The Matrix Resurrections (with Keanu Reeves, Carrie-Anne Moss and Lana Wachowski)

Agent Coulson

Keanu donated 70% of his salary from the Matrix to leukemia research which is about $31.5m.

https://nypost.com/2022/01/03/keanu-reeves-donated-70-of-his-matrix-salary/

o1s1n

Watched the first hour and a bit last night, had to switch it off.

Absolutely no problem with how the story was progressing and I quite liked the meta element to it all - however the way it was filmed, the increasingly irritating cast as the film went on, that annoying 'White Rabbit' montage, the jarringly unsubtle references to the earlier films (Ie, the cat's name) .. it was just unbearable.

micks_address

watched over the christmas on hbo max. I kinda enjoyed it. Wasnt amazing by any stretch and its not going to get watched 500 times like the first one.. i kinda hope they make more.. it might take a more interesting direction than reloaded and revolutions which i thought were awful compared to the first ones.

pixelburp

Listening to the Blank Cheque episode on this and one thing that interested re. the very original film I hadn't known: just how much was apparently storyboarded and locked in before a single shot was filmed - or the project even greenlit. Sounds like this was a bit of a Hail Mary for the sisters, the studio buying into a fairly wild concept thanks to the excessive pre-vis that was done. So when it came to production, very little required thrashing out beyond the actual fight choreography.

Compared with this, apparently with the Resurrections, Lana Wachowski ran a much more improvisational set, with little in the way of storyboards informing and often amending scenes as they shot (the example used was Jonathan Groff persuaded to take his socks off, as he seemed that kind of douchey exec 😆)

Bacchus

I went back and flicked through the action scenes, just to see if I was being too harsh. I wasn't.

• Opening "Trinity/Bugs" scene has half the impact and visual flair of the original. Only that moment where Morpheus and Bugs fall through the door into the corridor had a bit of flair about it but it was literally a 1-2 second moment.
• The attack on Morpheus and Neo... yawn. Walking around shooting guns. Can't even remember how that scene ended.
• The train fight with the swarm is a complete mess. Shaky cam, frantic pace, no idea who's punching who.
• The training dojo... meh, not a patch on the original
• The Smith/Merv attack spent more time focused on Merv monologueing than following the action. The camerawork on the action we do see is either too frantic to follow the fights, or so zoomed out that it looks like a larping battle. The fight between Morpheus and Smith doesn't hold a candle to the bathroom fight in the original. Equally the Smith/Neo fight is slow, and again lacks any drama to it.
• The final rescue sequence is a dull bar brawl with the swarm and a dull chase scene with Neo doing more force pushes. Even Bugs dramatic entry back to the Matrix to save the others was just her walking up and mowing down about 10-15 swarm bots with a gun. That was it.

It's all zero stakes, zero impact action that doesn't even allow the viewer to follow it cohesively. Each fight in The Matrix was part of the story, and you got to watch these antagonists duke it out, with every move given a moment to shine. Even Reloaded achieved this, particularly so with the highway chase. Ok the CGI in the Smith brawl did not age well but it was a thrilling fight to watch in the cinema. Revolutions failed on the Matrix action front, but the real world battle was great. Resurrections, has no redeeming action IMO, which for an action movie (a sequel to the movie that redefined action movies no less) is just not good enough.

youcancallmeal

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tHCsz78GfYg

Pitch Meeting spot on as usual

johnny_ultimate

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118413460#Comment_118413460

(some minor spoilers in this post for anyone who hasn't seen it yet).

Yeah there's a lot of very purposeful decisions here in terms of how the 'new Matrix' is represented - aesthetically it works to capture the loud, 'digital noise' that is the modern internet. That's then contrasted quite starkly with that moment in Io where Niobe lets Neo simply listen to the 'silence' that didn't exist in the new Matrix. I think a warmer colour palette then ends up working very nicely to emphasise the more emotionally earnest tone Lana's shooting for here.

And re @pixelburp's comment above, there's definitely a fundamental difference in Lana's filmmaking style now - no longer a rigid formalist, and more someone willing to embrace collaboration and spontaneity. Thematically I think that's very much reflected too - this is a film about love, community and friendship, with the film ultimately making Neo no longer the definitive and only 'one'. Trinity's story in particular feels well-earned - every much as central a part of this story as Neo himself, and Lana very much rewrites that central role here.

Some interesting comments from the film's cinematographer here: https://www.indiewire.com/2021/12/matrix-resurrections-cinematography-daniele-massaccesi-lana-wachowski-1234687515/

“Obviously we come in with a plan, especially when it comes to scenes where we have to match what visual effects are doing,” Massaccesi said, “but then you need to go where the emotion takes you." 

What Resurrections absolutely lacks in the big, ambitious, obsessively planned action scenes of the original films, it makes up for with genuine warmth and emotional honesty I think is absent in almost all big-budget films these days. I think it's endlessly fascinating to see a filmmaker evolve their style, especially within the confines of their biggest and most well-known work. Lana's said it's a very personal film for her, and I definitely sensed every bit of that in the film itself.

Lana's own words: “My dad died, then this friend died, then my mom died. I didn’t really know how to process that kind of grief. I hadn’t experienced it that closely… You know their lives are going to end and yet it was still really hard. My brain has always reached into my imagination and one night, I was crying and I couldn’t sleep, and my brain exploded this whole story. And I couldn’t have my mom and dad, yet suddenly I had Neo and Trinity, arguably the two most important characters in my life. It was immediately comforting to have these two characters alive again.” (https://www.indiewire.com/2021/09/lana-wachowski-revived-neo-matrix-4-comfort-parent-death-1234664318/)

Bacchus

@johnny_ultimate "this is a film about love, community and friendship, with the film ultimately making Neo no longer the definitive and only 'one'. Trinity's story in particular feels well-earned"

I've no issue with blockbusters with brains or heart. That's exactly what The Matrix was 20 years ago. The core story was around Neo and Trinity's love story that ultimately led to Neo becoming "The One". So, I don't feel that that aspect of Resurrections is so much different to the origins of the franchise. The problem I have with it is on the execution. Execution on plot choices (e.g. shoving Morpheus and Smith V2 in there). Execution on sets/style (everything has that big budget clean feel, in and out of the Matrix. It doesn't connect visually for me to the original trilogy). Execution on action.

As you mention it too. Having Trinity now be "The One" was a lazy retcon on the originals that Neo was The One... the 6th or 7th IIRC. A lot of detail went in to setting up the history of the One and this feels like a throwaway decision to create shock value at the expense of the established world they created 20 years ago. I think that ties in to what @pixelburp is saying, that this is a movie that wasn't thought through in any great detail. Thinking on it, I'd have loved to have seen this movie tie up the loose end of how Neo could influence the real world as well.

The warmth and emotional honesty as you put it is all good, and in broad-strokes, I like the plot and theme of the movie. I just wish it was a bit less in your face meta (a little meta was fun, but they went OTT on it, they were a deadpan 'looking into the camera' moment away from it being a complete farce), that more thought went in to the action and visuals, and that if they were going to go in to the mythology of the One or the machine/human war, that they did it in an interesting way (as opposed to, oh look Trinity is the one that can fly now).

johnny_ultimate

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118415730#Comment_118415730

One thing I will say about the Trinity stuff is that I actually found it genuinely moving and triumphant. Lore and canon are not things I'm super interested in generally when it comes to storytelling, so retconning and what not doesn't really bother me as long as it's done in service of the story being told. What I find particularly affecting here is how the Trinity story reflects Lana's own experience and her transition. I think there's a very conscious effort in the film to recentre female characters - not in the typical 'token representation' way, but more so a filmmaker who has transitioned presenting her new perspective on the story she told 20 years ago. In that sense, Trinity breaking free of the Matrix and embracing who she really is felt like a really beautiful, well-earned moment that felt deeply personal for the filmmaker telling this story (although Lana also has lots of fun with it - cracked a serious grin when that cover of RATM kicked in over the end credits). I should stress I think the film does a good job at making this all make sense on an internal level, but more than fair enough if you didn't.

I think The Matrix is a great film, but it's undeniably a pretty familiar 'Messiah' story at its heart. To me, The Matrix Resurrections greatest strength is how it revisits and rewrites that story from a new perspective without undermining what came before. For all its meta elements and the cheeky fun it has with the material, I don't think this is a cynical film - as the quote I gave above hints at, I think Lana ultimately is too fond of Neo and Trinity as characters to dismiss what came before, even as she evolves and reinterprets their story :)

I don't doubt many genuinely disliked this film for perfectly valid reasons, but to me it was a warm and welcoming delight to experience.

McFly85

Some interesting ideas but it all seemed a bit half baked. I agree with Kermode, there’s an interest short film in there somewhere but it almost felt like I was watching 2 halves of different films.

Also, as a continuation of the story it felt a bit contrived, too. As far as I remember, the previous film ended with humanity knowing about the matrix and being given the choice whether to stay or not (and it seemed like most would stay as they were so dependent on it). So the idea that the machines spun up a new matrix where again nobody knows where they are just seems lazy.

WB we’re going to make a new Matrix regardless which seemed to be the primary driver in Lanas involvement, on this evidence she would have been better off staying away.

Sleepy

I literally fell asleep for the last half hour and I'm not normally one to pass out on the couch. Had to go back and finish the ending the next day.

The Pitch Meeting video above covers it perfectly: this is a plain and simple cash grab that managed to get a few of the old crew back together on the promise that half of the old directorial team could use half the run time of the film to have a poke at the studio for "forcing" them to make an another unnecessary sequel to a lighting in a bottle hit.

While my favourite bit of the whole exercise was the use of Jefferson Aeroplane in the trailer, there were a few things I liked: the resurrection was done as well as these things can be and the use of Neil Patrick Harris's analyst as a "therapist" to keep Neo medicated was pretty clever. Had the action scenes been on a par with the earlier films, I may have even been able to look past the lack of any real stakes in the storyline but sadly they woefully underused Reeve's undoubted talent for intricately choreographed fight sequences and it looked more like a child who has only learned to used the "force push" button playing Lego Star Wars than a sequel to a movie which almost re-invented the action movie genre a little over two decades ago... a hugely wasted opportunity.

Supercell

Quite a good article about how the movie came to be and the thinking behind the plot.

https://screenrant.com/matrix-resurrections-warner-bros-reference-criticizes-franchise-plans/

ancapailldorcha

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118390022#Comment_118390022

If you enjoyed it, that's grand. Everyone has their tastes.

I think the main problem with Resurrections is that it doesn't really try to do anything beyond putting bums on cinema seats. Jokes about how bad remakes and sequels are only work when they're told once whereas they're almost half the film here. The rest is just a retread of the original story modified for 2021.

If Harper Lee, to stick with your example had lived long enough to write about the latter half of the previous decade, she may have produced a novel examining themes such as social media's influence on society, demagoguery, etc. It wouldn't just be To Kill a Mockingbird with smartphones and Instagram. I've not read her work so I don't want to go on but it's fine for an artist or an author to change over time or to try new things. The problem I had with this is that it simply doesn't.

johnny_ultimate

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118420794#Comment_118420794

"doesn't really try to do anything beyond putting bums on cinema seats" - I think that's a fundamental difference between reactions to this film :)

To me, it came across as quite the opposite of a cynical exercise. It's Lana Wachowski reapproaching the series from a very personal and heartfelt place. It's her style, her collaborators, her perspective, 20 years on - very overtly so! It may have originated in Warner Bros offices from a cynical place (more Matrix = more money) but Lana instead translated it into something very personal. That's the opposite way I feel about almost every, say, Disney Star Wars or MCU film - while the filmmakers behind those films are no doubt enthusiastic, the corporate machine squeezes out individual expression in favour of brand extension. The creative goals here are IMO much deeper and richer than anything in something like No Way Home (just to pick the most immediate comparison).

Whether Lana made a successful and interesting film is an entirely different question entirely, and a very subjective one :) But in a world of inherently cynical Hollywood filmmaking, this was earnest and personal in a way that truly got under my skin in the most welcome way.

Sleepy

You say earnest and personal, I read "self-pitying-millionaire didn't want to let someone else play with her old toys"...

~Rebel~

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118421375#Comment_118421375

That’s quite a cold way to look at the defining project and achievement of someone’s career, and the thing that changed every aspect of their life. Every bit of that thing, from basic conception of the idea right through to the final finishing touches was theirs. I think anyone - in any field - that’s worked very hard for a long time on anything, could relate to that level of connection to the material. Think a lot of that came through in the film. It’s not amazing by any means I think, but it’s interesting enough, and far from the regular franchise rehash.

ancapailldorcha

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118421183#Comment_118421183

While I didn't read anything about the film prior to seeing it, none of this came through for me at all. This was very much the epitome of a cynical exercise in my opinion. It was one of the rare films where I went to the cinema and spent a fair bit of it checking my watch I found it that tedious, akin to rewatching something mediocre and just waiting for various bits of it to come and go. I remain unable to recall anything in the way of themes, creative goals or commentary the "remakes are awful" shtick. Nor can I recall any nice elements of the score, memorable fight scenes, snappy dialogue or any other element of the thing.

~Rebel~

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118421580#Comment_118421580

I’ve a feeling it might also be one of those movies that does well on rewatches, at least from a subtextual point of view. It has tonnes of faults and isn’t as exciting as it should’ve been, but all the interesting stuff I got out of it was below the surface. I’m looking forward to a rewatch from that aspect.

Sleepy

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118421564#Comment_118421564

While they absolutely nailed the first film, they've pretty much danced on it's reputation with ill-conceived cash grabs since (though I do believe the Matrix Online game was pretty well received at the time?).

What about resurrections did you think was so far from the regular franchise rehash? Half the old cast back? Check. Less than half of the original production team? Check? Too many self-referential Meta in-jokes? Check. Bigger, Better SFX and action sequences? Uhm... here's a difference alright: that side of the creative team weren't involved so we didn't even get that...

generic_throwaway

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118421580#Comment_118421580

The ScreenRant article above is interesting, it talks about exactly that - how the film does NOT give the viewer what they want or expect from such a sequel/reboot. You're not wrong about the lack of the stuff that made the original great - the question is to what degree that was a deliberate choice for a specific reason.

johnny_ultimate

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118421580#Comment_118421580

Ah I'd completely disagree there. I think the film has much, much more going on it than just a 'remakes are bad' schtick. I think the meta elements alone are deeper than 'remakes are bad'!

Just some of the main themes:

How it reimagines the Matrix as a noisy, busy, overstimulated world far more reflective of the modern internet (and also how it has new visual ideas to match, such as the operator being able to be physically present in a more digital world)

What does a text mean and how is it interpreted by the world? That's one of the key things interrogated by the opening act, and something I think Lana wants to have her own say on with the rest of the film.

How it centres the female characters, with Trinity's story in particular clearly told from a very different perspective this time around (or Bugs in terms of the new characters) - obviously very personal given Lana's own story. I think this is reflected in both the script and the visual language of the movie.

The concept of a 'real world' post-war - how the world and its people have adapted when the central conflict has been resolved. I think this also is reflected in how the story frames violence & action, and how Neo now uses his powers in a more defensive way than before. I think it's very notable that the film doesn't simply reset the previous stakes like how, say, The Force Awakens does with the First Order.

A personal reflection on depression - while the film has lots of imagery related to suicide and moments of darkness, the ultimate conclusion is one of hope and empathy. It is, above all, a film about people being saved by the love and kindness of other people.

breezy1985

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118414869#Comment_118414869

I find with a lot of current sci-fi/superhero movies reading the plot synopsis and lore on a Wikia is way more fun than actually sitting through the movie.

I thankfully discovered this early on with all the extended Avengers characters side/B movies

~Rebel~

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118421631#Comment_118421631

Most of your comments there are production team based, which seems a bit neither here nor there… not sure about your cast note either, there’s Neo and Trinity, and that’s basically it aside from 5 minutes of Niobi.

in what it is though, it just doesn’t do the rehash stuff for me. Loads of new characters, and a total retcon of 2 of the biggest characters of the originals… recreating them almost like fanfic versions of themselves in a new universe. It doesn’t even remotely try to look or feel like the old ones - if anything (for better or worse) it very actively tries to feel totally different.

And narratively, it does this whole deconstructed reveal of the matrix to Neo, and what it really means (which I liked, but I know others don’t) - and then sets Neo off on a totally different path than before! Originally, he’s coming out with this stoic mission to bring down the agents and the machines , whereas here he comes out with a completely different perspective. He can see everything else, what Niobi wants, what Bugs wants, and instead of feeding himself into those processes like before, he basically says “nah, y’know what, I don’t give a ****, all I care about is the love of my life - everything else can go fck itself”. And that’s what he does. No interest in this machine civil war business, no interest in what’s going on in IO - all he cares about is Trinity… not as a means to an end, that is the end. And the way they go about it is far more like a heist movie than being even remotely reminiscent of anything seen in the Matrix universe before.

so yeah, for me, different kettle of fish.

(I didn’t love It by the way, thought it was fine, but I appreciate what they were trying to do.)

B.A._Baracus

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118420582#Comment_118420582

That article is garbage. Best line is "The Matrix 4 Mocks Audience And Studio Sequel Expectations (And Refuses To Deliver Them)" - well we all expected a entertaining movie, so I guess they chose not to deliver on that on purpose lol.

But the article deep dives too much. Matrix 4 is not a good movie. You can't polish a turd. No matter how the article tries by going in to things.

cagefactor

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118420582#Comment_118420582

"The movie received generally positive reviews". I have to dismiss everything mentioned in this article when I read that lie, this movie is hated.

pixelburp

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118432379#Comment_118432379

I dunno. Can't agree that it's hated: more that it's a very divisive film provoking a lot of debate; there's passion on both ends of the spectrum. CinemaScore is a B- which is hardly a decisive rejection, while sites like letterboxd show a distinct range of opinions, trending somewhere in the middle. The aggregators are harder to judge given ...well, 0/10 doesn't really tell much.

cagefactor

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118432589#Comment_118432589

I think Rotten-tomatoes is close to the reality, 63-64%. 0/10 tells little, additionally 9-10/10 is saying nothing, there is no way on earth this movie is a 9/10+

~Rebel~

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118434134#Comment_118434134

Yeah, the almost matching critics and audience score on RT (64 and 63) along with Letterboxd’s 3 out of 5 is pretty much bang on I’d say - it’s grand, it’s not great, it’s not woeful. ‘Hate’ is such a strong word and emotion that in reality for most people is reserved for films that go way beyond simply not being as interesting as they could be.

Brief_Lives

Just finished it.... I thought it was excellent... very clever...

I would likely give this a higher rating than most, it's nowhere near my top 10 or anything but as far as Hollywood blockbusters go it had more to say and said it well than anything I can think of recently. Visually it has a completely unique (in films) tone and grade and everything else. I sympathise with people who were hoping for better action. So was I, but it wasn't the point of the film, it was just there to keep the story going.