Slashdot Mirror


The Best and Worst Movies of 2003?

rufey asks: "As 2003 comes to a close, I thought it would be interesting to ask Slashdot what they thought the best and worst movie of 2003 was, and why. At the beginning of the year there was excitement about parts 2 and 3 of The Matrix triology, X-Men 2, and of course, LOTR: Return of the King. In Slashdot's opinion, what did and didn't live up to the hype and expectations, and were there any surprises?"

39 of 1,093 comments (clear)

  1. Surprises by shawkin · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Lost in Translation
    American Splendor

  2. pfftt by Frequanaut · · Score: 4, Insightful

    LoTR...meh..Go check out Bubba HoTep

  3. poll... by webtre · · Score: 5, Insightful

    shouldn't this be a poll?

    --
    litigious bastards
    suck it sco!
  4. Hello, Mummy... by Ironclad2 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    3 words:

    Bubba. Ho. Tep.

  5. School of Rock by Ghoser777 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This movie was much better than I thought it was going to be. It was fun to watch and see how Jack Black interact with a bunch of high class elemtary school students.

    Not an award winner, or even close, but still a lot better than I was anticipating.

    Matt Fahrenbacher

    --
    James Tiberius Kirk: "Spock, the women on your planet are logical. No other planet in the galaxy can make that claim."
  6. nemo by Cheeze · · Score: 4, Insightful

    nemo was pretty darn good for a major released cartoon.

    The matrixes were ok, but didn't live up to the hype the first one caused.

    i personally though 28 days later was a good movie.

    --
    Why read the article when I can just make up a snap judgement?
  7. Pirates of the Caribbean by Quobobo · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Yes, it was totally predictable, and standard.. but even so, it was awesome. If this is an indication of what Disney might make more of in the future, than I'm glad.

    1. Re:Pirates of the Caribbean by Beer_Smurf · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Agreed, Depp's added quirk made it one of the years best. The movie wouldn't have been the same with anyone else in the roll.

    2. Re:Pirates of the Caribbean by stefanlasiewski · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I enjoyed it also, but mostly because of Johnny Depp's character. He was anything but predictable and standard, and saved the movie from being just yet-another-pirate movie.

      And my god, Pirates of the Carribean 2 ???

      --
      "Can of worms? The can is open... the worms are everywhere."
  8. Quentens masterpiece by tanveer1979 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Kill Bill was a surprise. But on second thoughts you never expect the Pulp fiction chap to churn out shoddy things. Though it was too violent for some people's taste, the action scenes are choreographed to perfection. No CGI etc and pure raw martal arts and it beats matrix hands down in the fights. The volume one of Kill Bill was released this year. Check out IMDB

    --
    My Aurora : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o91ZsGwJYyg
    FB : https://www.facebook.com/TanveersPhotography
    1. Re:Quentens masterpiece by Bryan+Ischo · · Score: 3, Insightful

      My friend and I both walked out on this one, about an hour and a half into it. He wanted to leave after about half an hour, but I made him stay because I was just *sure* it was going to get better. It didn't. It got worse.

      Totally boring, totally stupid, totally a complete and utter waste of time.

      How someone who could make a movie as incredibly good as Pulp Fiction could make a movie as incredibly bad as Kill Bill will remain one of the greatest mysteries of my lifetime.

    2. Re:Quentens masterpiece by watzinaneihm · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I did feel the movie was a letdown, but it was not that bad. You just have to have watched a lot of hong-kong movies (i did ) beginning from the "drunken master" to like it.
      Everything including the introduction " XYZ cinema presentation...... Our feature presentation ....Kill Bill" ,on a black background that too, was a spoof on the eastern movies. (Golden harvest movies usually start like that IIRC).
      The action scenes were typically eastern, down to one (wo)man against a hundred scene . The excess of swords bit and lack of comedy was more Jetli'ish than Jackie Chan (and their hong kong movies not the hollywood ones).
      Overall I think that this was the best "eastern-style" action movie ever to come out of hollywood.No bombs, no guns, no 30-wheel trucks being chased by helicopters. But then again, its an acquired taste and quentin probably was hanging out in hongkong for too long for his own good.
      I also like the chapterwise progression, very much anime like. Also the background scores were great if you can follow it
      Anyway there is a second part coming up, if you watch the first half of "Pulp Fiction" it would have been plain boring. Just let him get out the second part and pray it doesnt end up like matrix.

      --
      .ACMD setaloiv siht gnidaeR
  9. 28 Days Later - best horror movie in years by fetta · · Score: 4, Insightful

    28 Days Later may be the best horror movie that I've seen since the original alien. An amazing amount of tension - but what really got me was that it didn't rely on special effects. From an effects perspective, you could have made the same movie in 1970.

    Watch this movie and realize that you can do sci-fi and horror without relying on the crutch of CGI effects.

    --
    ** The opinions expressed here are my own, and do not reflect those of my employers - past, present, or future**
  10. Re:Most overrated... by Sivar · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Matrix Revolutions, overrated?
    It was rated very poorly by nearly every crit...

    Oh.

    --
    Computer Science is no more about computers than astronomy is about telescopes. --E. W. Dijkstra
  11. Re:The Matrix by calebtucker · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Uh, I'm not following. The 1st was great and there was plenty of ways they could have expanded upon the 1st to make a good sequel (but obviously, they chose a different path).

    --
    My sig can beat up your sig.
  12. Bad Santa by crispy1083 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    A truly hilarious film. There was some controversy that people might have confused it for a lighter Christmas parody, but it was an excellent dark farce.

    Best quote from Billy Bob Thorton, while in a Santa suit, while having anal sex with a woman: "You're not going to shit right for a week."

  13. Re:The Matrix by 56ker · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The first was the best, but as with most sequels you start coming across the law of diminishing returns (except for box office takings). The third especially seemed like one over-long movie trailer relying too heavily on CGI to make up for a lacking script.

  14. I had huge hopes for 2003 by PovRayMan · · Score: 4, Insightful

    When I found out I was going to conclude The Matrix and The Lord of the Rings in 2003 all within months of each other, I was jittered with excitement. Both movie series filled in two seperate geek aspects; computers and epic fantasy. Some say The Matrix fell short with the sequels, but I won't get into the argument. I for one enjoyed all three Matrix films, and that's that. The ending of Revolutions left me somewhat satisfied, but not filled with joy knowing and seeing the end. Now just the other night I watched Return of the King and that void of emotion has been completely filled. Not only did The Lord of the Rings movie series end, it gave a full out conclusion. Most people not familiar with the books (That's me until I saw FOTR and then read the books for the first time) would assume that when the ring is destroyed the movie would end. Instead we're returned to the purity of Middle Earth as it once was before the corruption of the ring where the king of men rules once more, and the Hobbits drink, dance and sing joyfull songs. Unlike Matrix Revolutions we just get the idea that the Matrix lives on, but those who want out are freed and the machines no longer go off patrolling and killing humans from Zion (Assuming the humans don't go off killing the machines). That ending is nice and non-conventional, but it leaves an emotional gap. Return of the King fills the void, and even overflows it.

    "You bow to no one..."

    :'-(

  15. Worst.... Movie.... Ever.... by MBCook · · Score: 3, Insightful
    OK, so I never saw it, but I'd like to nominate a movie from January 17th. That instant horror classic (the horror being what you expiriance at even having to watch the commercials for it)...

    Kangaroo Jack

    Best movie? Pirates of the Carabian was good, I haven't watched Seabiscuit yet (I've got it on DVD near me right now), I liked X-2, and I thought that The Matrix: Reloaded was entertaining, Nemo was fantastic, I loved A Mighty Wind, and those are the only 2k3 movies that I've seen (that I can think of) as I only watch DVDs.

    Does Chicago count? It came out Dec 25th of last year, so that's within the last year (not last calender year though).

    --
    Comment forecast: Bits of genius surrounded by a sea of mediocrity.
  16. Bad Santa by foo+fighter · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Bad Santa was as close to a perfect movie as I've seen in a long time. It stayed true to itself, managed to be funny, thoughtful, and obscene all at once, and the characters and plot developed while still having plenty of action and slapstick.

    LotR: RotK was second in my book. I'm a geek who reads the book every year. Yet somehow I don't hold the book or its author up as holy items beyond reproach or critique. Peter Jackson has done a marvelous, magnificent thing with these three movies and I hope he wins some awards this year (best director, screenplay, and/or movie) from the big shows like Oscar and Globe. I find the nitpicks humorous and interesting as pieces of trivia, but feel sad about and pity towards those who get up in a bunch about minor inconsistencies, mistakes, and additions/omissions in such a masterpiece.

    My guilty pleasure this year was The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen. It was much better than all the reviews led me to believe. I actually enjoyed it more than X2 by a large margin. It was a fun action movie with really cool steam-punk technology and "magical" mythical heroes. What's not to like?

    My biggest disappointments were the Matrix sequals. WTF happened? Jackson did it right and the Wachowskis did not. My personal theory is that if the Wachowskis had been given the opporunity to shoot the three all at once The Matrix would be held up as a peer to LotR. The huge delay between The Matrix and Reloaded caused all kinds of subtle problems and gave the brothers too much time to think about the screenplay. Sometimes less is more.

    My happiest moment was when I discovered how to rip DVDs I rent to my hard disk. Then I burn those rips onto SVCDs to pass around to my friends as cheap Christmas presents.

    God bless us, every pirate!

    --
    obviously no deficiencies vs. no obvious deficiencies
  17. The Triplets of Belleville. by Peganthyrus · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Also known as "Belleville Rendez-Vous".

    French animated feature, very bizarre and entertaining. Lots more fun to look at than any American feature cartoon in recent memory. It reminded me why I got into animation in the first place.

    --
    egypt urnash minimal art.
  18. Re:The Matrix by HardCase · · Score: 4, Insightful
    Marix Reloaded/Revolutions = worst movies ever.


    How soon they forget Battlefield Earth.

  19. Re:The Matrix by malkavian · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I think it was subjective with the 2nd and 3rd..
    Personally, I think they were great. :)
    There was a lot of philosophy going on in the background, and a lot to chew over, and debate what you through really was going on. :)
    Not many movies these days play on consequence (to whit, setting off EMP pulse in the docking bay), or the fine line in some battles (the docking bay battle swung back and forth so many times, it made gripping viewing).
    I can see there'd be quite a few people for who this Matrix 2 & 3 wasn't quite their cup of tea..
    Same as Final Fantasy wasn't everyone's idea of a good movie..
    Personally, I loved 'em. :)
    But, as is the nature of art, it wasn't made to please everyone. Perhaps it didn't, but I've got the feeling it'll fit in that cult niche for a goodly many years to come.
    But, like I said. Purely subjective. :) Perhaps if they'd followed a path you were happy with, I'd have felt they sold themselves short, or something. :)

  20. Re:The Matrix by kv9 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    the animatrix is imho better than reloaded and revolutions put together.

  21. Re:Hail to the King..Yeah Baby.. by AEton · · Score: 5, Insightful

    But Gigli and Kangaroo Jack takes the cake for the worst ones..

    Not exactly. Actually, according to the IMDB bottom 100 films listing, From Justin to Kelly (the American Idol movie) is the #1 hands-down worst movie of all time. AND IT DESERVES IT. cf. review here or on IMDB. Or..wow.

    I am proud to have fought hard to get low votes for that movie. It was like Mary Poppins without Mary (or popping); like The Sound of Music without any Sound or Music worth re-hearing; like Oklahoma! only set on a god-awful Florida beach.

    That said, if you want something to laugh at and have a friend who was foolish enough to pay for a copy of this tripe and you have free time and want to stare off into space for a while, From Justin to Kelly is the movie for you.

    --
    We recently had heard in the office over one of the Yellow Machine that's made by Anthology Solutions.
  22. Re:The Hulk by laxcat · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The Hulk was made by an accomplished film maker that made one of my (and probably one of your) favorite films of all time . Visually and artistically, Hulk (while not the BEST movie ever) was not nearly as bad as everyone pretends. I think the problem was everyone was expecting "fun but dumb" and when they received something that was a little more experimental in style and truer to the tortured character from the comic books (especially the later ones), everyone felt cheated that they didn't get a "real" comic book movie. Maybe it wasn't Lee's best decision to try passing off something so different to a summer movie audience, but in a purely academic sense it really wasn't that bad. I would even say it was good.

    (Revoutions, of the other hand... I've seen better writing on a cereal box. I think they really phoned that one in.)

  23. Hulk, CGI, DVD "extras" by GuyMannDude · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I made the mistake of renting Hulk on DVD. Well, at least that wouldn't have been as big a mistake as watching it in the theater. I was pretty stunned at how terrible the CGI was. Sure, I had seen the TV commericals but I naively figured that those commericals had been thrown together before the complete rendering had been completed and that the CGI in the final product would be much better than the trailers. Nope. I was really surprised.

    But in watching the DVD extras my surprise turned to bewilderment and a little anger. While there was an entertaining featurette on the history of The Hulk from early comic books to TV to movies, most of the extras consisted of the movie makers going on and on about how incredible their CGI effects were and how they were doing something at a level of realism that no one else had ever tried. Now, I'll accept that perhaps what they had tried to do might have been quite ambitious but to suggest that they succeeded admirably was just too much to take. Quite frankly, I don't care how difficult the CGI technical problems are. If some average moviegoer like myself cringes at the poor quality of the effects, then you haven't succeeded at shit. It was really impossible to feel any kind of emotion because every time you saw that green bunch of silly puddy bounce around the screen you were instanteously "taken out of the movie". The poor quality of the CGI completely ruined whatever effect the director tried to accomplish.

    Here on slashdot we oftentimes like to point to the extras on DVDs as a model for the RIAA to follow in terms of adding value to their product. But the more of these extras I watch, the more I'm really doubting whether they add any value. Most of these extras are simply interviews with the cast and crew gushing over what a great job they've done and how thankful they are to work with such a talented group of individuals and so on. It's really just a bunch of self-serving, back-slapping crap. The 'deleted scenes' featured on many disks are really awful to watch -- there's no wonder they were deleted! In times I've come away from a movie having a lower opinion of the film after watching these extras. Attack of the Clones is a prime example. Now, I certainly wasn't under the impression that this was some kind of masterpiece originally. But after watching the featurettes where Lucas agonizes over minute, insignificant details of the CGI characters yet doesn't seem to give a shit about the awful acting and gaping plot holes, I found myself feeling more negative about the film!

    CGI has its place but it's clear that Hulk suffered tremendously because clearly the technology isn't there yet. And filmakers, make those DVD extras something worthwhile for a change, please.

    GMD

    1. Re:Hulk, CGI, DVD "extras" by Dr.+Manhattan · · Score: 4, Insightful
      Now, I'll accept that perhaps what they had tried to do might have been quite ambitious but to suggest that they succeeded admirably was just too much to take.

      I dunno. I submit that maybe if the Hulk had moved like a real human it might have worked better. Consider, the 'hulk dogs' - did they look convincing to you?

      Human brains have some highly refined hardware for recognizing and predicting human movement. (Humans have been way more likely to fight other humans than animals throughout our history.) We're not as finely tuned to pick up on, say, quadruped motion.

      Now (faithfully to the comics, I'll note) the Hulk did some things which just aren't physically possible. Tossing tanks the way he did would require him to be absurdly dense and heavy, even if his muscles were made of diamond nanofibers. If he were that heavy, he couldn't bounce around the way he did at other times. Mass, inertia, and balance didn't add up.

      The point is, I think people pick up on this much faster with an anthropomorphic character than with a dinosaur, or a dragon, or a CGI cat, or what-have-you. The close-up scenes of the Hulk's face worked quite well for me, actually. I think he looked much more realistic than the people in "Final Fantasy", and I don't think the effects guys need to hang their heads in shame. I believe the technology is more "there" than you do, but that there's no amount of technology that can make an utterly impossible movement look 'real'.

      Aside from that, there were other real triumphs. The multi-panel scenes took some getting used to, but really worked most of the time. The bit where Talbot is walking away from Bruce as Betty looks on, and for a moment you can see all three of their faces, tells you all about their relationships in a couple seconds.

      Some of the plot was, well, problematic. The dialogue could have used polishing in places. I agree that its flaws keep it from being one of the "best" movies of the year. But where it works, it works very well, and some of the problems with it have been very overblown.

      --
      PHEM - party like it's 1997-2003!
  24. Re:The Ring - japanese version is better by forgotmypassword · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I am going to have to disagree. This is one case where the American remake is actually significantly better than the original Japanese version. I don't want to take away from the original though, it was an extremely good movie made on a very small budget. However with that said, I could make many points in favor of "The Ring".

    First of all "Ringu", the Japanese version, doesn't have the double meaning that "The Ring" has. In "The Ring" , the 'ring' is both the the telephone ring and also the halo of light that the girl saw as the lid was covered over the well. This is not the case in "Ringu".

    As another poster has already pointed out, "Ringu" was a bit more fantasy oriented with the girl, as well as others, being psychic. However, in "The Ring", the girl had demonic origins - her parents weren't supposed to be able to have children, but they went overseas and came back with one.

    Secondly, "Ringu" was indeed a lower budget film. When the people died from the psychic girl, they were left with a grimace on their face. Where as when the demonic girl from "Ringu" killed someone, their body was left as if they had died and rotted in the well. This is a big step in not only special effects but the motivation of the killers. "The Ring" just tries to be more horrific than "Ringu" in every way that it can. But it doesn't give you an overdose of special effects - I don't think there has been such clever editing in a horror movie since the first big Dracula movie.

    There are many other small details, but the difference that stuck out the most in my mind was this: At the end of the movie when the boy says "You FREED her? You weren't supposed to free her." It is such an incredible twist and it leaves you with a terrible feeling in your belly. Nothing like that happens in "Ringu".

    In conclusion, it is very apparent that the American filmakers took great effort in making "The Ring" as much of an improvement as they could. But I still say that "Ringu" is worth watching, there are many details in the story that you can only get from the Japanese version - though the story lines aren't exactly the same.

  25. Re:The Ring by Geeyzus · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The Ring came out in 2002, actually.

    However I agree, this was an EXCELLENT horror film. I think 28 Days Later might edge it out, but as far as pure FEAR, this one is much scarier.

    I'm trying to get a friend of mine to come over and watch it with me. Of course, in my opinion, if you want to watch it, you have to rent a VHS tape, NOT a DVD. You'd have to see it to know what I'm talking about.

    Then in your pocket, have your cell phone (in silent mode) pre-dialed to your friend's cell... after the movie, push the "Send" button as you walk up to the VCR to push rewind or get the tape. Sure to ruin a perfectly good pair of pants. :-)

    Mark

  26. Re:Ug.. by GuyWithLag · · Score: 3, Insightful

    You have to understand that the movies, as shown in the theaters, are nothing more than extended trailers for the Special Edition DVDs - these have much better pacing.

  27. Re:Best I've seen by the+gnat · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Hmmmm, I saw it last night and thought it was thoroughly BADASS, but I have a few quibbles or additions:

    The battle scenes.

    I disagree. I would place the opening of "Saving Private Ryan", the first Coliseum scene in "Gladiator", or the massacre in "Last of the Mohicans" well above this. I'm probably forgetting something too. I would also rank the final fight in "Fellowship" above all the fights in the trilogy. It's important to note that these are all done on a smaller scale (even "Ryan" focuses on a small piece of beach) and with much less CG work. The CG work was excellent in RotK, but my suspension of disbelief only goes so far. The "Fellowship" fight, on the other hand, looked brutal and realistic.

    Shelob

    I didn't think Jackson could make a giant spider frighten me after at least ten viewings of "Aliens". I was wrong. Major, major props.

    The signal fire scene.

    I agree, but I doubt this was undiluted New Zealand. . . Jackson said very plainly at one point that while NZ was ideal for them, they did some doctoring to get it to look just right. Personally, after repeated viewings I still can't quite tell what shots that aren't immediately obvious as CG are manipulated, and what are original, but I doubt the signal fire scene was all natural. Still, very impressive.

    Legolas's required stunt scene

    I'm sorry, but the horse mounting in Two Towers fucking rocked, even if every female in the audience simultaneously climaxed. What made it so cool was the whole slo-mo lead-in from Legolas shooting arrows, and that what happens next is totally unexpected. When I watch the movies I keep rewinding that part (no, I'm not gay): I think it's the most impressively directed/coreographed scene in the trilogy. Just eye candy, yes, and nothing to do with the books, but utterly effective.

    On that note, I was disappointed that they left out the part of "Fellowship" where Legolas shoots down one of the winged steeds at night (from a boat!). None of the elf stunts in the movies seemed out of place because I remembered reading that, but I wish they'd left it in - it really establishes that Elves are bad motherfuckers.

  28. Re:The Matrix by haggar · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The Matrix Revolutions, just like Reloaded, is a masterpiece in disguise and a new kind of cinema all in one: nobody can say to have completely grasped it, during a single viewing. But when many people who saw it and thought about it, talk to each other, the many veils and layers of meaning of these movies, start to unleash and things click into place. And new ideas emerge, new possibilities, and then you start to appreciate all the though that went into the creation of Reloaded and Revolutions.

    These movies can not be fully appreciated by the individual, without a community or circle of friends, because they're so complex, layered and widely spanning.

    That's why, isolated and (wrongly) self-confident, the movie critics have mostly slammed Revolutions, and those that liked it, they did so because of the battle scenes and special effects. None of them has even tried to understand it.

    --
    Sigged!
  29. Re:The Matrix by camrdale · · Score: 3, Insightful

    It seems to me that the original was the most liked because it had the most scenes inside the matrix where cool things can happen. Reloaded has fewer, and Revolutions even less, leading to their dislike by people who want to see more of said cool things.

    Personally, I liked the series as a whole, but the original was, and still is, the best.

  30. Re:Ug.. by mitherial · · Score: 3, Insightful

    (and I also wanted to point out that...)

    The movies serve as a beautiful and epic-scale rendition of Tolkein's story: they "stand-on-their-own" as works of art though fully appreciating them requires being familiar with a prior work of art.

    --
    Foo?
  31. Re:Hulk, CGI by adrianbaugh · · Score: 4, Insightful

    A whole CGI character seems pretty ambitious, but hey - WETA Digital got it right with Gollum three years ago, which is an eternity in the digital FX business. There's no excuse for shoddy CGI now.

    --
    "'I pass the test,' she said. 'I will diminish, and go into the West, and remain Galadriel.'"
    - JRR Tolkien.
  32. Really ought to set responsible expectations... by iasenko · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I'm risking burning off all my karma in one glorious flash, but this has been nagging at me for a very long time.

    I've heard many peers whose opinions I typically respect, as well as many ignorant trolls claim the Matrix trilogy was shit the instant it became a trilogy. Really, I think people should step off their holy soap-boxes and consider for just one moment what makes the first movie better than the second or third.

    Looking back on the first movie, very little happens. Very little is revealed. The movie was written with vague exchange after vague exchange, with the bulk of the movie taken up by a communal admiration of visuals. What were the brilliant performances from the Matrix? Lawrence Fishburn as an educated black man who gets Neo to take drugs, get scared by lightning, jump off a building (all the cool kids are doing it...), and get his ass handed to him? Is that air you're breathing? Well, presumably yes. Unless I'm not breathing at all in which case this isn't happening. Next question?

    Of the cast of the Matrix, how many survive? Perhaps that's the best part of the movie, that the actors each have no more than a few lines (perhaps as profound as "It's my way or the highway" or even "Shut up". Then again, there's Cipher, who gives us "Ignorance is bliss"). Do Epoch and Switch believe in anything? If programs can go against their programming, why does Smith even bother chasing people? Why not just decompile himself?

    The Matrix was a great sci-fi movie. I'm not disputing that--I own it and adore it. However, I don't watch The Matrix to find Jesus. It's not a Platonic dialogue, and it's not a chapter of the Tao Te Ching. I watch The Matrix because I enjoy science fiction. As a science fiction movie it is far more than adequate; it has action, suspense, stunning visuals, and not enough character development to make you question anything.

    Why do I then think Reloaded and Revolutions are adequate as well? Reloaded is the substance that was missing from the Matrix...the characters we have are developed and we see that they are flawed. Revolutions lets these characters follow their own paths and do what they need to do. Reeves did a great job as the patchwork messiah of a terribly...human civilization. Bad actor jokes notwithstanding, he is confused, unsure, and underneath it all human. He doesn't always have a witty comeback, and sometimes he has to play superhero--if I were in that position I might not stay sane at all considering that I have a foot-long spike in my head that's letting me fight with an invincible program who sneers like no other, and the fate of humanity rests on my ability to think the crap out of a RAM chip somewhere. He never claims he's brilliant--he's a programmer for some huge corporation (maybe he's on the team that codes rpc for Windows), and he never claims he's wise--look how he just follows a squad of goth pirates just because his computer told him.

    The Matrix wasn't a perfect movie. I don't understand how one can compare the sequels to the original and come out with an unfavorable opinion. The trolls who endlessly rail against the sequels don't have much of a leg to stand on when it comes to the superiority of the original. They're movies, not religion. If they are canon to you, perhaps you should invest your faith in a religion less lacking in...substance.

  33. Re:The Matrix by Chump1422 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Honestly, it's not that deep. Just because you didn't get it the first time doesn't mean that others can't. If you've taken any intro philosophy courses or even had a conversation with a friend while stoned, you've probably covered 99% of what they blabbed on about in the movies.

    It's nice that they opened you up to these things, but they're nothing but B-movies with expensive effects.

  34. the length of films by CAIMLAS · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Does anyone else think it's interesting how films seem to be getting much, much longer? There have been numerous 2+ hour films in the last year or two, and those are just the ones I can think of off the top of my head. Kill Bill (vol 1), the second two Matrix films, all three LotR films, and seemably a couple others. Are people's attention spans getting longer again (due to the internet vs. TV, maybe?), or is this just a trend of a series of 3 3-hour 'compilation' stories?

    At any rate, I'm not sure if I like it or dislike it. Part of me enjoys being able to have 3 hours of film to properly tell a story; another part of me thinks that they intentionally pad the films to make them longer (as with LotR and the overly-emotional and excessive dialog at times); yet a third part of me wonders, "Where's the goddamn intermission, I've got to piss!" - they did have intermissions back in the day for really long films. Why not now? It's painful to sit there with a full bladder, but more often than not, it's preferable to missing 5+ minutes of a film you paid $7+ to see (more if you're on a date).

    --
    ~/ssh slashdot.org ssh: connect to host slashdot.org port 22: too many beers