51–60 of 323 posts
Having watched it I still don't think I could really explain it to someone else.
This movie had to be a troll. The ending cover song of RATM's "Wake Up" was just something else.
Not so much a "troll", but there's a scene in the first act that literally lays out the entire premise of the production and the creator's feelings about feeling forced to do it.
There are "lampshade hanging" fourth-wall breaks in the production meeting scenes that make Deadpool look conservative.
The Wachowskis didn't want to do more Matrix. Warner were going to do more Matrix regardless, so Lana Wachowski decided to do it herself and use it to deconstruct both their own movies and reboot/nostalgia cinema in general (looking at you Force Awakens, Ghostbusters: Afterlife, Space Jam et al)
I saw it, and enjoyed it for what it was. I will say that it very much felt like a few "Matrix" projects mashed-up together. I especially feel like the new characters could have stood on their own as a miniseries much better.
Yeah, I've seen a lot of online whining about it, but as someone who enjoyed the Matrix throughly in my teens, I thought it was a great film. Definitely wish the ambiguity of the first act was stretched a bit further though, that was my favorite part.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I quite liked The Suicide Squad (assuming that was the one that had no Will Smith).
I mostly liked it but I still think they did Starro dirty. Seriously, Starro typically takes on the entirety of the justice league by itself. Suicide Squad can take on maybe 2 or 3 Justice League heroes at a time, at best, not the entire team's collective focus. They're just completely incomparable in terms of threat-level, size or scope.
Uh huh. Sure. There's a reason they call it Hollywood Accounting[1]. Not that Warner Brothers is new to this game either: >A Warner Bros. receipt was leaked online, showing that the hugely successful movie Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix ended up with a $167 million loss on paper after grossing nearly $1 billion. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hollywood_accounting
Any reason to believe that this is an instance of Hollywood Accounting? At a glance, wikipedia says the film cost $190m, which seems reasonable for a film like this, and only received $124.5m in box office sales. Conversely, wikipedia lists Harry Potter OotP as a "150–200 million" budget on $942m in box office sales. It's certainly possible this is a case of Hollywood Accounting, but is there any particular reason we…
And you can add half of that again for the marketing budget.
This movie had to be a troll. The ending cover song of RATM's "Wake Up" was just something else.
So at first I dismissed your comment and moved on. But then I realized... maybe this was a troll? If WB really did try to strong arm her into making another one, this feels like the perfect response. "Sure, I'll make another one..." and then proceeds to make sure they never make a 5th. On the other hand, she has said in interviews that she was motivated by a personal loss to reach out and try to make it. Not sure who…
It’s what a revival should be: it gives you a way to observe the original work from a radically different perspective, while still building on it. The only other revival that’s done it better has been Twin Peaks: The Return.
Given Hollywood accounting I don't trust this one bit, and I haven't even seen this film - I might not for a few years, but it just sounds like nonsense.