie took place in a stupid coffee shop.

 

[Sithborg]

It didn't look cheap to me. But then again "bad" doesn't mean "cheap" to me.

Cheap is not being able to do basic green screen.

 

[psylockolussus]

The movie did look cheap, which I think is a first for a Wachowski? I haven't seen all their films, mind you, but The Matrix trilogy and Speed Racer look amazing. Not sure what happened here. They certainly had a big budget.

Jupiter Rising looked so high budgeted.

 

[Dr.]

Finally checked this out. But twenty minutes in, I got alternately bored, frustrated (and/or confused). So I ended up doing it in chunks over a couple of days. Admittedly, this is not a good way to watch a movie or give it a fair evaluation. Still… disappointment. Most conspicuously, the action set pieces seemed sub-par and disjointed. In the original trilogy, the fight scenes (for example) were usually staged with wide angles, long takes and intricate (even if fanciful) choreography. Here, the fights were shorter, presented with a lot of quick cuts (because the actors weren’t up for extended choreography?) and often anticlimactic.

Back in 1999, a lot young folk were introduced to existentialism, nihilism, simulated reality and Plato’s Cave via The Matrix. And that’s to the movie’s credit. But audiences didn’t flock to the cinemas so they could learn philosophy. They went because they heard that “bullet time” (and other stuff) looked really, really cool. Likewise, Resurrections is certainly allowed to be as thematically ambitious (political, subversive, meta, etc.) as it wants. But methinks it still needed to deliver the impressive “eye candy” — because that’s how you get the (political, subversive, meta, etc.) message to the greatest number of people. Resurrections didn’t do this.