The Matrix Resurrections estimated to lose Warner Bros $100M

Post by philistine » Tue, Jan 11, 2022, 4:41 AM UTC

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

Post by philistine » Tue, Jan 11, 2022, 4:51 AM UTC

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…

Post by philistine » Tue, Jan 11, 2022, 4:53 AM UTC

Apocryphon wrote: post #136

titzer wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 sp…

I think there's a way to make Matrix 4 that looks upon its own legacy and destroys that baggage, "kill your darlings" and all that, and even maybe many of the scenes filmed in this one could be present in that movie. But the film we saw in theaters is not the quality version of that meta-textual film, it is often very confusing with poor writing, execrable action scenes, and plot that is far less clever than its ambi…

Post by philistine » Tue, Jan 11, 2022, 4:56 AM UTC

brightball wrote: post #208

Apocryphon wrote: post #169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 command…

Exactly. There are only 3 Indiana Jones movies.

Post by philistine » Tue, Jan 11, 2022, 5:02 AM UTC

lukifer wrote: post #197

didibus wrote: post #38

I don't understand how they do the math with streaming. In a way, you can say that everyone who is an HBO subscriber has already paid for the Matrix Resurrections. Obviously you don't have to watch it immediately, since it's now part of the streaming service catalogue, so unlike a movie theater where all people who intend to see the movie must watch it before it leaves the cinema, all HBO max subscriber can just thin…

Streaming services truly flip the "economic calculation problem" [0] on its head: the stakeholders would supposedly gain more reliable information on the value of different IP licenses if we all made purchases a la carte. As it is, they have little idea which program I'm hate-watching ironically, vs what's good enough to convince me to stay on the service (Midnight Mass), vs what I'd pay for exorbitantly out of pocke…