- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Did "The Matrix" franchise really start going down at the end of the first movie
Posted on 9/5/14 at 10:19 am to Breesus
Posted on 9/5/14 at 10:19 am to Breesus
quote:
The Matrix is one of my favorite movies. I watch it every time it's on. But the sequels are horrible. I don't even remember what they're about anymore.
Pretty much this.
0
Posted on 9/5/14 at 10:20 am to Josh Fenderman
If i remember this neo was the only one who had the choice of trinity. All the other "ones" had a different choice. The oracle convinced the architect to give the choice of saving someone you love to this neo knowing he would choose that over resetting the system.
Posted on 9/5/14 at 12:19 pm to Methuselah
Sequels made the mistake in thinking it was all about the fight scenes and special effects instead of the main storyline: what is real and what do we do about it.
Kind of like Silence of the Lambs. What really drove that movie was the tension/chemistry between Agent Starling and Lecter, not the bloody violence. What did the sequels focus on? Bloody violence. They forget how to tell the story.
Kind of like Silence of the Lambs. What really drove that movie was the tension/chemistry between Agent Starling and Lecter, not the bloody violence. What did the sequels focus on? Bloody violence. They forget how to tell the story.
Posted on 9/5/14 at 6:32 pm to prplhze2000
quote:
Sequels made the mistake in thinking it was all about the fight scenes and special effects instead of the main storyline: what is real and what do we do about it.
Kind of like Silence of the Lambs. What really drove that movie was the tension/chemistry between Agent Starling and Lecter, not the bloody violence. What did the sequels focus on? Bloody violence. They forget how to tell the story.
Funny how some film makers can pretty much nail the sequels making for a great 2 or 3 film run. While others seem to follow up a great first effort with either just dreck to make money or legitimate efforts that just don't capture the first one.
Posted on 9/5/14 at 6:40 pm to Rhames
quote:
The oracle convinced the architect to give the choice of saving someone you love to this neo knowing he would choose that over resetting the system.
Just out of curiosity, why do you think that?
Posted on 9/6/14 at 12:10 pm to Breesus
While the second one was justifiably terrible and had piss poor special effects, I feel the third one gets a bum wrap. It doesn't compare to part 1 but was still a decent film.
Posted on 9/6/14 at 2:44 pm to theunknownknight
quote:
Part 2 explains
quote:
1. Neo was a necessary "bug" in the software (recall the people rejected a perfect system ala "Eden") 2. Zion is the "recycle bin" used to catch bad data created by the necessary Neo "bug" 3. Therefore, the architect periodically cleanses the system of the bug (by convincing the bug to kill itself based off a false choice) and then the architect empties the bad data in the recycle bin. Rinse and repeat to keep the matrix going. 4. The final Neo chooses differently leading to the ultimate unbalance of the system
One of the most simplistic explanations Ive read that makes sense. Thank you!!!
Page 2 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News