Why does everyone hate the Matrix sequels?

[Bryan316]

Allright. Maybe I'm not as educated a film viewer as some. Maybe I'm not bothering to watch it with the academic, sharpened-wit skills of a critic. Maybe I just dug the hell outta the ships bouncing around tubes buried deep in the earth.

No matter where the discussion held, people criticize the hell out of the two sequels of The Matrix saga, while heralding the original as breathtaking and revolutionary.

Why?

What sucks so much in the sequels? What ruined them? What incredibly lofty expectations does the modern film-goer have where such brilliant special effects and choreograhed fight scenes did not meed these expectations? Are people too snobby and expect even the sequels to be flawless and perfect and without error in even the bottom left corner of the 341st frame of the final battle?



And no, "I just didn't like em as much" doesn't qualify as a valid answer. Either have a strong point well explained, or shaddap. n00b.

[IAmTheDood]

all 3 are movies that i watch whenever they're on .. i liked 'em and have seen all 3 a number of times

[i_got_a_mohawk]

Ive only seen 1 and 3.

However, i did like 3, and keep meaning to see 2.

What i think some people might be getting at, is that the first one was something new (well, in a way), and it was ground breaking and bla bla bla. The 2nd and 3rd were the same, however, the new fancy stuff, had already been shown off in the first film, so what you saw in the second and third, while equally as good as the first, were not new. Because the first one had already broken the ice with its new-ness.

I know thats a bit garbled, but i hope it makes some sense.

The other reason is, some people just plain dont like sequels

[Bryan316]

Aww that's horse puckey. There are so many great movies/stories out there that I wish would get a sequel, or another sequel! Others were total suprises, like US Marshalls spinning off of The Fugitive.

I mean, how could you watch The Matrix, and not want some wickedawesome sequels with that film's ending? They just left their hands wiiiide open, teasing the heck outta us! "Wait til you see how this story unfolds!" Yes, some are more obvious, some aren't. Some weren't intended to get sequels but the film was so good they commanded a continuation.

[stedtale]

because they suck.

[Jared Lash]

Originally Posted by stedtale

because they suck.

stole my answer.

The problem I had was that the first movie, besides having groundbreaking special effects, had a really interesting idea for a plot. It appeared carefully crafted and thought out. The next two movies simply felt tacked on. There were incongruities (humans still have immense technological advancements but party like tribal people?), plot holes and the effects and action were used to replace good ideas rather than supplement them.

[stedtale]

Originally Posted by TheBigO

stole my answer.

The problem I had was that the first movie, besides having groundbreaking special effects, had a really interesting idea for a plot. It appeared carefully crafted and thought out. The next two movies simply felt tacked on. There were incongruities (humans still have immense technological advancements but party like tribal people?), plot holes and the effects and action were used to replace good ideas rather than supplement them.

I didn't steal it, I just simplified it before you typed it.

[Mon Rominee]

Quite simply put, because what sold the first movie could not sustain 3 movies. What sold alot of people on the whole shebang was the mystique of the Matrix, and all the rules therein were not written or divuldged upon until @ the third act of the first movie.

Now, I'm not saying the sequels were bad, and were necessary to flesh out the entire arc of the "adventures of Neo the Christ child saviour"...but you have to admit they traded in mystique for action... and I think some of the acting suffered and characters were semi-forgotten, like Trinity went from hard ass kicking ass bitch to helpless damsel sex object throught 2 & 3. Morpheus went from self-assured cool mofo in #1 to flawed, insubordinate regular Joe in 2-3. The Oracle even lost her charm. The only compelling character that moved more to center was Smith. I think he alone sold #2 & 3...I have no problem with a baddie taking the helm, but at least have an equally compelling goodie, and Neo just wasn't.

The Merovingian & the Keymaker & Albino ghosty twin story sub plots were wholly unecessary filler to pad the otherwise unstretchable main plot... too many superfluous characters, same as the Star Wars prequels. Not enough story, too much filler.

Mon

[Webtroll]

Originally Posted by stedtale

because they suck.

+1

The story just isn't there. The continued double talk stunk the most. Why him? Because it has to be him. Why now? Because it has to be now. Why pink? Because he likes smooching dudes. Movie 1: Original idea with a surprise twist and a "happy" ending that promises change for the future. Movies 2&3: Rinse and repeat poorly. The sequels were no better than the highlander sequels except for the special effects. They stole the first movie from someone else and they did a great job of producing it. They then tried to make their own sequels and were saved by the production values and actors.

[DaveDeVille]

Originally Posted by Mon Rominee

Quite simply put, because what sold the first movie could not sustain 3 movies.
Mon

... well put , sir !!

[MonetBass]

Yep, they SNL'd the second two films. (Translation: they took a one-movie story and stretched it to three. SNL likes (well, used to) take a one-liner and make a whole sketch out of it.)

Plus Keanu Reeves is one of the worst actors on the planet.

[arbitrary]

Originally Posted by stedtale

because they suck.

Originally Posted by TheBigO

The problem I had was that the first movie, besides having groundbreaking special effects, had a really interesting idea for a plot. It appeared carefully crafted and thought out. The next two movies simply felt tacked on. There were incongruities (humans still have immense technological advancements but party like tribal people?), plot holes and the effects and action were used to replace good ideas rather than supplement them.

Pretty much right there. The Trinity death scene is damned hilarious; about half the theater was cracking up.

[Bryan316]

Originally Posted by TheBigO

(humans still have immense technological advancements but party like tribal people?)

Hmm. Never thought of it that way. It seemed HUMAN to party. It showed that they were still indeed human, and needed that release of instinct to keep their humanity. Otherwise, World of Warcraft or DDR would just be more machines controlling their lives. Machines can't sweat, can't dance, can't feed off emotions, but a huge dance party is exactly the opposite essence of a machine world.

plot holes and the effects and action were used to replace good ideas rather than supplement them.

Ahh, the meat and potatoes of the arguments I hear. Now, expand on these holes cuz to me, it all seemed to fit.

[jady]

It seemed like they tried to mimic the Neuromancer books. The plot was watered down and shallow.

[Bryan316]

Originally Posted by Mon Rominee

The Merovingian & the Keymaker & Albino ghosty twin story sub plots were wholly unecessary filler to pad the otherwise unstretchable main plot... too many superfluous characters, same as the Star Wars prequels. Not enough story, too much filler.

Mon

I liked those subplots, cuz it showed the power and corruption of the Matrix from the inside, in very foreign and culturally different ways. We know what the Matrix was to Neo and Trinity and Morpheus, but what is the Matrix to the Merovingian? It was a mafia-like paradise that he conquered and controlled.

Also, without the extra arcs, who is there for the heroes to battle? Agent Smith and his cronies over and over and over again? These extra characters provided some different possibilities. Different abilities, like the phasing albino twins. Helluva ability, no?

The Matrix helped on-screen fighting effects take a huge turn. They couldn't have two more movies without some more characters, conditions and abilities and even more amazing fighting sequences, otherwise it would have been even more stale than people already claim it is.

[Dan1099]

The story line in the second two just wasn't compelling.

[Jeff Martinez]

I think the difference is that some folks are incapable of just sitting back and enjoying a film as somple entertainment. These people are determined to find something wrong with it. I happen to enjoy all three, simply because they are fun (and they have hot chicks in tight clothes). Much like the SW prequels, I want to enjoy them, so it's easy to see past any imperfections. The only movie I ever really had any complaints about is Battlefield Earth, and that's only because I am a HUGE fan of the book and more than half of the story was left out of the movie. Even so, I still enjoy the movie and just see it as something complete different than a representation of the written work.

Basically... it's easy to enjoy a movie if want to.

[arbitrary]

I don't think the question is that they weren't entertaining. Sure they were entertaining. But not necessarily the subjectively good entertainment as determined by the viewer. The matrix sequels are entertainment that I wouldn't care to repeat. Honestly, I didn't much care for the first one either, it was ok, but nothing I felt terribly moved by.

[stedtale]

After seeing the first Matrix movie, it freaked me out so much that I never went to the bathroom without checking the toilet for a bomb for 3 years.

[mjolnir]

IMHO if you take them at face value, judge them for what they are, they're entertaining flicks. I mean, come on, it's just a couple movies.