“The Matrix Resurrections” is an excellent movie | Hacker News Reader

“The Matrix Resurrections” is an excellent movie

skibinsky.com

34 pointslordmax59 comments

I'm happy SOMEONE is enjoying it. Because it... christ it was awful. I had no expectations for it, and it felt like some big budget fan fiction tripe. Almost a parody.

But I've come to understand that whether you enjoyed it or not comes down to what you decided the film was about, early on.

For me, I assumed it was all in Neo's head. Especially the bits outside the Matrix. So I didn't bother investing in or even taking seriously any of it, expecting it all to crumble around as Thomas Anderson's fantasy life collapses on him by the end.

But uh... then the credits rolled, and I realized all that nonsense was "real". Huh.

Haven't seen it but other movies or shows like the witcher, I liked a lot but apparently a bunch of internet people are about to start a revolution over how horrible they say it was. Same with the recent Star wars movies, they were all great for me except the one about Solo. I've learned to remind myself that my experience and taste can and will be different than the crowd. I watched seasons of shows in great enjoyment and then apparently I was not supposed to! Don't let others' reviews and opinions set your expectations, people tend to see what they're looking for.

I enjoyed the parody. Visual aesthetic of the original but at high resolution (might rewatch in 4k for the fun of it)

Since I had no idea what the plot was I didn't form many future expectations. I think the dialog won't hold up well long term

shrug I really liked it. It felt like Lana Wachowski re-imagining what they really wanted to do for the first movie, but now 20 years wiser and more experienced. I loved how it brought in more color--some scenes almost reminded me of Speed Racer with all the hues.

Thank god she didn't do this to the first movie. We would have missed out on a legendary movie and gotten this shit instead.

The change of hues in the trailer was enough for making me skip the movie.

Colour grading is fairly low down my "make or break" list.

You’re not the only one. It’s already my favorite. It’s like the first, but taken a little more seriously. More conventionally dramatic. Less comic booky. The way I wanted the Matrix movies to be treated all along.

It had both some of the elements of the first (deliberate) and much of the nonsense and mysticism of the second and third.

That was what was so childish about 2 and 3, and that childishness remained here. The role-swapping in service of allegory was annoying, as well.

I thought the movie was entertaining.. but also trash and way too long.

[Spoilers]

Going in, the bar was pretty low given the reception of the 2nd and 3rd movies. I went in to this thinking it would be their "star wars ep 7", and it kind of was. Except comparing apples to apples, Ep 7 was much better than this, which isnt saying much. I love Keanu but his acting just isn't that good. He's the same character as in the John Wick series. The writing is a lazy attempt to be meta and deep. They make direct self references to Warner Brothers forcing them to reboot. "Stories never really end, we keep telling the same ones again and again but with different characters". Okay. There are some hot takes about the zeitgeist, how the new matrix manipulates our feelings instead of our facts (hint Twitter and facebook).

So yeah, the first 30 mins are a slog, but then the action kicks in and the action scenes are pretty fun.

The ending is what you'd expect, the good guys escape the matrix - again. As for humans vs machines, to be continued.

Hopefully the sequels don't further mirror the star wars reboots.

I had really cynical expectations for this film, as someone who saw the original in theaters, loathed the sequels and other related media, and even have The Matrix DVD as my first purchase (still in my order history!) from Amazon in 1999, I thoroughly enjoyed it.

It was… fine. There’s some great shots and action, and some interesting new ideas in there somewhere. But it does some meta level self aware bullshit that doesn’t work. Also, thinking back on it, there really aren’t many stakes to feel threatened by. And it leans way too much on the original trilogy. Like, there’s so much footage from the old ones… There’s a decent movie in there somewhere, I think. But they needed someone else not involved in the originals to wrangle the screenplay.

One review put it nicely. It's better than the sequels...

They were so awful. This, I didn't need it. I expected the worst. It exceeded my expectations and was reasonably entertaining. The two other sequels were awful.

There were sequels?

The second film will probably stand forever as one of the most monumental achievements in practical action and stunt cinematography. Look into the making of the highway chase scene, it's unbelievable and what they did building an entire highway for all the stunts. Kind of like the real chariot race in the 50's version of Ben Hur, there are some movies that do something so spectacular it will never be done again.

If you look at imdb user reviews, then many people seem to be saying it is trash.

"Hackers, game, and crypto developers will enjoy “Resurrections” immensely. The general audience might have a more tepid reaction, since one has to be a coder to really get all the references and insider humor."

Yes, but when you read the reviews, it seems that people who are Matrix fans also don't like it.

The script has some very interesting ideas and a really entertaining anger toward its own existence. The actual filmmaking however is really cheap and poorly done. Bad editing, bad shots, bad fight choreography.

>Bad editing, bad shots, bad fight choreography.

Is it bad or is it just different from original Matrix and on a higher resolution/framerate? The cinematography reminded me of Jupiter Ascending which wasn't bad imo.

It's not just these things. The dialogue is so poorly written one wonders if the accusations surrounding the first Matrix lifting the script from another screenwriter were true. [1]

Who thinks writing in a MILF joke is an appropriate follow-up to such a classic (and classy) film?

[1] https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/sophia-stewart-matrix-laws...

I dunno, this comes off like some sort of hyperbolic fanboyism

Some of that is due to COVID restrictions.

Nope, even as a coder for 40 years, worked at and ran startups etc, so get the jokes.. it was …. A bit pants.

The first hour was entertaining and interesting but as it became more cluttered with fight scenes i found it boring. Maybe it’s just me but I don’t see the appeal of fight scenes where there is no jeopardy or realness.

Back in the day Jackie Chan would do scenes where you knew he would win but the physical impressiveness of what he was doing kept it entertaining. As it’s just a load of CGI that element has gone and it all feels pointless filler. The fact that is in a unreal (matrix) environment just increases the pointlessness.

Problem with this movie is that is it was forced. According to one interview with the director, they said that a family loss prompt them to write some story as a coping mechanism, which ended up being adapted to a studio forced cash grab Matrix movie. So what a natural lack of effort and inspiration, what was great about the first 3 - the dread, sense of threat, etc... is simply gone.

Having said that, i found it mostly enjoyable and a good resolution to Neo's arc. Don't think i will repeat viewing.

The Matrix Resurrections is the worst sequel.

- Shaky camera cinematography, not used before.

- Iconic color correction is not used.

- Without Yuen Woo-ping, Kung-fu fighting scenes are poorly executed. He is a Hong Kong martial arts choreographer and film director who worked in Hong Kong action cinema, and directed all fighting scenes in all previous Matrix movies, but not this one. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JNCLUd3Htos

- Weak soundtrack.

I watched it and the best review I read about the movie was “this could have been an email”.

There are no fight scenes like in the previous matrix, the soundtrack is also lacking. Just know this before watching the movie. This is the last time I’ll watch one of her movies personally. This is dragon ball evolution all over again, but with one of the original director. It makes no sense.

It’s incredible to see Lana be handed millions of dollars to make a film and they bomb every single time no matter how large or spectacular. They just keep giving her money. It’s amazing how she makes the same mistakes every time and never seems to learn or gain any self awareness. And it’s amazing to think it all began somehow with the greatest movie of all time.

Yeah, that's my impression too. It's unbelievable that there was right amount of everything in The Matrix.

Cloud Atlas, Sense8, and other movies Lana made after The Matrix just feel a bit cringy and off most of the time.

Felt like watching fan fiction.

> [...] crypto developers will enjoy “Resurrections” immensely.

wait, what?

First matrix movie i turned off half way through. I stopped listening to the dialogue after 10 minutes because it was so dreadful but I had hopes that it was just made intentionally bad to make a point or something.

It wasn't. This is the best they could do and it's awful.

It was completely meta. They literally reference having to make a sequel because if they didn’t, “Warner Brothers would do it without them”.

From that point, just watch the pretty action and stop critically thinking, because they sure as hell weren’t.

"Is it just me, or is this boring?" -- my friend about 45 mins into it.

I really enjoyed it, it was very self-aware and meta, even breaking the fourth wall. It could have been a bit deeper, but it still gives a lot to think about (existence and such)

The article conveniently forgot to mention Trinity and Smith, because suddenly with them in the equation everything about recursion falls apart. No, it has nothing to do with recursion[1]. There is some sort of "iteration" in the movie somewhere, but yeah, nope.

You know what the movie is about? Nothing, but some low quality romance between Neo and Trinity. I wish I could read more into it, but nope.

[1] His definition of recursion is wrong as well, and still does not fit... at all.

My recursive functions don't hang, they just get better.

Mmm, so... Crazy amount of people sitting down and talking for an action movie, almost like a black and white French film. Anyway... I remember how people said at the time how the previous sequels 'Matrix Revolutions' and 'Matrix reloaded' were not as good as the original. 'Resurrection' is like a sequel to them...

It’s like when your streaming video misses an I-frame and each subsequent frame distorts the one before it (aka game of telephone). I didn’t like it but fairly eager to give it another chance at some point.

Recursion sounds like resurrection, so they must be the same.

What about the Matrix Resuscitation, because resuscitating someone is like 'resurrecting' them from the dead. Im sure they meant to call it Matrix Resuscitation, the meta is strong.

great plot and lots of interesting bits, but it feels like they left in absolutely every shot they made? a lot could have been left on the cutting room floor, and the tighter pacing would have improved the movie

e.g. how many shots of agents falling from the sky did we need to see in order to understand how determined they were and how dire things were becoming for our heroes in that chase scene? I think there were 5?

pass me the jog dial and I could cut it down into a 90 min must-see while hitting all the plot points; release the jareklupinski cut ;P (just trimming the shots from the first three movies would have saved 15 min already)

It was so bad that it made "Keeping Up With the Kardashians" look like Citizen Kane. And I watched the Kardashians for only 1 minute. Then I threw up.

I managed to enjoy Dark Phoenix, Last Jedi and Aliens 3 so godammit I'm going to enjoy it

You will. It was so f-ing bad I was laughing hysterically the whole time and I had a blast.

If you smoke a lot of weed you might be able to enjoy it

Alien 3, it's kind of a big deal.

I have been watching it in 15 minute segments. It is pretty good.

Keanu Reeves and Carie-Anne Moss have a nice 30 minute interview on YouTube about making the sequel. I recommend the interview.

So good you can only watch 15 minutes before moving to something else?

Pacing myself

What a load of incoherent nonsense.

> Recursive functions and algorithms are a cornerstone of computer science, that is simply how computers work.

No, not at all.

> What is recursion? It simply means taking something you have, running it again, but running in such a way that it gets slightly better next run.

What in the...

> Even the word “Resurrections” sounds a bit like “Recursion” which might be a coincidence, yet knowing Lana’s unparalleled talent of creating meta everywhere, makes me wonder.

My eyes rolled back so hard that I'm now legally blind.

> Repeat it thousands or million times, and you get a far, far better result than what you started with.

I wish.

That's why I never write a stop clause in my recursive functions. Makes everything infinitely better. /s

Thank you! I will try that and see how that goes. :)

Edit: I got a stack overflow! Does that mean I should download more RAM, or what am I doing wrong?!

---

But seriously, I think the author is referring to evolutionary algorithms. It does not make much sense regardless. Smith and Trinity are crucial to account for, but the author left them out completely.

> or what am I doing wrong?!

Not using a a language implementation with tail call optimization, or recursing outside of tail position, probably.

It better be perfect though!!! At what point can I tell that it is in the most perfect state? If we are talking about infinities, is there a point where we can say that it is in a perfect state and it cannot get any more perfect? Is there such a thing as perfect state?

For example:

> It simply means taking something you have, running it again, but running in such a way that it gets slightly better next run.

So... is there an end of this? Physically speaking, there is a limit, yeah, but can we reach the most perfect state where it cannot get any better?

> is there a point where we can say that it is in a perfect state

I suspect it's asymptotical. You'll need to determine at which point it's close enough to perfection to stop improving, or just let it rip to infinity (and never benefit from it, probably).

Yeah, fair enough. I am interested in cases where we do not know what we are looking for exactly, or rather, we do not know exactly what "perfect" is. When we can define the state we want perfectly, then we have an easy job, but what if we cannot?

Maybe they're confusing "recursion" with "iteration"; and "iteration" in a similar sense to iterative programming and not to loop iterations.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com