That...?

People were disappointed enough in Reloaded to not give a damn about how it ends. Disregarding Revolutions' terrible reviews, its opening day was nearly $16 million less than Reloaded's. That definitely points to a loss of quality in the eyes of the public. Is your argument there going to be "they didn't know it was out,"? Terminator 3 had nowhere near the amount of hype The Matrix did, and still outgrossed its final installment. Just look back in the archives of BOM and look at the average Matrix predictions -- no one figured Revolutions would dip below $200 million, and yet it stalled out at $130 million (which again, indicates a lack of interest from the public).

If you don't consider that a major disappointment, its fanboy denial.

The Matrix...Best Trilogy...LMFAO!!!....of course not! =D>

they screw the trilogy on realoaded and they screw up even more on Revolutions...if your counting originality well you got your selve a winner

LOTR is much better and im not a fan
Terminator is better!
Star Wars is muuuuch better and im not a fan either

If you'll read my other post, I stated that Matrix Revolutions received a very lukewarm reception (for example, it rates a 6.4 at IMDB.com - poor in comparison to the first two). My argument is that it has some elements consistant with other movies in history that could elevate it's opinion over time. It's unconventional approach could be viewed better with the assistance of time.

I also think that the 6 months release date was WAY too short, and that people were burned out from the hype. I think the quick release date worked against it and spurned a backlash. But, I have never argued that Revolutions received a warm welcome and was universally loved by all. However, on the flipside, it was also not universally hated as some suggest. $130 million+ domestically and $400mil+ World wide is not an outright bomb no matter how anybody tries to color it.

Who?

Oh, and Snrub, I was thinking we could make "Quit Playing Games With My Heart" our special song. What do you think?

I'm not saying Revolutions was an outright bomb (as you said, if $400 million worldwide is a bomb, how high is "success"?), but it is a disappointment, and disappointment doesn't lead to being well looked-upon. Revolutions was supposed to be the home run - after all, Warner Bros. spent a year marketing 2003 as "The Year of the Matrix." And then what happens? It gets bitch-slapped by Elf.

But I do think the fact that you enjoy the films is clouding your judgment as to how people perceive them. Personally, I love the Star Wars prequels, but I also know quite a few people hate them. Matrix on its own is a pretty good trilogy - but when you stack it up against something like The Lord of the Rings, and say there's a chance it'll be looked upon more highly in the future, it just strikes me as fanboy wishing (please note - I'm not using "fanboy" as an insult, like so many other people do :razz:)

I don't think anyone's seriously trying to colour it as an outright bomb, just as a disappointment. $400 Mil world-wide would be terrific for a film like White Noise, but for a film with the marketing bucks, budget, pre-release hype and weight of expectation of The Matrix Revolutions, $400 million is a disappointment. A disappointment that can be reasonably ascribed to the bad reaction its predecessor received.

I think you should remember to put the brackets in the song title, that's what I think! It's "Quit Playing Games (With My Heart)" you fool! People who get song titles wrong make me so angry!

Hmmm... come to think of it, those Boys sure do love their brackets, don't they? I mean, just off the top of my head there's "Get Down (You're The One For Me)", "Quit Playing Games (With My Heart)", "Everybody (Backstreet's Back)", "I Want It That (Way)", "The (Call)", "(Drowning)"...

Heh, Backstreet Boys? B(r)ack(et)street Boys more like!!

See? Pure mould!

"The Year of the Matrix" term was coined by Time Magazine, not by WB marketing. The Matrix movies made nearly 1.2 billion WW in 2003. No other movie series has sold more tickets in a single year. I'd say that's a pretty good year. How much more should have it made before it earned that title? Would 1.5 billion have worked? Between the 1.2 billion in ticket sales and at least another $500 million in DVD sales (in the US alone), not to mention a large chunk of change for TV rights and advertising, I'm guessing WB isn't crying over the nearly $2 billion it earned off of these two movies that cost about $300 million to produce.

Revolutions pulled in about $425 million WW to Elf's 220 million. Personally, I'd take the 1.2 billion over Elf's 220 million, but I was never good at math. Hell, I'd even take the $425 billion from Revolutions over Elf's $220 million. But, not being a math expert, you may be able to enlighten me on this point.

I have never claimed that a lot of people weren't disappointed in Matrix Revolutions and agree with many of your points. Also, I've never claimed it was or will be viewed better than LOTR. I only said that nobody knows in time. It's impossible to predict the future. If I had to place a bet right now, I'd put my money on LOTR as being viewed more favorably in time. It is the safe bet. But, as history has shown us, you just never know what will happen.

What bad reaction did it's predecessor receive? MReloaded received a fairly decent reception by all accounts as I demonstrated several time in one of my 2000 posts in this thread.

Your blatant error has infuriated me and I just may never listen to our song ever again.

On top of not being a math expert, I'm am not no English expert either. I understand you speak that fancy brand of English that comes from the Eastern side of the United States, so maybe you can help me out on this? Are the parenthesis really needed (in that song title)?

You fancy lads probably have a whole different word for parenthesis, don't you?

Actually this (is catching on) a little bit the more (I think about it)!

Are you talking about the 75% fresh rating on Rotten Tomatoes? It's easy to be misled by such a high looking number, so before we get carried away, let's take a look at some of these "Fresh" reviews:

"The world created so vividly by the Wachowskis is still brand new but not nearly so intimidating or alienating."
-- Joe Baltake, SACRAMENTO BEE
"By itself, The Matrix Reloaded is deeply flawed, but ultimately entertaining."
-- Tor Thorsen, REEL.COM
"While I enjoyed it immensely, Reloaded didn't upgrade my system like the first one did"
-- Carrie Rickey, PHILADELPHIA INQUIRER
"Eyes will pop, nerves will jangle, thoughts will be provoked and other summer blockbusters will shrink in comparison. But to quote from one of the few cultural touchstones not referenced in this film: 'Houston, we've got a problem.'"
-- Peter Travers, ROLLING STONE
"Its structure of leaden philosophical conversation followed by butt-kicking, repeated repeatedly, is formulaic, but it is certainly awe-inspiringly cool when it wants to be."
-- Eric D. Snider, ERICDSNIDER.COM
"...so many scenes of couples sucking face I felt like I should have been at the drive-in theater."
-- Dan Marcucci and Nancy Serougi, BROOMFIELD ENTERPRISE
"Plug in. Again. But be prepared for some glitches in the software."
-- Steve Murray, ATLANTA JOURNAL-CONSTITUTION
"This picture never accumulates the sense of shared adventure that the first one did, and though the special effects are even better than before, they cannot be new twice."
-- Bruce Newman, SAN JOSE MERCURY NEWS

Notice a pattern? Here, I'll write my own glowing review for Rotten Tomatoes right now!

"It's good! But it's a bit crap."
-- Snrub, SNRUBBERY.

But what of the true shining beacon for all that is well-received theatrically. Namely the Razzie nomination! In this case The Wachowski Brothers were nominated for their directing skills on "both Matrix sequels" -- one of which, I believe, was Matrix Reloaded.

Would you argue also that The Phantom Menace was well received? What with it's $400+ million take and 62% fresh rating on Rotten Tomatoes?

Talk about misleading! You quoted a few of the splats. I can do the same thing and list all of the glowing reviews. With 213 reviews it's easy to take anything out of context, which is why it's best to stick to the cold hard numbers. But, just to play along, here's some that say it's better or as good as the first...

"In the face of almost unbearable expectations, the Wachowski brothers deliver a sequel that soars to places only hinted at in the original."
-- Richard Roeper, EBERT & ROEPER

"If The Matrix is considered one of the best sci-fi movies ever made, then The Matrix Reloaded is a pretty damn excellent sequel to one of the best sci-fi movies ever made."
-- Scott Weinberg, EFILMCRITIC.COM

"It's safe to say that anyone buying a ticket to the film purely to see more crazy-cool, high-wire kung fu and learn how the Wachowskis and visual-effects supervisor John Gaeta top the 'bullet-time' effect will come away from Reloaded smiling."
-- Glenn Whipp, LOS ANGELES DAILY NEWS

"A sadder, wiser, more grown-up movie than its predecessor."
-- Andrew O'Hehir, SALON.COM

""Matrix Reloaded" is a smart, exotic, erotic, intriguing action film; a superhero sci-fi film for adults."
-- Michael Szymanski, ZAP2IT.COM

"We're in glorious new territory here."
-- Phil Villarreal, ARIZONA DAILY STAR

"'A more-than-worthy successor to the original and proves that an action spectacular doesn’t have to be dumb in order to succeed with audiences.'"
-- Peter Sobczynski, CRITIC DOCTOR

"Reloaded might not have the power to change the way you see the world, but it just may change the way you look at movies."
-- Terry Lawson, DETROIT FREE PRESS

Heck, if I wanted to I could take blurbs out of context and make it look like Gone With the Wind or Catwoman and anywhere in between.

A demonstration that I destroyed in my two posts. Nobody reads my stuff...

Anytime somebody says something GOOD about Matrix, it's usually about the first movie. All that stuff about "originality" or big-budget intelligence or great WOM or gaining DVD fans or decent reception* or any other praise can be said about the FIRST movie. You don't need a trilogy for that. Put another way, Matrix 1 could have taken on on most of these trilogies, and held its own, by itself. Nobody is arguing that. But then Reloaded and Revolutions came along and stained the good Matrix name.

Matrix will be high on the list of Tony's trilogies, there's nothing wrong with that. But if you're determining an overall, average, time-blurred opinion of the population as a whole, Matrix as a trilogy won't be on the top of the list.


-------
*I still contend that the decent reception of MReloaded was more of re-appreciation for Matrix 1 than a real review of Reloaded.

I like debating with you as well, because you actually respond with intelligent points, many of which I agree with. You are in fact oen of my favorite posters aroudn here, even though we rarely speak.



The releasing them so close was in fact a gamble. I think the reciepts on Relaoded demonstrate just how many fans the orginal film made on DVD/VHS. i actualyl saw the orginal in theater, and it was amazing...I wish more people had turned out for it. I think hype certianly did not bode well for Revoultions, their was ahuge backlash agaisnt the films, inpart from fans who felt like I did...sort of underwhelmed. relaoded felt like half a movie so I wanted to hold judgement till Revolutions, still it was a disappointment. And in that sense i think many people who saw The matrix as this holy film of sorts, riivaling the love of hte holy trilogy (SW:OT), suddenly felt let down. I think utimately that will taint The matrix's place as an all time trilogy. Just as the Star Ward rpequesl will taint the love of the orginal trilogy. I stilllove the first film, but having seeing hte latter tow I cannot no longer look at hte first withotu thinking of what came after. Jsut like I cannot separate the Star wars films, or forget that the Godfather Part III ever happened. But this goes to my point that I doubt any trilogy will ever get the love of Star Wars, due to the hype and how fast it spreads on online. Plus, Star Wars, jaws, they all came out before blockbusters were expected...and so this to lead to a much different kind of hype.

LOTR is the closet a series of films has come to Star Wars, but the had a huge built in fan base from the books. I am nto sure something started from scratch can do that.



True, if total sales meant anything then well Britney Spears wwould be the greatest female singer ever, and well that jsut ain't the truth.

And yes the are more factors then box office, but often times when comparing a sequels performance to itts predecessors the increased span of time has to be taken into accoun. In this case it is nice becuase we can see dollar for dollar the drop in interest.

Also look at the press in comparison to the release of Reloaded to Revolutions...there was just alack of excitement in the air for the latter and an obsession with the former.



The ending may not have ben the Bruckheimer/bay one, but it was still left alot to be desired. In some ways more in execution then plot.

I happen to very picky about Sci-Fi films, I end watching htem all but I freely admit alto f the belvoed ones i think are ok at best. Like I hate Blade Runer, but I am nto a fan of Philip K. Dick.

I think the first film will always be well thought of, I jsut the trilogy as a whole will end with more of a mediocre rating. Sort of the way people look at back to the Future. When I think BTTF, i think fo the first film with little attention to the latter.




I don't consider the story orginal, given Necromancer and the fact that the Wachowski Bros.a dn WB jsut lost a suit against a women who suied them saying they stole her ideas.

I do consider the first one groundbreaking in that it was a smart rated R movie with good effects and a great story. The katter two though had effects I found so-so and easy to spot and a story that I also found so-so and execution that felt rushed.



I loved FOTR, TTT was mediocre but the extended edition is a big improvement, though every scene with Arewn is poitnless and Aragorn goign over the cliff is the higight of dumb. I think ROTK is crap, it had an extra hour at the end that was just boring and happy, why b/c Jackon cut out the one part of the ending of the book that was interesting and helped balance the happiness and showed that when war ends, it is not really over. I honestly think FOTR deserved some Oscars, while TTT and ROTK shoud kahve ben up for music, cotumes, stuff like that. ROTK as Best Picture, ugh, gag me with a spoon.

ROTJ is crap, and I HATE the scene where Lucas added in Hayden CHritensen with Yoda and Ben Kenobi, ugh, Christensen is laughing and looks embrassed.

I bet it woudl be awesome to sit and watch all three movies with you and discuss them at the same time.

Hey, hey, hey! Every one of the reviews I quoted were marked as fresh! Except for the one I wrote, of course. I was just trying to point out that a lot of the so-called "fresh" reviews weren't really all that fresh at all. A lot of them seemed to be saying "It's okay, but...", and then wringing their hands while wincing awkwardly.

As for these "reviews" you've quoted, well each of them can easily be refuted with simple character assassination:



Not even a real critic. Dodged the draft. Gay.



What is Scott Weinberg trying to say here, really? Read between the lines Tony! No sane person really considers The Matrix to be one of the best sci-fi movies ever made. Ergo, The Matrix Reloaded can't possibly be a pretty damn excellent sequel to one of the best sci-fi movies ever made!



But anyone buying a ticket to the film to see anything else (like a coherent plot, compelling dialogue or interesting characters perhaps) will walk away, what, vomiting? I think that's implied!



"Grown-up" is critic speak for boring. Besides, never trust a review that comes from a magazine named after a place women go to gossip and have their hair dyed blue.



Micheal Szymanski is a convicted felon you know. I can't really say what for because of a gag order, but let's just say he sleeps with the fishes. And let's just say that "fishes" in this context means "little boys".



Phil Villarreal never graduated from high school you know. He's also impotent. And French.



It's a little known fact that Peter Sobczynski is in fact a clumsy anagram of Michael Szymanski... And all that that implies.



I agree. I used to look at movies as a form of escapist entertainment and The Matrix Reloaded changed that part of me. Now I look at movies with a cynical glare before running away like a wounded puppy. I won't get hurt again Tony!!



Yes you do, Tony. Yes you do. [-(

Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't the original 2002 teaser trailer, which played on Attack of the Clones, feature the "Year of the Matrix" tagline? I know it's not on the Ultimate Matrix DVD, but then again, I specifically remember the trailer featuring a "2003" tag, and that wasn't on the DVD either.

l'm laughing a lot. Brillyent.

:lol:



oh man, you're hilarious. seriously, amazing.


as far as the actual question goes, um. no.

Well I didn't win the BOM Funniest Poster and Most Entertaining Award earlier this year for nothing! Or rather, depending on your perspective, I did! But either way... I won something!

If you're being sarcastic I'll cry...

Please...do not encourage him! [-X

I've never seen that on a trailer from WB, but could be wrong (me being wrong has happened before, I'm told). I know that Time coined the phrase on a cover story. Perhaps WB used a blurb in the advertising from Time? Anyhow with nearly $2 billion in sales between the movies and DVDs for the two films, I'd say they could use that phrase without embarassment.

Year of the Matris jsut makes me think no other movie will outshine it though. I recall that being said as well, and it was part of the hype machine problem.

Woah woah woah man, I don't know what button I just pressed on the "piss Tony off" machine, but man, calling me a liar and changing the facts for my personal benefit is completely uneeded. Fuck dude, what have I EVER done to you for you to snarl at me like a rabid dog? I'm not saying that Reloaded was hated by movie reviewers (though it definitely wasn't loved) or by people who are big enough film fanatics to give a user review rating on IMDB. I'm saying that the general audiences my age didn't. Just normal average kids that don't see more then 2 movies a month. Y'know, people who aren't as insanely passionate about movies as we are (and c'mon, let's not be in denial here). And so you know, personally I like the Matrix trilogy MORE then the Terminator movies. If anything, I'd say it looks like your the person whose perception seems to be based around your personal preference. And man, don't be pissed off at me for saying that, I'm just returning the favor.

That's because of the restraining order you got against me barring me from speaking to you. But, once again in all seriousness you're the most rational person I've ever debated here which makes it awfully damn hard to keep debating with you because I'm forced to agree with most of your points. I think I pretty much agree with everything you said and we're about on the same page. But, I'll make a few comments because I can't keep my mouth shut...



Just a note...I'm still surprised by how many were disappointed in the cliffhanger ending of Reloaded. I thought it was common knowledge going into it that it was essentially the first of two parts. But, I do frequently hear the "1/2 a movie" argument, and people shocked by the cliffhanger ending. I'd also agree that the Matrix will likely never reach the "holy trinity", Star Wars:OT. I said that originally in this thread, but Algren said he wanted to discuss true trilogies and felt that Star Wars was a 6 part movie, not a trilogy. I grew up on Star Wars and it was the first movie I ever saw in the theater. I was disappointed by ROTJ, but still love them all.



I have nothing to add other than I'd like to restate my hatred for LOTR. Have I mentioned that lately?



I still think this has a little to do with the release dates being so close. The hype machine can not possibly run that long and maintain it's steam. It will die down eventually. There needed to be separation in my opinion. I seriously think the Wachowski's should have ended Reloaded where Neo saves Trinity, and then take a few years before finishing the last chapter. It would have given people time to breathe and rebuild the hype machine for a stellar 3rd part. But, I doubt WB is crying about the decision as it saved costs, and they still made a boatload of cash on both movies.



Perhaps, but after listening to the philosophers commentary I appreciate the ending much more, and see all the signs leading to that ending from very early on in the first Matrix.



I'm a Sci-Fi film whore! Like you, I'm picky, but I'll watch them all.




I generally liked the BTTF sequels (not loved, just liked), but I think the Matrix sequels are much better, so I still have to disagree with you on this one point. We'll have to settle this one in a cage match to the death, or until I get sleepy.



I don't consider the story original. It borrows most of it's points from philosophy which was written way before Necromancer. Also Johnny Mnemonic, eXisitenZ, and Dark City also play with many of the ideas. I do think the Matrix was deeper than those, and liked the infusion of special effects and western kung fu in with that plot. But, it's definitely not a groundbreaking original story by itself. When you add all the pieces, I think it is original.



I could go on for hours how I hated the end of ROTK. I literally threw up in my mouth when Frodo had little elfs jumping around in his bed. Worst scene ever in a movie and I've seen almost all of Ed Wood's stuff.



ROTJ was good - especially the Princess Leia slave outfit thingy - but, when the Ewoks showed up that's when it really hit the wall. Stupid friggin' Ewoks!

Which 3 movies are you referring to...Matrix or Star Wars? I'd probably just argue with you through the Matrix movies while forcing Rotten Tomatoes reviews and IMDB scores on you until you punched me. Now, Star Wars...that would be a good time! rink: