If they consider the videogame cannon then Morpheus is dead and this is a (fake?) Morpheus...
The Matrix 4
- Thread starter JoeZhang
- Start date
Yeah, that's what I liked most about the trailer too.
It's not been released and won't be until 2022. However, there are other announcements around it being discussed in the Future of Trek subforum.
"A continuation of the story established in the first Matrix film"
"Continuation and extension of the original movie"
That's exactly what it means, it's way too specific to mean anything else. Looks like Reloaded and Revolutions are history.
I read that as a marketing stunt to draw more people in because more people disliked than liked the sequels if you can believe the internetchatter. It would make sense for them to focus on the original movie to draw in as many people as they can.
It is true, though.
Is will be a sequel to the events established in the first Matrix movie.
The second and third also continued the events established in the first Matrix movie.
Is will be a sequel to the events established in the first Matrix movie.
The second and third also continued the events established in the first Matrix movie.
My comment about Strange New Worlds was a reflection of my belief that certain characters who will be present in that series are only being included for the purposes of pandering to nostalgia, which I am vehemently opposed to.
Yes, nostalgia is soooo horrible and must be avoided at all costs.
If all you're doing is catering to nostalgia, I have no interest in what you're doing.
I find Power Rangers Dino Thunder to be the second-worst season in that franchise because it shoved the character of Tommy Oliver into the story for no other reason than to pander to MMPR fans, and the decision is made even more egregious because all they did was copy-paste him into the season in place of an original character whose role and personality was completely different from who Tommy had previously been portrayed as being.
And that's the crux of the matter. What gives you the idea that that is ALL they are doing?
Tell me again, why are you in interested in a film that's a sequel to a series that ended 18 years ago very definitively (and even if it wasn't definitive, the two lead characters who died are returning nonetheless)? How is it not fueled by nostalgia?
This movie is happening because Lana decided that there was a new story to tell in the Matrix universe (Lily disagreed, which is why she chose not to be involved), not because of a desire by Warner Bros. to capitalize on "Matrix nostalgia").
I didn't say anything about Warner Bros. simply trying to capitalize nostalgia.
And again, who is to say the showrunners of Strange New Worlds don't have new stories to tell with the returning characters and not just "trying to capitalize on nostalgia"?
Both are the same and both are building on nostalgia to tell new stories.
And there's nothing wrong with that.
And again, who is to say the showrunners of Strange New Worlds don't have new stories to tell with the returning characters and not just "trying to capitalize on nostalgia"?
Both are the same and both are building on nostalgia to tell new stories.
And there's nothing wrong with that.
But since the title is called Resurrections; there's a chance he will be restored like Neo and Trinity.
There are fans of those sequels and I am not one of them, but WB should promote the brand as they and the creator Grant Morrison... uh, I mean Lana Wachowski needs best. The images looked pretty, but whether it will be as good as the Matrix remain to be seen. I hope WB doesn't share anymore images or trailers and allow the audience to see it without any story spoilers.
Having watched this trailer without any prior knowledge of the project, my (and my wife's) primary reaction is... eh.
I'll watch it eventually, but there's nothing particularly grabbing about the images or story hints in this trailer. And deliberately leaving Laurence Fishburne out of the film is just dumb. Fishburne's performance was the absolute highlight of the original film. Unless they're trying to keep his role in this movie as a big surprise (I believe Fishburne himself has said he isn't in it, thought actors will lie about such things if the studio asks), in which case their marketing isn't doing the movie any favors imo.
I'll watch it eventually, but there's nothing particularly grabbing about the images or story hints in this trailer. And deliberately leaving Laurence Fishburne out of the film is just dumb. Fishburne's performance was the absolute highlight of the original film. Unless they're trying to keep his role in this movie as a big surprise (I believe Fishburne himself has said he isn't in it, thought actors will lie about such things if the studio asks), in which case their marketing isn't doing the movie any favors imo.
I'm sensing a more revealing trailer is coming. By doing this the movie may unravel to lower expectations; I don't recall the Wachowski's track record in delivering competent movies in their careers after The Matrix. The Matrix was an anomaly and it led them to make a series of disasters after the sequels, where after "Jupiter's Ascending" Lana admitted studios won't be investing in the director's projects any longer.
https://deadline.com/2015/02/jupite...-tatum-mila-kunis-box-office-bomb-1201369053/
https://www.cinemablend.com/new/Wac...-Get-Make-Another-Big-Budget-Movie-69695.html
This is becoming another case of "Fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me."
https://deadline.com/2015/02/jupite...-tatum-mila-kunis-box-office-bomb-1201369053/
https://www.cinemablend.com/new/Wac...-Get-Make-Another-Big-Budget-Movie-69695.html
This is becoming another case of "Fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me."
I never saw Jupiter Ascending--but I would argue that how much money their movies made is not a reflection of quality. The Warchowski's are arthouse directors whose commercial success allowed them to make bigger budgeted movies. If you are looking for "blockbuster" fair, they are probably not it.
