Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The Matrix Resurrections estimated to lose Warner Bros $100M

wegotthiscovered.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 323 posts

Re: The Matrix Resurrections estimated to lose Warner Bros $100M

#111

Post by pengaru »

trepanne wrote: post #96
sam0x17 wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can also always take the time to _become_ a CPA. I've thought about it a few times.

...or take an intermediate position on buy vs build, and _marry_ a CPA. I've regretted it a few times, but on balance I'd recommend it.

> ...or take an intermediate position on buy vs build, and _marry_ a CPA. I've regretted it a few times, but on balance I'd recommend it.

Has the marriage concluded in divorce/death yet? Otherwise I'm not sure how much weight should be placed in that recommendation ;)

Re: The Matrix Resurrections estimated to lose Warner Bros $100M

#112

Post by tunesmith »

TrispusAttucks wrote: post #54

Not surprised. The Movie was an utter trash cash grab hollywood sellout "look how meta and cool I am" let's shit on the original. If you liked it I'd love to know why?

I think most people that viscerally hate it came in with strong expectations. On its own I found it quite interesting. On the matrix reddit there are two "blue pill, red pill" threads that split apart the people that like it and don't, and for the people who like it there are some long essays explaining why, that I found heartfelt and well-reasoned. I have a theory that if people really liked Cloud Atlas and Sense8, they're more apt to like Resurrections.

Re: The Matrix Resurrections estimated to lose Warner Bros $100M

#113

Post by trissylegs »

titzer wrote: post #61

I saw it twice. I honestly cannot tell if Lana Wachowski hates the Matrix or not. There was this meta montage of "oh we have to make a sequel to the Matrix because the suits wanted it, everybody pile on stupid crap", which was obviously a middle finger to...someone. I laughed out loud at how over the top that blatant F-U was...but given that the movie proceeded to then actually crap on every single thing that was awe…

I think the F-U might have been to the Redpill movement. For taking an allegory for Estrogen and turning into some misogynist hate movement.

Or it could just be these tweets: https://twitter.com/lilly_wachowski/status/12621047544963399...

Re: The Matrix Resurrections estimated to lose Warner Bros $100M

#114

Post by 101008 »

Not sure if it applies to this particular link, but WeGotThisCovered is probably the worst website ever, full of clickbait. 90% (or more) of their news are clickbait straight lies, they don't care that's a lie as long as it is clickable and people comment it on Facebook.

My favourite example is this one:

https://wegotthiscovered.com/?s=emma+watson+reportedly&submi...

They add "reportedly" just to any article that's 100% invented by them. Emma Watson was never approached to do any Harry Potter film, there were no talks to do them, etc, etc, etc. And I put that example because that's the one I am more familiar with (I am very deep in the Harry Potter fandom), but I have seen reports by them from all franchises with clear lies.

Re: The Matrix Resurrections estimated to lose Warner Bros $100M

#115

Post by dragontamer »

EdwardDiego wrote: post #55
dragontamer wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

It was my first time meeting Starro, and I was pleasantly surprised at how they managed to make a giant space starfish still seem like a feasible villain. If you'd told me that they fight a giant starfish that mind controls people with smaller starfish, I would've been bemused.

Starro is supposed to be closer to a Thanos-like figure. Yes, a giant starfish, but cunning and hyperintelligent. It's Starro the Conqueror because he has already conquered other galaxies and is coming for earth.

Space army, hyperspace travel / technology, in depth knowledge of the mysteries of the universe.

But yeah, a giant starfish Looks can be decieving.

Re: The Matrix Resurrections estimated to lose Warner Bros $100M

#116

Post by bentcorner »

LegitShady wrote: post #107
Latty wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Quoting box office sales while ignoring the fact this was released simultaneously for streaming really doesn't tell the full story.

Do they suddenly make more money streaming? Do you have any evidence people joined a streaming platform to watch it? This thing bombed everywhere. People with existing subscriptions watching it doesn't make it any. More profitable to Warner Bros

While I can't answer your question, just using a calculation like "box office receipts" - "movie making expense" is surely disingenuous. In that case every single direct-to-netflix release would be considered a money loser.

Re: The Matrix Resurrections estimated to lose Warner Bros $100M

#117

Post by Apocryphon »

darkerside wrote: post #58

The choreography in this movie was incredibly lazy.

Yeah. As confusing or bad the writing and dialogue in this movie got, that was never new to the franchise, the sequels had plenty of that. But what doomed this one was the lack of good action, some of it was truly bad. I understand that Lana is much older now and likely doesn't want to do the "hire a comic book artist to storyboard each scene in excruciating detail to make it perfect" ordeal anymore, the stars are much older and not as action-capable as they used to be, and that the pandemic probably troubled the production terribly. But the action scenes look incomprehensible at times (the train), with utterly mediocre CGI (the lake house), just horrid angles and motion (the finale at night).

I would've rather they had just cut out all of that and turned this into a mystery or psychological thriller, instead of trying to force action scenes that just look embarrassingly bad.

Re: The Matrix Resurrections estimated to lose Warner Bros $100M

#118

Post by boxmonster »

The Matrix is a 'trans metaphor', Lilly Wachowski says. "That was the original intention but the world wasn't quite ready," says Lilly Wachowski, who came out as trans along with her sister Lana after the films came out.

https://www.bbc.com/news/newsbeat-53692435

That killed my interest in it because I didn't want to see a message movie. I liked the earlier movies because of the Science Fiction and people like Elon Musk asking "Are we living in a simulation?". That's fun. I also watch movies to escape into a couple hours of enjoyable fantasy and get away from daily issues. I couldn't watch "Don't Look Up" for the same reason.

Re: The Matrix Resurrections estimated to lose Warner Bros $100M

#119

Post by notjustanymike »

titzer wrote: post #61

I saw it twice. I honestly cannot tell if Lana Wachowski hates the Matrix or not. There was this meta montage of "oh we have to make a sequel to the Matrix because the suits wanted it, everybody pile on stupid crap", which was obviously a middle finger to...someone. I laughed out loud at how over the top that blatant F-U was...but given that the movie proceeded to then actually crap on every single thing that was awe…

It was like watching fan fiction of the original.

Re: The Matrix Resurrections estimated to lose Warner Bros $100M

#120

Post by Apocryphon »

andrew_ wrote: post #28
acchow wrote: post #13

In comparison, Spiderman No Way Home is the 8th highest grossing film of all time. I haven't seen it yet, but some of my friends have said the two films are equally bad. It seems they both attempt to sell nostalgia, and one of them worked and one didn't

I enjoyed Resurrections. It was the kind of lighter Matrix I was craving. IMHO No Way Home was boring and tried to do too much. I didn't enjoy the Maguire or Garfield Spiderman movies, so them being in it and old villains reappearing didn't do much for me. Willam DaFoe is always a welcome addition to any movie, however. There were some bright spots that I hope they build upon, and I'm looking forward to more in the D…

No Way Home seemed like it was doing the "let's reexamine the legacy of a long-established superhero IP" thing that Into the Spider-Verse already did three years ago.
Post reply on HN