The Matrix Resurrections estimated to lose Warner Bros $100M • Hacker News Board

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

#221

Post by oliyoung » Tue, Jan 11, 2022, 4:03 AM UTC

SV_BubbleTime wrote: post #207

minimaxir wrote: post #193

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It was rumored that WB would have made another Matrix without Wachowski involvement if she had not agreed to it. Who knows how that would have turned out.

Sure ok, but so what? What kind of person (allegedly) sinks a movie franchise out of spite? How about… Not do that and put effort into everything you do? IDK. Not sure I buy this and think it’s possible the Wachowskis that made the first movies are gone, and this was a good effort. ♬don’t let money change ya♬.

> sinks a movie franchise out of spite?

it's not spite. She didn't "sink" it because she was spiteful, she wanted to say something about the films and her work and chose to deconstruct the act of making a sequel to a trilogy after 20 years. It's their art, they can do what they want with it.

Their work since Matrix has always been avant-guard (Cloud Atlas is barely a film in any normal sense, a Speed Racer film by anyone else isn't _that_) they were never coming back to make another stock science-fiction action film.

The real question is, how did Warner green-light the script and release knowing that it was going say all those things.

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

#222

Post by redisman » Tue, Jan 11, 2022, 4:04 AM UTC

XorNot wrote: post #159

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…

Since the 90s the concept of the corporate drone has only increased. Swap out Neo in a cubicle for Amazon warehouse worker, and you've got "the Matrix is keeping you on a tighter leash now". I find it very odd that people swear the themes wouldn't work today.

The thing that wouldn’t work is to try to do something sincere instead of everything dripping in ever so hilarious irony. I honestly can’t wait for gen Z to do something different please. It’s been like 20 years since someone made art that was not ironic

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

#223

Post by ankurdhama » Tue, Jan 11, 2022, 4:11 AM UTC

It seems that people expectations with this movie was that it will try to expand on or answers some of the questions that the last 3 movies raised, instead it turns out to be giving just a happy ending to Neo and Trinity characters.

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

#224

Post by redisman » Tue, Jan 11, 2022, 4:14 AM UTC

tomohawk wrote: post #102

"There can be only one" Applies to The Matrix at least as much as it applies to the movie it came from.

Loved the original but I already thought the two other movies were garbage so I have very low expectations for this..reboot?

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

#225

Post by XorNot » Tue, Jan 11, 2022, 4:14 AM UTC

redisman wrote: post #222

XorNot wrote: post #159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Since the 90s the concept of the corporate drone has only increased. Swap out Neo in a cubicle for Amazon warehouse worker, and you've got "the Matrix is keeping you on a tighter leash now". I find it very odd that people swear the themes wouldn't work today.

The thing that wouldn’t work is to try to do something sincere instead of everything dripping in ever so hilarious irony. I honestly can’t wait for gen Z to do something different please. It’s been like 20 years since someone made art that was not ironic

The Wachowski's are Gen X'ers (not that I disagree with your comment otherwise).

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

#226

Post by oliyoung » Tue, Jan 11, 2022, 4:14 AM UTC

brightball wrote: post #212

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…

Honestly, I didn’t like the movie but after reading your comment and realizing you’re completely right…I like it better now. Thanks for that.

Pleasure!

I had reservations about it, and I was surprised how much I liked it and how on board I was with it.

I mean, it's not perfect, the third act is soft and there are plot-holes you can drive a truck through, but that wasn't the point and once I settled that, I found myself really enjoying it.

I honestly think I'd have been more down on it trying to be just another "Matrix" film

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

#227

Post by Apocryphon » Tue, Jan 11, 2022, 4:21 AM UTC

908B64B197 wrote: post #143

matwood wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Exactly. Box office numbers are going to become less and less important over time. Except for the few big special effect movies, most movies will move to streaming. Another wrinkle is the movie format itself is under attack. Dune for example should have been a weekly series. There just isn't enough time to do it right in a movie.

> Dune for example should have been a weekly series The movie is a trailer for the books. It's as good as it could ever be, considering it was in the making for 40 years [0]. [0] https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/movies/movie-features/dune...

Honestly, even as long as the movie was, I felt like they could've added another thirty minutes worth of material to make it an even three hours to flesh out the characters and add more clarity to some points made in the movie. The theatrical cut for The Fellowship of the Ring ran 178 minutes while ran a relatively paltry 156 - just twenty minutes could have pushed the movie lightyears ahead.

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

#228

Post by titzer » Tue, Jan 11, 2022, 4:24 AM UTC

oliyoung wrote: post #221

SV_BubbleTime wrote: post #207

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure ok, but so what? What kind of person (allegedly) sinks a movie franchise out of spite? How about… Not do that and put effort into everything you do? IDK. Not sure I buy this and think it’s possible the Wachowskis that made the first movies are gone, and this was a good effort. ♬don’t let money change ya♬.

> sinks a movie franchise out of spite? it's not spite. She didn't "sink" it because she was spiteful, she wanted to say something about the films and her work and chose to deconstruct the act of making a sequel to a trilogy after 20 years. It's their art, they can do what they want with it. Their work since Matrix has always been avant-guard (Cloud Atlas is barely a film in any normal sense, a Speed Racer film by an…

It was really petty and I lost a lot of respect for her over this. She could have let WB fail on their own (proving what a masterstroke their first movie was), she could have outdone it (proving she's still a master), or she could have given a middling effort. All of which, IMHO, would have been better than intentionally sullying--frankly, ruining--the original piece.

Frankly I hope I can just forget the fourth movie, because I don't want to watch the first movie knowing that Neo ends up a doddering old pilled-up nutter and Trinity's a cookie cutter soccer mom with barely a bike shop. (and of course, that's silly, because they didn't really end up that way, they were put into that way--at great expense--for why again? stupid plot. Stupid, stupid plot.)

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

#229

Post by aahortwwy » Tue, Jan 11, 2022, 4:30 AM UTC

ruined wrote: post #163

jevoten wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 poo…

> also, like, when a creator tells you their work means a thing, just take them at their word.

This is reductive.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reader-response_criticism

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

#230

Post by ffhhj » Tue, Jan 11, 2022, 4:38 AM UTC

This movie is basically a conmemorative sequel with pets and zombies. It feels like a wink to Disney.

I'd have peferred them to explain how Neo was able to use the "force" against the machines, see their energy while blind, and who's the Zero. Expected a replica of Neo to be used by the machines or something in the lines of "don't be evil" becomes evil, as a critique to modern tech.