|
|
|
|
|
by yepthatsreality
1745 days ago
|
|
Disagree, the trilogy is one of the best Sci-Fi trilogies available and utilizes ideas about people and computing in unique ways. I always heard that the sequels didn’t live up to the hype and avoided them during release. It was only later that I rented them and found out I was taking advice from lowest common denominator action movie fans. I only label those fans like that because their criticism only makes sense if you treat and view the films as blockbusters (which I think they’re pretty good at too). |
|
The last two movies just aren't that great. They aren't terrible, but they leave a lot to be desired. The second movie is fine, it gives us a lot of cool ideas, but the pacing is a bit off. It tries hard to manage being a cool sci-fi movie all about the concepts and an action movie. They just don't nail the balance, but it's not a complete miss as a blockbuster movie.
The third movie is where things really fall off. Everything setup in the second movie is ruined with this movie. They are balancing too many things; The Matrix world and the real world all with multiple subplots, and the concepts with the characters and action. They try to force in new characters that don't have any time to really develop, so we don't really care. And the last fight scene is just a bit dumb and the CGI is pretty bad. It's really just a lazy ending and fan pandering trying to capture the fight scene from the first movie. And because this is tying up the stuff we get in the second movie, it just makes all the cool stuff of that one sort of lackluster.
I won't flame you for liking all three, that's the joy of art. But I think people also have reasonable criticisms of the trilogy overall.