Slashdot Mirror


Ten-disc 'Matrix' DVD Box Set Planned

squishey writes "The Matrix trilogy is to be released as part of a special ten-disc DVD boxset in time for Christmas, according to the DVD Times. Out on December 12 and with an RRP of 44.99." Includes a lot of stuff you probably already own, and a few things you might want... like a version of Reloaded with the Enter the Matrix footage included.

530 comments

  1. 44.99 != $ by strictnein · · Score: 5, Informative

    That's not $44.99, it's 44.99, which is what, ~$75-80?

    1. Re:44.99 != $ by strictnein · · Score: 1, Informative

      And the pound sign is not supported by slashdot...

      44.99 british royal pounds (or whatever they're called)

    2. Re:44.99 != $ by julesh · · Score: 4, Informative

      Do you mean GBP 44.99? (Slashdot eats pound signs)

    3. Re:44.99 != $ by rshidla · · Score: 4, Interesting

      As and American living in the UK, I would guess that when the set is released in the US it will be $44.99. Most new release DVDs sell for 19.99 here as they sell for $19.99 in the US.

    4. Re:44.99 != $ by StarKruzr · · Score: 5, Informative

      That would be "Pounds Sterling."

      And I'm American. Sheesh.

      --

      +++ATH0
    5. Re:44.99 != $ by katorga · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The first Matrix was great and I own it on DVD. The second was so bad that I never got the DVD and never even bother to see the 3rd installment in the theater.

    6. Re:44.99 != $ by hattig · · Score: 3, Funny

      UKP and Yen support has been fixed in Slash CVS 'cos I reported it after getting annoyed.

      Dunno if I'd want to pay that much to get anything that includes Matrix Revolutions ...

    7. Re:44.99 != $ by isorox · · Score: 0, Redundant

      44.99 what? €s? pounds? yen? dinars?

    8. Re:44.99 != $ by KDan · · Score: 5, Funny

      Dunno if I'd want to pay that much to get anything that includes Matrix Revolutions ...

      Ditto. I might even be tempted to pay to NOT get it ;-)

      Daniel

      --
      Carpe Diem
    9. Re:44.99 != $ by Lord+of+the+Wazz · · Score: 1

      Don't know where you've been buying your DVDs from, but these days, most new releases cost around GBP15 (less if you go to the likes of play.com). Still more expensive than their region 1 counterparts, but a bit closer than they used to be.

    10. Re:44.99 != $ by ArcticCelt · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I remember that after the deception of seeing "Star Wars Episode one" I was thinking well at least there is the two next matrix that will kick ass... I was so wrong. Like you I love the first one but the two other have nothing to do with the original.

      Now I have switched my trust to Star Wars again and I am crossing my fingers and hoping that the name won't be something like: "Star Wars III - Jar Jar Binks Chronicles."

      George, you are our only hope... (so basically where toast)

      --

      Yahh, hiii haaaaa! -Major Kong, from Dr. Strangelove
    11. Re:44.99 != $ by narsiman · · Score: 5, Funny

      Doesnt matter. In hongkong it is $2 - Irrespective of the conversion rates.

    12. Re:44.99 != $ by Anonvmous+Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

      "That would be "Pounds Sterling." And I'm American. Sheesh."

      Yeah I learned that from Benny Hill, too.

    13. Re:44.99 != $ by anno1a · · Score: 1

      George Lucas gives to you:

      STARWARS: RELOADED!

      I wouldn't expect anything else...

      --
      ------- I fumbled my registration and I now must suffer
    14. Re:44.99 != $ by drawfour · · Score: 1

      You can pay me. I will NOT send it to you.

    15. Re:44.99 != $ by scrytch · · Score: 2, Interesting

      spoiler warning ... ah hell, who cares, you've seen it or you won't.

      I have the first DVD as well, and only that thanks to the dreary and disgusting mess of the second two Matrix movies, in the same fashion that George Lucas succeeded in turning me off to Star Wars (I own zero Star Wars DVD's). The first Matrix was great, but never for the acting. It was a perfect fusion of sci-fi and kung fu, complete with the philosophical reflections on reality (think of the treatment of chi in kung fu here).

      The second one unfortunately had dialog that was as wooden and juvenile as the first, but it failed to bring anything original except more fight scenes and (rolling my eyes) a big car chase scene. And Keanu flying around like Superman. Dreadful. Stupid. Come to think of it, calling it juvenile insults juveniles.

      It did have one saving grace: the architect. His little soliloquy on free will was masterful in writing and acting. Neo must have felt like Winston Smith in 1984 when O'Brien tells him the real story about Emmanuel Goldstein, but even more trapped by the inevitability of his fate.

      But no, he just blasts out of there, becomes some sort of cyber-messiah, and gee wiz, turns out by the third movie the architect just lied about Zion's purpose and state of existence. Or if he was a construct (might explain some of his superpowers) then it sure as hell didn't get adequate exposition. I don't ask to be led by the hand, I do ask for the various premises of a film to feel like they weren't just made up on the spot, like so much improvised roleplaying gaming.

      I think the Farrelly Brothers would have put more consistency and thought into this wretched trilogy than the Wachowski Brothers did.

      --
      I've finally had it: until slashdot gets article moderation, I am not coming back.
    16. Re:44.99 != $ by zonker · · Score: 0

      so will this version include more story and less suck?

    17. Re:44.99 != $ by slyxter · · Score: 0

      Slashdot eats pound signs
      #
      Works fine for me.

    18. Re:44.99 != $ by Malc · · Score: 1

      No, that's hash or number.

    19. Re:44.99 != $ by Malc · · Score: 1

      Don't forget, that includes 17.5% VAT, whereas American prices rarely include the taxes. You're comparing apples to oranges.

    20. Re:44.99 != $ by robbot · · Score: 1

      Well, I thought the second one was the best of the trilogy.

    21. Re:44.99 != $ by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, I buy most of mine in New Hampshire, where there are no sales taxes. So $44.99 would really be $44.99.

    22. Re:44.99 != $ by the_2nd_coming · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      yeah, nothing except the same story line and plot and characters, and...oh never-mind, your a moron

      --



      I am the Alpha and the Omega-3
    23. Re:44.99 != $ by sherriw · · Score: 1

      Psst... word on the street is that Star Wars Episode 3 will be "The Birth of The Empire" ... Or so I hear. Hopefully that's not the real title!

    24. Re:44.99 != $ by cdyson37 · · Score: 1
      (Slashdot eats pound signs)

      I can't help but feel I'm being discriminated against.

    25. Re:44.99 != $ by ArcticCelt · · Score: 0, Troll

      yeah, nothing except the same story line and plot and characters, and...oh never-mind, your a moron

      ???What the hell are you talking about???

      Are you on crack?

      --

      Yahh, hiii haaaaa! -Major Kong, from Dr. Strangelove
    26. Re:44.99 != $ by wuice · · Score: 1

      Thanks for sharing.

    27. Re:44.99 != $ by desmogod · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      You're an american? Don't worry, it's not your fault. You where born that way...

    28. Re:44.99 != $ by cfuse · · Score: 1
      Now I have switched my trust to Star Wars again and I am crossing my fingers and hoping that the name won't be something like: "Star Wars III - Jar Jar Binks Chronicles."

      I can save you the trouble, you give me the money for a movie ticket and I will kick you in the balls. You'll enjoy it just as much as the next star wars flick, and you can enjoy it now!

    29. Re:44.99 != $ by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      toast in toaster.

    30. Re:44.99 != $ by sumbry · · Score: 1

      Star Wars III: "Birth of the Empire"

      If you take it in content, the name actually fits more closely with the later(earlier) movies.

      The Phantom Menace
      Attack of the Clones
      ---
      Birth of the Empire
      A New Hope
      The Empire Strikes Back
      Return of the Jedi

      There are just rumors that this will be the new title tho... time will tell.

    31. Re:44.99 != $ by Requiem · · Score: 1

      Exact same experience here. The second was so bad that I completely avoided the third. My friends tell me that that was a wise decision.

    32. Re:44.99 != $ by julesh · · Score: 1

      Only Americans call that a pound sign. In Britain, a pound sign is a fancy L with a loop on the top and a crossbar approximately one third the way up. It has the ISO-8859-1 character code 0xA3.

    33. Re:44.99 != $ by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Live free or die, biatch!

    34. Re:44.99 != $ by slyxter · · Score: 2, Funny

      Canadians call both of them pound signs. Also there is a sign for snooty british people that call Canadians americans, it is an extended middle finger .

    35. Re:44.99 != $ by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I liked the third one quite a bit, if for nothing else than that it fucks with people's feel good idea of the 'real world' (in the Matrix), which is pretty much revealed to be just another layer of programming, or a parallel Matrix (what with Neo still being able to see when blind, etc). No, all this fighting of our photogenic heros, for nothing.

    36. Re:44.99 != $ by elemental23 · · Score: 1

      I think the Farrelly Brothers would have put more consistency and thought into this wretched trilogy than the Wachowski Brothers did.

      Personally, I'd like to see it remade by the Coen brothers.

      --
      I like my women like my coffee... pale and bitter.
    37. Re:44.99 != $ by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hmm, George Clooney as Neo. Well, the dialogue would sure be a lot more intelligent, I'll say that much.

  2. For those wondering this isnt Region 1.... by arock99 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    A box set hasnt been annouced for region 1 yet (US & Canada).

    1. Re:For those wondering this isnt Region 1.... by IWantMyNickBack · · Score: 2, Insightful

      So? Make it work.

    2. Re:For those wondering this isnt Region 1.... by danormsby · · Score: 5, Funny

      No-one can tell you what the region 1 price is, you have to see it for yourself.

      --
      Omnis amans amens
    3. Re:For those wondering this isnt Region 1.... by stienman · · Score: 3, Funny

      There is no region.

    4. Re:For those wondering this isnt Region 1.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      Do you believe the price in region 2 has anything to do with the price in region 1? Do you really think that's air you're breathing?

      (yeah I know I messed up that quote, I haven't seen the movie in years)

    5. Re:For those wondering this isnt Region 1.... by MarkCollette · · Score: 2, Funny

      I can only show you the Future Shop door. You're the one that has to walk through it.

  3. 10 DVDs? by Bob+McCown · · Score: 5, Funny

    Whoa

    1. Re:10 DVDs? by freqres · · Score: 2, Funny

      EXCELLENT!!!

      --
      Rampant Ninja related crimes these days...Whitehouse is not the exception
    2. Re:10 DVDs? by UnixRawks · · Score: 1

      Non, non, non-heinous!

      --
      I
  4. There's a trilogy? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    As far as I'm concerned, there is only The Matrix. I refuse to acknowledge the existence of any followup films.

    1. Re:There's a trilogy? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      That is how I feel about 'Highlander'. Truly, there can be only one... movie.

    2. Re:There's a trilogy? by fitten · · Score: 1

      Ditto to this and its parent.

      When the second Highlander movie first came out at the theatres, we were all excited to go see it but I couldn't for some reason (we were in school at the time so probably some project) but my friends did. They came back and told me to never go see it because it was so bad that it ruined the first one. I took his advice and I have never seen any Highlander movie other than the first one.

      Similarly with The Matrix, I loved that movie and to me, it was complete at the end of it. I was surprised to learn that the 2nd and 3rd were actually planned parts of a trilogy instead of just milking the franchise. The 2nd and 3rd were OK if you dissociate them from the first one and just look at them as Sci-Fi action movies on their own but they really detract from the first movie, IMO.

    3. Re:There's a trilogy? by AviLazar · · Score: 1

      Why?
      I really liked the first & third one. The second one had some really bad points to it (the raver party, the speech before the raver party, the unlimited Mr. Smith's that couldn't beat Neo).
      Though I did like the very beginning where Neo jumps into the sky and does the kickin pose - given that *IF* the movie was considered to be absolutely worthless - that specific pose would be enough for me (if I were a highly paid actor) to do the movie :)

      -A

      --

      I mod down so you can mod up. Your welcome.
    4. Re:There's a trilogy? by PacoTaco · · Score: 1

      Yes, the big talking head in the third movie was the most original thing ever.

    5. Re:There's a trilogy? by NanoGator · · Score: 3, Interesting

      "As far as I'm concerned, there is only The Matrix. I refuse to acknowledge the existence of any followup films."

      Why even go that far? What was it about the first one that was underwear-tent-popping good?

      I'm serious about this. What I saw was a flash in the pan that hardly survived a second viewing. What'd everybody else take out of it?

      --
      "Derp de derp."
    6. Re:There's a trilogy? by aoe2bug · · Score: 0

      IIRC, theyre NOT actually followup films, tho i agree that the first one is the best, and the others "feel" like more of an afterthought then something planned.

      --
      -Dan
    7. Re:There's a trilogy? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      Yeah. I've never seen that face before.

    8. Re:There's a trilogy? by finkployd · · Score: 2, Funny

      Andross reveals his true form.

      Been there, done that.

    9. Re:There's a trilogy? by no+reason+to+be+here · · Score: 4, Insightful

      For a mindless summer blockbuster, there was a good dose of philosophy and symbolism in The Matrix. Add to that the fact that, in 1999, those really were some freakin' cool special effects. I was, however, let down that the first movie devolved into a blow 'em up, shoot 'em up gun fest. There was a lot of potential there halfway through that was lost the instant Neo says they need "Guns. Lots of guns."

    10. Re:There's a trilogy? by Alby · · Score: 1

      Personally I think the first film was just about the best set-up for a "TV series based on a movie" EVAR!

    11. Re:There's a trilogy? by Dogtanian · · Score: 1

      The second one had some really bad points to it (the raver party, the speech before the raver party, the unlimited Mr. Smith's that couldn't beat Neo).

      Yeah; it had some very major flaws. But it still worked as a sort of Alice in Wonderland (okay; bad book, crap analogy) adventure inside the Matrix.

      The third film was just *boring*. If you hated Morpheus' speech in the second, how could you not hate the endless bad dialogue spouted by the new-characters-that-no-one-in-their-right-mind-giv es-a-fuck-about in the third one?

      Third rate war movie. Lousy new characters. Old characters gone missing (and when they *were* there, not always that good; Neo worked as an icon in the first film- he really didn't have a strongly defined character beyond acting confused- but the weaknesses showed in the second film where he should have developed and we should be seeing his motivations. Those weaknesses- due in large part to Reeves' mediocre acting- were another major reason to not give a damn about the third film). Endless, boring CGI action scenes.

      I could right a decent critique of the third Matrix film if I could be arsed, but it comes down to this- bad dialogue, bad characters, stupid plot, dull setting. Boring film.

      At least Reloaded had some life to it.

      --
      "Slashdot - News and Chat Sites Deviant". (Click "homepage" link above for details).
    12. Re:There's a trilogy? by ArcticCelt · · Score: 1

      I think that your post resume everything a sane person have to know about this movie and any other discussion is a waste of server space. Ok people; move on to the next story! Nothing to see here.

      --

      Yahh, hiii haaaaa! -Major Kong, from Dr. Strangelove
    13. Re:There's a trilogy? by DavidLeblond · · Score: 1

      You forgot the "legendary final battle between Neo and Smith" aka the largest anti-climax ever to reach the silver-screen.

    14. Re:There's a trilogy? by AviLazar · · Score: 1

      I could right a decent critique of the third Matrix film if I could be arsed, but it comes down to this- bad dialogue, bad characters, stupid plot, dull setting. Boring film

      Though there were some good scenes, overall, you are correct.

      --

      I mod down so you can mod up. Your welcome.
    15. Re:There's a trilogy? by Prvt.+Public · · Score: 1

      You're living in a dream world neo.

    16. Re:There's a trilogy? by Pxtl · · Score: 3, Interesting

      For one thing, it will be remembered as the last movie that had actual, cool special effects besides simple 3d-rendered models. The fights in Matrix were 1/10th as spectacular as those in the sequels, but were so much more enjoyable and enthralling to watch because the actors were real humans and not models.

      Maybe its just me, but I can still tell very, very easily when they switch over from meatspace people to 3d models in most movies, and somehow my eyes gloss over at the 3d human substitutes. Spiderman 2 was the only movie where I had difficulty telling, and that was because his costume is so inhuman looking already. In Harry Potter, LoTR, Van Helsing, and Matrix 2,3, all the CG scenes somehow just don't grip me the way the real meatspace scenes do. Its different in older movies where the CG was only used for wholly inhuman things, or in all-CG movies where the CG version _is_ the character, but in new movies where CG is just used for impossible stunts - it just becomes ignorable.

    17. Re:There's a trilogy? by Dogtanian · · Score: 1

      You forgot the "legendary final battle between Neo and Smith" aka the largest anti-climax ever to reach the silver-screen.

      Yeah, sorry. :-)

      That really gave me the feeling of "here we go again, big climactic fight scene... yawn". Hollow, boring.

      --
      "Slashdot - News and Chat Sites Deviant". (Click "homepage" link above for details).
    18. Re:There's a trilogy? by homer_ca · · Score: 1

      You forgot the "legendary final battle between Neo and Smith"

      Yeah, I've seen that fight before. It was ripped straight from Superman II.

    19. Re:There's a trilogy? by DavidLeblond · · Score: 1

      Yeah, I've seen that fight before. It was ripped straight from Superman II.

      In the next film they plan on Neo and the gang writing a virus that takes the intrest the bank rounds off and puts it in a private account. Kinda like taking pennies from the "pennies for everyone" jar.

    20. Re:There's a trilogy? by daeley · · Score: 1

      Alice in Wonderland (okay; bad book, crap analogy)

      Bad book? Thems fightin' words, pardner.

      --
      I watched C-beams glitter in the dark near the Tannhauser gate.
    21. Re:There's a trilogy? by Dogtanian · · Score: 1, Interesting

      Alice in Wonderland (okay; bad book, crap analogy)

      Bad book? Thems fightin' words, pardner.


      Bit harsh, I'll admit. I never read the book itself as a kid, perhaps because I perceived it as a girls' book. I read it recently, wanting to like it, but it did absolutely nothing for me.

      Possibly because of its influence on 1960s culture, it seemed a bit tired, although I appreciate its invention and so on. Bit like I never 'got' Jimi Hendrix because I'd been too exposed to the people who were influenced by him, I guess.

      Anyway; the book seemed nonsensical, but didn't really have a coherent feel I was hoping for. I was going to say that I was looking for "dream-logic" (you know, "logical" thinking that seems to make perfect sense when you dream, then you wake up and realise it was nonsensical), and didn't find it. However, I think the book *does* contain this.

      I also think my dislike is part reaction to its "childrens' book that adults think that children should read" reputation.

      Really, I feel that it's ultimately a children's nonsense book and not *that* much more, despite the inventive imagery; coupled with the above, this might explain why I didn't particularly like it.

      It ain't the Matrix.

      --
      "Slashdot - News and Chat Sites Deviant". (Click "homepage" link above for details).
    22. Re:There's a trilogy? by stanmann · · Score: 1

      IMO, there are 2, but the second stars TVs Highlander.

      --
      Food not Bombs is a nice platitude but it breaks down when you notice that the Bombees are usually well fed
    23. Re:There's a trilogy? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      If you ever feel like trying again, read the Annotated Alice version. There is quite a lot more going on than you might think. And exactly how is "You can see nothing? And at such distance? What eyes you have child!" not dream-logic?

    24. Re:There's a trilogy? by Dogtanian · · Score: 0

      And exactly how is "You can see nothing? And at such distance? What eyes you have child!" not dream-logic?

      Reread my post; I said it did contain dream-logic.

      However, my most fucked-up dream-logic can't really survive in "this world"; as soon as I try to analyse what I was thinking, it falls apart. The closest I ever get to holding it is (*was*) when I was at university, not getting enough sleep, and sitting in lectures *almost* asleep. That was actually very pleasant sometimes; came out of the lecture feeling nice, if still damned tired.

      You know when you think you're still awake, and suddenly you realise that your thoughts make *no* sense at all- you're entering dream-state? Sometimes I can hold onto it then, but generally, trying to explain "dream-logic" doesn't work even to myself because I'm trying to understand it in a conventional framework in my waking state-of-mind and it just won't fit into that. It sure as hell couldn't fit into a book.

      Anyhow, if I ever come across that version you mentioned I might check it out.

      --
      "Slashdot - News and Chat Sites Deviant". (Click "homepage" link above for details).
    25. Re:There's a trilogy? by seanmeister · · Score: 1

      And Neo be given a choice between the red stapler and the blue stapler, right?

    26. Re:There's a trilogy? by Malc · · Score: 0

      For me the turning point was when Kan't-Act Reeves couldn't resist himself and came out with the "whoa". If my eyes were closed it might as well have been Ted Logan saying "whoa dude"

    27. Re:There's a trilogy? by General+Wesc · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I must have missed the part with the interesting philosophy. I saw Socrates repeated for the ten thousandth time. Socrates, Descartes, myself, and everyone else who has every though about what they know.

      I like philosophy. I'm doubling in philosophy. But when someone says a film has a lot of good philosophy in it, I generally expect to see some ideas that haven't been mainstream for 2,000 years and haven't been rehashed in half the science fiction previously written.

      The other two made decent action films. I actually prefered them. They weren't great, but at least they didn't waste all their time rehashing trite scifi storylined. Well, they didn't seem as trite.

      My brother (not an action fan, but certainly a scifi fan) summed up The Matrix fairly well, I though: they discover that this is all a big illusion and nothing in the simulation is real. So they get a bunch of not-real guns and shoot all the not-real stuff. WTF?

      (Probably is better on the big screen. Oh well. Too late now, I suppose.)

    28. Re:There's a trilogy? by wolfdvh · · Score: 1
      I feel about Matrix exactly the way I do about Highlander...There should have been only one.

      Sometime the greed of making sequels until they stop making money. Examples are legion, Planet of the reMakes" comes to mind. Does anybody really believe that the "trilogy" concept for Matrix wasn't hatched after they were suprised by how well the first move did at the boxoffice?

    29. Re:There's a trilogy? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sorry. There are still *3* movies. Your kung-fu is weak

    30. Re:There's a trilogy? by Slurm-V · · Score: 1

      One thing to remember is that Charles Dodgson/Lewis Carrol was a mathematician, so a lot of the 'dream-logic' is represented by explicit examples of logical fallacies as demonstrated by conversation. I was vaguely aware of this at the time I read it but the annotated Alice (by Martin Gardner of SciAm's Mathematical Games column fame, inter alia) really fleshed it out - as well as providing a key to many of the in-jokes and now-obscure yet then contemporary references. Not to mention including the originals of the various nursery rhymes Dodgson parodies.

      --
      Of course it's going off the rails. How else is it ever going to fly?
    31. Re:There's a trilogy? by Catbeller · · Score: 1

      It was a JOKE. Ha ha, funny, that sort of thing.

    32. Re:There's a trilogy? by no+reason+to+be+here · · Score: 1

      Well, I never said it was good philosophy. :)

      However, it was a lot more philosophy than your typical movie goer is exposed to.

    33. Re:There's a trilogy? by Santana · · Score: 1

      The simulation is real in some way. It's real for the agents of the system, and for the humans connected to it.

      "what is real" asks Morpheus to Neo didn't you see it?, how come did you miss the answer. And when Neo gets out of the Constructor and finds himself injured, do you remember what it comes next? Take your time, watch the movies again.

      Most of the comments I read against the Matrix trilogy are based on misconceptions and lack of understanding of them. That's probably why many of us that love the movies say: "you didn't get it".

      --
      The best way to predict the future is to invent it
    34. Re:There's a trilogy? by YOU+LIKEWISE+FAIL+IT · · Score: 1
      the annotated Alice (by Martin Gardner of SciAm's Mathematical Games column

      Very interesting! In a pile of very old Scientific Americans I rescued from a library sale table, I found a mathematical deconstruction of the Red (?) Knights speech ( in part, "Sometimes it makes them cry. And sometimes it does not." or similar ) into symbolic logic. Would this have been the same author?

      YLFI
      --
      One god, one market, one truth, one consumer.
    35. Re:There's a trilogy? by TRACK-YOUR-POSITION · · Score: 2, Insightful
      But when someone says a film has a lot of good philosophy in it, I generally expect to see some ideas that haven't been mainstream for 2,000 years and haven't been rehashed in half the science fiction previously written.

      Why would you expect that? Has there ever been a movie that met your philosophy quotas? Would even Waking Life make the cut? None of the ideas in that moving are something you wouldn't hear a philosophy 101 undergrad say. Pure ideas simply don't render well into visual medium.

      The Matrix is great, possibly even artistically great, for two reasons--how well it translates those fairly simple ideas into the visual (Waking Life rules for the same reason), and the suggested isomorphism between the machines hallucinogenic domination of humanity and the forms of social control that exist in our present day world (or at least a anarchist's punk caricature thereof). The sci-fi aspects are secondary to the social parable aspects--which is why things like the obviously second law of thermodynamic violations like "human batteries" are allowed.

      Sure, you can read about a brain in a vat in your textbook, but that doesn't capture the creepy absurdity of the idea--you wake up, go to work, work hard all day--but it's just an illusion--you're actually sleeping suspended in nutritive fluid, with tubes sticking out of your servo-mechanical orifices, while sadistic machines are poking and proding you on a doomed Earth under an eternal nighttime sky. You never knew it, but the entire planet is dedicated to making sure you never wake up.

      There's nothing new about the idea, it's the visual translationg that's noteable.

      But the truly interesting ideas aren't in the philosophy or science of it, but in the politics. The people of the Matrix are required to go to school even though learning can take place in an instant, and go to work even though the "food" they purchase and consume has no effect on their metabolism--their jobs don't exist to serve any purpose, they exist merely as a distraction, to prevent an uprising by the masses.

      Consider our present day world--a very miniscule population is required to grow the food we eat in America, and an ever dwindling population is required to produce the products we use Check the numbers--we aren't losing manufacturing jobs to China and India, the World is losing jobs to robots and automation. The government subsidizes both agriculture and manufacturing to keep those populations artificially high. Capitalism, like the Matrix, exists not to meet our material needs, but merely to keep the masses occupied. I'm not saying I believe this, but I believe it is the hidden message of the Matrix--that whether or not we live in an actual "Matrix" of physical hallucination, we still live our day to day lives in a "social" hallucination.

      Indeed, perhaps the Second Law ignorance of the Matrix is in fact a parody of the Second Law ignorance of capitalism--why am I paid to work, when work merely uses up the only thing that's TRULY scarce in our world, useable energy.

      Okay, I'm reaching on that last one.

      Still, one interesting thing I remember from the second movie, when Zion's leader is comparing the machines that dominate humans to keep themselves energized to the machines humans dominate in order to keep Zion running. There's a point made about civil disobediance--what we have power over we grow to depend upon, and therefore has power over us. Zion's machines are model of the humans in the Matrix--which itself is a parable of modern social control. I thought that was kind of clever.

    36. Re:There's a trilogy? by Mr.+Moose · · Score: 1

      Highlander - There can be only one. Unless, of course, it's a success, in wich case we reserve the rights to make a number two, three, four...

    37. Re:There's a trilogy? by AgentSmith · · Score: 1

      Mmmmmm yeah.
      uh . . . Neo . . we're gonna need you to
      move your desk back a little so we can move some more files into your cube and free up some desk space.

      Oh, my stapler. Well, I'll just take that.
      *yoink*





      C'mon. I Loved the Burly Brawl. Except for that collective ass kicking part. No sir, Mr. Anderson, I didn't like it.

    38. Re:There's a trilogy? by General+Wesc · · Score: 1
      "what is real" asks Morpheus to Neo didn't you see it?, how come did you miss the answer. And when Neo gets out of the Constructor and finds himself injured, do you remember what it comes next? Take your time, watch the movies again.
      I didn't really see any development of 'anti-realist' thought in the film. I saw soundbites like Morpheus' question. Granted, I wouldn't want to watch a two hour film of the philosophy club I attend, but 'what is real?' isn't a very provacative question anymore. It's been a popular thing for people to say when they don't feel like debating a point. Doesn't make me think about what 'real' is (I've already done that), it makes me say, 'Not that'. (Because they say it when I've told them something isn't real, and asking me to think about reality without providing any argument isn't about to change my mind. [But I digress])

      I will watch the film again and try to look more carefully for the stuff you and the other posters have pointed out. I'll probably like it better, but I still don't think I'll like it half as much as most people here. Which is okay.

    39. Re:There's a trilogy? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The philosophy you mention is all western philosophy. I've recently began studying privately some eastern philosophies and realized that The Matrix Trilogy is full of philosophical concepts outside of western thought. And don't forget religions either, western or otherwise!

      I really liked the trilogy because of the things it makes you think about. If you look at it simply as an action movie the you miss the message. If you look only for western thought then you miss a lot too!

      I particularly like the mythological aspects of the movie as well. I like how Trinity has to go to Hell to rescue Neo.

      There are also some quantum concepts thrown out in the movie, although I think that was coicidence. Quantum computers could be used to implement a Matrix like simulation. Could we all exist in an alien quantum computer?

      As an action movie, I was very disappointed with the sequels. Otherwise, I think the Trilogy has lots to say if you look for it!

  5. Nothing like buying twice by icezip · · Score: 1

    I will most likley buy this set, even though I already own the first two on DVD. That paper case the first one came in sux.

    1. Re:Nothing like buying twice by wo1verin3 · · Score: 1

      Thats why I got the collectors box for the first one :)

      http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/B000 01ZUGJ/104-5977042-7107929?v=glance

    2. Re:Nothing like buying twice by muskr · · Score: 1

      My wife and I are serious DVD collectors. We've got the I and II, but we've decided not to acknowledge the third. We've already wasted $14 on that piece of trash. Still liked 1 and 2.

  6. But... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Does it have a good version?

    1. Re:But... by BananaPeel · · Score: 2, Funny

      Neo bender was the best version i saw... but i guess that ain't on the disks

    2. Re:But... by dbzero · · Score: 1

      It is sad...I have no desire to buy this DVD set. The movies turned out to be such a let down after the first. I bought the first DVD and bought the second thinking the third would be end on a high point. I still haven't bought the third and have no desire to buy that one or this DVD set. Though I am looking forward to buying the third Harry Potter movie and, of course, The Return of the King. :)

  7. Wow by bool+morpheus() · · Score: 2, Funny

    Ten discs, at ~4.5gb a piece. I wonder how long it will take to rip a DivX of that. As a bad actor once said, "whoa".

    --

    ----
    Ground Control to Major Tom...
    1. Re:Wow by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually around 9 gigabytes. But thanks for playing.

    2. Re:Wow by AviLazar · · Score: 1

      Wouldn't each disc be a 9 gig disc? Most movies are produced on those so they can 1) put more crap on it and 2) *help* prevent *some* people from burning it (or at least forcing people to do another one-two steps in the process)...
      In my experience, I rarely view the extras. If they include deleted scenes, I would really really like it if they just stuck it in the movie (give an option to turn it on and off, but I want the scenes incorporated)... So for me, unless they have added scenes (again, in the movie), I do not need the extra discs - movie 1 2 and 3 are good enough :)

      --

      I mod down so you can mod up. Your welcome.
    3. Re:Wow by bool+morpheus() · · Score: 1

      Oops. I'd been awake about 10 minutes when I posted that.

      --

      ----
      Ground Control to Major Tom...
    4. Re:Wow by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      how long it will take to rip a DivX of that

      Ripping would be fairly quick, but encoding would take a few days. Downloading may take longer. ;)

      Size:
      If you want just the movies, a little over 2GB each would give you a nice quality rip. All included without commentary options would be around 10-12 GB I think. Everything included would be very large, maybe 50GB or so?

  8. 10 discs? by julesh · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Isn't that, like, a little extreme? They could get nearly 40 hours worth of video on that. I wouldn't have thought that much footage would have been shot during the making of 3 films.

    1. Re:10 discs? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

      They shoot for a few months, and you don't think they'll have 40 hours? They likely have hundreds of hours, with dozens of cuts for each scene. These are just the prime selection of that.

    2. Re:10 discs? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      Isn't that, like, a little extreme? They could get nearly 40 hours worth of video on that. I wouldn't have thought that much footage would have been shot during the making of 3 films.

      Having worked in the movie business, I'll tell you that a typical hollywood movie has hundreds of hours of footage, if not thousands.

      Although, most of the footage is just retakes of the same scene.

    3. Re:10 discs? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny
      Well, they tried different catch-phrases other than "Whoa!", so those will also be on the discs, including:
      • "Dude!"
      • "Oh man!"
      • "Jinkies!"
      • "What the friggity?!"
      • "Wowzers!"
      • "First post!"
    4. Re:10 discs? by Brain+Stew · · Score: 5, Informative
      Through some investigation at DVDTalk.com and HMV, here's what will be on this UK set:

      The ten discs seem to be:

      1. The Matrix - With All-New Transfer & Audio Commentary
      2. The Matrix Revisited - Original Version With Behind-The-Scenes Footage
      3. Matrix Reloaded Extended Version - New Cut With 55 Minutes Of New Footage Inserted Back Into The Film
      4. Matrix Reloaded Revisited - All New Interviews, Scene Dissections And More!
      5. Matrix Revolutions - Original Cut With Audio Commentaries
      6. Matrix Revolutions Revisited - A Host Of All-New Extras
      7. The Animatrix
      8. The Roots Of The Matrix - 3 Hours Of Features
      9. The Burley Man Chronicles - The People Behind The Matrix Discuss Their Work
      10. The Zion Archive - A Tour Of Matrix Design Concepts, Storyboards & Drawings

      And here is HMV's list of special features for the new discs:

      THE MATRIX

      • All-New Transfer & Audio Commentary
      • All-New transfer supervised by The Wachowskis and director of photography (DP), Bill Pope
      • Audio commentary by Keanu Reeves, Carrie Anne Moss, Laurence Fishburne, DP Bill Pope and other cast and crew
      • The Matrix Revisited - Original version with behind-the-scenes footage
      • The Matrix Revisited (180 Minutes) - Same special features as previous release
      • Offers comprehensive behind-the-scenes look at the first film in the trilogy.

      MATRIX RELOADED

      • Extended Version - New Cut With 55 Minutes Of New Footage Inserted Back Into The Film
      • Matrix Reloaded Revisited - All New Interviews, Scene Dissections And More!
      • Matrix Reloaded Extended Version (190 Minutes) - New Special Features new cut incorporating 55 minutes of footage shot for the 'Enter The Matrix' Game
      • Audio Commentaries by Keanu Reeves, Carrie-Anne Moss, Laurence Fishburne, Jada Pinkett-Smith, Production Designer Owen Paterson, 2nd Unit Directors David Ellis And Kimble Rendall and other cast and crew
      • Matrix Reloaded Revisited - Special Features (180 Minutes)
      • Includes All New Footage Including Dozens Of Never-Before-Seen Cast And Crew Interviews, Scene Dissections, Explorations Of The Production Design And Special Effects, And More

      MATRIX REVOLUTIONS

      • Matrix Revolutions - Original cut with audio commentaries
      • Matrix Revolutions Revisited - A host of all-new extras
      • Matrix Revolutions - new special features:
      • Audio commentaries by Keanu Reeves, Carrie-Anne Moss, Laurence Fishburne, Special Effects Supervisor, John Gaeta; editor, Zach Staenberg and other cast and crew
      • Matrix Revolutions Revisited - Special Features (180 Minutes)
      • Includes all new footage, including dozens of never-before-seen cast and crew interviews, scene dissections, explorations of the production design and special effects, and more

      THE ANIMATRIX

      • Same Special Features As Previous Release

      THE ROOTS OF THE MATRIX

      • The Roots Of The Matrix - 3 Hours Of Features:
      • The Roots of the Matrix - Special Features (180 Minutes)
      • The Matrix and the History of the Action Genre - Examines The Many Influences Of Action Cinema That Make Up The Matrix
      • Brainiacs' Revenge - Scholars, Philosophers, Theorists, And Charlatans Deconstruct The Intellectual Underpinnings Of The Trilogy
      • The Science Behind The Fiction - Is The Notion Of A Real Matrix Plausible? An Investigation Of The Technologies That Inspire The Metaphor Of The Matrix

      THE BURLEY MAN CHRONICLES

      • The Burley Man Chronicles - The People Behind The Matrix Discuss Their Work:
      • The Burley Man Chronicles - Special Features (75 Minutes)
      • The Burley Man C
      --
      "Here's a spoiler: You're will die alone."-Triumph the Insult Comic Dog
    5. Re:10 discs? by peragrin · · Score: 1

      Another hour added to Reloaded, it wasn't that good to begin with,where are they sticking another hour, of Neo flying around like superman.

      --
      i thought once I was found, but it was only a dream.
    6. Re:10 discs? by Tassach · · Score: 5, Insightful
      In other words:
      • Two versions of one cool movie
      • Eight disks of self-aggrandizing ego balm wherein the W. bros try and reassure themselves about how cool and talented they are.
      --
      Why is it that the proponents of "one nation under God" are so eager to get rid of "liberty and justice for all"?
    7. Re:10 discs? by chrish · · Score: 1

      You forgot:

      • "Get it while it's gelatinous!"
      --
      - chrish
    8. Re:10 discs? by Fiver- · · Score: 1

      Is the "Burley Man" stuff a reference to Barton Fink?

    9. Re:10 discs? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      Two of the disks are composed entirely of the deleted portions of the Trinity death sequence.

    10. Re:10 discs? by Chibi · · Score: 1

      Is it correct to assume, then, that this set will not contain the theatrical cut of the Matrix Reloaded? *sigh* I hate it when studios do stuff like that, although since this is the UK version, it doesn't affect me at this point.

      With the LotR movies, I didn't even consider the theatrical cuts, but I guess I'm a little worried if the extra 55 minutes of Reloaded would be good or bad...?

      --
      If all you have are silver bullets, everything looks like a werewolf.
    11. Re:10 discs? by XO · · Score: 3, Funny

      You forgot when they were trying out Snoop Dogg for the part:

      Fo-Shizzle!

      --
      "Champagne for my real friends - and real pain for my sham friends!" http://ericblade.postalboard.com/
    12. Re:10 discs? by Unkle · · Score: 1

      Well, if you buy all three extended editions of the LOTR movies (assuming they keep the same format for Return of the King as they had for the first two), you get 12 discs for 3 movies. Plus, the Matrix discs have more than just the movies on them, like the Animatrix.

      --
      Against stupidity, the gods themselves contend in vain.
    13. Re:10 discs? by gcaseye6677 · · Score: 1

      That's what it looks like to me. A movie that was cool, in the beginning, and then a lot of fluff and filler. I guess that way they can price it a lot more than it would be for just one movie. I, for one, will not be contributing to the stuff-the-egotistical-maniacs-wallet-fund. Maybe I'm still just bitter about the second movie, Matrix Regurgitated.

    14. Re:10 discs? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I hate to be pedantic, bu you misspelled the last one. It's "Frist psot!"

    15. Re:10 discs? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      An extended version of Reloaded? Sheesh, I'd prefer and edited version where they took 55 minutes of bloat out of the film.

    16. Re:10 discs? by ro_coyote · · Score: 3, Funny

      Matrix Reloaded Extended Version - New Cut With 55 Minutes Of New Footage Inserted Back Into The Film

      34 minutes of which will probably be an extension to the original "Dance Party Zion".

      *long shudder*

    17. Re:10 discs? by shigelojoe · · Score: 2, Funny

      Only two disks? Where will they fit in the part where she lectures Neo on the finer points of Keynesian economic theory?

      Geez, after five minutes of that craptacular monologue half of the theater was yelling "Come on, die already!"

    18. Re:10 discs? by The+Dobber · · Score: 1


      The big difference being the fact that LOTR didn't blow dead donkey dick.

    19. Re:10 discs? by danila · · Score: 2, Funny

      From here:
      http://yro.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=950 20&cid= 8149141

      But of course we must honor the best quotes from each of the three movies:

      The Matrix:
      Context: Morpheus jumps a massive gap between two skyscrapers
      Neo: Whoa.

      Reloaded:
      Context: Neo throws a smith out of the battle, where he lands, hard.
      Smith: More!
      More context: (More smiths charge in)

      Revolutions:
      Context: Neo runs out of the train station, off to the left, and we see him come back into the train station on the right.
      Neo: Shit!

      That sums up the three movies, and also the main reactions that this MATRIX thing seems to be inspired by:
      Woah!
      More!!
      Shit!!!

      --
      Future Wiki -- If you don't think about the future, you cannot have one.
    20. Re:10 discs? by danila · · Score: 1

      Have it ever occured to you that the creators of that "cool movie" actually know what they are doing much better than you do? And that the reason you don't like Matrix 2 and Matrix 3 is because you either are too stupid to understand them or too stupid to have your own opinion?

      --
      Future Wiki -- If you don't think about the future, you cannot have one.
    21. Re:10 discs? by Tassach · · Score: 1
      Have it ever occured to you that the creators of that "cool movie" actually know what they are doing much better than you do
      "Larry, are you pondering what I'm pondering?"
      "I think so, Andy, but where are we going to find a pigmy marmoset, duct tape, and lime jello at this time of night?"
      "No, you pervert, I meant that we should make mind-numbingly bad sequel to The Matrix, and then make a seqel to that one that's even worse, and then sit back while geeks with no taste line up to throw money at us.
      "Well, Andy, Lucas got away with it, so we should be able to too... but I still think we should get the marmoset."

      Yeah, I think they know what they're doing. And laughing all the way to the bank.

      And that the reason you don't like Matrix 2 and Matrix 3 is because you either are too stupid to understand them or too stupid to have your own opinion?
      Or, perhaps, you are too stupid, deluded, or testosterone-poisoned to recognize a steaming pile of shit when you step in it.
      --
      Why is it that the proponents of "one nation under God" are so eager to get rid of "liberty and justice for all"?
    22. Re:10 discs? by hambonewilkins · · Score: 1

      Agreed. Why is it that if one hates the dreadful Matrix 2 and 3 they don't get them? I got them alright, and what was there was terrible.

      --

      God Bless America. Why? Did it sneeze?
    23. Re:10 discs? by rishistar · · Score: 1

      Well a very good friend of mine already has a 10-disc set with all the Matrix films on....

      --
      Professor Karmadillo Songs of Science
    24. Re:10 discs? by danila · · Score: 1

      I am not saying you (or anyone else) don't get them, I am saying that you don't get all of them. Many people enjoyed both sequels very much. There is no evidence that Wachowski went in it only for money and all facts that we have point in the direction that they weren't. Given that the brothers are pretty decent directors, I would be very surprised if they made dreadful movies - it is quite possible that they make a movie that some people don't like, but chances are it would still be a well-made movie. Just like William Shakespeare didn't write bad plays - you may not like all of them and some may be worse than others, but technically all of them are quite good.

      The main complaint I hear about M2 and M3 is actually "I didn't like it or some part of it". One can't say that acting was horrendous because it wasn't (not Oscar-worthy, but all of it quite good and some really great). One can't say special efffects were pathetic, because they weren't. One also can't say the script was bad, because even though it might not have been universally liked, it was as good as in the Matrix, not that original, sure, but consistently good (with some weaker moments, sure). So it's really wrong to claim that the sequels were dreadful, because that's false.

      --
      Future Wiki -- If you don't think about the future, you cannot have one.
    25. Re:10 discs? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What about:

      "No Way Bill!"
      "Yes Way, Ted!"

    26. Re:10 discs? by TiggsPanther · · Score: 1

      Hmmmmm. Maybe the money I shelled out on the Reloaded disc won't be wasted if I buy the box-set.
      If you realyl want it, do the usual of checking bargain bins, sales, and Amazon special offers.

      Tiggs
      --
      Tiggs
      "120 chars should be enough for everyone..."
    27. Re:10 discs? by TiggsPanther · · Score: 1

      I hope these "Never Seen Before Cast And Crew Interviews" are significantly different from the various things I saw on MTV last year.
      All too often "Exclusive footage" isn't, and "Never seen before" has been.

      Tiggs
      --
      Tiggs
      "120 chars should be enough for everyone..."
    28. Re:10 discs? by hambonewilkins · · Score: 1
      Many people enjoyed both sequels very much. Yes, and many people (as evidenced by ticket sales) liked Star Wars: Phantom Menace and Attack of the Clones. However, the majority still holds that they are terrible movies.

      Given that the brothers are pretty decent directors, I would be very surprised if they made dreadful movies. There was never any intention for the first movie to have sequels. Once it was a huge hit, it got sequels. This implies that money had a role. As far as them never directing crap, "Assassins" and "Bound" might have some words with you. And I see where you're going with William Shakespeare, but please don't use his name in the same sentence as Matrix 2 or 3.

      The acting was stiff and wooden, the special effects were overwrought (technically excellent, but incredibly obvious), the script was bad (and far worse than M1). Are these my opinions? Yes. But they are shared by the majority of people and critics. Among critics, the Matrix usually averages 4/5 stars, Reloaded 3/5 stars and Revolutions 3/5 stars. Does it not make you wonder why so many people don't like the second and third film? This isn't some blind hatred - many people have different opinions than yourself. It's fine that you like them, they are fun action movies. But as films themselves, they are very weak (IMO).

      --

      God Bless America. Why? Did it sneeze?
    29. Re:10 discs? by danila · · Score: 1

      I can well understand why the sequels are rated lower. I was certainly not as impressed by them as by the original. But I still maintain that they are really great movies of comparable quality, but very different in almost all ways.

      The ratings are understandable, but it is quite intersting how many of low ratings for M2 and M3 were driven by irrational hatred for the sequels. Check out IMDB, there is a huge share of 1/10 ratings for both M2 and M3 (same can be seen at rottentomatoes, but they don't have a simple way to see how many critics rated the films exactly 1/10). I take this as evidence that opinions of a lot of people should not count, because they clearly suffer from some deep psychological problems.

      The story and the philosophy of the Matrix are really quite simple and unsofisticated. I think that in the sequels the brothers took it too far for the general public and, although clearly within the reach of any remotedly educated person, the movies lacked the simple narrative and the "Wow, that was deep and original!" factor of the first film.

      As for the acting, I simply refuse to believe that with the same actors and the same directors the acting can become stiff and wooden in just 4 years. Some people actually think that reserved and subtle acting was one of the main requirements to letting the brothers tell their story. In particular, Will Smith explained in his recent Wired interview how he would fuck up the film if he accepted Neo's role in the Matrix (by being too lively and expressive) and how Keanu played it as it should be played.

      As Morpheus might have said, where you see stiffness, I see conception, where you see woodeness, I see purpose. I would not change anything in the acting, because everything fits as it is.

      I don't understand what everyone means when they say FX were obvious? So what? That was the movie set inside a computer program. The action was not supposed to be limited by laws of nature. That was the whole point and if that distracted anyone too much to enjoy the film, well, first they were not supposed to be watching it, second they lacked imagination and third, they had some deep psychological problems that caused them to hate the sequels, but, refusing the admit it, they tried to rationalize their hatred instead.

      --
      Future Wiki -- If you don't think about the future, you cannot have one.
  9. If only... by ites · · Score: 4, Insightful

    ...the successors to the Matrix were not some of the most disappointing films I've ever seen, I'd run out and buy tomorrow.

    --
    Sig for sale or rent. One previous user. Inquire within.
    1. Re:If only... by gl4ss · · Score: 3, Funny

      you obviously haven't seen precursors to one other film series..

      --
      world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
    2. Re:If only... by emorphien · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Amen. The second was bad, the third was unthinkable. They totally destroyed what was and could have been a really cool series and a lot of fun.

      After a while it became really painful to watch those CGI'd smith and neo fights that would just drag on forever and had action similar to what a 10 yr old might daydream during english class. It went beyond the "matrix" physics and just became absurd. Everyone was so powerful there was no suspense.

      --


      Presently here, but not there.
    3. Re:If only... by teslatug · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Anyone else reminded of the DBZ fight scenes while watching those fights?

    4. Re:If only... by Planesdragon · · Score: 1

      Everyone was so powerful there was no suspense.

      Acutally, the Neo/Smith fight was fairly well done. They were both "so powerful" that they were a rather even match--i.e., suspense.

      there's a lot wrong with The Matrix. But lack of suspense isn't one of its problems.

    5. Re:If only... by EtherBoo · · Score: 1

      Sounds like some anime's I've seen. If anyone has watched all of Dragon Ball Z, thats sort of what the Matrix was. Neo, like Gokou kept getting stronger and stronger to fight Smith, who was like [Insert Villan Here]. The silly part about it was that during the last fight scene, I felt like I was watching DBZ live. I mean, the flying, the explosions, etc. It had potential, but it turned out to be one big shitty story.

    6. Re:If only... by D-Cypell · · Score: 2, Funny

      The second and third matrix films were a work of pure genius. It was just so subtle you guys didnt see it... you see the W. Bros. were simply elaborating on the 'black cat concept' in the first film....

      It worked on me anyway, at first I believed I had watched two totally shit movies, after much deliberation I decided it was actually the exact same shit twice!

    7. Re:If only... by emorphien · · Score: 1

      Not while I was watching it (i was too much in shock) but now that everyone's mentioning it, yes. It was very DBZish.

      --


      Presently here, but not there.
    8. Re:If only... by Total_Wimp · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Gotta chime in an alternate opinion. I thought the third film, while not as good as the first, was quite fun.

      First, I will not apologize for any of the crappy Zion dialogue. The best I can say for that is that dialogue was in thankfully short supply down there. But the fight down there was breathtaking. It was expertly conceived and executed. I couldn't take my eyes off the screen if I wanted to.

      And the interplay between Neo and Smith was great. The fight was classic unstoppable force impenetrable barrier in the style of a lot of anime and American comic books. The resolution was both classic and unexpected; the only way to win was to give up.

      Speaking of giving up, I think a lot of the bad feelings over the third film were because people gave up after the underwhelming second film. Perhaps the third doesn't "make up" for the second, but how could it? Watch it again and you just may find you actually like it on it's own merits.

      TW

    9. Re:If only... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Suspense? It was about as suspenseful as watching two evenly matched tic-tac-toe players go at it. What the #@$% is so suspenseful about watching two invincible opponents hit each other? Neither side was ever going to win. The only way the scene would ever come to a conclusion is if one of them forfeited, which Neo finally did after what seemed like 45 minutes of obvious futility.

    10. Re:If only... by Biogenesis · · Score: 1

      Everyone was so powerful there was no suspense.

      What? Like in all anime, which seemed to have a big influence on the films in terms of taking things too far.

    11. Re:If only... by Jeff+DeMaagd · · Score: 1

      Why did people like the first Matrix again? There used to be vocal Matrix haters, but I guess they somehow shut up or quit participating in discussions, possibly after somehow having been exposed to the sequels.

      It's like Star Wars. The original trilogy wasn't that great. I wonder if there's some sort of nostalgia. I don't think a movie series like the original SW trilogy would succeed if released today even with updated effects. Same goes for Star Trek, the latest movie made the old generation look not so bad in comparison, but that doesn't mean they were great.

    12. Re:If only... by kahei · · Score: 5, Insightful

      But the fight down there was breathtaking. It was expertly conceived and executed. I couldn't take my eyes off the screen if I wanted to.


      Yes, it was good the way the squids all poured in through this one hole, and the humans all stood stock still and shot at them... and more squids came... and the humans kept shooting... and more squids came and the humans shifted position veeeery slightly, and kept on shooting, just shooting and shooting and shooting until you wonder whether the budget simply didn't stretch to any other sound effect, and then they shoot some more...

      Gripping stuff!

      --
      Whence? Hence. Whither? Thither.
    13. Re:If only... by mbourgon · · Score: 1

      I enjoyed the second and third. I personally think that if it had come out in one shot, people would've enjoyed it more. As it left off, there were several questions that we had several months to ponder. Hence all the "many layers" theories, the Architect discussions, etc, etc. And then the second movie comes out, and it's a gigantic war. Not that I minded - fun all-out action. But considering people were waiting for Neo to realize he was (1) a robot, (2) a simulation, or (3) still trapped inside the matrix - even Zion's in The Matrix, they were disappointed.

      Oddly, I see similar stuff in the Kill Bills. The first one was chop-socky, hong-kong action, while the second was a Western. Matrix Revolutions was a Sci-Fi war film.

      --
      "Sometimes a woman is a kind of religion, she can save your soul & set you free from all your sins" - Bad Examples
    14. Re:If only... by AliasTheRoot · · Score: 1

      You haveta agree that both the 2nd and the 3rd were pretty shitty. As for this boxset, I have a 2 cd thingy of Matrix, no idea what 8 extra cd's of stuff could be about, and honestly dont care.

    15. Re:If only... by emorphien · · Score: 1

      People might be more cynical now, maybe not. But I don't think the original SW was bad. Of course I'm not madly in love with all the LOTR had to offer, although they were good.

      The latest Star Trek movie (Nemesis) seemed to be a better movie to reach out to the masses than most previous films, it was less trekky and more just sci-fi fun. Not an award winner but not horrible.

      The original matrix was cool IMO, broke new ground in special effects and had a lot of interesting ideas and messages in it. However they needed to leave it at that. I don't really think they had a trilogy thought out, they did the first, it was successful so they pimped out the 2nd and 3rd to follow, without giving them much thought.

      --


      Presently here, but not there.
    16. Re:If only... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yep, but I liked the saturday-morning-too-lazy-to-get-out-of-bed Dragon Ball Z better. And the rain + sort of rainbow ending of the movie was very cheesy. Come to think of it most of the CG was boring, childish and cheesy. And the story? pffff

    17. Re:If only... by bfields · · Score: 2, Interesting
      After a while it became really painful to watch those CGI'd smith and neo fights that would just drag on forever and had action similar to what a 10 yr old might daydream during english class. It went beyond the "matrix" physics and just became absurd.

      Of course, the funny thing is that the fights in the first movie were already absurd, at least from the perspective of someone not already exposed to lots of kung-fu movies.

      Come to think of it, the fight scenes in almost all movies are absurd; we just take them for granted because they fit into a language of fight moves we've seen in previous movies. The sound and visuals associated with a given punch may be completely unrealistic, but we understand what it's all supposed to mean for the characters involved so we accept it.

      In each Matrix sequel they built up an increasingly bizarre and abstract vocabulary of fight moves, coming to a sort of logical conclusion with those enormous waves of distorted space in the final scenes. It was that development that was one of the few things that kept the movies interesting for me, exactly because it was so weird.

      --Bruce Fields

    18. Re:If only... by CGP314 · · Score: 1

      Really? I thought it was some of the most poorly executed action sequences I've ever seen. The worst was when the squids break into Zion. That scene should have been 15 seconds long at the most. The squids, if they were truly intelligent would have broken in, swarmed the defenses and taken down that whole big chamber in an instant. That, I think would have been breathtaking. But, not. Instead we get all the squids filing up in a line and flying head-first into gunfire. Lame.

      -Colin

    19. Re:If only... by _xeno_ · · Score: 1
      I went to see the third movie with co-workers as part of a "team-building" event. Sometime before the Zion fight we wound up deciding that the movie wasn't worth taking seriously and started heckling it amongst ourselves.

      Someone pointed out the MagiTek armor, complete with hood-ornament pilot, during the Zion scenes.

      And, of course, once we got to the final fight scene, I just looked at my co-workers and said "Dragon Ball Z." I waited for Neo as Goku to go Super Saiyan and was disappointed that he instead fused with Smith at the end and then defeated him from the inside.

      I do have to credit the third Matrix movie, though: before watching it, I thought a live-action Dragon Ball Z movie might look cool. After watching it I realized that it would be just as tedious using live action as it is in the cartoon.

      (Another ancedote about the third movie involves my sister asking me if it was supposed to be a comedy. She figured they had to be trying for something that bad.)

      --
      You are in a maze of twisty little relative jumps, all alike.
    20. Re:If only... by Santana · · Score: 1


      Not everyone was so powerful. Everybody had his/her limitations, c'mon. There's nothing absurd on bending or breaking the Matrix rules. It is a human prerogative.




      Of course there was suspense! The first one is all suspense! The second one is more action but still had many enigmas to solve for the third, which was so magnificent.


      --
      The best way to predict the future is to invent it
    21. Re:If only... by monkeyfinger · · Score: 1

      I remember thinking that at the time that the squiddies were moving around in a stupid fashion. They stayed in big easy to hit columns and wasted a lot of time swooping around instead of attacking the enemy quickly and efficiently.

    22. Re:If only... by NG+Resonance · · Score: 1

      My feelings exactly. If they were to sell the new version of the original Matrix DVD seperately, I'd buy it in a heartbeat.

    23. Re:If only... by statusbar · · Score: 1

      But you GOTTA buy it! it is the MATRIX! And not only that, Larry Wachowski needs the money for his next Transformation Operation
      --jeff++

      --
      ipv6 is my vpn
    24. Re:If only... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Your correct!
      To all others.
      The films do all fit together in the end and make sense.
      I didn't like the second movie until after I'd seen the third, although I'd rather see a reduced price, boxed, three disk set without all the extra bullshit offered for sale.

    25. Re:If only... by Tiro · · Score: 1

      no way. I thought the second film was as good as the first. the third one had too much religious idiocy.

    26. Re:If only... by Artifakt · · Score: 1

      Yeah, the only way to save that section would have been to have some really big weapons also included, and have them armored enough that the machine guns on the big bots were ineffective and some people had to go to up close infantry modes. Then when they take one down, it could become apparent that killing 99% of the sentinels wassn't going to be enough, as they would try to repair the big stuff, so everyone had to change tactics to take out the big things more thoroughly or nail all those sentinels that weren't just pouring through the obvious breach and sticking with the herd.
      Of course, that would make no sense. The sentinels would have to fight like souless machines, or they would break and run in the face of such a high casualty rate, and they'ed have to be like machines again for their command to rely on the proper numbers of them following a contingency plan to break off and repair a damaged big machine with such inhuman precision.
      The only thing that could have made a scene like that better would be if the Zion-oids were trying to get one of those cool EMV's with the EMP weapons, you know like in the first movie, back into the combat zone, and the tactical command was of divided opinion on whether it would help, but the rank and file soldiers just assumed it would and went with it. I figure that would have never flown, as no audience would tolerate the idea that the people in charge in a war might not all agree or make the best calls, or worse that the best decision might be less than blindingly obvious. I mean, next they'll be saying Eisenhower was unsure D-day was going to work.

      --
      Who is John Cabal?
    27. Re:If only... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Gripping stuff!

      Umm, you misspelled 'tedious' :o)

    28. Re:If only... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My correct?

      ...

      Retard.

  10. Enter the Matrix footage... by rokzy · · Score: 2, Insightful

    ...contains IMO Seraph's coolest moment - "first I must apologise" to one of the Captains with a gun, then backwards somersaults and knocks the gun out of his hand. Then quite a good fight to "get to know him" like he does to Neo.

    1. Re:Enter the Matrix footage... by Surlyboi · · Score: 1

      That's the bit where he fights Roy Jones Jr. Jones gets in a good line after that fight is over.

      --
      Mod me down and I will become more powerful than you can possibly imagine...
  11. Disc Four: Matrix Reloaded Revisited? by Roofus · · Score: 2, Funny

    Nice! I'm going to wait for the Super Special Edition though, I hear it will contain a disc titled "Matrix Reloaded Revisited Revamped".

    That price seems awfully cheap for a ten disc set though.

    1. Re:Disc Four: Matrix Reloaded Revisited? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


      Nice! I'm going to wait for the Super Special Edition though, I hear it will contain a disc titled "Matrix Reloaded Revisited Revamped".

      Thanks, I just got dumber for having read your post. Ass Clown.

    2. Re:Disc Four: Matrix Reloaded Revisited? by PacoTaco · · Score: 1

      They should have called it "The Matrix Regurgitated."

    3. Re:Disc Four: Matrix Reloaded Revisited? by Roofus · · Score: 1

      I've used that same line many times on Slashdot. You repeating piece of shit!

  12. In U.S. Dollars by reidhoch · · Score: 1

    It is gonna be roughly $82.79 as of July 6th, 2004.

    1. Re:In U.S. Dollars by Threni · · Score: 1

      Assuming you live in a State with 17.5% sales tax.

    2. Re:In U.S. Dollars by jgordon7 · · Score: 1

      What are you talking about. The guy just did the conversion from Pounds to US dollars. The site posts 44.99 pounds.

      Current conversion is 1 USD = 0.544 pounds

    3. Re:In U.S. Dollars by squiggleslash · · Score: 2, Informative
      I'd imagine the reference is to the UK (actually EU) sales tax, "VAT" (Value Added Tax), which will be 17.5% for this DVD set. Why is this relevent? Well, in the UK the custom (by law) is to quote prices including sales taxes. So the 44.99GBP price includes that 17.5% making the pre-tax price... erm... 38.29GPB.

      So to get the US price, you need to start with 38.29GBP and convert that to dollars, not 44.99GBP. Otherwise you're also converting the sales tax.

      --
      You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
    4. Re:In U.S. Dollars by Threni · · Score: 1

      You're quite correct - that is exactly what I meant.

      Note though that - although VAT is indeed a EU tax - it can be set at different levels in different countries. Scandanavia has higher tax than the UK, for instance. But it's nearly always included in prices you see in shops and magazines. It might even be an offence to advertise using prices excluding VAT.

  13. New Revolution? by dbm1175 · · Score: 1, Redundant

    Will the boxed set include a version of 'Revolutions' worth watching?

    1. Re:New Revolution? by JaffaKREE · · Score: 2, Interesting

      You know, I bet a lot of people bashing reloaded and revolutions actually enjoyed them - it's just the cool thing to hate on the two sequels. Admit it, you just didn't understand what was going on after Neo's chat with the 'father' of the matrix. Yes, the neo/trinity sex scene/rave was stupid. Don't let a lame 10 minute trip ruin the subsequent 3 hours.

    2. Re:New Revolution? by Prior+Restraint · · Score: 1

      Yes, the neo/trinity sex scene/rave was stupid. Don't let a lame 10 minute trip ruin the subsequent 3 hours.

      I'm going to have to tentatively disagree with you on this one. I admit, the instant the drums started, I immediately flashed to the Special Edition version of Jabba's Palace: I was embarassed for myself, for the other theater goers who paid full price on opening day, and for the actors onscreen. Even now, I still get an echo of that embarassment whenever I see it.

      The thing of it is, once the film was over, and I was thinking about the film as a whole, I realized the scene actually served a purpose. It put into stark contrast the human element of Zion. The rave was a celebration of all things primal, it was a rebellion against the order, the cleanliness, and the cold emotionlessness of the Matrix.

      Was it poorly executed? Perhaps. But I can't think of any way to have made it better. Sweat, dirt, raw sexuality,...

      You know, now that I think about it, it's an interesting point that Club Hell had a lot of the same aspects, but still felt less "vital," for lack of a better word.

    3. Re:New Revolution? by Kenshin · · Score: 1

      I remember a review in a local paper here saying "the film features a sex scene that is so dull and un-erotic that it could only have starred two Canadians."

      --

      Does it make you happy you're so strange?

    4. Re:New Revolution? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      WRONG

      For me it is in fact not cool to hate the sequels. Matrix was a fantastically stylish movie about a favorite subject (VR) with the possibility of substantial philosophical underpinnings. Hope ran high that the possibility would pan out and we'd end up with gold.

      The follow-up movies failed to deliver substance and resulted in rather disappointment. All you got instead of philosophical assertions or even suggestions was continued "token slinging." This is what I call it when an artist takes powerful concepts and just starts throwing them at you without any binding context.

      I for one did not think the rave was a bad thing. There's nothing wrong with a doomed civilization having a party. Quite the contrary -- It's important. It's like the last wish for a death row inmate. Defiant joy. There's a powerful token in a meaningful context. That's not like a ship named Logos that doesn't have anything to do with words (or even really The Word).

    5. Re:New Revolution? by stanmann · · Score: 1

      It had a place and it was a good place, but it wasn't a 10 minute place, it was a 2 minute place... And that is how to make it better. 3 minutes of morpheus speechifying/praying/preaching and 2 minutes of dancing.

      --
      Food not Bombs is a nice platitude but it breaks down when you notice that the Bombees are usually well fed
    6. Re:New Revolution? by sgt_getraer · · Score: 1

      Um... no. The sequals just plain sucked. No 'cool conspiricy' was enacted to bring them down. They sucked a suckitude all their own.

    7. Re:New Revolution? by Prior+Restraint · · Score: 1

      It had a place and it was a good place, but it wasn't a 10 minute place, it was a 2 minute place... And that is how to make it better. 3 minutes of morpheus speechifying/praying/preaching and 2 minutes of dancing.

      Morpheus's monologue lasted for two minutes; the sex/rave scene (from the moment Morpheus left the "pulpit" to the dissolve to "lights out" throughout Zion) was just over five and a half minutes.

      There's exaggerating to make a point, and then there's just making shit up.

    8. Re:New Revolution? by stanmann · · Score: 1

      Ok, so 5 1/2 minutes felt like 10, and 2 minutes felt like 1... so make the 3 minutes longer which is what I wanted... more talk less "action" This is a movie about the prison of our mind, lets use it.

      --
      Food not Bombs is a nice platitude but it breaks down when you notice that the Bombees are usually well fed
    9. Re:New Revolution? by Prior+Restraint · · Score: 1

      First of all, I thought you were trying to say Morpheus's monologue should be trimmed to 3 minutes, so I apologize for the misunderstanding.

      Expanding that bit might be good. Morpheus comes off as a religious zealot in Reloaded, which I think was intended. His faith that Neo is the answer to everything, and The Prophecy is all that matters was fairly obvious, and to me he seemed to put too much faith in the idea that things had to work out in the end, but a lot of people I talked to didn't seem to notice the "blind" part of his blind faith. Letting him rant a little longer like some kind of fire-and-brimstone preacher could have made it more obvious, might drive home the point that his beliefs are perhaps irrational. On the other hand, maybe the goal was to get the audience to buy what Morpheus was selling (he's pretty well established as being a sort of sage in the first film), so maybe subtlety is better. I imagine well-written dialog could be constructed to lead the audience in either direction.

      As to the other points:

      There's another potential problem with trimming the 5 1/2 minute scene. It includes two "important" pieces of dialog ("Some things do change," and "I'm not letting go"). Both of these lines get repeated by the listener later in the film, which appears to be a kind of shorthand for showing a connection, or something learned (compare to the first film, where Neo copies Morpheus's "come get some" hand gesture). Surely some of that can get trimmed and the point still made, but the rave/sex itself (the contiguous part without any dialogue at all) is under three and a half minutes (I have the DVD handy; sorry if I'm being a fanboy). I agree, it feels like an eternity, but it's really not as long as everyone thinks. The cynical part of me thinks the scene was just an excuse to put another song on the soundtrack, but I'm overall satisfied with the end result.

      You said: "This is a movie about the prison of our mind, lets use it."

      I don't know that I even agree with this statement, though. The first film was definitely about that, but I don't think the sequels were necessarily about that anymore. I mean, Revolutions? It seemed that more happened outside the Matrix than in it, and by then it felt like Zion and (former) Agent Smith were the center of the story. I'll let somebody else argue about what the trilogy as a whole was or wasn't about. It just seems to me that the individual films had separate agendas to push, and I think that's why a lot of fans of the original have a problem with the sequels.

      I do kind of wish I hadn't seen more of Neo's butt than Trinity's, though. :-)

  14. That's sweet... by Shads · · Score: 2, Funny

    ... next year we'll have the super platinum deleted scenes 15 disk version, and the following year the titanium unloaded reloaded version with 20 disks...

    I suppose waiting for the matrix will be alot like waiting for LoTR-- Gotta sit through all the regular, bronze, gold, platinum, titanium editions to get the best version... I just hate to buy and then rebuy later to get the additional content.

    --
    Shadus
    1. Re:That's sweet... by Iscariot_ · · Score: 1

      I just hate to buy and then rebuy later to get the additional content.

      Then just wait until the 2nd or 3rd "edition" before buying?

    2. Re:That's sweet... by YomikoReadman · · Score: 2, Informative
      oooo.. an LoTR troll.. I'll bite.

      Since you either actually don't know, or just want to bitch about extended editions, here's the real happenings on LoTR. There will be no boxset. Due to the fact that it's going to run for way more than he'd like it to, Peter Jackson canned it. As for different versions of the films aside from what's already out there, that's not going to happen either; the extended versions that have either been released or are in the process of being released will be the longest that they ever get.

      --
      I have no regrets, this is the only path.
      My whole life has been "UNLIMITED BLADE WORKS"
    3. Re:That's sweet... by r00zky · · Score: 2, Funny

      I'll opt for the unobtanium version, thank you.

      --
      I'm a chainsmokin' alcoholic sociopath, so-ci-o-path
    4. Re:That's sweet... by dafz1 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Let's call it "George Lucas Syndrome".

      The Wachowskis/Peter Jackson will release the version "they really wanted to make", after the royalties start drying up(though Jackson will be able to beat this horse for a while with the release of The Hobbit). I could see a redo of the battle of Pelennor Fields, or maybe the attack of the Ents at Isengard(that sequence bothered me).

      Unlike Lucas and the original triogy, the Wachowskis can't make the new versions any worse than the original release.

    5. Re:That's sweet... by Migrant+Programmer · · Score: 2, Interesting

      You mean like they did with The Matrix? Oh wait, they didn't. The collector's edition was released at the same time.

      You mean like they did with Revolutions and Reloaded? Oh wait, they didn't. There are no collector's editions.

      And of course, this is exactly like LOTR where the producers told everyone straight up that there would be a standard edition and an extended edition for each movie.

      Not to mention that it wasn't exactly difficult to predict that box sets would become available for The Matrix trilogy and the LOTR trilogy..

      Sorry, I forgot. Ha ha ha, the standard DVD joke! OMFG ROFL etc.

    6. Re:That's sweet... by XO · · Score: 1

      How else is Larry Wachowski gonna pay for that sex change operation?

      Information here in case you haven't heard about it.. Larry wants to become Linda.

      --
      "Champagne for my real friends - and real pain for my sham friends!" http://ericblade.postalboard.com/
    7. Re:That's sweet... by Dogtanian · · Score: 1

      How else is Larry Wachowski gonna pay for that sex change operation?

      It's a game of chinese whispers; the true (original) story is that a bunch of crazed Matrix fanboys saw the third film and are after the Wachowskis, "in order to cut off their meat-and-two-veg".

      --
      "Slashdot - News and Chat Sites Deviant". (Click "homepage" link above for details).
    8. Re:That's sweet... by chamblah · · Score: 0, Troll
      I myself didn't see that comment as a troll, more as a comparison between trilogy dvd releases.

      And other than you saying something, what proof do you have to back up your claims?

      Seems more like you're the only one that's acting like a troll.

    9. Re:That's sweet... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah. I am tired of paying 2$ for every edition in the open chinese market.

    10. Re:That's sweet... by joeljkp · · Score: 1

      In all seriousness, do you have a source for the box set thing? I've been waiting for some kind of box edition of all three, but if that's true, I may just buy each one...

      --
      WeRelate.org - wiki-based genealogy
    11. Re:That's sweet... by joeljkp · · Score: 1

      They're redoing The Hobbit? When? Peter Jackson?

      --
      WeRelate.org - wiki-based genealogy
    12. Re:That's sweet... by YomikoReadman · · Score: 1

      Well, seeing as this question has been brought up by two people, and I don't feel like posting it twice, I'll give you both a way to check up on it. Go to your local video store, like a suncoast, or something along those lines, and ask about it. I too, was interested in the possiblity of one, but was informed rather recently that he stated that in a recent interview he gave, and IIRC, it was in Entertainment magazine, or something along those lines. I only saw a clipping of it, but long story short, since there's not going to be anything extra added, and never was, due to the cost of what a box of all 3 extended versions would run, on top of whatever else got thrown in, would make it somewhat prohibitive, as it was estimated to be somewhere around $200 for the set. This makes a certain amount of sense to me, seeing as the limited versions of the exteneded edition are running upwards of $80 a piece, and the extended versions themselves MSRP at around $60. I'm not saying that I've paid that much; I bought both Fellowship and Two Towers for under $50 for the pair, and I dont' expect to pay much more than $30 for RoTK, either.

      --
      I have no regrets, this is the only path.
      My whole life has been "UNLIMITED BLADE WORKS"
    13. Re:That's sweet... by Filmwatcher888 · · Score: 1
      NNNOOOO!!!!!
      My Precious!!!!
  15. Finally... by NeoFunk · · Score: 5, Funny

    A TEN disc Matrix box set. The geeks really HAVE inherited the earth.

  16. great by NanoGator · · Score: 5, Funny

    Here comes a bunch of "Matrix sucks" comments. Hurry up, I'm anxious to read them!!

    --
    "Derp de derp."
    1. Re:great by warkda+rrior · · Score: 0, Troll

      Here you go: Matrix sucks!

      --
      You need to install an RTFM interface.
    2. Re:great by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      See the comment bellow me. :-)

  17. Will this sell? by mekkab · · Score: 5, Interesting

    This isn't a troll; I just have a warped, slashdot view of the world.

    As far as all the geeks I know here say, the last movie SUCKED (or WAS TEH SUCK).

    Are there enough remaining fan boys who loved the series the justify a purchase like this?

    I know that for Lord of The Rings a 40 disc box set (including a full disk of Viggo Mortensen clearing his throat in the morning) would be snapped up in a jiffy by everyone here (*well, everyone but the Tolkein die hards).

    --
    In the future, I would want to not be isolated from my friends in the Space Station.
    1. Re:Will this sell? by octal666 · · Score: 1

      Probably, even thinking myself that second, and mostly third movie sucks a lot, will be pretty tempted to buy the pack myself, why? Well, first for the adicional footage in the second film, and also because the original movie is still The Matrix

      --
      DON'T PANIC
    2. Re:Will this sell? by jmays · · Score: 1

      Without a doubt, I would buy a 10 disk Matrix box set before I would buy a 10 or 15 or 20 or ??? disk LoTR box set.

      --
      KARMA TAG! You're it.
    3. Re:Will this sell? by FortKnox · · Score: 1

      Maybe it'll sell for the enter the matrix scenes, cause most geeks hate the game.

      I enjoyed the game and saw all the scenes. Not really worth having IMHO... except one lesbo kissing scene (the merovingians wife (who makes Neo kiss her in the second one) kisses Jada Pinkett-Smith). Not all that exciting, but some guys really get off on that stuff.

      --
      Good quote, too many chars. Seriously, the slashdot 120 char limit sucks!
    4. Re:Will this sell? by Wiwi+Jumbo · · Score: 1

      I'm the same only because I wouldn't trust the LoTR set to be the final... there'll always be another "New and Improved" DVD set around the corner...

      --
      Wiwi
      "I trust in my abilities,
      but I want more then they offer"
    5. Re:Will this sell? by bobaferret · · Score: 1

      I watched all three just last night, and I still think they all rock. They are good movies, a lot of fun as well as interesting trying to figure out what the directors were aiming for in the symbolisim area. So, yhea, I'll make someone give me these for christmas.

    6. Re:Will this sell? by joeljkp · · Score: 1

      From reading other comments on this topic, it seems that it's been known for a while that there will only be Standard and Extended versions of each LOTR movie (and someone said no box set, but who knows...).

      --
      WeRelate.org - wiki-based genealogy
    7. Re:Will this sell? by danila · · Score: 1

      I don't see it that way. In LOTR, FOTR was The Shit, TTT was just shit and ROTK was utter shit. So buying a bundle would mean wasting 67% of the money. The Matrix, on the other hand, had 3 good, but very different films. The Reloaded might not have been to everyone's liking, but you can't ignore the fact that about 50% of it was some of the the best non-stop action ever filmed.

      --
      Future Wiki -- If you don't think about the future, you cannot have one.
    8. Re:Will this sell? by hambonewilkins · · Score: 1
      but you can't ignore the fact that about 50% of it was some of the the best non-stop action ever filmed.

      What a psychological conundrum: how do you ignore something that's completely false? Woah!

      --

      God Bless America. Why? Did it sneeze?
    9. Re:Will this sell? by wuice · · Score: 1

      Are there enough remaining fan boys who loved the series the justify a purchase like this?

      Yes.

    10. Re:Will this sell? by DarkEdgeX · · Score: 1
      including a full disk of Viggo Mortensen clearing his throat in the morning

      Only if it was DTS encoded. I'm afraid the full experience of listening to Viggo clear his throat wouldn't be properly conveyed in Dolby Digital. It would also need to take advantage of surround sound properly (e.g. - correctly echoing the noise from the rear surround and surround back channels).

      --
      All I know about Bush is I had a good job when Clinton was president.
    11. Re:Will this sell? by Wiwi+Jumbo · · Score: 1

      Yeah, I've heard that, but I don't really believe it.

      --
      Wiwi
      "I trust in my abilities,
      but I want more then they offer"
  18. Does anyone care? by sphealey · · Score: 0, Redundant

    Is there anyone out there who (a) thinks that Matrix 3 was anything except poor/disappointing (b) cares about this 73 disk set?

    sPh

    1. Re:Does anyone care? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You misread, it says "10 disc set." I can see how the 1 looks like a 7 with a short top, and the 0 looks like a 3 with the left side removed, and the right side concaved in...

    2. Re:Does anyone care? by squiggleslash · · Score: 2, Insightful
      It wasn't disappointing because it followed Matrix 2 which was so awful that, frankly, if Spiderman 2 had been called "Matrix 3" it would have seemed like a quality sequel.

      That said, my opinion of Matrix 3 has lowered since I watched it originally. I don't think it was the piece of crap most people claimed it was, but it certainly wasn't a worthy sequel to the original.

      --
      You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
    3. Re:Does anyone care? by JaffaKREE · · Score: 1

      Reloaded evolved the storyline, people (geeks) complain that it was too convoluted and self-aggrandizing.
      Revolutions was a 2 hour war/fight, people complain it didn't evolve the storyline how they wanted.
      What DO you want ?

      (A: To complain)

  19. Like the acting.. by Durzel · · Score: 5, Funny

    Does it come in a wooden box?

    1. Re:Like the acting.. by stienman · · Score: 3, Funny

      Does it come in a wooden box?

      Suitable for burial. Unmarked gravestone not included.

      -Adam

    2. Re:Like the acting.. by bfields · · Score: 1
      Does it come in a wooden box?

      Hey, I learned something about acting from the Matrix. I mean, I'd always heard people talk about stuff like "chemistry" before, but I never knew what they meant until I saw that first kiss in the Matrix and realized that I felt, well, absolutely nothing.

      And I'm normally a sucker for movie romances. Was there anyone that was moved at all by the supposed romance between Trinity and Neo?

      --Bruce Fields

    3. Re:Like the acting.. by dubiousmike · · Score: 1

      i think you get a free bowl of soup with it too...

  20. Enter the matrix by alex_tibbles · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I've never played this so may get this for that (footage interleaved as Extended Reloaded). Dispite its faults, the Matrices are slick and impressive action films, the first being a finely balanced roller-coaster (with amusing product tie-ins etc.) and the other two being poorly balanced but still exciting to watch (IMHO).

    1. Re:Enter the matrix by glesga_kiss · · Score: 1
      I downloaded the version that has Enter the Matrix intersperced with the second movie about a year ago from the usual places. It was quite interesting, definately worth a watch if you liked the film. It was just all the live action created for the game, which did intertwine well with the story. They were filmed at the same time with the same cast and crew.

      In fact, that's the one thing I did like about the follow-ups. The Anamatrix tied in quite well with the story being fleshed out in the other parts as well as the game. None seemed to loose from this, you could watch any one and get a complete story, or them all to get a few "ah, yes..." moments as there is a cross-reference between them. It was well done, just a shame that the celuloid one was a bit of a let-down. As a package, I'd say it was worth a look just to see all the extra bits.

      I'm quite interested in this version though. When I downloaded it, I thought it was just going to be like the Phantom Edit; an unofficial cut-up. Strange that it now gets a commercial release...

  21. Trinity by mrpuffypants · · Score: 5, Funny

    I believe that this box set will also include the 30 minute long death footage of Trinity that was cut for 'consistency'

    "Neo"
    "Yes"
    "Lets act out MacBeth before I die.....one last time!"
    "Hark!"

    1. Re:Trinity by mustangsal66 · · Score: 1

      wait wait!

      30+ more minutes of Trinity's ass in leather... Now that I'd buy.

      --
      Why worry? Each of us is wearing an unlicensed "nucular" accelerator on his back.
      Sig changed for readability by G.W.
    2. Re:Trinity by DMUTPeregrine · · Score: 1

      Oh please. Richard the III would be so much more appropriate. (Time wise at least)

      --
      Not a sentence!
  22. Revisionist history by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    In this version, Greedo "whoas" first. And some of the dialog has been 3d rendered.

    1. Re:Revisionist history by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      And in the slowmotion shots the guns and bullets have been replaced with walkie-talkies and popcorn.

    2. re: revisionist history by ed.han · · Score: 1

      feature set of new 10 disc set:

      *all good guys guns are replaced with walkie talkies.

      *elrond--er, agent smith--shoots first

      *new footage of neo climbing up mumlak's trunk.

      *new footage of neo throwing a defeated agent smith clone down a flight of stairs, then surfing down the stairs on the agent.

      ed

  23. Last Flight of the Osiris? by Speare · · Score: 1, Interesting

    I hope they include the Animatrix short, "Last Flight of the Osiris." It's the only track of the Animatrix disc which I think is worth anything, and was pretty well done. I think Squaresoft (Final Fantasy: Spirits Within) did the animation for this, and aside from the state-of-the-art-but-still-weak lip synch job, it matched the Matrix look pretty well.

    It would be neat if the W Brothers beatify/canonize this track as official Matrix lore.

    --
    [ .sig file not found ]
    1. Re:Last Flight of the Osiris? by philbowman · · Score: 5, Informative

      That would be on disk seven - The Animatrix. As far as being canonical goes, I understood that was the reason for seeing Animatrix before Reloaded - that was a chunk of story you should know about (but then so was the game, which is why I'm glad they're inserting that into the movies). Just glad I decided not to buy 2&3 - I was sure they would bring out more complete disks in time (if not better-scripted).

      --
      Phil
    2. Re:Last Flight of the Osiris? by hoggoth · · Score: 1

      > aside from the state-of-the-art-but-still-weak lip synch job, it matched the Matrix look pretty well

      No, I'd say BECAUSE of the weak lip synch it matched the Matrix look pretty well.

      --
      - For the complete works of Shakespeare: cat /dev/random (may take some time)
    3. Re:Last Flight of the Osiris? by boogy+nightmare · · Score: 1

      I think ytou will finds that thye already did, I beleive that they had input to all of those mini films (although not directors or producers) so they did in fact tie into the rest of the movies and the mythos invovled.

      check this out for a more indepth info

      http://www.matrixfans.net/anime/

      --
      Kingdom of Loathing (www.kingdomofloathing.com) Addicted is me
    4. Re:Last Flight of the Osiris? by nomel · · Score: 1

      look again...it is included.

    5. Re:Last Flight of the Osiris? by Karhgath · · Score: 1

      Why does everyone love the last flight of the osiris that much? The opening duel scene is long and boring, catering to young geeks that wants to see *virtual* skin. Wow, he cut her shirt, wohoo!

      What's the appeal? The last part is a little better, but the story is weak, only having maybe 2-3 important bits.

      Sure, the animations was superb (felt a bit contrived in some parts tho) but still, can't see why everyone loved it so much. I much prefered the others. Heck, I believe the 4 free animatrix they offered on their website are the bests IMHO. The art in Detective Story is more appealing to me, and the animation on Program was incredible. The Second Renaissance is packed with info and the art is also nice.

      I dunno, sure Squaresoft anims are usually high quality, but I was pretty disappointed with it after that much hype.

    6. Re:Last Flight of the Osiris? by ctishman · · Score: 1

      I gotta disagree with you on the "only one worth watching" bit. The Second Renaissance and Detective Story were really well done, and seemed to be far more loyal to the story than the second or third movie were.

    7. Re:Last Flight of the Osiris? by hambonewilkins · · Score: 1

      For your sig: it's Shubs and Zuul's. Just FYI.

      --

      God Bless America. Why? Did it sneeze?
    8. Re:Last Flight of the Osiris? by hoggoth · · Score: 1

      > For your sig: it's Shubs and Zuul's. Just FYI.

      No, it's not.
      I can't find a link right now, but I already had this argument on slashdot. Two thirds of the sources found spelled it "Shuvs and Zools", one third spelled it "Shubs and Zuuls".

      --
      - For the complete works of Shakespeare: cat /dev/random (may take some time)
    9. Re:Last Flight of the Osiris? by snuf23 · · Score: 1

      "Just glad I decided not to buy 2&3 - I was sure they would bring out more complete disks in time (if not better-scripted)."
      I'm glad I decided not to buy them too - but for entirely different reasons.
      I will say - the Animatrix was pretty cool. Most of the shorts where very nicely done with decent stories. It was nice to see so many different animation styles in one place. By far more entertaining than the 2nd and 3rd movies in my opinion.

      --
      Sometimes my arms bend back.
    10. Re:Last Flight of the Osiris? by TiggsPanther · · Score: 1

      It's even more complete/canonical when you realise the the ETM footage of the Logos crew watcing the last message from the Osiris is actually (static-fuzzied) footage taken straight from the Animatrix short.
      It all fitted together, and I like that. They didn't just make animated shorts and a game that used the franchise name and merely paid lip-service to the storyline. At least two parts of Animatrix contained extra backstory to the sequels, and the game (even though no the best game in the world) decided to take the player through some of the action going on elsewhere, rather than the tried and tested "Play through the major sequences of the film, but modified to fit a gaming engine".

      It's effort we can only dream of seeing in many other licensed movie franchises.
      Yes, there movies out there with better sequels and probably even better games. But none of them make such a coherant whole. Just imagine what could happen if the same level of effort in keeping the spin-offs consistent was put into a better-sequeled series.

      Tiggs
      --
      Tiggs
      "120 chars should be enough for everyone..."
    11. Re:Last Flight of the Osiris? by alex_tibbles · · Score: 1

      thanks - I saw when I looked again. It wasn't given much description in TFA which explains why I missed it.

    12. Re:Last Flight of the Osiris? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      According to IMDB it's Zuul.

  24. There was only one Matrix Movie by RobPiano · · Score: 1, Interesting

    I only acknowledge one Matrix movie. I know they did make 9 DVDs worth of advertising/money gouging however..

  25. Milking the franchise by sql*kitten · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I'd bet dollars to donuts that next year, there'll be another special edition, a widescreen edition, a directors cut... how many times can you get the same people to buy the same movie with just a few tweaks? I don't know but George Lucas must have a pretty good idea by now, and the Wachowskis are his best students.

    1. Re:Milking the franchise by WebGangsta · · Score: 1
      two words, take your pick:

      Blade Runner The Terminator

    2. Re:Milking the franchise by 120duff978 · · Score: 1

      Yeah, because I can't count the number of Star Wars boxsets that have been released on DVD.

    3. Re:Milking the franchise by sql*kitten · · Score: 1

      Yeah, because I can't count the number of Star Wars boxsets that have been released on DVD.

      Lucas is merely waiting for VHS sales of the 4 or so different Star Wars box sets to dry up, then he can repeat the sequence on DVD.

  26. Boxed sets... by DrXym · · Score: 0

    ... are a great way to palm off shitty sequels for $$$. I hear the Robocop trilogy is available as a boxed set too.

    1. Re:Boxed sets... by nharmon · · Score: 1

      I agree, Robocop I was the best, and only good movie in the series. The enforcement droid 209 scared the hell out of me.

    2. Re:Boxed sets... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I picked up the Robocop set for about $25. I just consider it getting the unrated cut of the first movie (which used to only be avalable in a $40 SE) with the two other movies as bonus features.

  27. As Long As... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    As long as the box set contains the super-duper/director's/extended cut AND the original theatrical release, I'll be happy. I wish more studios/directors/etc. would do this.

  28. Better ending? by JohnFromCanada · · Score: 1

    I will only purchase this set if they completely re-shot the third movie. The first movie was great; the second was mediocre and focused too much on amazing special effect scenes and the third I found to be incredibly poorly done. I thought this trilogy would be amazing at first however, in my opinion, I was shown to be wrong. I just can't wait for the LOTR series on DVD. I would love to hear what other Slashdotters thought about the entire trilogy.

    1. Re:Better ending? by Marc_Hawke · · Score: 1

      What they need to do is re-edit 2 and 3.

      I -- Was 'the' Matrix movie. They needed no other.

      II -- Wasn't a Matrix movie, it was a 'trapped in the computer' movie with some annoying/unrelated stuff about some subterrainian people who are scared of robots.

      III -- Wasn't a Matrix movie, it was a 'humans against the machines' war movie with some annoying/unrelated stuff about some people trapped in a computer.

      They need to re-edit it and change the titles. All of the 'in-the-computer' parts of 3 should be moved to 2, and it should be called "Tron 2" and be 100% about anthropomorphizing processes in a computer.

      All of 'humans-vs-robots' stuff in 2 should be moved to 3, it should be renamed "Humanities Last Stand" and be 100% about a war between humans and their almost sentient AI robot overlords.

      In "Tron 2" Neo is either a 'user' jacked into the computer (like in "Tron") or he's just an actual OSS program fighting against the evil DRM overlord (like Tron himself.)

      In "Humanities Last Stand" Neo is just a rebellious member of the community with a wild plan to attack the robots at the central brain instead of of fighting the minions at the gates.

      I'm pretty sure they could pull it off, with just reditting all the footage, and doing a few pickup scenes.

      --
      --Welcome to the Realm of the Hawke--
  29. Quadrilogy by Scorchsta · · Score: 0

    So...when's the fourth one coming out?

  30. Extra footage by singleantler · · Score: 2, Insightful

    "Matrix Reloaded Extended Version (190 minutes)

    New cut incorporating 55 minutes of footage shot for the 'Enter The Matrix' game"

    But is it enough to make it a good film?

    I like this product, it shows they really want to suck as much money from the fans as possible while the second and third film still have some residual hype going. Having the mass of extra material will set a level that many other production companies will try to match in the future, just for bulk. It's just a shame it isn't for a better set of films.

    --
    "What if they're using IE?" "I've dumbed Mozilla down to cope with it." - BOFH
    1. Re:Extra footage by SuiteSisterMary · · Score: 1
      But is it enough to make it a good film?

      Much more coherent, if nothing else.

      --
      Vintage computer games and RPG books available. Email me if you're interested.
  31. Matrix sucks comments by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You read it here. Hope that makes you feel better!

  32. RTFA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    RTFA

  33. A few things we might want, such as: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    - A version of Reloaded that doesn't suck
    - A version of Revolutions that doesn't suck horribly
    - An ending not designed to make one violently ill
    - A box set that comes with two free movie tickets to any other movie, as a means of apologizing for the money wasted on Reloaded
    - Rather then taking up all this space, a box set that only features stuff worth watching.

    Oh wait, we already have that last one. Its called the first movie!

    1. Re:A few things we might want, such as: by TheKubrix · · Score: 1

      oh god, someone PLEASE mod parent as redundant

    2. Re:A few things we might want, such as: by Dysson · · Score: 1

      Agreed. How is this post even funny?

      How about this one?

      I liked Matrix better when it was Dark City.

      Hahaha...I'm so witty...mod me up!!

  34. 10 discs sounds a lot by Timesprout · · Score: 4, Funny

    But I believe an extension to your house will be required to store the LOTR special edition discs.

    --
    Do not try to read the dupe, thats impossible. Instead, only try to realize the truth
    What truth?
    There is no dupe
    1. Re:10 discs sounds a lot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Please, can SOMEONE find a link to that picture of the Lord of the Rings 27 disc pack (or whatever it was)? It was damn funny, but I can't find the right search terms :(

  35. They laugh.... by FatSean · · Score: 0

    ...but I feel the same way. Guess the original's mind-bending concepts were too much for the average movie-goer and they had to turn it into an action movie. Nothing wrong with action movies, but I had much higher expectations.

    --
    Blar.
    1. Re:They laugh.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      yeah, the ending was absolute trash.

    2. Re:They laugh.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A couple of comic book fanboys set out to make 3 movies about a comic book hero's life. They probably didn't even realize that nobody wanted to see the "comic book" aspects of the story (i.e. #2 and especially #3), so they didn't think they were pulling a bait-and-switch on mainstream movie goers. Bastards. I shoud never have rented the second two movies. I want those 5 hours of my life back.

      The sad part is: I let #2 give me false hope about how good #3 would be. I thought "hey, that wasn't as bad as I had heard. Sure, they could have done without the freeway chase, the burly brawl and the stupid zion party/sex scene, but it was a decent (2.5/4 stars) movie otherwise." I thought the 3rd movie would go into more depth with the Architect's dilemma for Neo. Instead it was just a crappy war movie + comic book ending (1.5/4 stars).

  36. Standard disclaimer on package: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Batteries not included.

    (Until you buy it that is)

  37. Now I may gloat by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I knew something like this would happen, so I avoided buying the last Matrix on DVD. Finally, a wise choice on the DVD front.

    Similarily I've not purchased Return of the King as I am sure something like this will be out in a year or so. I can wait...

  38. Free your wallet, Neo by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    I can't wait to watch "The Making of 'The Making of the Matrix'".

  39. and a few things you might want... by quantaq · · Score: 0, Redundant

    and a few things you might want...

    Oh yeah? Like a version of movies 2 and 3 that don't suck?

  40. Torture Regiment by Ravensign · · Score: 4, Funny

    Ok.

    20 Hours of Matrix footage + 4 hours of sleep a day would work out to a pretty nice punishment for murderers.

    Of course, the Trinity death scene would be removed due to 8th amendment considerations.

    --
    "Sig free in '03!"
  41. Yep by Nugget · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I had the same reaction. I stopped caring about these films after seeing the second one in the theater. I've never seen the third one either.

    1. Re:Yep by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

      There was a second one?

    2. Re:Yep by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      gee, thanks for the info. you should form a support group so you can get over yourselves... as if anyone cares what some pseudonymous fuckwads predictably did once they decided they didn't like a movie sequel. how about why you did it? that would be at least marginally interesting data.

    3. Re:Yep by tolan-b · · Score: 1

      I felt the same, but I saw revolutions at a friends one night, and actually it put reloaded in perspective a bit for me tbh.

      The thing for me is that in the 2nd and 3rd parts the matrix stopped being represented as being like the real world, and instead became a complete fantasy world. That was why I hated the 2nd, but I actually started to enjoy it in the 3rd.

      The first part is still far and away the best though.

    4. Re:Yep by ziggy_zero · · Score: 1, Funny

      Yeah, seriously. The only Matrix I recall is the original. What are these sequels people keep talking about?

      --
      I belong to the ______ generation.
    5. Re:Yep by Fred_A · · Score: 3, Funny

      I didn't want to see the third one either but those bastards at Aeromexico forced me to watch it during my flight back to Paris.

      I listened to music during most of the movie though. That showed em.

      --

      May contain traces of nut.
      Made from the freshest electrons.
    6. Re:Yep by N3koFever · · Score: 1

      It's a joke that's gone on too long and people just won't drop. Like those Star Wars prequels and the special editions.

    7. Re:Yep by cbreaker · · Score: 1

      I agree that the first part was the best, but it was the whole concept of "what if.. this isn't real? What is real?" that made people like it so much.

      You can't beat that feeling in a sequel. Well, there's some exceptions. But not many.

      I didn't like the second matrix, and I thought that the third one was a little .. *too much* with some of the fight scenes. But all in all, if you look at the trilogy as a whole, it's not bad at all.

      They probably could have combined the second and third films together and it would have been better.

      --
      - It's not the Macs I hate. It's Digg users. -
    8. Re:Yep by ObiWanKenblowme · · Score: 1

      I've had that same reaction about people who feel the need to go on and on about how bad they think the Matrix sequels were.

      --
      Obvious exits are NORTH, SOUTH, and DENNIS.
    9. Re:Yep by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I liked the second one better than the first, and the third one just sucked.

    10. Re:Yep by CrackHappy · · Score: 1

      I agree with you there.

      Personally, I had very mixed feelings after the second, but decided to reserve judgement until I had seen the third and saw the Matrix as a complete whole. I now own all three DVDs and found that I truly liked the entire series as a whole when I watched sequentially with no break at all. I did not have any problems suspending my disbelief and really got into the story much more.

      The important thing to remember is that these are JUST MOVIES and are for entertainment, not personal enlightenment. That would be like watching Little Buddha to attain Nirvana.

      --
      1f u c4n r34d th1s u r34lly n33d t0 g37 l41d Capitalization really works: i helped my uncle jack off a horse
    11. Re:Yep by DMUTPeregrine · · Score: 1

      No, but there was a mass hallucination after the Good Brothers died in a plane crash.

      --
      Not a sentence!
  42. Basic ROM Features? by ajs · · Score: 2, Interesting

    What does "Basic ROM Features" mean on disk 10?

    1. Re:Basic ROM Features? by Winterblink · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Automatically installs crummy DVD player software that totally takes control away from the good one you alread had. That's just my guess though :)

      --
      "I'm a leaf on the wind. Watch how I soar."
      -Hoban Washburn
    2. Re:Basic ROM Features? by pete-classic · · Score: 2, Funny

      One would presume that it is MS BASIC on ROM. I can finally get rid of those "NO ROM BASIC" errors on boot!

      I guess that explains why Smith was able to spread to every other system in the Matrix, and why it has to be reloaded so damned often.

      Damn you Gates!

      -Peter

    3. re: basic ROM features? by ed.han · · Score: 1

      why obviously, it contains a licensing crossover effort featuring max grodenchik and armin shimerman commentaries while the 2 reprise their ST: DS9 roles. after all:

      "and profit all that matter, isn't it, brother?"

      ed

  43. DVD/CCA? by WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWX · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    Are these discs DVD/CCA encrypted? Or is the Matrix still locked in the Matrix? I only have Linux and I'd like to buy this but I don't think it's legal for me to watch Neo fight The System because the The System won't let me.

    I'm assuming since this is posted on Slashdot where we all use Linux that this is region 0, otherwise nobody would be interested... but please confirm?

    Thanks.

    1. Re:DVD/CCA? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      use xine, ogle or mplayer to play any region dvds.

  44. Why buy crap for 44.99? by 32bitwonder · · Score: 1

    The second and third instalment only served to destroy what could've been a great series (Episode 1 anyone?). Their production had absolutely nothing to do with making good movies but to solely capitalize on the franchise - as do so many other s(pr)equels.

    If you already have the first movie on DVD, bully for you. If you don't, feel free to go purchase the first film - but don't feel obligated to contribute more money to crap which shouldn't have been made in the first place for the sake of filling an empty bit of shelf space! By doing so, you're only helping to validate this sort of thing!

    1. Re:Why buy crap for 44.99? by slimyrubber · · Score: 1

      Actually the Matrix was planned as a trilogy to begin with, but the Warner bros. were uncertain about it so they put a hold on Reloaded and Revolutions until the first became a success. If you check out the official site, you can check out the storyboard of pics dated as back as 1999. Plus they explained it themselfs on Matrix Revisited.

      As for the suckyness in the story.. well dont look at the trilogy as three movies but one movie cut in 3 parts. First part was about the story, second was about the action and third was about the climax. Now compair that to any movie/story thats known to man kind...
      Of course that doesnt justify the cheesy dialogs and over-action focusing on sfx just for the heck of it.. but then again, The Matrix (1st) was _so_ good that even sequels didnt manage to live up to it.
      It did looked that the sequels were trying to be matrixy like those b-grade movies and commercials and underworld.

      --
      [ I can not bring myself to believe that if knowledge presents danger, the solution is ignorance ] -- Isaac Asimov
  45. "Lord of The Rings a 40 disc box set" by da5idnetlimit.com · · Score: 1

    Where ! Where !

    Do you think they will also include a shot of Gollum naked ? with hot grits ? /me cannot wait !!! Gollum Porn NOW !
    8)

    --
    It takes 40+ muscles to frown, but only four to extend your arm and bitchslap the motherfucker
    1. Re:"Lord of The Rings a 40 disc box set" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You must be old here ;P

  46. No by koi88 · · Score: 1

    The geeks really HAVE inherited the earth.
    No. The government make these to keep us in our rooms. After this comes the 15 DVD set of LOTR, then...

    --

    I don't need a signature.
    1. Re:No by jest3r · · Score: 1

      ... then a 25 disc Starwars Special Extended Lucas Edition complete with the ghost of Jar Jar and Qui Qon Jin inserted into the original trilogy Jedi ghost sequences for continuity purposes.

    2. Re:No by Mr.+Neutron · · Score: 1
      with the ghost of Jar Jar and Qui Qon Jin inserted into the original trilogy Jedi ghost sequences for continuity purposes.

      Nah, Jar-Jar and Qui-Gon didn't die anywhere near Luke Skywalker. If Amidala/Padme/Whatever had been preggo at the time, Mace Windu and the other Jedi who died on Neo-Geo (or whatever) might have been in Luke-Death-Range, though.

      --
      dinner: it's what's for beer
  47. 10 Hrs should be enough by valintin · · Score: 0, Redundant

    This should be enough material for someone to re-edit the last two movies into something worth watching. Looking forward to the Matrix Remixed.

  48. TRINITY DIES AT THE END OF "BEHIND THE SCENES" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Troll

    Spoiler in subject

  49. Enter the Matrix footage by WormholeFiend · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I've always wondered why no one ever made a "phantom edit" of Matrix Reloaded with that extra footage...

    1. Re:Enter the Matrix footage by mbourgon · · Score: 1

      Because everyone really enjoyed it at the time. It was after the third one came out, and didn't go the way they expected, that they started saying how it was TEH SUCK.

      --
      "Sometimes a woman is a kind of religion, she can save your soul & set you free from all your sins" - Bad Examples
  50. DAMMIT! They are doing it again!!! by Chanc_Gorkon · · Score: 0, Troll

    Can't greedy Hollywood just bring the frickin thing out ONCE! :P I, like almost every other freakin slashdotter are probably going to go and buy it...CRAP! :P

    --

    Gorkman

  51. Does it bother anyone else... by jbarr · · Score: 5, Interesting

    ...that movie studios are filming scenes specifically to cash in on the DVD aftermarket? It used to be that I would go the movie theater to see a movie on "the big screen" to see the film "the way it was meant to be seen." Now, when I go to see a movie in the theater, I feel like I am being cheated because they simply aren't showing the "entire" movie. It's now become a given that DVD's will contain "extra" or "deleted" scenes. At sometimes over $9.00 for tickets, I feel cheated by this.

    A colleague of mine said "Well, you're paying the extra money for the extra DVD content." Hmmmm. Shouldn't movies now be marketed as "Movie Theater Edition" or something?

    --
    My mom always said, "Jim, you're 1 in a million." Given the current population, there are 7000 of me. God help us all!
    1. Re:Does it bother anyone else... by Migrant+Programmer · · Score: 2, Insightful

      All movies go through a process called "editing" where the film is cut to fit the director's vision and the studio's time constraints. There have always been "extra" or "deleted scenes." With DVD, we get to see them. Before, we did not.

    2. Re:Does it bother anyone else... by koreth · · Score: 5, Informative
      There is no conspiracy here. Directors have always been forced for one reason or another to cut out footage they originally intended to include in a film. That's why there's usually a person with the job of "editor" on the crew of a movie -- in addition to helping select which particular angle is the best one for a scene, that person's job is to trim out the fat and keep the pacing of the movie on track.

      The difference these days is that where the studios used to take all that extra film and throw it in the trash (or stuff it in poorly-maintaned warehouses where a lot of old footage has rotted away or -- I'm not joking -- been eaten by rats) now it's preserved and put on DVD for interested viewers.

      Yeah, there are a few movies like the LotR trilogy where the director shoots a scene knowing full well that it's intended for the DVD. And I suppose given its financial success, we may see additional "shoot some extra scenes for the video game" cases like Matrix Reloaded. But the vast majority of deleted scenes on DVDs are simply the result of the absolutely ordinary process of editing a movie into shape.

      When it comes on again, try watching "Project Greenlight" if you want an illuminating view of what a director goes through and how much of the intended film actually ends up on screen. I believe I heard they're doing a low-budget horror movie for the next project, which ought to be fun.

    3. Re:Does it bother anyone else... by TopShelf · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Peter Jackson discussed this on one of the LoTR discs, pointing out that for home DVD viewers, a director can take more time to flesh out characters or plot. At home you can always hit pause when you need to and take more time to enjoy the film, whereas commercial theaters have a greater interest in churning the audiences in and out the door.

      I wonder if we'll ever see a long commercial film released again in the US that actually contains an intermission. You'd think that with the money made at concession stands, this wouldn't be a bad idea...

      --
      Stop by my site where I write about ERP systems & more
    4. Re:Does it bother anyone else... by biglig2 · · Score: 1

      I saw a DVD the other day that said it has "deleted scenes shot specially for this release". Eh?

      The sequels are odd though. I think if you had:

      Matrix + (animatrix / 2) + (Reloaded + EnterFMV - rave) + (revolutions / 8)

      It'd not be half bad, so this box set is a step on the way.

      --
      ~~~~~ BigLig2? You mean there's another one of me?
    5. Re:Does it bother anyone else... by guybrush876 · · Score: 1

      No if there is a clear announcement by the studio that there will be two versions, like New Line did with LOTR, the second version is clearly too big for the theatre. But in this case there was no announcement of the extended version of reloaded giving people a choice to by one or the other, worse this version is included in pack with products that everyone interested in seeing that version already ones.
      I hope New Line doesn't mess up the work it has been doing and that other studios follow the example of announcing extend version before realising the normal ones.

    6. Re:Does it bother anyone else... by stienman · · Score: 4, Insightful

      You've got it all wrong.

      The movies theaters are for showing the "film as it was meant to be shown to the masses" not the "film as intended by the director".

      Movie theaters exist because home theaters are very expensive and it's more cost effective to see the movie in the theater than to invest in a good home setup.

      Just as the movie industry had to change with the introduction of videotapes, they will again have to change when home theaters are less costly and more common.

      But the upshot is that a movie theater is set up to have a fixed ticket price per movie. Some movies will never go longer than 1.5 hours, and others will require 3 hours or more. Theaters are not set up for graduated pricing, and they make significantly less money showing a longer film than showing a shorter one unless it also runs for several weeks longer and attracts a steady audience.

      Theaters will not show long films that are not guranteed to draw huge audiences. Producers know this and force directors to cut films to a reasonable length. Directors, knowing that they will "always have the DVD", do so reluctantly and then polish the film for the extended DVD release. Did you notice how LoTR 1 played in theaters for weeks longer than LoTR 3? There's a cost/benefit ratio here. If you want to see the movie as the director intended (given the budget they had) then you buy the extended edition. Consumers are happy, fans are happy, studios make millions, and the smurfs escape from gargomel once again.

      So don't feel cheated. You're paying $9 for a $9 experience. This is the edition the director expected you to spend $9 for. Remember that the directors and the theaters are at the mercy of the movie studios/producers. If you don't like it, then spend time writing letters and faxes to the studios - both when they do good and when they do bad. But don't blame the theater owners when they start raising prices across the board to accomodate the one or two movies a year that are 4 hours long.

      Remember that we American Consumers like our flat rates.

      -Adam

    7. Re:Does it bother anyone else... by Kupek · · Score: 1, Funny

      I think Gettysburg had an intermission.

    8. Re:Does it bother anyone else... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Movie theaters exist because home theaters are very expensive... "

      Movie theaters exist to make money. Home theaters are expensive if you spend a lot of money on it. Some people are happy with a basic television. Some go for a slightly better television set with a surround sound system. It doesn't even cost that much these days for a decent sized and quality television and a good sound system.

      Movie theaters still exist because people are willing to go out and watch movies there.
      Beyond that one comment, your mostly right.

    9. Re:Does it bother anyone else... by jbarr · · Score: 4, Insightful

      While I definitely agree with your explanation, I still feel like there's an underlying "falseness" to the whole process.

      Take, for example, "Close Encounters of the Third Kind" which I saw the week it was released back in the late 70's. As many know, the "theater edition" was very different from the "special edition" now available on DVD. OK, I'll concede that my liking the theater edition MAY be due to seeing it first, but the tone and mood of the "theater edition" is very different from the "special edition"--I personally prefer the "theater edition".

      Additionally, the "theater edition" is/was the edition that the critics and viewers reviewed and talked about. It was the edition that made the press. It was the edition that won the awards. It was the edition that made the studio its money. Do we now have to have Oscars for after-market releases? (Maybe they do--I rarely watch awards shows anyway.)

      And the kicker is that the theater edition (and not just of "Close Encounters") of movies is often not available on DVD, only the "director's cut". These "special" or "director's" editions continue to be available, but the editions that launched it all disappears. While I certainly embrace the ability to see what the director "really wanted" and the extra content is typically worth the price of the DVD, I feel like it's a form of re-writing history.

      --
      My mom always said, "Jim, you're 1 in a million." Given the current population, there are 7000 of me. God help us all!
    10. Re:Does it bother anyone else... by nine-times · · Score: 1
      Right. Supposedly, the extended edition Lord of the Rings DVD's came about as a result of negotiations between the studio and Peter Jackson.

      Peter Jackson shopped the films around to various studios, and many studios would only deal if he made the whole story crammed into 1 film. For some reason, Hollywood knuckleheads didn't think making 3 would be profitable. Jackson refused. Jackson wanted to be able to make 3 films, and shoot them all at the same time, and to be able to make them however long it took to tell the story. This was a deal breaker for most studios, since it meant, even if you assumed huge profits, it would be a huge up-front expense, and years before you see pay-off.

      So they negotiated. The final deal was that the movie, as released to theaters, could be no longer than 3 hours and 15 mins (or something like that). Jackson wasn't too happy, but apparently it's hard to get theaters to show movies much longer than that, because then you have to have intermission and whatever. So, to appease Jackson, they said he could make a director's cut DVD, in addition to the standard "theatrical" cut.

      The reason, again supposedly, that the two cuts aren't released together, is because Jackson is still actively working on the director's cut even after the theatrical cut DVD is released.

      Now, you can call shannannagins, but it sounds reasonable, and I'd bet, though the studio doesn't exactly hate the idea of people buying 2 copies of the same movie, there are often reasons why DVD releases work out the way they do.

    11. Re:Does it bother anyone else... by stienman · · Score: 1

      In the special features I recall a segment where Peter explains that he was simply hoping to get a studio to let him do two films at the same time, and the person he talked to said, "Wouldn't it be better as a trilogy?" and that's how he got the trilogy, and picked the studio.

      I haven't heard about any deal making with the extended editions. I expect he gave them the song and dance about making exceptional amounts of money by releasing two DVD sets a year and they bought it. Knowing that it'll be extended before you start editing the first cut probably makes it cheaper (you can take notes and the secondary editing process takes very little time comparitively).

      As far as the length, I heard (don't recall where, this could be a myth) that they set the limit to 3 hours. The first two movies they let him go over a bit. The last movie he showed in the screening room and simply turned it off at exactly 3 hours (well before everything was resolved). They wanted to see the remainder and afterwards when he asked them what should be cut they said nothing and allowed it to go to print.

      I love this kind of gossip, however untrue it may be.

      -Adam

    12. Re:Does it bother anyone else... by Stickster · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Directors have always been forced for one reason or another to cut out footage they originally intended to include in a film.

      It's not always the case that directors have to be "forced" to cut their films. Many are good judges of pacing and story who enjoy and embrace the trimming process, and can be quite ruthless on their own. For instance, Ridley Scott considers his original 1979 theatrical cut of Alien the best version, and was not forced into it by any stretch of the imagination. (See his interviews and commentary on the recent Alien Quadrilogy set for more details.) In fact, the studio had to beg him to revisit the cut for a 2003 "Special Edition" that would serve as a kind of reverse advertisement for the DVD set, as well as the upcoming Alien Vs. Predator.

    13. Re:Does it bother anyone else... by nine-times · · Score: 1
      'In the special features I recall a segment where Peter explains that he was simply hoping to get a studio to let him do two films at the same time, and the person he talked to said, "Wouldn't it be better as a trilogy?" and that's how he got the trilogy, and picked the studio...
      As far as the length, I heard (don't recall where, this could be a myth) that they set the limit to 3 hours.
      '

      I saw an interview with Jackson where he claimed:

      1. The first few studios he went to wanted to make it 1 movie, and he wanted to make 3, and he wanted to make all three at once. I think the whole business about asking to do 2 movies came after several rejections from other studios. So he went in with a comprimise in mind, but they gave him more than he asked for...
      2. It was in his contract that he had to provide the studio with a cut that was under some time limit, but I don't remember what the limit was. I'm pretty sure, though, that the limit was greater than 3 hours but less than 4 (something like 3:30 or 3:15).
      3. It was a result of this time limit that he had put into his contract that he would get paid to release a 'directors cut' over which he, of course, would have full control, and be able to make as long as he wanted. The reason this warrented a contractual ammendment was that he wasn't merely going to add in some deleted scenes, but he'd might want to recut large portions of the movie, create new portions of the soundtrack or new visual effects, or possibly bring in the actors for re-dubbing and such.
      4. The reason the extended editions were late was because he was still working on them, not because of strategic marketing.

      Now, of course, these are just his claims during a public interview, so who knows if the statements were crafted to be 'good pr'. Actually, I don't remember where I saw the interview, so it may have been one from the extended edition of one of the first two movies. I may also be putting information from multiple interviews together.

    14. Re:Does it bother anyone else... by fcw · · Score: 1
      In the special features I recall a segment where Peter explains that he was simply hoping to get a studio to let him do two films at the same time, and the person he talked to said, "Wouldn't it be better as a trilogy?" and that's how he got the trilogy, and picked the studio.

      Yeah, I remember this story along these lines: Jackson et al had hawked the project around studios for more than a year, and had been making the pitch as a pair of movies. When the Newline executive saw their proposal, his first words were "I don't understand", and Jackson's heart sank. Then the executive said: "It's three books, why aren't you making three movies?" and Jackson knew he'd found a studio that understood.

    15. Re:Does it bother anyone else... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Two words: Fast Forward.

    16. Re:Does it bother anyone else... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The theatres would not want to show the movie because at 4 hours, that means a lot fewer showings per day for that particular theatre. Especially when compared to a movie that is only 100 minutes long.

      They might make it up on concession sales, but that's iffy. Not to mention the fact that most folks can't sit still for 90 minutes, let alone 4 hours (the biological necessities, don't ya know).

  52. Re:pound this by TopShelf · · Score: 0

    From Google:

    "The monetary unit of the United Kingdom, composed of 20 shillings (s.) of 12 pence (d. for denarii, Latin for "pence") each. At one time, the British monetary unit was a troy pound of silver, which became known as a pound sterling. The term sterling stems from "Easterlings," the name given to North German merchants who established a Hansa, or trade guild, in England in the thirteenth century. Their coins were noted for their uniform reliability as to weight and fineness."

    --
    Stop by my site where I write about ERP systems & more
  53. 10 discs padded out... by Brain+Stew · · Score: 1

    More or less :D.

    Reloaded was dreadful. I didn't see Revolutions, but I heard it it didn't help much.

    Oh well, I really want to upgrade my original Matrix disc, so if a US equivalent comes out in time for Christmas, I may upgrade.

    --
    "Here's a spoiler: You're will die alone."-Triumph the Insult Comic Dog
    1. Re:10 discs padded out... by bygimis · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Revolutions was far, far worse.

      Morpheous should have died on the roof of the truck in reloaded. He does nothing the rest of the film(s). This would have supprised us and given the film some dramatic impact.

  54. 3.141 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That's already been said, and the sentiment has been expressed for ages.

    The first one was amazing, the other two sucked (or was teh suck)

  55. *Nothing* was as bad as 'Highlander 2' by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative
    Not even any of the Matrix sequels.

    Just read these. And to think I actually went to see "Highlander 2" the first weekend it was out - the audience was laughing at the film. Gawd it's awful. It would probably make a good basis for a MST3K showing, though.

  56. useless matrix by laurentc · · Score: 4, Insightful

    go Read Neuromancer by Gibson

    It's much better value and probably will last you a lifetime copared to this inept excuse for a movie.

    --
    My drinking team has a Rugby problem
    1. Re:useless matrix by Ubergrendle · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Existenz, which was released simultaneously to The Matrix, is also a good alternative if you want to watch a movie with more depth. Cronenberg has really grasped a strong sense of the 'what is reality' themes from Philip K Dick, along with the technology/biological fusion themes of Gibson. It was more of a thinking movie than an action shoot-em-up. The Matrix was fun to watch (unlike the sequels), but Existenz is a movie that I thought about when leaving the theatre.

      PS Side note... While writing this post I just realised that Dick and Gibson are/were essentially emmigre Americans who live(d) in Vancouver, BC. I wonder if its the rain that alters their perceptions of reality in such creative ways?...

      --
      John Maynard Keynes: "When the facts change, I change my mind. What do you do?"
    2. Re:useless matrix by rishistar · · Score: 1

      I would also recommend Dark City for a different take on the alternate reality thang.

      --
      Professor Karmadillo Songs of Science
    3. Re:useless matrix by CeramicNuts · · Score: 1

      and of course there is Dark City, one of the best sci-fi movies ever.

    4. Re:useless matrix by DoktorGonzo · · Score: 1

      eXistenZ is PAUSED!

  57. party footage? by whynotme · · Score: 4, Funny

    The Matrix Reloaded: New Cut With 55 Minutes Of New Footage Inserted Back Into The Film
    Does this mean that we'll finally be able to see the end of the "Cavern Dance" party??? I've been wondering how that turned out...

    1. Re:party footage? by gowen · · Score: 4, Funny

      I want to see the bits where Keanu and Carrie are getting it on, and he keeps bashing his head on the extremely low ceiling that is above him.

      --
      Athletic Scholarships to universities make as much sense as academic scholarships to sports teams.
    2. Re:party footage? by themurph17 · · Score: 1

      what about the orgy at Morpheus' place? (MTV Movie Awards spoof w/Andy Dick)

  58. Re:pound this by perly-king-69 · · Score: 4, Informative
    Nice. Only about 30 years or so out of date. This refers to the system before 1970 when there were 240 pence in the pound.

    Since then it's all gone decimal. 100 pence to the pound.

    Don't use google for your homework kids!

    --

    --
    This sig is inoffensive.

  59. Larry W getting a sex change by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Read here

    Now this could be a reason for the change in the trilogy's direction in the sequels. We knew that the bros were kinda whacky but this is really strange. Considering the whole love theme in the sequels this really bring to light how far the these movies are from the first one.

    1. Re:Larry W getting a sex change by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Larry Wall is getting a sex change??!?! Will this be in the next State Of The Onion?

  60. Arwen by gumpish · · Score: 1

    I think I could watch a few hours worth of Liv Tyler as Arwen brushing her hair. Or doing long division. Or sleeping...

  61. You forgot... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    You forgot this one:

    "Excellent!" (followed by a riff on the air-guitar.)

  62. News? by jaghatarjankare · · Score: 1

    It's a lot of discs, but it's not news, and for two reasons:

    1. Only M1 was any good. M2 and especially M3 really bit it.

    2. We thought it was futuristic, only to find out it was all inspired by some freaking dominatrix.

    Oh yeah, there's a third reason: Bill Gates and Steve Ballmer think it's cool. Then it's definitely not news.

    Move on. Go home. Dinner's ready.

  63. Burley Man = Agent Smith by Brain+Stew · · Score: 1

    Burley Man is a reference to Agent Smith and his cyphers. The fight with Neo and the 100 Smiths is called, "The Burley Brawl." Why? I have no idea, but that's what it's called.

    --
    "Here's a spoiler: You're will die alone."-Triumph the Insult Comic Dog
  64. Note to mods: Parent = Joke by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's poking fun at the spoilage attempts when Matrix 2 came out. It's not a "troll" by any means.

  65. Illegal, right? by WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWX · · Score: 1

    Aren't the methods you're proposing illegal in the United States? I thought I read in the Jack Valenti interview by the MIT student (posted recently to Slashdot) that there were no legal DVD/CCA players for Linux.

    Are you proposing that I break the law, or do you know something I don't? Someone moderated me "Flamebait" presumably because I'm ignorant of something, so I'd appreciate it if I could be let in on the secret instead of being moderated down.

    1. Re:Illegal, right? by SirNAOF · · Score: 1

      We've all heard this before. It's not a "legal" DVD player, blah blah blah.

      If I spend the $15 - $20 on a DVD, I'm going to play it on whatever I damn well please.

      --
      Jeremy Baumgartner
    2. Re:Illegal, right? by joeljkp · · Score: 1

      Linspire DVD Player

      You have to install Linspire as the OS though.

      --
      WeRelate.org - wiki-based genealogy
  66. Opinion... by morgdx · · Score: 0

    I haven't watched any of the films, but I did find revolutions disapointing.

    --
    http://jfin.org/jFin pure java open source financial library
  67. Admit it - the sequels are actually really cool by LightStruk · · Score: 1, Insightful

    I'm probably going to get modded down for expressing a dissenting opinion, but I feel that this communal Matrix sequel bashing is unwarranted.

    Admit it - you loved the ghost twins and the car chase extravaganza. You watched with mouth agape as Neo held his own against waves of Agent Smiths. You feasted your eyes on the gunfight in the club at the beginning of Revolutions. You delighted in the apocalyptic, desparate battle between the defenders of Zion and the machines.

    And finally, you still found the philosophy intriguing. Do humans have free will, or are we as predictable and predestined as the Oracle and the Architect believe? Had you ever really thought about how much we depend on machines before the councilman's conversation with Neo? What would the offspring of software be like, and what happens to beings without "purpose?"

    So, suck it up. Sure, there are major problems with the sequels. Nevertheless, I am GLAD I paid money to see them, and so are you.

    1. Re:Admit it - the sequels are actually really cool by Kobold+Curry+Chef · · Score: 2, Interesting
      Admit it - you loved the ghost twins and the car chase extravaganza.

      Nope, thought they were respectively dull and way unbelievable. Funny how all the overpasses in the Matrix are 10 feet taller than in the real world.

      You watched with mouth agape as Neo held his own against waves of Agent Smiths.

      Only in the Burly Brawl. After that, I was just bored by it.

      You feasted your eyes on the gunfight in the club at the beginning of Revolutions. You delighted in the apocalyptic, desparate battle between the defenders of Zion and the machines.

      Nope. Couldn't get past the stupid stupid design of the mechs and ammo loading.

      And finally, you still found the philosophy intriguing.

      More like pretentious and, as Robert Plant once put it, "deep and meaningless."

      Nevertheless, I am GLAD I paid money to see them, and so are you.

      That sounds like the thinking of a machine to me.

    2. Re:Admit it - the sequels are actually really cool by poppageek · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Do not forget the dock battle. APUs were neat and the battle intense.

      Trinity getting to see the sun and cloud tops drove home the idea of having always lived underground and never seeing daylight.

    3. Re:Admit it - the sequels are actually really cool by somoney · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I agree ... I like them all very much. Any Slashdot reader who likes Anime should have liked the 3rd one since it had all the taste of Anime during the final fight. Too many people, IMO, just didn't get it all in the end. Oh well...

      --
      And you know this MAN!!!
    4. Re:Admit it - the sequels are actually really cool by soccerisgod · · Score: 1

      The farce will be with you...always.

      --
      If a train station is a place where a train stops, what's a workstation?
    5. Re:Admit it - the sequels are actually really cool by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Something I once used as a nickname, the phrase "Each line of the program creating a new effect, much like poetry", which compares poetry to the art of coding and programming, made a friend of mine particularly happy, he liked the phrase a lot, being a programmer himself. Of course then I told him it's not my phrase, it's from the Bros.

      The Merovingian, the French guy, says it while he's analyzing what is cause and effect in the restaurant. My friend did see the movie, it's just that at that time everyone was checking out Monica's big and large "assets", and failed to listen to this, may I say, quite interesting and beautiful comparison.

      Now when one says "the philosophy" of the movies, I guess most people just hear that, "the philosophy", which they'll probably think it's the whole "humans vs machines", and should we create or not create machines, because one day they may turn against us.
      But that's not all "the philosophy", specially since the sequels introduced many more themes, themes which for the majority of the viewers seem to be pretty much inexistent, themes like cause and effect, what makes us tick, why we do the things we do, also choice, explored in the first movie, is grandly expanded in the sequels.
      There's also exploration on the themes of ressurection, the whole science aspect of the Matrix, how it works, the reaching of the Nirvana state, the choice to sacrifice oneself as so many did in the movies, like Trinity, the Oracle, Neo, the parents of the girl Sati, Captain Mifune (the captain of the mechs).
      Now most of these themes make sense to think about in the world today, we see in the movies people who are capable of giving themselves up for others, something badly needed in our world, a sense of sacrifice for another. I can't see how that is meaningless.

      I mean, the whole point of view on love by the program Rama Kandra, father of the little girl, isnt that just great, how these AI's that have been living amongst a human community seem to better understand concepts that we thought belong only to us!

      Also I fail to grasp how the majority of the geek community doesn't appreciate the many nods to programming and to guys like us, for instance with the introduction of the grand white hallway in the matrix, like a backdoor way, a programmer's maintenance corridor, or the Architect, who sees himself as the master programmer, or the usage of an appropriate hacking tool when Trinity hacks the powerplant power rerouting, or even the whole deification of Neo, who started out this journey as a simple cubicle worker, maybe even checking out slashdot.org now and then!

      Then there's the whole symbolism bit, which I do believe many of you wouldn't like exploring, because it's based on free association, there aren't rules, basically you just see something in the movie that could be similar to something else, and you make a connection, it becomes a symbolism, it means something, there's a point to be made there.
      The symbolism may mean zip to you, but for me and my essay on the movies, it was a very important way of making and stating my points, basing myself on metaphors introduced in the movies.
      And also another thing, the music, these movies have some of the best musical scores ever, specially Revolutions, with Neodammerung topping everything, I mean it's like a Wagnerian Opera with hindu lyrical chorus, that were taken straight from the Upanishads, sort of the Bible for Hinduism, and each and every line makes a point, it means something, like the first three who speak about each of the movies, and then the lyrics evolve into describing the One, the unification of all, and this exploration, this dissertation in hindu helps the viewer who is interested make sense on the choices and the why of Neo letting himself go in the final battle, accepting his destiny like a regular program would.
      Basically, while Thomas Anderson took the red pill, to get out, Neo took the blue pill in the end, he sees the good in the virtual world, sees how they can change it and change the

    6. Re:Admit it - the sequels are actually really cool by myside · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Actually, I'll take it a bit farther. I thought the second one was the best of the lot. It had more kung fu and less dialog.

    7. Re:Admit it - the sequels are actually really cool by Bluesman · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Except she would have seen the sun in the Matrix, so it wouldn't have been THAT fascinating.

      Hell, she wore sunglasses almost the entire time. What were they for?

      --
      If moderation could change anything, it would be illegal.
    8. Re:Admit it - the sequels are actually really cool by _xeno_ · · Score: 1

      You are aware that there is more to anime than Dragon Ball Z, right?

      --
      You are in a maze of twisty little relative jumps, all alike.
    9. Re:Admit it - the sequels are actually really cool by Billobob · · Score: 1

      I'll admit that some of the battle scenes were good, and I liked the car chase (although I thought that Terminator 3 had it beat for car chases *in the same year* since more stuff blew up, and it was all done the old fashioned way). However, the philosophy/dialog part is just flat-out stupid; I could have dealt without all the stupid banter between Neo and the Architect, and without pretty much every single scene in Zion.

      It would have been a much better movie if all the speaking parts were thrown out and shit just blew up, because none of the dialog really helped the movies in any way, and was the reason so many people hated it.

      --
      If you have to ask, you'll never know.
    10. Re:Admit it - the sequels are actually really cool by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're kind of gullible, aren't you?

    11. Re:Admit it - the sequels are actually really cool by ChilyMack · · Score: 1

      Except - no. I, uh, really didn't like them. But thanks for pretending you know what I think. It is possible to balance plot, effects, and loyalty to the original in a sequel - Spiderman 2 did it winningly, even improving on the first. With the Matrix sequels, I didn't clap my hands soundlessly and gaga over the effects; I felt insulted by the unhidden and unmixed motive. In case you're still looking for it, it's the same shade as the color scheme - green.

      I wanted my money back and an apology. If that's "GLAD", then sign me up.

    12. Re:Admit it - the sequels are actually really cool by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, I did not find the philosophy intriguing. In the first movie the philosophy was somewhat subtle. In this one they tried to stuff it down your throats. I liked the gunfights and all that but my god the philosophy was an afterthought on their part.

    13. Re:Admit it - the sequels are actually really cool by c64k · · Score: 1

      Seeing the same effects laden chase scene spread across two movies gets old.

      The philosophy in the matrix is that of introduction to philosophy courses. Sorry if that doesn't excite me much anymore.

      The acting in the second and third movies is painful to watch (exceptions in the third movie for a handful of the zion defenders). Full of stilted monologues doing a hard sell for the philosophical themes that somehow managed to be in the first movie without huge neo(n) signs pointing them out.

      Sorry if I've failed 'to grasp and appreciate themes that explore our world and life in it.' But if you liked the movies, good for you, I hope that the themes in it spark your interest and you look into philosophy more.

      --
      CIA Industries - Running the world for fun and profit
    14. Re:Admit it - the sequels are actually really cool by somoney · · Score: 1

      Yes, yes I do. Thanks...

      --
      And you know this MAN!!!
    15. Re:Admit it - the sequels are actually really cool by fahrvergnugen · · Score: 1

      And yet her cavefish eyes were somehow magically not seared from her skull the moment she became the first person to see sunlight in hundreds of years.

      --
      Even Jesus hates listening to Creed.
    16. Re:Admit it - the sequels are actually really cool by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You liked Spider-Man 2? You think it was BETTER than the first?

      GAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

      Go home. It's past your bedtime.

      (Slapstick works in Army of Darkness. Not so much in a Spider-Man movie.)

    17. Re:Admit it - the sequels are actually really cool by sewagemaster · · Score: 1

      i think with the 2nd and 3rd movies, you have guys like joel silver that are just total sell-outs - trying to capitalize on everything they can. the repeated scenes was what seemed to "work" for the first film, so they're trying to have as much of that in the sequels to please the fans, so to speak. and they tried to "raise the bar so high that there is no bar" - fuck, i hate it when he uses that line all the time. it only raised expectations.

      I did actually enjoyed the dialogues because of the philosophical aspects, perhaps partially because I didn't take any philosophy courses. The acting may have been "wooden" because that's the way they wanted neo's character to be - not making this up, read this somewhere. as for the other characters, well, they werent meant to be the a-list big budget actors in the first place because the first film wasnt meant to make any money :)

      The ending was quite horrible and poorly done, and I'm hoping that the edited scenes will fill in some of the gaps to make it more coherent....

      the score mentioned in grandparent post about the hindu lyrics are quite awesome i think.

    18. Re:Admit it - the sequels are actually really cool by Vaevictis666 · · Score: 1

      The sunglasses were so they could hack a HUD in :P

    19. Re:Admit it - the sequels are actually really cool by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You know, if I wanted reality I would go outside. NOT TO THE MOVIES, get a friggin life jerkwad.

    20. Re:Admit it - the sequels are actually really cool by danila · · Score: 1

      I am not sure there was sun in the Matrix... I just fast forwarded through the movies and all scenes seem to take place on cloudy days.

      --
      Future Wiki -- If you don't think about the future, you cannot have one.
    21. Re:Admit it - the sequels are actually really cool by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      The highway scene was certainly the best car chase I've ever seen.

      But, every other action scene in the sequels were overly long and, worst of all, repetitive. No I did not like them. And the final Zion battle was really one of the most tedious IMHO.

      As for the philosophy part, that had all already been covered in the original. I did not appreciate being hammered over the head over and over and over again for two whole sequels.

      In short, I found the sequels added almost nothing to the original movie. And unfortunately the original wasn't exactly an example of stellar acting, you must admit.

    22. Re:Admit it - the sequels are actually really cool by SuiteSisterMary · · Score: 1

      Recall the end scene with the Oracle and, I believe, the Architect discussing the future...watching a sunrise.

      --
      Vintage computer games and RPG books available. Email me if you're interested.
    23. Re:Admit it - the sequels are actually really cool by Bullet-Dodger · · Score: 1
      Thank you, I agree. The first Matrix was a really tight, lean, dark, self-contained movie, and it's great.

      The second was a sprawling, fun, pulpy, super-hero movie and I think if people accepted it as such they'd like it more. IMO, if the second one was released on it's own and didn't have to live up to people's expectations from the first one, it would be remembered as a really really good super-hero movie.

      The third one, I thought, didn't do a good enough job at tying things up and explaining things from the second. It had some very good moments, but it went totally off the rails and mystical to explain things. Neo didn't stop the sentinels in reloaded because he was still in the matrix, or because he was a machine himself. No, he had... a connection... to the source. Also, the ending seems to set things up a little too neatly for the upcoming MMORPG.

    24. Re:Admit it - the sequels are actually really cool by Bullet-Dodger · · Score: 1

      Uhh, she was the first person to see sunlight but it's not like they're living total darkness underground. Her eyes would be accustomed to some light.

    25. Re:Admit it - the sequels are actually really cool by AvantLegion · · Score: 1
      I'm probably going to get modded down for expressing a dissenting opinion

      No, you'll get modded down for telling everyone else that their opinions are false, and that they actually did "like" the movies.

      However, not everyone shares your low standards.

    26. Re:Admit it - the sequels are actually really cool by metalligoth · · Score: 1

      Thank you for speaking out. I was looking around the comments, like the members of the council in Reloaded asking "is there not one among you"?

      It doesn't make sense. This is the Star Wars movie of the new generations. Then again, I remember from being really young that ROTJ got a bunch of shit for it's "singing muppets" and whatnot, too. I think that once people have seen one really great sci-fi they just can't stand to see the sequels. I mean, face it. It was 1999. Think back to that time. The tech boom. Did you really go to see this movie with the Bill and Ted's Adventure guy with any expectations at all? Of course not. That's what made the first one so good. You weren't expecting it to be the Star Wars of a new generation, so when you saw it, you walked out with mouth agape. Then the next two come out, and you have all these preconceived notions in your mind as to what it should look like. It's nothing like what you wanted it to be, of course, because you're not the the damned writer.

      I am appalled at the lack of appreciation on Slashdot for what I think is the greatest set of Science Fiction and Philosophy movies of all time.

      I don't know. Maybe it was just a movie for "goths" and that's why the rest of you "didn't get it". Maybe you should all get out more or something.

      Sorry, I don't mean to be flamebait here. If you were all, as a community, saying Windows ME was the best OS on the planet I'd be just as ticked off at you all, and just as perplexed.

    27. Re:Admit it - the sequels are actually really cool by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      sry
      some ppl can't suck it up here
      40% overrated
      Wow

    28. Re:Admit it - the sequels are actually really cool by mabu · · Score: 1

      I am appalled at the lack of appreciation on Slashdot for what I think is the greatest set of Science Fiction and Philosophy movies of all time.

      Ex-Squeeze me? With all due respect, you're insane. It's weirdos like you that convince the studios they need to subject everyone else to trash packaged as "science fiction". Please stop paying to see this crap.

      The Matrix wasn't a sci-fi movie at all. It was a Kung Foo CGI circle-jerk.

      The first movie introduced an interesting premise, but then it turned into an action-adventure Schwartzenager-bash-fest with no rhyme or reason. The sequels just piled higher-and-deeper.

      Go to your video store and check out some REAL sci-fi... the sci stands for "science", not "Superfluous Computer Imagery".

    29. Re:Admit it - the sequels are actually really cool by Card · · Score: 2, Funny

      Andy? Is that you?

    30. Re:Admit it - the sequels are actually really cool by petrus4 · · Score: 1
      >That's what made the first one so good. You
      >weren't expecting it to be the Star Wars of a new
      >generation

      That was exactly the problem, as I said earlier. Originally it hadn't been planned on being the "Star Wars of the new generation," but was actually going to try and be something halfway original, and go in its own direction. It became the Star Wars of the new generation for the simple reason that it was thought that a new Star Wars would make lots, and lots, of money. ;-)

    31. Re:Admit it - the sequels are actually really cool by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The problem wasn't with the movies. It was with the rediculously high standards and brain numbing expectations that majority of you /.'ers expected from it.

      I read all the /. responces to the movies before I went and saw 2 and 3 in the series, and almost didn't watch them. How glad I am that I ignored most of your comments.

      No sequal could EVER live up to your outrageous expectations. Half of you wanted it to focus on the biblical and philisophical side. The other half read what you all said about it and just joined the flock of sheep.

      Lets change the movies to suit the needs of the few shall we.

      There is no Movie 2 in the series. We dont learn about the corrupt programs that aren't under the control of the Matrix. We dont learn about the poor traits that have passed onto the "superior life" on the planet now. We miss the personal touch that Smith gived us playing the virus in the machine.

      Movie 3 is 15 minutes long. We dont see Neo Surrendering to Smith. We dont see Neo paving the way for peace between humans and machines again. What we see is the highly mechanical and electronically evolved machines drill a hole into the top of Zion and Nuke all the last remaining humans. Then being content with having killed their creators who forced them to be slaves, they turn themselves off and human/machine life on the Earth finishes.

      Maybe they should have just canned the 2 and 3 totally and just had a 5 minute opps movie where the machines realised that it was much easier to use Cows or Sheep in the millions to power themselves. Now that would have made the big bucks.

      Face it, no ending, Hell no series after the first would have been good enough for most of you. You should all go watch the movies again and actually make up your own mind about how truelly good or bad they are, instead of trying to sound more intelligent by agreeing with the masses.

      But hey! thats just an Anonymous Cowards opinion.

    32. Re:Admit it - the sequels are actually really cool by mabu · · Score: 1

      The problem wasn't with the movies. It was with the rediculously high standards and brain numbing expectations that majority of you /.'ers expected from it.

      Pardon me. I don't consider six bucks to be "great expectations".

      I just wanted a decent story that didn't meander into a blender of disjointed special effects tied together by stupid, never-ending martial arts scenes with no resolution.

      But I digress. My idea of a good movie is one that makes sense instead of just blinding ones' senses with meaningless FX.

    33. Re:Admit it - the sequels are actually really cool by snuf23 · · Score: 1

      Would it be incorrect to mod this -1 troll? :)

      --
      Sometimes my arms bend back.
    34. Re:Admit it - the sequels are actually really cool by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Except she would have seen the sun in the Matrix, so it wouldn't have been THAT fascinating.

      Well to be a bit crass, I'm sure when you were a teenager you looked at, um, interesting images of women...so when you finally actually got to see one up close for real, I guess by your standards it can't have been that fascinating...

      Now perhaps you see the difference between experiencing a simulation and experiencing it for real first-hand?

    35. Re:Admit it - the sequels are actually really cool by danila · · Score: 1

      Yes, I noticed that, but it doesn't count - the sunrise was made by Sati and Trinity was already dead. So it appears that the machine world of the Matrix didn't, in fact, have a sun. Whether people there actually knew about sun is unclear, but it might have very well been so that Trinity never saw Sun before.

      P.S. If I recall correctly, Beyond from Animatrix had sun.

      --
      Future Wiki -- If you don't think about the future, you cannot have one.
    36. Re:Admit it - the sequels are actually really cool by SuiteSisterMary · · Score: 1

      My point exactly; the Matrix didn't really have Sun until after the peace was reached.

      Although I do seem to recall the training programs possibly having sunshine; the girl in the red dress scene, for example.

      Shit. Now I'll have to watch the three movies looking for sunshine in the Matrix scenes.

      --
      Vintage computer games and RPG books available. Email me if you're interested.
  68. damn... by Chuck+Bucket · · Score: 1

    and I thought the movies dragged (and I did). Really, this seems over the top for anyone but the most diehard fans, of which I can't see many willing to shell out, or put up with, this type of packaging.

    I mean really, as a trilogy do you think this deserves more attention than the orig Star Wars or Indiana Jones movies? Those were far more intreguing imo.

    CBDS$R3

    1. Re:damn... by quantum+bit · · Score: 1

      I mean really, as a trilogy do you think this deserves more attention than the orig Star Wars or Indiana Jones movies? Those were far more intreguing imo.

      Don't forget: For every Empire Strikes Back, there is a Temple of Doom to balance it out...

  69. I wouldn't pay for it. Good thing... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ... my dual-layer DVD+RW drive just showed up a half-hour ago.

    Eat me, Jack Valenti.

  70. Banned for excessive gore by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You do NOT want to see what happens to somebody who pukes in a Lava pit! The steam alone... *shudder*

  71. Bah! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What I want is my 20-DVD set for the Lord of the Rings trilogy!

  72. New transfer by rd_syringe · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Unfortunately, I doubt it'll be sold seperately, but the version of the Matrix in this box set is a brand-new transfer. Should be much cleaner. Also, the Wachowskis were never happy with the originaly DVD transfer, as it was too bright. The new transfer will be more accurate to the original theatrical release as well as more consistent with the color scheme of the sequels.

    Personally, the dark green and blue of the two sequels gave me headaches, but hey, hopefully the first one won't look bad, and it'll be a much cleaner transfer and probably include a new audio mix.

  73. The open source disk set by Animats · · Score: 2, Funny
    The ten disks you really want:
    1. The rendered movie.
    2. Principal photography before post.
    3. The 3D models.
    4. Motion capture and animation curve data.
    5. Texture files.
    6. On-set audio.
    7. Re-recording audio.
    8. Mixer setting and timing files.
    9. Asset management configuration files and build scripts.
    10. Help files.
    1. Re:The open source disk set by WombatControl · · Score: 1

      Only 10 disks? What, you think all that can fit in only 47GB?

      Now, if they had the 1000 disk Blu-Ray set and some really nice compression you may be onto something...

      Especially if you're doing something with high-resolution photogrammatry, you can easily burn up a couple gigs in textures for one scene alone...

    2. Re:The open source disk set by thomasdelbert · · Score: 1

      sounds great but do we really need the first disk?

      - Thomas;

      --
      ___ This sig is in boldface to emphasize its importance!
    3. Re:The open source disk set by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      sounds great but do we really need the first disk?

      Not in "The Matrix: Gentoo Edition"

    4. Re:The open source disk set by mabu · · Score: 1

      That's not a bad idea. Release the stuff as open source and maybe someone can make a REAL MOVIE out of that pile of trash.

  74. Someone always says this... by rd_syringe · · Score: 1

    ...and people like me have to point out, yet again, that there have only ever been two versions, the normal releases and the extended releases of LOTR. And they've been upfront about that since the beginning.

    It's not funny or clever anymore to make up really long names like "super special extended bronze edition." We've seen that joke a million times now.

  75. As Cypher said... by Amorpheus_MMS · · Score: 1

    Ignorance is bliss.

    1. Re:As Cypher said... by ObiWanKenblowme · · Score: 1

      Then there sure must be a LOT of truly blissful people posting to Slashdot... :)

      --
      Obvious exits are NORTH, SOUTH, and DENNIS.
  76. Trivia about the sequels: "The Burly Man" by HedonismBot · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Actually, "The Burly Man" was the name the Reloaded+Revolutions production had while they were filming it. The reasons for this fact are beyond me, since the sequels had already been announced and everyone [who cared about it] knew where it was going on. And it's not as if you could keep a secret on a movie with 10 mins of credits anyway.

    Want proof? It's mentioned in this article from Wired, appears on this crew-exclusive T-shirt and you can see it in a surprising amount of footage on all those behind-the-stages documentaries this boxset seems to be so prolific on.

    Ew, I feel like a geek. In the bad sense of the word.

    --
    Sailors. Oh man!
  77. Rooting for Death by N8F8 · · Score: 2, Funny

    By the end of that scen I was mentally screaming for her to die.

    --
    "God fights on the side with the best artillery." - Napoleon, Marshal of France - speaking truth to power
    1. Re:Rooting for Death by nizo · · Score: 1

      You know, I almost rented the 2nd and 3rd one the other day (saw them in the theater). Thank you for reminding me again why I shouldn't bother renting the 3rd one again! Though if I rent it I can at least skip the stupid extended death scene from hell, something I wished I could have done in the theater. Oh and the extended car chase scene in the second one, and the neverending rave scene, wow the list goes on and on. Maybe they should just release the last two movies condensed down to 30 minutes each instead of extended versions?

  78. Re:pound this by klui · · Score: 1

    First link contains the original posted and that of Princeton which states 100p/GBP. Of course, the one after that contains more detailed info. http://www.wordiq.com/definition/Pound_Sterling

  79. Self-replicating comments by kahei · · Score: 2, Funny


    Look... an endless stream of near-identical /. comments about how bad the sequels were!

    The only way to defeat them is to stand still and wave a rubber pole at them for something like twenty minutes.

    I only hope I can manage that before they morph into a more powerful strain of /. comments about how unbelievably dreadful Trinity's death scene was (the last 15 minutes were the worst).

    --
    Whence? Hence. Whither? Thither.
  80. Re:pound this by k31bang · · Score: 5, Funny

    b b b b buuuuuuut google is my friend!!!!!

    --
    -+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+ *** http://www.mountainfort.com *** +-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-
  81. To those mouthing off by Floet · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Granted, it could be said subjectively that the first Matrix movie was the best of the trilogy, but quite frankly, it makes me very annoyed that people would have the gall to badmouth the series the way they do. Is the Matrix Trilogy a cinematic classic that will be taught and lauded for decades to come? Short answer, no. But the way most of you geeks blab on and on about the piss-poor quality of the movies, you'd think that given the helm, and a word-processor that whatever "film," you produced would rise above the level of tripe.

    Before I am flamed, I undertsand that everyone does have their own opinion, and is entitled to that opinion, but because a movies didn't follow the path you thought they would, doesn't make it utter shit. They (the Wachoski *siblings*) were able to make something very philosophical, even if it wasn't Pantheon worthy, while at the same tiem incorporating enough so that the mundanes would actually enjoy it. Add to that decent characterization, and a sustained theme throughout all three movies.

    Personally, I found the second movie, sans dance sequence, to be the best of the bunch. Even though the computer graphics were a bit over the top, it did give much to think about. Did everyone forget the discussion with the Architect was in there? And that he essentially gave the whole philosophical underpinnings to the movies in the tirade? I could understand how many people would not understand the philosophy, but to you computer nerds, its rooted in math!!!

    To those who say the ending sucked at the end of the third, I have no comment. Yes, it was something of a flaccid penis instead of the money shot, but look at it in relation the rest of it. Neo is the 1. Not the ONE, or One, but the 1. The Matrix is an equation, or rather supposed to be a balanced equation. The Architect spells out that because of a flaw, a 1 results in the equation, and manifests itself in the Matrix. Neo. I know everyone may already know this, but keep with me. When Neo talks with the Oracle, she says that Smith is his opposite, due to the Matrix trying to balance itself. Hmmm, Neo, is one...Smith is...? -1. Period. Therefore, neither of them can really *win* they can only beat themselves into battered pulps. Neo realizes this, and stops fighting. Yea, even dumbass Neo realizes it. Now, to all you advanced theoretical math types that prowl these forums, 1+(-1)=?

    Ahh, the balancing of the Matrix.

    Weak? Maybe. Deus ex Machina? Certainly not. They cement reasons that everything happened, even though it may not have happened as you would have fantasized. So I reiterate what I said again, this time as a challenge. To those mouthing off, make something, or even just conceptualize something that you think is better than the Matrix concept. Add to that, how you would execute it. Until then, just shut your mouths and read a book.

    1. Re:To those mouthing off by UberOogie · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Why is it that the endless Matrix apologists can't seem to fathom that there are those of us who do understand the "philosophy" behind the movies, got the oh-so-clever references that were crowbarred in at every opportunity, and still see the films for what they are: weak, derivative, poorly-plotted eye-candy with a dash of pretension?

      --
      "Enough of this wretched, whining monkey life." -- Marcus Aurelius, _Meditations_, Book 9, 37
    2. Re:To those mouthing off by RazorX90 · · Score: 2, Funny

      Neo is the 1

      Matrix exited with error code 1

    3. Re:To those mouthing off by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Pfffft. Errant nonsense. "Oh yeah, you could do better?" is not an argument. I don't have to write, produce, or direct to know rushed crap and weak storytelling when I see it.

      The Brothers bit off more than they could chew, and had to settle for a deus to end the thing. They rushed the scripts for the second two movies, and turned out some pretty-looking crap as a result. Period.

    4. Re:To those mouthing off by halcyonGT · · Score: 0, Redundant

      Whatever. The Matrix movies are crap. The sequels ruined what was otherwise a cult fave movie.

      --
      I'm not liked at all.
    5. Re:To those mouthing off by DeltaSigma · · Score: 2

      The Matrix did some things really well. And I mean really well.

      Some things were even ('No') better (*Gasp*) than Lord of the Rings ('He didn't just say that!').

      Keep in mind I'm not saying that Matrix is better, there were just aspects better executed, and I'm sure plenty will (anxiously) agree that there were aspects which are worse.

      However let's look at both. They're fictional war movies. Thus they both have two sides to the same story. Now here's my problem with the LotR trilogy:

      We've got the bad guys, and the good guys. That's it! That's all of it. Here's a bunch of different races aligned with evil, and here's a bunch of races aligned with good, and they have to battle and we're left to wonder who's going to win.

      Deep.

      Anyhow, then we have the Matrix trilogy. And here's the eff'ing beauty of the Matrix trilogy. We have two sides to this war. One side, properly depicted during the birth to be "evil." And one side, properly depicted during the birth to be "good." However they're not good and evil, and this is revealed over the course of the trilogy. They're different sides, different opinions. Both sides are doing what is best for themselves.

      We learn ultimately that both sides want the same thing. Neo, Morpheus, the Oracle, the Architect, every control built within the Matrix, every breath exhaled by an occupant of Zion. It's all been building for centuries up to the point of the last movie. Every freaking piece of the puzzle was trying desperately to complete the puzzle. And it wasn't until one individual (no, not neo, smith) decided to mess the puzzle up, that we finally saw the end.

      That's the beautiful thing about Matrix vs LotR (the movies) in this respect. You can track everything back throughout every movie and it's all attempting to contribute to peace. Every bullet fired, every step taken, every flight, every fall, every love and betrayal. Every-freaking thing coming together. Everything being resolved in the end.

      Smith told us how Matrix was beating LotR ever since Reloaded. Over and over he said it, "Purpose."

    6. Re:To those mouthing off by doctechniqal · · Score: 1

      The Wachowski Bros' reach must by definition exceed their grasp, or what's a mecha for?

      I liked all 3 movies. Things blowed up real good.

    7. Re:To those mouthing off by mabu · · Score: 1

      Matrix I

      First half: cool, twisted sci-fi universe that was really creepy and interesting.

      Second half: stupid kung foo movie, total destruction of an otherwise good premise

      Matrix II

      Riverdance in slow motion. Endless parades of CGI army men dancing around acting stupid.

      Matrix III

      Are you kidding? Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me. I won't get fooled again.

    8. Re:To those mouthing off by mabu · · Score: 1

      If the Matrix is this generation's "Star Wars", I feel SO sorry for them.

      Every one of the Matrix movies sucked, except for the first half of the first one. Then it was all downhill.

      Personally, I think people who like the matrix must be hooked up to some machine and are computer controlled just like in the movie. That's the only reasonable explanation I can find for the sycophants who don't see that piece of trash of a film for what it is.

      Whatever happened to good Sci Fi? It's been a black hole of dumbass CGI battle sequences lately.

    9. Re:To those mouthing off by CFTM · · Score: 1

      You're right, it's not an argument at all but it also doesn't mean that your opinion has any validity either. Opinions are things that we are all welcome to but they're all worth shit until you can actually back them up with some concrete suggestions/ideas/evidence whatever the fuck you may want.

      "War is bad! Peace man peace!" Yes everyone wants peace, yes no one likes war, but give me some fucking solutions instead of whining like a little bitch.

    10. Re:To those mouthing off by mbourgon · · Score: 1

      "endless Matrix apologists"? Aside from me and 2 or 3 other people, it's pretty much ONLY Matrix-bashers in this thread.

      --
      "Sometimes a woman is a kind of religion, she can save your soul & set you free from all your sins" - Bad Examples
    11. Re:To those mouthing off by Blakey+Rat · · Score: 1

      Maybe part of the problem is that THEY present their opinions as opinions ("Despite what people say, I like the Matrix trilogy") while assholes like you basically *DECLARE* that they are bad movies. "See the films for what they are:"

      Look, you didn't like the Matrix movies. Fine, that's your opinion, but don't present it as fact. It makes you look like an asshole and weakens your argument. Be nice.

    12. Re:To those mouthing off by UberOogie · · Score: 1

      Although those of us who hated these movies may sometimes present our opinions as fact, it is a thousand times more polite than the standard Matrix fanboy tactic of saying that people who don't like the movies (i.e. don't share their opinion) are simply too stupid to understand the "intricasies" of the film, and therefore enjoy it.

      --
      "Enough of this wretched, whining monkey life." -- Marcus Aurelius, _Meditations_, Book 9, 37
    13. Re:To those mouthing off by UpnAtom · · Score: 1

      There is a much bigger plot. Not a great plot by any means but it is there.

      The One is software. Neo is at least the 2nd One, but there may have been 5 before him. A previous One is the Merovingian (who can also see/manipulate code). The Oracle's bodyguard is also from an earlier Matrix, apparent because of his orange code.

      Neo is also human, or at least starts off that way. How Neo comes to be The One (maybe in the same way the Agents take over people in the Matrix) and develops his real-life powers is open for discussion.

      Another unanswered question is why the Machines keep humans alive in the first place. Either we accept the stupid battery idea else realise that humans innately provide some other resource the machines find valuable. Remember there are 3 parallel pipes leading to the Machine City.

      One other question is why the Architect has to give Neo the choice of saving Trinity in Reloaded. Choice is a big factor in all the films (remember the video screens too - parallel universes?)

      The Oracle was created (by the Architect?) to solve the equation (end the war). She isn't omniscient but does understand humans in a way that the Architect doesn't.
      Somehow The Oracle gained independence.

      Smith calls The Oracle "Mother" in Revolutions. Maybe she created all the Agents? Smith loses his job after being 'killed' by Neo in Matrix. Whether this is because he was 'changed' and able to replicate himself I don't know.

    14. Re:To those mouthing off by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, but you not liking the Matrix is your opinion, which is fine.

      The fact that you're stupid is, well, fact. But you're right, it's somewhat rude. From now on I'll just refer to you as "special."

    15. Re:To those mouthing off by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I feel for you - just to add my support, I and many others I know loved all three movies. For the record, I'm 29, and from my 16 year-old brother up to my 33 year old sister we all enjoyed them.

      Of course, we're all in New Zealand, so we escaped the whole American Group Think that seemed to happen. I shouldn't just blame the US though - it seems to be spreading across the Western World... the urge to decry anything that is/was popular.

      It's part "It's cool to hate things" (especially popular things, as if by having contempt for something cool you can become cooler!), and part "I must agree with everyone else so I am not a target of ridicule".

      The latter is part of the problem that Hulk, and even Gigli suffered! For proof consider this: everyone you ask will tell you without any hesitation that "Gigli sucked, It's the worst movie ever." However, considering how poorly the movie did world-wide it is highly unlikely that even a fraction of those people have ever SEEN the movie!

      I haven't seen Gigli myself, but I really have to question the opinions of anyone who is just repeating what they were told by somebody else...

      Hmm...guess what I'm trying to say is, ignore the bashers. Most admit they haven't seen all 3, so they have no place to judge. The others who do have their opinions seem to fail to realise that some of their "treasured movies" would be on the hate-lists of the very people they are currently agreeing with.

  82. You know, the trashtalking is getting kinda old... by Brained+Child · · Score: 1

    Yes, we were all disappointed by Revolutions and Reloaded because they weren't clones of the first movie. HOWEVER, if they had been seperate movies unrelated to the first with modified storylines 99% of us would ooh and ahh over them as great sci fi. Heck, if reloaded and revolutions were combined into one movie as they were originally intended, most people really wouldn't mind all that much because together they would compare to the original. I'm sorry your minds weren't blown and that some fan stories had better plots (the twins should have been virii) but what's done is done. Try and look at it as you would the Illiad or the Odyssey.

  83. Re:pound this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Or even better, you can link to the same at Wikipedia, while giving more credit where it is due and avoiding annoying banner ads at the same time.

  84. Re:If only...Amen! by gosand · · Score: 4, Insightful
    Speaking of giving up, I think a lot of the bad feelings over the third film were because people gave up after the underwhelming second film. Perhaps the third doesn't "make up" for the second, but how could it? Watch it again and you just may find you actually like it on it's own merits.

    Agreed. Here is a tip - don't stand in line for these things at the theater. I saw the first one and frickin loved it. Saw the second one, and left kind of scratching my head. I had to hope that the third one would tie it all up. But I waited, and didn't go see it in the theater. I read all the bad reviews. Then I rented it - and thought it was better than the 2nd one. It wasn't THAT bad. Not great, but better than a lot of the reviews I read.

    Everyone talks about the "movie theater experience", but I just don't get it. Other than bigger and louder, the theater experience just is not as good to me. No, I am not one of those people with the 5.1 surround and a 60" TV. I have basic surround and a 27" TV, and I still enjoy movies more at home than at the theater. Cheaper food, more comfortable, I can go pee without missing any of the movie, etc. I don't need to share the experience with a hundred other people.

    --

    My beliefs do not require that you agree with them.

  85. 6 disks too many. by ScottGant · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I mean, come on...one disk for each movie (don't give me extended versions unless you actually filmed extra footage to include later on special DVDs ala "Lord of the Rings"...seeing footage that was cut because it SHOULD have been cut is not my cup-of-tea. See the extended version of "Dune" and "Superman: The Movie" for stuff that should have stayed out...."Otis, feed the babies"...nuff said....

    Ok, we have 3 disks there with plenty of room for commentary tracks. Then we can have an extra disk for the Animatrix shorts AND all the "Making Of" docs you want. There...saved ya 6 other disks. Something tells me that they're not filling up to full capacity the DVD's.

    --

    "Music is everybody's possession. It's only publishers who think that people own it." - John Lennon.
    1. Re:6 disks too many. by Kelerain · · Score: 2, Insightful

      (don't give me extended versions unless you actually filmed extra footage to include later on special DVDs ala "Lord of the Rings"...seeing footage that was cut because it SHOULD have been cut is not my cup-of-tea.)

      The new footage was filmed specially for the 'Enter the Matrix' video game, which takes place in parallel to the film, following the story of Niobe and Ghost. You see/help them do things such as playing catchup on the freeway chase, and going to the power plant to destroy it. The parallel game idea was nice, but it didn't work out so well. I'm glad they are releasing a version that includes the footage because it helps with the subplot quite a bit.

    2. Re:6 disks too many. by BoneFlower · · Score: 2, Informative

      Sometimes footage is cut not because it sucks, but because the director is told "This movie cannot exceed 90 minutes"... thus forcing said director to cut otherwise good footage that *should* be in there.

      Also, as the other poster said, it inserts the video game stuff.

    3. Re:6 disks too many. by NathanM412 · · Score: 1

      Obviously this isn't the case considering that each movie was over three hours long!

    4. Re:6 disks too many. by G-funk · · Score: 1

      Nothing says "there's a reason this footage was cut out" like the extended version of the exorcist tho. Now that was boring as bat-shit.

      --
      Send lawyers, guns, and money!
    5. Re:6 disks too many. by Shardis · · Score: 1

      Lay off the weed, it's distorting your time sense. :P

    6. Re:6 disks too many. by NathanM412 · · Score: 1

      Sorry, I don't know what I was thinking when I wrote that. But, they were 45 minutes longer than just 90 minutes.

    7. Re:6 disks too many. by Shardis · · Score: 1

      Erk, jeez, that comment could've been a bit trollish of me anyway - wasn't thinking and was posting tres tired... - sorry man. Anyway...

      Yeah, definitely, they were longer than the usual flick at the movies - just re-watched 1 & 2, so that comment kinda caught my eye. :)

      I just hope (I'm kindof ignorant on this, haven't even looked around yet) that there's just the basic 3 disc set out also - but might go for the full set if it's not too overpriced, ya never know. Depends on how full I feel my pocketbook is when I finally go looking prolly...

    8. Re:6 disks too many. by BoneFlower · · Score: 1

      the 90 minutes was an arbitrary number.. most films are around that length, and my comment was meant to address why scenes are cut in general, not necesarily why they were cut from the Matrix movies in particular.

  86. As if this will be the last DVD set... by ian_ian · · Score: 0

    We've seen it before *COUGHGeorgeLucas*:

    This is your last chance. After this, there is no turning back.

    You keep the normal DVD -- the story ends, you wake up in your bed with your wallet intact and believe whatever normal plotline you want to believe.
    You buy the Kajunga-Extended-DVD -- you stay in "I just gotta see every cut scene ever" -Land and I show you how deep the money-hole goes.

    :/

    ...why oh why didn't I keep my 44.99 pounds sterling?

  87. Ten discs of The Matrix? by dave-tx · · Score: 1

    Well, that makes the decision pretty easy. I'll take the fucking blue pill, thank you very much.

    --

    >> "What would the robut do? Frame someone!"

  88. 10 disc box set of The Matrix? by michael+path · · Score: 1

    Christ, more like The Matrix: Imploded.

    *boo, hiss*

  89. Don't take the red pill by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    For that matter, don't take the blue pill either.

  90. Who is to blame? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "self-aggrandizing ego balm wherein the W. bros try and reassure themselves about how cool and talented they are"

    I don't know that blaming the warchaaavuhsuiveg brothers is totally the way to go here.

    I recall hearing an interview right after the first matrix came out, and the interviewer asked "So - matrix 2?"
    and the W's were like "Oh man. We're so burned out on the matrix. No way."
    And then the matrix made $zillion.
    So, natch, Hollywood came to the warchaggerswg's and offered them $293768265827635872635 for some sequels and they were like "umm.... ok!"

    The first matrix was created, and it was rad. The second two were bought, and they were corporate trash.

    The Wahsgfdgfsjhgf's are in the business of making movies, so when someone offered them a bunch of money for sequels of course they said 'yeah sure!'

    If you want to blame someone for the suck of the later matricies blame the hollywood machine.
    "This movie was excellent. We must reduce it to formula and trample it to death."
    "This movie was excellent. We must hire the creative talent behind it and let them express themselves freely."

    The prevelence of one of these statements over the other is the fault of Corp. Hollywood, and the cause of so many matrix-like catastrophies.

    Catastrophies which, sadly, continue to make money.

    1. Re:Who is to blame? by Durzel · · Score: 1

      Sure, the studios probably led the charge for the sequels to be made but in all honestly I'm sure the Wacowski Bros made a fortune just off the back of the first film, without "selling out" for the sequels.

      As has happened in the past with other films they would've probably still been made, but by different (read: worse and/or less scrupulous) directors.

      Hell, even if they made the sequels and just came out and said "there is no reason for these films to exist except to perpetuate the Matrix movie merchandise money gravy train" (there's a tongue twister for ya) I would've had more respect for them. To imply that they somehow always intended for the 2nd and 3rd films to be made, and then to make such a half-assed job of making them whilst all the while proclaiming about how the films have "hidden meaning", etc is just plain annoying, frankly.

      The only thing "hidden" in the Matrix Reloaded and Revolutions is the agenda the studios, producers and - it seems - the Wacowskis had in making them.

    2. Re:Who is to blame? by PriceIke · · Score: 0

      Blame?? All right, I can't sit on this any longer ...

      I am so sick of all this invective against these two movies (Reloaded, Revolutions).

      If you people have the guts, talent and energy (do you know how HARD it is to make a single movie? Much less TWO at the same time? With all the chances they took on untried special effects techniques that they wouldn't know whether they'd look decent at all?) to PRODUCE YOUR OWN ORIGINAL MOVIE then do it and then I'd give your opinions half an ounce of credibility. If not then why don't you all just shut your holes.

      So you didn't like the damn movies, fine. Be on your way. You don't have to waste all this Web space shitting all over them. I've seen a lot of shitty movies in my time but you don't see me writing VOLUMES telling everyone how shitty I thought they were.

      At least the Wachowski brothers are out there CREATING and contributing something imaginative and original to the world. I feel sorry for them for having put SO much work into their movies and then have to listen/read all this bullshit about how badly they SUCK. Hopefully they know better than to give keyboard jockeys like you all the time of day much less take you the least bit seriously regarding whether or not you liked their movie!

      Flame away gentlemen ..

      --
      It's not a lie. It's the truth with lossy compression.
  91. Enough. It ends now. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Can't we all just admit that the whole Matrix trilogy, really, kinda sucked. OK, granted, the first one was tolerable, with a pseudo-indy feel and cool visuals that helped mend our movie-seeing hearts, collectively broken and sh@t upon by Jar Jar.

    If you can't admit that the second and third films were horrible, nay, unwatchable, then you should really examine your life. If it's Keannu that you really like staring at, go rent that Gus Van Sant movie...

  92. In Australia we only get 9 DVDs by paragon_au · · Score: 1

    Not only don't we know what the price will be, we get jipped on one DVD.
    9 DVD box set, that's laughable.

    Not only do we lose half the special features on the good movies, we lose 'em on the bad ones aswell.

    Ref: http://www.ezydvd.com.au/item.zml/227483

  93. No DTS? by bludstone · · Score: 1

    No DTS, no sale.

    I'll only re-buy these if each dvd of the movies gets a DTS track and commentary.

    I could care less about the other extras.

    --

    no .sig
    1. Re:No DTS? by mrhide · · Score: 0

      I'm thinking the same thing ...
      let's wait for the 2 Blueray "Boxset" version

      --
      http://mrhide.pinnesota.org
  94. Ask Jason Hall about that... by pommiekiwifruit · · Score: 1

    As the new head of warner games, he has stated that Warner should penalise developers of games based on Warner movies that score below an average of 70% in web reviews. Oddly enough the Matrix game from Atari scored 69% on the site mentioned. His previous role as boss of Monolith (which made another Matrix game) is purely co-incidental.

  95. Heh. by StarKruzr · · Score: 1

    I had no idea he did a bit on that. The only reason I know is from living in Ireland and hopping back and forth to London for a semester.

    --

    +++ATH0
  96. Commentary. by Coyote67 · · Score: 1

    And still zero commentary from the "masters" behind the opus. I might pass on this because the only motivation behind getting this set would be to hear the wackowski's reasoning for some of the horrible things they did in revolutions.

    "Well we can end the trilogy with zion being destroyed, including trinity and morpheus. We could do a beautiful scene with neo leading the generation of zionians to their new home. An enthic child can come up to him and ask him blah blah blah. " - LArry
    "Nah lets just have neo and trinity die and then end with a sunset" - The other one
    "You know the people who bought int othe whole backstory that we pooped out with the animatrix are going to hate that." -lArry
    "Pffft. So!" - The 0ther One

  97. Re:You know, the trashtalking is getting kinda old by east+coast · · Score: 1

    HOWEVER, if they had

    If is a pretty big word, isn't it?

    And why shouldn't we trashtalk it? What's getting pretty old is the fanboys trying to defend what was utter tripe. Perhaps it's time we did a serious reality check and face the fact that as long as fanboys support bad art of any type it will not come to an end. The die-hard fans who couldn't accept the fact that the first film was good but the series lost ground in the long run are the ones that are wrong, not the honest movie fan who finally came out and admitted that the 2nd and 3rd film are trash.

    what's done is done

    You're telling me? Why is it that you think people should except instead of taking a critical view? Maybe the Matrix should be a taboo subject to anyone who doesn't worship the films?

    --
    Dedicated Cthulhu Cultist since 4523 BC.
  98. my take on the sequels by BigBir3d · · Score: 1

    The 1st movie was good, but we all knew that Keanu is not good for much more than walking around in a daze. The 2nd and 3rd movies tapered off into crap because the actors couldn't do any better. In one sense it was nice; don't have to worry about the series being ressurected Star Wars style...

  99. Re:$44.99 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    For $44.99 did they make the second two movies not suck? I think they should sell only the first movie in the box set. It would be less disappointing.

  100. So what're they gonna call the box set? by Not_Wiggins · · Score: 2, Insightful

    "The Matrix Trilogy Re-Marketed?"

    Seems more like a ploy to recoup costs on the third movie. Anybody else notice when the third movie came out on DVD they weren't pushing the movie for movie sake, but trying to capitalize on the "own the trilogy" angle?

    Some people will collect anything.
    Personally, I like to collect bad habits.

    --
    Diplomacy is the art of saying, "Nice doggie!" until you can find a rock.
  101. Re:If only...Amen! by joeljkp · · Score: 1

    I saw Revolutions on IMAX, and all I remember about it was that Smith didn't have a very good makeup job. Once it got on the IMAX screen, his "facial blemishes" were the size of my fists.

    I think IMAX was somewhat overwhelming for that kind of stuff anyway. I could focus more on some kind of logical storyline (assuming there was one) if I was watching it on video.

    --
    WeRelate.org - wiki-based genealogy
  102. Brits were shortchanged on the original DVD by Andy_R · · Score: 2, Informative

    Here in the land of the vanishing currency symbol, the first film was cut in 2 places by our film censors (they demanded about 1 second of head-butting be cut from 2 fight scenes).

    For the DVD, we lost the 'music only, no dialogue' bonus soundtrack that was present on the other region 2 DVDs entirely, because they couldn''t be bothered syncing up that version of the audio or finding 1 one-second bits to splice into the fights.

    --
    A pizza of radius z and thickness a has a volume of pi z z a
  103. Personal opinions... beware! by curious.corn · · Score: 1

    I believe the only Matrixes worth watching are:
    - the original one
    - Animatrix
    Actually I've bought both of 'em (see MPAA, I'm no freeloader) and thoroughly enjoyed them. Animatrix's theme is the personal interpretation of the Matrix theme by some really kick ass artists. So much in there, cool music, very different "handwriting".
    The Matrix is just itself; so cool & evocative you're willing to give up the inconsistencies just for the sake of believeing in it.
    All the rest... a run for the buck...

    --
    Mi domando chi à il mandante di tutte le cazzate che faccio - Altan
  104. I freely admit it! by ghost_world · · Score: 2, Interesting

    In fact, the overwhelming negative response to the second movie was entirely predictable well before it was even made. Expectations are a HUGE part of people's ejoyment of entertainment, so it was utterly impossible that the sequal to The Matrix could be widely enjoyed. After the nearly religeous zeal (need I say "cult") surrounding the first movie, everyone's expectations were unacheivably high. But after that dissapointment had been experienced, expectations for the third movie were more reasonable... and lo and behold, many more people liked it (many still hated it, but I think that was still residual expectations from the first one).

    Anyway, despite a few painful scenes, and after I convinced myself not to dwell on comparisons with the original, I really enjoyed both Reloaded and Revolutions. Besides being entertaining, they had some interesting stuff to think about... and I like thinking about things.

  105. Obligatory DBZ joke by shigelojoe · · Score: 4, Funny

    How many DBZ characters does it take to screw in a light bulb?

    Only one, but it takes three episodes.

  106. Conceding for the sake of argument.... by jotaeleemeese · · Score: 1

    .... then they should release the DVD version first, and later the cut, theatrical version.

    --
    IANAL but write like a drunk one.
  107. Will they include... by kindbud · · Score: 1

    ... a version of the 2nd and 3rd movies that don't suck ass?

    I'm sure mine is the 152nd post to say the same thing....

    --
    Edith Keeler Must Die
  108. 10 discs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    9 of them shite.
    Strictly for idiots, fanboys, and a landfill in Nevada.

  109. Stop going to the theater then by cruff · · Score: 1

    So don't go to the theater then. So much of the current movies are crap, they are not worth $9/ea
    to see in the theater. $3 for 50 cents worth of a small soda, $3 for a small bag of mediocre quality pop corn, its a real rip off. Wait for the DVD to show up at the video rental place, wait for the $1.99/movie rental specials, then see it.

    I do this, I get the benefit of all the reviews and people's comments to weed out the really bad movies, and I get to eat high quality fresh pop corn. :-)

  110. Re:You know, the trashtalking is getting kinda old by doctechniqal · · Score: 1

    I dunno, it does seem like a lot of people here derive a certain - how you say in your country - cathartic release in trashtalking the 2nd & 3rd parts. I chalk it up to the 1st part having set the bar so high, having presented so many interesting concepts and ideas in such a compelling fashion, that there was no way audience expectations were going to be satisfied by the followups. Strip away all the high concept baggage and eye-candy CGI, and what you're left with is an entertaining and engaging sci-fi roller-coaster ride marred by a little too much exposition where it is not needed, and too little exposition where it is very much needed. Taken in as a continuous storyline, I enjoyed it more and got more out of it in a marathon home DVD viewing session - skipping over the unnecessary shoe leather and replaying the scenes that truly advance the plot - than I did watching the three separate parts temporally fragmented in a movie theater.

  111. Philosophy? Don't make me laugh. by jotaeleemeese · · Score: 0, Redundant

    I can think of many phylosophical movies, that treat those aspects with intelligence and tact.

    The Matrix underline some interesting thoughts, but is all superficial and at times presented in a terribly boring manner.

    It is a sad sign of our times that people are defending thes movies for their philosohy, most probably because any approach to philosophy of most pepople is almost nil.

    --
    IANAL but write like a drunk one.
  112. Time to fire up DVDxCopy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    get set...copy!

  113. You should not be modded down.... by jotaeleemeese · · Score: 1

    .... because it will be more ignominous to cull your argguments with a big cluestick :-P

    -WHy should we love the twin ghosts? they add nothing to the movie.

    -Car extravaganza? Boooring. The human race fate is at stake, the very concept of human freewill may be into question, and what do the history tellers concentrate o? A fsckin car chase. Yeah, great and original (ahem... Speed... ahem).

    -Battles? I saw that on Starship troopers, much better and realistic. The Matrix whatevere it wa calle looked cheap an unimaginative.

    -Philosophy? Get the real thing, don't accept cheap substitutes....

    --
    IANAL but write like a drunk one.
  114. So what? by jotaeleemeese · · Score: 1

    You can make pretty much any DVD player play any region disks.

    I regularly play region 1 DVDs in my supposedely Region 2 only DVD...

    --
    IANAL but write like a drunk one.
    1. Re:So what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well why don't you tell us how, wiseass.

  115. No more Wachowski brothers by Galvatron · · Score: 1

    Just thought I'd bring you up to date: it's now just "the Wachowskis." See this article.

    --
    "The question of whether a computer can think is no more interesting than that of whether a submarine can swim" -EWD
  116. It is too bad by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It is too bad that only one of those ten is worth owning.

  117. I'll stick with my 1 disk version thanks by ivanmarsh · · Score: 1

    Worst sequal(s) ever!

  118. Does anybody really care any more? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You know, I actually liked the first movie before the fanboys ran it into the ground. Now I seem to have developed a nervous twitch that sends my face into spasms every time I see a bullet-time sequence...

  119. Something tells me.. by acariquara · · Score: 2, Funny
    ...suprnova.org is going to be in need of some new servers real soon.

    (there goes my Karma)

    --
    Dear aunt, let's set so double the killer delete select all
    1. Re:Something tells me.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why? You do know supernova only lists the torrents, don't you? They don't host every file for download. Do you even understand how bittorrent works? Fuckwit.

  120. Re:pound this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    lol, someone has no idea how the american government works. Bush can barely do anything on his own. He didn't go to war on his own, and if congress wanted to, they could cease all military action. The executive branch (read: president) has very limited authority to act on his own.

  121. The trilogy was fine, folks by Gr8Apes · · Score: 1

    but contained some droppable scenes. That 2 & 3 didn't "surprise" most the way the first did isn't surprising. Overall, I found them thoroughly enjoyable, and I own all three.

    Now, this 10 disc set, the remastered "The Matrix" and the extra 55 min on "Reloaded" intrigue me. I'd still drop a few scenes on #2 though.

    LOTR trilogy is still the king of trilogies though, and perhaps as an epic story as well.

    --
    The cesspool just got a check and balance.
  122. What's included? by Brandybuck · · Score: 1

    Hopefully the much talked about, but never released, plot will be included on one of those discs...

    --
    Don't blame me, I didn't vote for either of them!
  123. Dialog snippit obtained by xerph · · Score: 1

    I've received word that this is just one of the scenes to be included in the extended version of reloaded that we have to look forward to:

    Neo: woah
    Trinity: what? stop saying that
    *the door is blown apart and Elrond walks in*
    Agent Smith: you wont escape this time Morpheus.
    Neo: woah
    Morpheus: bring it, bitch
    *Another 30 minute rave scene ensues where morpheus and smith have a dance off. In the end smith wins and stabs morpheus with his glow stick*
    Neo: woah
    Smith: Now neo, how would you like to die?
    Neo: I choose balloons for 400
    Smith: that's not a choice
    Neo: My mistake, I shall take balloons for 600

  124. Just a thought by DynaSoar · · Score: 1

    I grew up in the 60's.

    I'd have taken both pills.

    --
    "I may be synthetic, but I'm not stupid." -- Bishop 341-B
  125. TWO WORDS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Orgasm Pie

  126. You got the right idea by emorphien · · Score: 1

    Good to see at least one person agrees with my view of it.

    As far as I'm concerned it would have been more suspenseful if the guy you wanted to win was the underdog, but when they're both pretty much gods, they can beat the snot out of each other until hell freezes over with no result.

    Woo, that's suspenseful.

    --


    Presently here, but not there.
  127. Warped /. view by vijaya_chandra · · Score: 1

    The story you Geeks rave about being a classic is nothing compared to what children over here in India read in some of the magazines for children ( or atleast used to read ).

    And these stories are nothing compared to the other story that you have a low opinion of. Even if a little loong with 6 hrs of screen time, sparking the view that what you think/see/feel might not be real is definitely cool compared to the fantasy crap

    (Karma be damned; I am no better than an AC anyway)

    1. Re:Warped /. view by RyatNrrd · · Score: 1

      OK, I'll bite. What in hell are you talking about?

  128. Who is the moron, illiterate boy? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    >your a moron

    Learn to contract, you Twinkie-packing, rump-wrangler.

    You are = you're
    You possessive = your

    Example: Your lack of grammar skills shows how poorly you studied in school; it is no wonder you're a freaking idiot.

  129. Re:If only...Amen! by rishistar · · Score: 1
    Everyone talks about the "movie theater experience", but I just don't get it. Other than bigger and louder, the theater experience just is not as good to me.

    Yes, but when you see Reloaded at the Imax theatre you can check out Monica Bellucci's 60 foot wide breasts!!!!

    --
    Professor Karmadillo Songs of Science
  130. AOL disks make better coasters by mabu · · Score: 1

    and don't make you feel like you were ripped off after you see what's on them.

  131. Re:pound this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Ok, now can you tell me where the term quid comes from?

  132. negative 44.99 lbs by Prince+Vegeta+SSJ4 · · Score: 1

    If I have to watch Reloaded again, I might just upchuck 44.99 lbs

  133. Waitaminute! by Prince+Vegeta+SSJ4 · · Score: 1
    The resolution was both classic and unexpected;

    I actually expected the outcome that happened, and here is why:

    • remember the whole returning to the source, integral anomaly thing. If you take the integral a simple line (everything that has a beginning has an end), then attempt to solve, you will get a +C (Neo) and a -C (Smith). They must cancel each other out.
  134. Now I know why I thought it sucked. by mabu · · Score: 2, Funny

    Maybe that's my fault. I didn't enter the movie theatre HIGH.

  135. Re:pound this by joshholm · · Score: 1

    "You don't have any friends, nobody likes you!"

    Gollum

  136. Faeces ex Machina. by uxo · · Score: 1

    The first film succeeds because it is an action movie, and so there is a willing suspension of disbelief on the part of the audience. But the sequels try to be serious science fiction, and to accomplish that the Wachowski Brothers had to answer the question everyone was asking when they left the theater: Why do the machines need a Matrix in the first place?

    Generating electricity from living human beings would be pretty damned inefficient. Ignoring fossil fuels, biomass, nuclear energy, geothermal and hydroelectric, dead humans burn pretty well once you get them started.

    Even assuming all those energy sources had been exhausted (except the last) you still wouldn't need a Matrix because you could grow micro-encephalic humans, or lobotomize them. Or worse, just treat them as we do lab animals.

    So I don't care what rationalization the WBs pulled out of their butts for the Matrix's existence, and more car chases and more Agent Smith's don't make up for that fact.

    To those mouthing off, make something, or even just conceptualize something that you think is better than the Matrix concept. Add to that, how you would execute it. Until then, just shut your mouths and read a book.

    Well maybe if the WBs had subjected their screenplays to some healthy criticism we'd all be buying the boxed set.

    1. Re:Faeces ex Machina. by DeltaSigma · · Score: 1

      Morpheus' understanding of the Matrix's purpose was that its primary use was for electricity.

      He was mistaken come the second movie, the architect scoffs at the very idea that humans would be needed for electricity.

      It's quite possible the Wachowski brothers did listen to the criticism.

  137. spidey sucked by robfoo · · Score: 1

    "Spiderman 2 was the only movie where I had difficulty telling.."

    What? Spiderman 2 had CG about the same quality as the much-overhyped-piece-of-shit 'burly brawl' from Matrix 6 or whatever.
    All the CG in spiderman looked a bit too 'cartoony' for me. Cartoony is fine, if you're Shrek. Mixing it with live-action means spending a bit more time on lighting and textures.
    Plus, all the CG motion-capture was overacted. You can always tell when it switches to CG-spidey cos the actions become very pronounced, like some kind of second-rate pantomime.

  138. What went wrong with the Matrix sequels? by petrus4 · · Score: 1
    >every opportunity, and still see the films for
    >what they are: weak, derivative, poorly-plotted
    >eye-candy with a dash of pretension?

    To say I loved the first film in particular would probably be the greatest understatement I've ever made, but of course it's pretentious. I saw that it was pretentious...I think everyone knows that it was pretentious...that was part of the whole point. Some of us actually revel in our shameless wannabeism. *big grin*

    Seriously though...I agree with you wholeheartedly about Revolutions, and to a lesser extent about Reloaded. Reloaded had it's moments, but...I've always said that where the series really went wrong was the Animatrix. The reason why I say that is because (a) I actually thought the Second Rennaisance in particular was rather lame, and (b) that and Kid's Story (which I also didn't really like very much) was what they based the second two movies almost in totality on. Reloaded in particular really had very little storyline for anyone paying attention...it was fairly simply a mindless action movie. From that point of view I enjoyed it...After I got over the initial disappointment that lightning wasn't going to strike twice, and that the Wachowskis had pulled a shameless George Lucas impersonation on us.

    That to me was the real problem...that the Wachowskis (or whoever was primarily responsible for the writing in the second two films...I assume it was them) very obviously got caught up in a desire to plagiarise Star Wars. Because of that, in Revolutions we had the infuriating Kid filling in for Jar Jar Binks, as probably the most glaring example.

    AFAIK, a trilogy was always planned, unlike what I've heard people saying that the second two were an afterthought. The original Matrix wasn't really what I'd call totally mainstream, or it at least didn't seem like it was intended to be. It however caught on with enough people that it was obviously decided that the two sequels had to be crowd pleasers, and for that reason I'm inclined to believe that material that was originally planned for the two sequels (which actually could have been GOOD) was scrapped in favour of making something lame, but which would appeal to the unwashed masses and therefore generate large amounts of money.
    That, in a nutshell, is what happened. The writers got dollar signs in their eyes, and sold out.

  139. Peeing saved me... by spoco2 · · Score: 1

    Peeing actually saved me from having to watch Neo and Trinity have sex in the second film... I needed to go, the orgy/dance party seemed to be going on for ever... and guess what? it did! I was able to leave the cinema, go to the toilet, and come back without missing anything.

  140. Re:You know, the trashtalking is getting kinda old by east+coast · · Score: 1

    I chalk it up to the 1st part having set the bar so high, having presented so many interesting concepts and ideas in such a compelling fashion, that there was no way audience expectations were going to be satisfied by the followups.

    Sorry to bust your bubble bub. Truth be told I felt luke warm after the first episode. I wasn't screaming for more but it had enough of my interest to see what happens next. Besides, the 'concept and ideas' really weren't that new to me. It surprises me the number of people who hadn't considered this in some fashion at some point. Especially with other 'sci fi' (ha ha) films such as Total Retard, I mean, Total Recall. As for the philisophy? I read books, I don't need these ideas dressed up in CGI for me to take interest.

    Strip away all the high concept baggage

    High concept? I scoff...

    skipping over the unnecessary shoe leather and replaying the scenes that truly advance the plot

    Ah so it comes to this; You like the film but you're bored to tears watching it the way it was presented? I'm not here to debate what may have been. I'm thinking of what is. Was Matrix an OK concept? While it wasn't real sci-fi by my standards they could have done worse, and they did in parts II and III.

    I'm not saying that you shouldn't like it. I'm just sick of fanboys telling me that if I didn't love the Matrix then I was a lowlife that couldn't grasp Eastern Mysticism 101. The films are what they were. I didn't need the as a vehicle to inner-awareness.

    Sorry, Even aside from the claims to enlightment that the film held for most it just didn't keep my attention.

    --
    Dedicated Cthulhu Cultist since 4523 BC.
  141. Much cooler tag lines by mec · · Score: 1

    Notice that all the tag lines that people quote and use for parody are from the first movie?

    "No one can tell you what the XXX is. You have to see it for yourself."
    "There is no XXX".
    "No lieutenant, your XXX are already dead."
    "Whoa." (okay, of course that is from earlier Keanu Reeves movies, but it's only funny in the first Matrix movie).
    "Humanity is a virus ... I am the cure."
    "Misssteeer Annnndeerrrrsonnn ...."
    "Ever have the feeling ..." "It's called LSD. It's the only way to fly."
    "Guns. Lots of guns."
    The red pill / blue pill speech.
    "How did they know what chicken tastes like?"

    And on and on.

    I don't ever see anybody quoting lines from the second or third movies. "Choice is an illusion between those with power and those with not." -- too pretentious. Smith almost had something going with his "purpose" speech, but then the scene morphed into that crappy video game clip. One good line is "You never really know someone until you fight with them". Another line I like is: "Would that include a bullet from this gun.", but by then the crappy dialogue had gone on so long that the momentum was lost.

    My favorite line: when Trinity says: "Neo, I had to" (after he catches her). That line actually ties into the "free will" theme in a thought-provoking way.

    As for Matrix Revolutions, urgh. One promising but forgettable speech about love in the subway. And the whole hyper-brawl was a setup for Neo to deliver a stunning epiphany to sum up the whole trilogy, and he says something really lame. He might as well have stuck with "woah".

    1. Re:Much cooler tag lines by Jonavin · · Score: 2, Interesting

      "You never really know someone until you fight with them"

      That line is actually a popular Chinese saying. Not sure it's a proverb or just a saying made popular by Kung-Fu flicks. In any case... nothing orginal here, move along.

    2. Re:Much cooler tag lines by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Ever have the feeling ..." "It's called LSD. It's the only way to fly."
      I believe he says "It's called mescaline. It's the only way to fly."

    3. Re:Much cooler tag lines by antek9 · · Score: 1

      My fav line from Reloaded was 'We're all here to do what we're all here to do.'. Unbeatable.

      --
      A World in a Grain of Sand / Heaven in a Wild Flower,
      Infinity in the Palm of your Hand / And Eternity in an Hour.
  142. This is just not fair! by /dev/trash · · Score: 1

    A three movie TEN disc set comes out and costs 44 bucks. Northern Exposure comes out on 2 discs for SIX, yes SIX episodes and costs 45 bucks.

  143. ext version of Dune by gad_zuki! · · Score: 1

    I like the ext version of Dune. Its especially good for people who are not familiar with the book. Sure, the narration could be better but I believe it keeps the story flowing instead of people looking around and saying "wtf" every ten minutes.

    The added footage (30+ minutes if I remember correctly) fits in pretty well; its not sub-par in any way. It wasn't cut out because of quality, but because it makes the movie 2+ hours long.

    Dune will always be a love it or hate it movie, but I'm sure more people would like it (or understand it) if they got to see the longer version with all the narration at the theater.

    1. Re:ext version of Dune by kbranch · · Score: 1

      I could be remembering an entirely different version of Dune or maybe this was in the shorter version too, but that whole telekinetic Fremen thing was just complete BS. It really makes it seem like they just have better guns than the Sardaukar, when in the book the Fremen overwhelm any opposition with little more than a knife.

      Again, this is just a vague memory of what I think is the extended Dune movie.

    2. Re:ext version of Dune by geminidomino · · Score: 1

      The problem with the extended version is that it does cut out some scenes (The scene where Harkkonen 'eats' the little thrall dude's blood comes to mind) When Linux gets some decent video editing and DVD authoring software, I think I'll merge the two of them and make myself an ultra-mega-extended version. :)

    3. Re:ext version of Dune by anakin876 · · Score: 2, Funny

      Oh Man, if I could get a version without those 80's guitars in it, I would be so happy. Every time something that should have been stirring or emotional occurs, Toto comes in with those damn guitars to take away all my enjoyment

  144. Re:pound this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    Sounds like someone's currency is still tied to precious metals or some such.

    Speaking as an outsider, I think you Americans were better off when you could still trade your dollars in for a guaranteed tangiable amount of specified object, i.e. before bullion for private investment was outlawed in 1933 and then later when Nixon switched away from a gold standard altogether in 1971 (?). Maybe I'm just a romantic though, even I admit that runs on the bank when credit creation goes overboard are no holiday.

  145. Not getting it by Devil · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I got my copies of The Matrix and The Animatrix used at Blockbuster; two for twenty dollars. Why would I want the other two films, both of which were abyssmal?

  146. excess inventory sale? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It sounds like their trying to dump the excess inventory of disks that they couldn't sell after those crappy sequals came out?

  147. It was good... by cuteseal · · Score: 1

    But not that good. The first movie was a classic, IMHO the other two were average.

  148. And Then... by OzRoy · · Score: 1

    And then in a fantastic display of superiour Artificial Intelligence, and good sportsmanship, the machines decided to give the humans a chance by staying tightly bunched together allowing them to be easily shot.

    Not only that but their superiour tactics dictated that instead of actually attacking every threat in the room they should just fly round in circles looking cool.

  149. Carbon copy sequels by L1TH10N · · Score: 1

    I heard one director say that audiences like to see the same movie again when they watch sequels. I didn't believe it. But now reading the comments related to the Matrix; People are saying they hated the movie because it was not like the first movie. I for one am glad that the movie is very different from the first movie. I would say that a good scifi sequel should develop the mythology of a world. A good example is the movie Aliens, which developed the mythology of the world from Alien.

    Another good example is the second Matrix movie which really developed the mythology of the Matrix world and thats what kept me glued to my seat whilst I was watching the movie. The third matrix movie didn't do it for me, it really just was there to bring people into the box office, but did not really contribute to the story other than providing an ending. I would hate to have seen what borefest would have been made if the sequels of the Matrix were like the first. Diversity is the spice of life.

    I think what most geeks complain about in the second movie is that the movie did not go as they imagined it. The first movie was abiguous, which meant that people could imagine the mythology of the world. The second movie is more explicit which is completely different to what people imagine and thus these people get offended when the second movie does not go the way they imagined it.

    I say stop being CMGs (Closed Minded Geeks) and experience something differnt to you narrow bounds and go along for the ride. The Matrix trilogy WILL be a classic movie series remembered for decades.

    --
    Yet another ironic recursive statement.
  150. Does this version come... by alcmaeon · · Score: 1

    ...without the lame-assed ending? That might get a few $$ from me.

  151. It's like the highlander films by dbIII · · Score: 1
    There can only be one.

    However, most parts of the animatrix were astoundingly good.

  152. no, it didn't by Versix · · Score: 1

    Considering Spider-Man is a comic book, or a cartoon; I thought the CG was great. Just how can you make a skinny nerd leaping all over the city like Spidey does look realistic anyway?

    1. Re:no, it didn't by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well if that's your excuse for Spider-man 2 (I realise you aren't the grandparent poster) you can hardly criticise the special effects of the Matrix sequels when they took place in a simulated world ;^)

      Personally I like that excuse for the computer generated characters - that when they are moving too fast, or there are too many (as with Agent Smith clones in the Burly Man Brawl), the Matrix can't handle the complexity, and the simulation starts to break down somewhat... it's a piece of apologism but it's cute :)

      (I myself realise that the state-of-the-art dates quickly and am willing to just accept it as it is)

  153. Ad infinitum. by uxo · · Score: 1

    After watching The Matrix Reloaded I came to the conclusion that the "real world" outside the Matrix was itself a Matrix, because Neo was able to knock out the squids there. No human being can generate electromagnetic pulses. (Although Ben Stiller can stop Chinese throwing stars with the Magnum look.)

    In which case, it doesn't matter what Morpheus, a human (or meta-agent), or the (sub) Architect believe. They're just constructs in a potentially endless recursion of Matrices.

    1. Re:Ad infinitum. by DeltaSigma · · Score: 1

      That's like disregarding every Star Trek episode ever made as soon as they traveled back in time.

  154. Oh Dear God! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    My nipples are hard just thinking about this!!

    I, for one, plan to cram all 10 disks up my anus while jerking off to my Keanu Reeves poster!!

  155. Extras by Klebz · · Score: 1
    includes a lot of stuff you probably already own, and a few things you might want... like a version of Reloaded with the Enter the Matrix footage included.

    Does this include an actual ending to the trilogy, since the last one made me want my money back, even though I won the ticket on the radio

  156. I admit it - the sequels ARE actually really cool by TiggsPanther · · Score: 1

    The problem is that people think that films are (or should be) either perfect, or utter garbage. They're not very good at finding the middle ground. OK, there are many films that do hit those extremes, but there are films which "could have been a lot better, but are still good films".

    The Matrix sequels didn't live up to the promise that a lot of fans saw in the first movie. People seem to blinded by what they wanted to see to give what was given a chance.
    Newsflash. This happens a lot in stories. Sometimes you give up following them, sometimes you persist anyway to see what happens.
    Yes, there are many series (books and TV) that I gave up on. Do I think they're utter failures? No. They're not what I wanted, but that doesn't make them bad.

    I saw Reloaded at least twice in the cinema. I also bought the DVD. (Though, I admit, pre-ordered on Amazon to save cash - but I think all UK DVD-releases are priced 5-10 quid too high. So that's not a Matrix-only issue.)
    I saw Revolutions twice in the Cinema. Haven't bought the DVD yet, but that's the above-mentioned price issue.

    I enjoyed them both. Yes, there are things I'd rather unfolded differently. Yes, there are some serious flaws in both films. But do I think that the films are totally unenjoyable? No.

    If anything the main problem was that there was so lone between Matrix and Reloaded. 3-4 years worth of expectations was too long, especially for a film like the first Matrix.
    People also missed a major part of what made the first movie so special. It was all exposition. We were following Neo in his evolution from system-cog (albeit an unwilling one) to ultra-powerful rebel. But once that genie was out, there was no going back. There's no way that a sequel could have the same kind of feeling, as too much had changed in the first.

    The sequels followed one totally viable plot-direction. Nothing was contradicted except for things which were mere assumptions on the part of the rebels. (And even then, I went back and noticed that although it changes the facts behind some of Morpheus' explanations, the words he says still hold. Only he was following an interpretation that turned out to be false)
    OK, so the direction it took wasn't the one that many fans wanted to see explored. Too much disappointment. Too many people just weren't interested, but this manifested as hatred and suddenly everyone started saying that the movies sucked.

    I've paid to see them. I'm glad I did. Although I have the first 2 on DVD, I don't have the Revisited or Animatrix yet, so might even buy the box-set when it comes out and get the lot.
    (10 discs for under 50 quid? Even if I only watch every disc once, it'd be worth it to me.)

    Do I wish that the sequels had turned out differently?
    Honestly, I don't know. Despite the flaws, the movies were ones that I did enjoy. That's a fact. Whether I'd enjoy ones made differently is speculation. So I'll take what's out there. 2003 would have been a lot less fun for me without those two films.

    Tiggs
    --
    Tiggs
    "120 chars should be enough for everyone..."
  157. The Matrix had more potential than LOTR by clockpenalty · · Score: 1
    As movies, the LOTR films flog the matrix, but the premise of the matrix is far superior.

    I believe that, executed properly, the plot of the matrix trilogy would produce an experience far superior to that of LOTR. I enjoyed the LOTR movies, but none of them matched the feeling I got at the end of the first Matrix.

    In short, they were nothing new. But they were nice.

    --
    Shinsengumi de gozaru
  158. Linear Algebra by AgentSmith · · Score: 1

    I wonder what the Dot Product of the Matrices would be?

    Could a Beowulf cluster figure it out?

    Well, I'm going back to the grits ranch and say hello to the owner, Natalie Portman. I hear she's a bit sore. Kinda stiff. Almost . . . Petrified.

    Meanwhile in the news, Soviet Russia does things to people.

  159. Non sequitur. by uxo · · Score: 1

    > That's like disregarding every Star Trek episode
    > ever made as soon as they traveled back in time.

    That doesn't make sense. Please expound.

    A better comparison would be Dallas, where a whole season was a dream. After it was revealed as a dream should anything that occurred in that season matter to a fan? I don't think so.

    * * * 13th Floor spoiler below * * *

    Or imagine you're a person who learns they exist within a simulation, which in turn exists inside another simulation, ala 13th Floor. Would you still show up early for work every morning?

    1. Re:Non sequitur. by DeltaSigma · · Score: 1

      That's the thing. In 13th Floor, the setting is a simulation inside a simulation.

      In the Matrix, you decided it's a simulation inside a simulation. Did you ever bother to see Revolutions?

  160. Re:pound this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No, I'm afraid you're grossly missinformed, the reason Mr. Bush "cannot do anything on his own" is because he is grossly under qualified for his present gig.