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

161–170 of 323 posts

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

#161

Post by geenew »

sam0x17 wrote: post #129
geenew wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

Agreed, the robots fighting each other aspect was interesting, I perked up at that. In retrospect, it's a sensible prediction of how artificial consciousnesses would behave given resource constraints. It's a question that's ignored in the single-hive-mind view from so many other dystopian techno-futures.

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

#162

Post by Spivak »

boxmonster wrote: post #118

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 M…

That quote is talking about the first movie. The original one. Neo’s story is a cleverly hidden but also extremely thin metaphor about a trans woman finding herself. That scene with the red and blue pills is literally Neo choosing estrogen over antidepressants. “Mr. Anderson” with that iconic over the top emphasis on the mister is Neo getting deadnamed. Neo has this feeling that the world is wrong (gender dysphoria) and finds the truth in online chat rooms and in a bar full of people who wear full leather outfits (a crude stand-in for the LGBT community).

I could keep doing this for every part of the movie but you get the picture. And it’s all canon.

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

#163

Post by ruined »

jevoten wrote: post #144
trissylegs wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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...

I've heard that the Wachowskis claimed that, but in what way is the Matrix's red pill similar to estrogen pills, or transexuality in general?

when it was originally written, the most common estrogen pill on the market was red.

short answer: the matrix is gender.

but it also represents any social construct pretty generically, and that's why there's so much confusion.

long answer: duck duck go matrix transgender.

also, like, when a creator tells you their work means a thing, just take them at their word. they would know. you can criticize how well or how poorly it conveys the meaning, or explore what subterfuge is concealed within, but questioning explicit intent is a bit silly.

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

#164

Post by queuebert »

a-dub wrote: post #122
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

If the determinant is the revenue of Matrix 4, then yes.

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

#165

Post by liamwire »

EZ-Cheeze wrote: post #137

I think the saying "set and setting" applies to movies as much as it does to psychedelics. I was hyped to watch it, I was nicely toasted, I watched it as soon as it came out, and it did everything right in my book. For starters, it grabbed me from the get-go: the shot of a SWAT operator's foot stepping into a puddle was totally gorgeous. Everything else that happened was interesting as hell - a program being evolved…

I’m absolutely with you here. I walked into it having intentionally avoided the trailers, and treating the whole existence as a thrown-bone, a “here’s one last throwback to something truly special, in a time when we could all use some familiarity,” while remaining self-aware, and tongue-in-cheek. It knew what it was, looked that right in the face, and said ‘don’t take it too seriously.’ And I didn’t, and it was great.

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

#167

Post by abathur »

SV_BubbleTime wrote: post #138
oliyoung wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I honestly cannot tell if Lana Wachowski hates the Matrix or not. The movies and the production of them? Yes. The concept and story? No. > Did she honestly ruin it on purpose? Yes. I think she did.

What kind of person would take something of their own and ruin it like that? Tons of people loved the matrix, just let it be.

Assuming the dialog can be believed: they either had to participate in the reboot, or let WB reboot it without them.

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

#168

Post by wonderwonder »

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 was so disappointed in this movie and I thought the trailer looked amazing. It was just so bad. When they brought back the Merovingian looking like he had not brushed his teeth is 45 years I almost turned it off. Then amazingly it got worse.

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

#169

Post by Apocryphon »

SV_BubbleTime wrote: post #138
oliyoung wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I honestly cannot tell if Lana Wachowski hates the Matrix or not. The movies and the production of them? Yes. The concept and story? No. > Did she honestly ruin it on purpose? Yes. I think she did.

What kind of person would take something of their own and ruin it like that? Tons of people loved the matrix, just let it be.

I really don't like this new movie, but it doesn't impact my enjoyment of the ones that came before. If I really cared to, I can just pretend that this movie doesn't exist, as people are fond of doing to the original two sequels.

Even from a "cinematic universe" or "canon" perspective I don't recognize its ability to affect the previous story; we're living in a rapidly accelerating era of media where escapism commands huge money and nostalgia is king; who's to say five or ten years down the line someone else might not make a new Matrix property and retcon the story as told in this one? Would be funny if Lilly Wachowski was the one to do that.

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

#170

Post by scoopdewoop »

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?

In my opinion, the movie wasn't trying to shit on the original at all. The Matrix has, since the beginning, been a really sentimental, romantic story that wears its heart on its sleeve and really directly states its themes. Meanwhile, the series ballooned into a big franchise that ran its course, its about to get put through the reboot-industrial complex, and its themes get adulterated and co-opted all of the time. The Matrix in pop culture is more associated with style and effects than the themes.

The new sequel did a really good job of adding nuance and deepening the themes already present in the trilogy. Specifically the way systems define our reality as a means of control. It did so while tying in really well with the first films world-building, expanding on more nuanced understanding of AI/programs that the sequels started to explore.

The film did take some time to reclaim its narrative, but I think it did so in a way that most fans can appreciate.

Post reply on HN