It laked the impact of the original film for me. That had moments of "Jeus Christ! That was amazing in it!" This had moments that were cool and stuff, but there was nothing that I thought was totally groundbreaking.
The music was also weird at parts. Especially the Smith/Neo fight. Which I actually found a little dull until he picked up his staff and went all Kilik-from-Soul-Calibur. Pity they showed the best bits in the trailer.
And there seemed to me to be a bit too much "complex for the sake of being complex stuff". Things that will have otaku going "Oh, I played the game and watched the Animatrix, SO I GET THAT BIT! I AM SO COOL!"
-------------------- Yes, you're despicable, and... and picable... and... and you're definitely, definitely despicable. How a person can get so despicable in one lifetime is beyond me. It isn't as though I haven't met a lot of people. Goodness knows it isn't that. It isn't just that... it isn't... it's... it's despicable.
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
"This had moments that were cool and stuff, but there was nothing that I thought was totally groundbreaking."
Well what did you expect? Everybody whines about "Reloaded" having too much filoso-babble but I guarantee, if they'd left it out people would be whining that there's no filoso-babble like in the first movie!
I'm amazed they still managed to put some doubt and suspense in there (I followed the oracle's and architect's dialogue, unlike many others), instead of just turning it into a no-brainer, swashbuckling "Starship Troopers"-offensive, now that they have Neo.
And this was planned to be a trilogy back in -97 already, like LOTR. It's not like they just made "The Matrix", then listened to the mob and thought "Hell, why not just make another one, but with more neat stough in it, to milk the cash cow!" (Highlander II, III, IV?). The first movie was about birth, the second is about life, the third will be about death, as they say.
-------------------- "I'm nigh-invulnerable when I'm blasting!" Mel Gibson, X-Men
Registered: Aug 1999
| IP: Logged
quote:Originally posted by Nim: (I followed the oracle's and architect's dialogue, unlike many others
So did I. But I was still thinking "Just fuck off and get someone in who can talk normally."
There's not dumbing down to the audience, but there's also using long words merely for the sake of it. Honestly, it was like the unholy union of Simon (in full idiosyncratic mode) and Tim (in full pretenscious mode) were writing the architect's dialogue.
And, er, LOTR was planned to be a trilogy since a wee bit before 97.
-------------------- Yes, you're despicable, and... and picable... and... and you're definitely, definitely despicable. How a person can get so despicable in one lifetime is beyond me. It isn't as though I haven't met a lot of people. Goodness knows it isn't that. It isn't just that... it isn't... it's... it's despicable.
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
Well you have to keep in mind that it was a machine talking...
Sort of like how Spock (or, more appropriately, Data) always lose people with what they're saying because of the language they're using. I thought it was appropriate. The Merovingian as well.
-MMoM
-------------------- The flaws we find most objectionable in others are often those we recognize in ourselves.
Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
posted
Except in those cases, they'd be speaking made up goobledeegook, then someone would say "what?", and then they'd reply "like putting too much water in a balloon!"
-------------------- Yes, you're despicable, and... and picable... and... and you're definitely, definitely despicable. How a person can get so despicable in one lifetime is beyond me. It isn't as though I haven't met a lot of people. Goodness knows it isn't that. It isn't just that... it isn't... it's... it's despicable.
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
As an pseudo-related aside, I always thought it was amusing when Dawson's Creek was big, and TV critics always complained about its dialogue being too sophisticated/sophisticated/etc. Its a sad state of affairs when people have difficulty following a goofy teen drama. We now return you to your regularly scheduled sci-fi talk.
PS: I can't believe that I actually recognise that reference. "Thats a cheezy effect! I'm not an effect!"
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
The problem I had with Dawson's Creek wasn't that the dialogue was "sophisticated". It was that they spoke, well, bollocks. A simple "Do you want food" would require a 30 word answer, with most of the words containing at least 6 sylablles. People don't talk like that.
-------------------- Yes, you're despicable, and... and picable... and... and you're definitely, definitely despicable. How a person can get so despicable in one lifetime is beyond me. It isn't as though I haven't met a lot of people. Goodness knows it isn't that. It isn't just that... it isn't... it's... it's despicable.
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
BTW, I prefaced that with the "psuedo-related" note exactly because I probably do agree with you...it is unrealistic. But on the same note, I still find it amusing. Besides, I don't really think that realism is the foremost goal in that TV show.
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic
