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

121–130 of 323 posts

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

#121

Post by geenew »

sam0x17 wrote: post #101
oliyoung wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This movie had to be a troll. 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 regardl…

Hot take: I was a huge fan of the original matrix trilogy and the animatrix, and while it wasn't what I expected, I enjoyed the film. In the late 90s, we had this whole thing of the corporate drone. That's sort of dead now. Instead we have millennials and zoomers with their spunk and crippling anxiety and standups and fair trade and breaking of fourth walls, and meta, etc, etc. It just feels like the original trilogy…

I like this take.

I actually really enjoyed the first ~half of the movie, even laughed out loud a couple of times (esp the 'warner bros will make the game with or without us so we'd better just take on the job').

The second half of action-soup was, for me at least, boring and as far as I can tell nonsensical.

I think the movie would have done a lot better without trying to redo any of the gunplay/holodeck-type fantasy, and instead stuck to the more grounded storyline from the first half.

At this point we need commentary in the popular culture on reboots, there is enough grist in that mill for 2 hours at least.

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

#122

Post by a-dub »

fallingmeat wrote: post #27

Resurrections was like someone saying, “Hey remember that awesome movie we made in the 90’s? Yeah that was so great…” Axiom: You can only see The Matrix for the first time, once.

> Axiom: You can only see The Matrix for the first time, once.

THE MATRIX IS SINGULAR

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

#123

Post by StanislavPetrov »

romwell wrote: post #2

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

Hollywood Accounting is absolutely a real thing but that doesn't mean that movies that cost hundreds of millions of dollars to make and promote don't routinely lose huge amounts of money when they bomb.

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

#124

Post by titzer »

Barrin92 wrote: post #97
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 so, or at least the film was very self-aware of the fact the Matrix as a movie franchise has exactly become what the Matrix in the original movie was, a repetitive, stagnant world that exists solely to suck the lifeforce out of its subjects. This is a critique that Baudrillard (whose work is featured in the original) actually had already of the original trilogy itself when he stated that "the matrix is the ki…

The first time I saw Resurrections, I was lol'ing at the brainstorming montage, as I saw it as her explicitly sticking her finger in the eye of all the haters and crackheads out there. But the second time it was cringe. I mean, the first Matrix was this unabashedly bad-ass movie that was so fresh, and then by the time number 4 rolled around, it hates itself and everyone else so much that most of the screen time is spent just trying to get even...with whom? Screw those stupid critics; make a kick-ass movie that completely leaves those morons in the dust. Instead, the more I think about it, the more it just drags everything into the muck.

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

#125

Post by justapassenger »

fasteddie31003 wrote: post #98
sydthrowaway wrote: post #21

This movie had to be a troll. The ending cover song of RATM's "Wake Up" was just something else.

The cover ruined it for me. I remember being a kid and seeing that scene with Neo flying and Rage Against The Machine playing and it sent chills down my spine. Not so much this time around.

I think that big part of that maybe also that you aren’t a kid anymore.

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

#126

Post by doctornoble »

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

Anecdotally I did. Well for that and Dune - and I’ll probably keep it, I was surprised and impressed with the selection.

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

#127

Post by sgarman »

brandmeyer wrote: post #78
ascagnel_ wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’ve heard a different version: that the Wachowskis were told the reboot would be going ahead with or without them. The movie feels like a very personal “screw you, executives”, in that it denies catharsis to some of the most popular parts of the first movie and at the same time makes some very, very clear statements that echo what Lana Wachowski has said in the past. It’s what a revival should be: it gives you a way…

> the Wachowskis were told the reboot would be going ahead with or without them. The writers made this part of the plot of the repeating inner world. Between that moment and the painful scenes of the game designers' cyclic rounds of buzzword bingo, I agree that the movie was at least trolling the WB executives.

> trolling the WB executives

In my mind that's undeniably true. The question I want to know is why was the rest of the movie so bad, was that also bad on purpose or just poor execution?

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

#128

Post by lilyball »

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

They had a deal for home streaming simultaneously with the box office release. This means that yes it is highly likely that far more people streamed this movie than movies that do theater-exclusive releases.

And people with existing subscriptions don’t matter, because Warner Bros isn’t getting subscription money directly, they’re getting money from deals with subscription services.

Edit: HBO is owned by Warner. So even if they don’t do accounting such that HBO pays Warner but just track subscription revenue directly, it still doesn’t matter. Retaining subscribers is hugely important, not just getting brand new subscriptions. It does make it a lot harder to compare box office receipts though.

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

#129

Post by sam0x17 »

geenew wrote: post #121
sam0x17 wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hot take: I was a huge fan of the original matrix trilogy and the animatrix, and while it wasn't what I expected, I enjoyed the film. In the late 90s, we had this whole thing of the corporate drone. That's sort of dead now. Instead we have millennials and zoomers with their spunk and crippling anxiety and standups and fair trade and breaking of fourth walls, and meta, etc, etc. It just feels like the original trilogy…

I like this take. I actually really enjoyed the first ~half of the movie, even laughed out loud a couple of times (esp the 'warner bros will make the game with or without us so we'd better just take on the job'). The second half of action-soup was, for me at least, boring and as far as I can tell nonsensical. I think the movie would have done a lot better without trying to redo any of the gunplay/holodeck-type fantas…

I should add, though, I did like the interesting tidbits on what happened with Zion, how the machines went to war with _each other_, and how a new Zion (I forget the name) was formed, but instead allying with exiled machines. I was fascinated and wanted to know more about that "blue" faction and the "red" faction of robots that are seen briefly fighting each other. That glimpse into the lore was worth it for me.

This is also just a really good evolution from the central conflict of the first three films which is basically like "technology = bad, but we need it". This film shows us "technology can be bad, but we can work together with it to build something beautiful and brighter". Really good evolution there.

I think what ultimately sank the movie for a lot of fans was the Agent Smith actor was replaced. Too bad.

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

#130

Post by sircastor »

jgalt212 wrote: post #86
romwell wrote: post #2

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

Dumb question: how is Hollywood accounting not fraud? I know there have numerous civil court cases over differences of "opinion" over incentive compensation calculations, but has anyone actually gone to jail?

Part of the problem is that many of the people with a stake in the “higher profits” camp risk losing future opportunities. If you start to make a ruckus about contract profits you find yourself not employed by that studio, and you start to be looked over by other studios. It’s a shell game but everyone agrees to it so as to book another gig.

The recent scuff-up between Scarlett Johannson and Disney was an example, and the rumors of Disney being unwilling and to work with her was the quod-pro-quo rearing it’s head.

Post reply on HN