Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

First Matrix Reloaded Review

CmdrTaco posted more than 11 years ago | from the get-in-line dept.

The Matrix 776

EpsCylonB writes "The IMDB is reporting that the London Daily mirror has the first review of the Matrix Reloaded. Sounds like the Wachowski borthers have gone for an all out action movie which is a shame if true. What I liked most about the original was the way it blended stunning action with a subtle philosphical theme about how we percieve reality." I'll hold judgement until the closing credits myself.

cancel ×


Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Its a sequel (1, Insightful)

bmantz65 (642864) | more than 11 years ago | (#5906897)

Its supposed to make money, not innovate all over again.

Re:Its a sequel (5, Interesting)

aarondyck (415387) | more than 11 years ago | (#5906966)

Are you saying that it's not possible to innovate AND make money? It seems to me that in the first Matrix movie they were both innovative and money-making! In addition, this movie has been compared to the Empire Strikes Back by the Wychowski bros. (sp?), another movie that both innovated and made money...seems to me that Empire is still in the top 20 all time...and do you remember the scenes with the ships and the guns and the snow and the stormtroopers...cutting edge bluescreen technology, they did things that were unheard of in the movie inudstry at the time. I believe that Matrix Reloaded will be the same...right down to the romance scenes!

The latest Wired magazine (4, Informative)

mao che minh (611166) | more than 11 years ago | (#5907058)

The latest Wired magazine (May 2003, "Take the Red Pill") has an in-depth interview with the lead special effects guru of The Matrix, John Gaeta. According to him (and he has in-depth explinations and narratives) "Reloaded" innovates a ton - the battle between Neo and Agent Smith uses technology that is completely new, for example.

Besides, it has some great pics of Jada Pinket-Smith in it. Yeeeeaaaaa baby.

Unreserved judgements (1)

ackthpt (218170) | more than 11 years ago | (#5907089)

Its supposed to make money, not innovate all over again.

Ah, a realist! *swat* *swat* *stomp* *stomp*

Yeah, this is why every Star Wars film since Episode IV: ANH has been, for me, an unfulfilled wish to achieve the same jawdropping awe. Sequels can be good, but there's the rate of declining return, as it's all become familiar and harder to impress with.

I'll hold judgement until the closing credits myself.

I've pretty much made up my mind from the trailers, it's not at the top of my list, and I may skip it in favor of something which isn't a sequel. If it featured Jay and Silent Bob, however...

Destiny (2, Informative)

mao che minh (611166) | more than 11 years ago | (#5906899)

I believe it is our fate to read the review.

It is our destiny.

I believe this review holds, for each and everyone of us, the greatest spoiler of our lives.

** By the way **, the site was already running a bit slow when I previewed this article, so just in case, the article text:

May 7 2003
From Jackie Winter In Los Angeles

AT THE start of The Matrix Reloaded, Laurence Fishburne turns to Keanu Reeves and says: "This is going to be difficult." How right he is.

The much-anticipated sequel to 1999's cult classic sees all manner of kung-fu warriors and evil machines thrown at Reeves in an orgy of highly-choreographed martial arts mayhem.

The Matrix Reloaded picks up where the original left off - but explodes the action and special effects by a factor of 10.

There are more fights, more crashes and more action in two hours than a hundred other sci-fi movies combined. But the highlight is a spectacular freeway demolition derby which takes car chases to a whole new level.

And the first film's groundbreaking slow-motion/freeze-frame effects have been further extended, tweaked and enhanced to make them even more eye-popping than before.

But if you're looking for something a little more than crash, bang, wallop then this second instalment will leave you cold. Reloaded is crammed full of the cod philosophy that fans of the original loved but which left me distinctly unimpressed.

The plot is even more convoluted than before and flits between everything from religion to quantum physics and mathematics.

When we last saw Neo (Keanu Reeves), he was preparing to lead a revolt against the machines that had enslaved all of humanity - and that were now threatening to attack the last human city of Zion.

Recognised by Morpheus (Laurence Fishburne) as The One, the potential saviour of mankind learned how to manipulate the computer program that is our world.

Now Neo has honed those skills until he can fly like Superman. It's a skill that comes in handy after he starts having dreams about his girlfriend Trinity (Carrie-Anne Moss) falling from a city skyscraper in a shower of glass.

The villain of the first film - Agent Smith (Hugo Weaving) - is back with a few new tricks up his sleeve, not least the ability to replicate himself. In one of the key scenes, Neo battles it out with first just one Smith, then eight, then 24 and finally 100.

Dressed in his shades and robe, Reeves once again deadpans his way through the movie. It's a role made for him as he has to do little more than smoulder and high kick his way through the baddies.

At least he gets a sex scene with Moss before he heads off to the city of Zion. It's one of the few breaks from the relentless action and although it sounds ridiculous, it provides a welcome diversion from the non-stop effects.

There's also some new characters like Niobe (Jada Pinkett Smith), who captains one of the rebel ships. And Persephone (Monica Bellucci), a sexy bad-girl-turned-good who hooks Neo up with the all-important Keymaker (Randall Duk Kim).

Also making an appearance are evil twins played by brothers Adrian and Neil Rayment who have, bizarrely, made the leap from handymen on Carol Vorderman's Better Homes to Hollywood stardom.

If you're looking for a deep, meaningful cinematic experience then The Matrix Reloaded is not for you. But if it's a non-stop rollercoaster ride you're after, then this movie is light years ahead of anything that's gone before.

- THE Matrix Reloaded is released on May 23. The final chapter in the trilogy, The Matrix Revolutions, is out in November.

THE Matrix Reloaded and the next film, Matrix Revolutions, were shot simultaneously in Australia over 270 days from 2001 to 2002. Combined, they cost more than £200m - £160m more than the original.

MANY believe The Matrix is cursed. In August 2001 pop star Aaliyah, who had been cast in a supporting role, was killed in a plane crash. A month later Gloria Foster, who played the Oracle, died of diabetes.

KEANU Reeves turned his moribund career around by taking the part of Neo. But it could have been a lot different. Ewan McGregor and Will Smith both turned down the part before the Speed star snapped it up.

WHILE Reloaded is set on the Matrix computer program, Revolutions is set in the smoking ruins of the future. In a final battle, the machines invade the human city of Zion in a bid to erase the last remaining rebels.

Re:Destiny (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5906976)

That's pretty cool. Does it talk about how Trinity dies at the end of the Matrix Reloaded?

Whore (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5907068)

...of Karma.

Your impression... (5, Funny)

dvk (118711) | more than 11 years ago | (#5906904)

Your impression that the first Matrix had any philosophical content was just a glitch in the program.


Re:Your impression... (1)

MSTCrow5429 (642744) | more than 11 years ago | (#5906917)

My program is fully debugged then!

Philosophy and the matrix... (4, Insightful)

Goonie (8651) | more than 11 years ago | (#5906983)

The first Matrix did have some ideas that were distinctly philosophical in nature - to (poorly) summarise "how do I know what is real, and what does 'real' mean anyway"? However, the questions have been asked, and answered, pretty much the same way in a great deal of other fiction. It's philosophical, sure, but it's well-trodden ground.

Re:Philosophy and the matrix... (5, Funny)

kamikazichaser (670854) | more than 11 years ago | (#5907066)

but that question was simply there to set up the action, not enlighten or challenge you. I loved the first one, but it was pure escapism, nothing more. if this movie is 10 times the action and 10 times the SFX, as the mirror reviewer states, then it will be 10 times the movie (ideally speaking of course). Hell, I want people to be passing out in the theater due to the action!

Re:Philosophy and the matrix... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5907102)

Hear, hear! This isn't philosphy, this is what stoners talk about at 2am.

First guy: "But dude, what is reality anyway? What if this is all a dream?"

Keanu: "Whoah!"

Re:Philosophy and the matrix... (2, Insightful)

goatasaur (604450) | more than 11 years ago | (#5907103)

Try Descartes' Meditations if you want to check out the OG of questioning.

As Plato said in Phaedrus, "the writer cannot determine his audience". and I have a feeling that most people who enjoyed The Matrix won't be able to handle lofty philosophical concepts, much less a fiercely logical structured argument for the existence of God and reality, without constant diversions in the form of gun battles, sex scenes, and other forms of violent eye candy.

Re:Your impression... (1)

Rhone (220519) | more than 11 years ago | (#5907138)

Note to moderators: This comment is actually more "Informative" than "Funny"

Not this first (5, Informative)

Yusaku Godai (546058) | more than 11 years ago | (#5906910)

Ain't it Cool News [] has had a number of reviews up for a couple of days, not so much professional reviews, but mostly from fans who were lucky enough to see advance screenings (mostly one held by MTV).

Re:Not this first (2, Informative)

Stephenmg (265369) | more than 11 years ago | (#5907061)

Time magazine even has a review [] of it already and it is dated May 4. I'd say its a professional review.

Re:Not this first (2, Informative)

Yusaku Godai (546058) | more than 11 years ago | (#5907121)

Ack, but from what I've heard the Time review spoils the entire movie, including the ending. Nobody should look at it unless they really don't care and don't intend on seeing the movie. And I can't imagine who that would be.

Re:Not this first (5, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5907076)


The Matrix Reloaded is upon us and I felt it necessary to really comment on the nature of what is going on in the fan base and give you my NON-SPOILER review of the film. To preface let me say that I have seen X2: X Men United. I was amazed at that film and how much I was persuaded to care for every character in that film. Brian Singer not only improved upon the first film, he blew it out of the water.

That said I think that there has been some unnecessary comparisons between the world of the Matrix and the Xmen franchise. These universes definitely have similarities between them, but they operate on two completely different levels. An orange is great and so is an apple, but they serve different purposes and have different tastes. Perhaps by now you are skimming through this thinking "he's not telling me anything I don't already know." Perhaps this is true but I implore you to continue to read.

The world of the Matrix is perhaps one of the most ambitious science fiction projects to come from any studio since 2001. If these films were produced and released only dealing with the philosophy and the ideology they presented then I strongly believe that they would have flopped on impact. Instead the Wachowski Brothers opted to not only present one of the smartest and intriguing stories written for the screen but the most visually stunning works ever imagined to date. Yes there have been copy-cats but in these past 4 years nothing has come out that is nearly as well produced or finessed as the first film.

Now, I saw Reloaded out here in LA last week at a private screening. Unlike others I really want to keep the story and the spoilers under wraps. However I must say how satisfied I am with what I have experienced thus far. When I had heard talk of 2 sequels in the making I was very excited, not because I wanted to see what new effects [admittedly that was also a desire as well] but I wanted to see how this story ends. I was and am intrigued by the storyline that has been presented to me in the first and second installment. I discussed the first Matrix film from people aged 8 to aged 68. I have yet to meet anyone who liked the film [or not] that has not been willing to discuss these movies in depth. Now granted I have the upper hand these past few days with Reloaded under my belt.

My review is a bit unorthodox because in it I do not want to discuss the movie per se. Rather I would like to, with my knowledge hit on point for point these rather interesting criticisms that I have been hearing and reading on this site and others. First I'll answer some questions.

Was I blown away?

Answer: No, not in the way that you would suppose.

Is the bar raised again?

Answer: Yes but it's not because of the effects.

Are the effects amazing?

Answer: Absolutely one hundred percent amazing.

Is the story as intriguing as it was in the first film?

Answer: Yes and No.

The answers I will attempt to explain. For starters I was not blown away because frankly I've seen this world before. The first film blew me away because I had at that point never experienced anything like it before. When Reloaded began I expected to see what I saw. Anyone going to this film expecting to have the same feelings they had for the first film are setting themselves up for disappointment. Just like in a marriage 15 years after the wedding won't feel like that wedding night, that experience is singular and special for it's time. Like a marriage Reloaded has it's moments of "Whoa".

A criticism that I have read based solely from the trailers is "It looks like more of the same". I'm sorry to burst your bubble boys and girls but Reloaded is indeed more of the same. But why is more of the same a bad thing? After all I fell in love with the first film because of its feel and philosophy. I became anxious about Reloaded and Revolutions because I desired more of the same. Yes there is still bullet time, it's a trademark of the matrix and personally just because others have used it since 1999s The Matrix does not mean they should just drop it because, "It's been done." Saying that is like expecting Verizon Wireless or T-Mobile to stop carrying cellular service because, well, it's been done before. As I said before bullet time is a product of the Matrix, it's a key element of my liking the first film and part of the reason I was so excited about Reloaded. I could watch bullet time for hours. The beauty of Reloaded and The Matrix is that the effects are secondary to the story.

The effects in Reloaded are unlike anything I have ever seen, I still cannot believe what they were able to pull off. The Burly Brawl is by far one of the most visual astounding feats to date. Again though, that is secondary. The story of Reloaded builds and twists and turns and of course leaves me hanging at the end. BY this time the credibility of this so-called review is probably under scrutiny. I would imagine that the talkbackers doubt me having even seen this film because perhaps the lack of my decision to NOT produce any new plot points or effects tricks. No matter.

The bar has been raised in some instances but the biggest bar that has been raised or broken is the depth of this story. Yes, the first part of the film is exposition, but for me, it was the exposition of the first film that drew me to it. I loved how the story continued to unfold in Reloaded. I was intrigued to see Morpheus doubted by his fellow believers in the city of Zion. Up to this point I had only Morpheus to go on. His word was gospel as far as I was concerned. Enter Reloaded and there are more, there are those who disagree with Morpheus and his methods. I enjoyed that. I enjoy being challenged by some who perhaps disagree with a certain philosophy. Morpheus is no longer John the Baptist in Reloaded; he instead becomes a captain of one of many ships with one of many missions. The picture is now in panorama, not the beautiful Polaroid that was the first installment. I think many would want that same magic, that same sense of wonder that was created in the first film. You won't find that in Reloaded, there is a different dynamic here, not better, not worse, just different. In my humble opinion I do not think that it is important that this film blow the first out of the water, it cannot, that is a bar set by the fans and the media, a bar that is impossible to reach. Bigger and flashier is not always better. The Wachowski brothers can only stay true to their art and their vision. They cannot be hampered by outside opinions and what the fans want or expect.

I've said this before, the only people I would want to tell this story is the Wachowski Brothers. It was their story that attracted me initially and I want to continue to listen and watch their story unfold. There is a difference between judging a film based on whether or not it works and judging or critiquing a film based on our own ideas of how we think it should work. We must give respect where respect is due. I would hope that the Wachowski Brothers stay true to their vision, as artists that all I ask of them. Reloaded is not a perfect film, but it is damn near the second most engaging and philosophical film I have seen since its inception in 1999. If you go to see Reloaded purely to be dazzled visually you will be disappointed, not disappointed because it fails, disappointed because you will only be experiencing a third of what Reloaded has to offer. Regarding this point of originality and the Matrix I will say of course it's not original. The whole concept of a savior and a prophecy is old hat. The idea of a kung fu postmodern film is also not a new idea. Rare is it when a really original idea comes along, just ask George Lucas. What makes The Matrix original is the way in which the story is told. It's in the telling that a revolution was started and not in the story itself. So whomever of you are throwing this out because the Matrix is not original you must look deeper. If you cannot see anything but the surface than you miss the point of the film entirely.

Not in a long time have filmmakers actually engaged an audience as they have with Reloaded and The Matrix. Usually audiences are expected to be quite dumb. Most films have to show and tell everything and dumb down the script for us to understand. Not so with the Brothers Wachowski, they show us respect and expect us to engage them and interact with their story on a higher level. Speaking of bars being raised or broken, the bar was broken when WB had the balls to release a film and complex as these films. With the religious connotations most studio suits would request that it be removed or lightened so as not to offend or insinuate. The Wachowski Brothers have done a service to the film industry, through their films they have challenged the film industry to be more about content then image, quality over quantity. No longer will cool or flashy suffice, we want more, we deserve more, and we pay for more. With Reloaded, more is what you get and then some.

J.M. Prater

Just an action movie? (3, Informative)

valis (947) | more than 11 years ago | (#5906912)

From the article:

""" ...Reloaded is crammed full of the cod philosophy that fans of the original loved...

The plot is even more convoluted than before and flits between everything from religion to quantum physics and mathematics.

I am unconcerned =]

Oh come on (4, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5906913)

Subtle philosophy? More like blatantly obvious and hackneyed oversimplification of philosophy.

If by philosophy you mean the sort of thoughts you have when you get stoned and are fascinated by the Winamp visualization plugins, then I'll agree. But if by philosophy you mean anything vaguely legitimate on an academic level (I'm talking about old dead Greek and European guys here), then you're sorely mistaken.

The "message" of the Matrix, if it can be called that, is sort of like Plato's Allegory of the cave, minus any actual intellectualism and plus a lot of guns. Don't get me wrong, it's a helluva lot of fun to watch, but you'd be hard pressed to sell it (or the vaunted "Fight Club") as a "philosophical" movie. The Matrix is philosophy in the same sense that pop music is music.

Or maybe that's just my arrogant elitist opinion. Mod down if you really want to, I suppose.

Re:Oh come on (0, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5906982)

Yeah, old dead Greek guys certainly held the key to life... Oh wait, no they didn't. They're fucking dead.

Re:Oh come on (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5907001)

If obtaining immortality is the prerequisite to developing interesting and perhaps even legitimate philosophies, then I'd say we're all pretty screwed on that regard.

Re:Oh come on (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5907042)

As Socrates said in another Keanu (whoah, dude) film: "Like sands through the hourglass, so are the days of our lives".

Matrix Philosophy (4, Interesting)

dpilot (134227) | more than 11 years ago | (#5906993)

Two catch-phrases stuck with me from the movie. The first one was, "There is no spoon," because it was quoted here on /., and on second thought it was kind of amusing.

But the one that really stuck was, "Guns, lots of guns." The lobby scene was one of the most poetic sequences of violent overkill I've ever seen, right up there with the Diva/Lulu music/fight scene near the end of Fifth Element.

I am purposely avoiding reviews until I see the movie, so I haven't read the link, and skipped the earlier quote. But the action is OK if it has the poetry in motion of the first one. Hopefully they've broken some new ground, if they want my money on the third movie before it gets to second-run cheap seats.

slightly OT: another great orgy of movie violence (1)

Indy1 (99447) | more than 11 years ago | (#5907094)

The bank robbery scene in HEAT. If you watch this, watch it on a EXTREMELY loud 5.1 (or better) speaker setup. You can FEEL the 5.56 rounds whizzing by your head. This scene justifies surround sound like no other does.


Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5907104)

Bummer, huh?

Re:Oh come on (4, Informative)

still_sick (585332) | more than 11 years ago | (#5907047)

It's odd that you chose to mention Plato's Cave in your rant, rather than the "Mad Scientist" / "Evil Demon" / or "Brain in a Jar" problem, each of which being essentially the actual premise of the movie.

A very very very quick summary for those who didn't waste time in Philosophy classes (like me :) :
- Plato's Cave poses the idea of some people being bound in a cave in such a way that the only things they can see are shadows on the back of the wall. These people are in this situation for their whole lives, and so to them, the entire world consists of shadows on a wall. Anyone who tried to tell them that the shadows are being created by 3D beings in a whole big bright world out there would be immediately dismissed by them as a lunatic.
- The "Mad Scientist" / "Evil Demon" / "Brain in a Jar" problem are all the same question - how do you know "reality" as you know it really exists? How do you know you're not imagining everything? The "Mad Scientist" and "Brain in a Jar" are two names for the same variant - what if you're nothing but a brain in a jar being poked/prodded by a Mad Scientist such that he's making you THINK that your reality exists. The "Evil Demon" is the exact same idea, but posed way back in Plato's time - what if the entire world the way you know it is nothing but a trick being played on you by an Evil Demon?

Re:Oh come on (4, Interesting)

spoonboy42 (146048) | more than 11 years ago | (#5907051)

Funny, I always thought the Matrix was more like Descartes' "Malicious Demon", who has conspired to decieve an individual from birth into believing in an utterly false conception of reality. Starting by assuming that the existence of said demon is possible, Descartes began to reason that only his own internal thoughts were not suspect (and even then, his thoughts must have been colored by perception. Who is to say that 2 + 2 = 4 is not itself a deception?). This led to his eventual famous formulation: I think, therefore I am.

I could go on at length about his "ghost in the machine" concept here, but I'll hold my tongue, as I don't feel like typing all that. Suffice to say, the Matrix has a good number of Cartesian themes.

Anyway, the Matrix isn't meant to introduce genuinely revolutionary concepts in Philosophy. It does, however, serve as an excellent vehicle for conveying Philosophical concepts in an entertaining, easily accesible way. Plato himself did this by writing dialogues: Sure, he expoused all sorts of interesting ideas in works like the Republic, but he related them much more fluidly in the dialogues (except for Euthyphro, Apology, and Crito, which were really about his teacher Socrates). No, the Wachowskis aren't possessed of Socratic wisdom, but they are much like the great poets whom Socrates questioned: they have an intuitive knowledge of their art, and through their work they introduce the masses to ideas that they wouldn't ordinarily come across, and this is definately a *good thing*.

Re:Oh come on (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5907131)

*cough* bullshit *cough*

don't you have a paper to go write? the wachowskis couldn't blow a pothead's mind.

there is no spoonboy

mod parent up (0, Troll)

illerd (579494) | more than 11 years ago | (#5907067)

Word to that. The only people I talked to who were genuinely intrigued by the philosophical questions that the matrix set forth were, to be blunt, stupid and uneducated. I didn't say that to their faces though cause they were also violent gun-loving types. The rest of us dealt with the question of "what is reality" in highschool english class cause we were paying attention when they talked about Plato. We didn't find it that interesting, though, cause there weren't any guns or robots.

If the matrix was the first thing to make you ponder these types of questions then either you're very young or you just don't think much.

Re:Oh come on (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5907112)

Don't forget old dead asian guys.

Unless your on some kind of western chauvinism thing...

Re:Oh come on (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5907123)

Fair enough. Old dead guys of all flavors.

Agreed, but... (1)

ackthpt (218170) | more than 11 years ago | (#5907134)

Subtle philosophy? More like blatantly obvious and hackneyed oversimplification of philosophy.

Agreed, but why the A.C. posting? Didn't pack the flameproof underoos?

Watching all the fawning over The Matrix makes me wonder how people might react if Bladerunner hadn't been screened until a year ago. People still wouldn't be able to get enough of it and foam at the mouth for a sequel (which, thank God, there hasn't been one.)

And all this must be making the MPAA do a respectable Montgomery Burns impersonation, "Excellent."

heil hitler (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5906914)

and now shut up, you damn geeks.

We are Slashdot of Org (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5906916)

You will be moderated.
Relevance is fubar.

A review I shall not read (0, Offtopic)

autopr0n (534291) | more than 11 years ago | (#5906921)

I'm trying to keep a strict information quarantine around my brain regarding that movie.

Re:A review I shall not read (1)

benna (614220) | more than 11 years ago | (#5906974)

I am proud to say I have seen no trailers at all. I'm gonna see it cold release day (or before).

Re:A review I shall not read (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5907005)

I would think that your brain is sufficiently quarantined simply by means of its own existence.

Re:A review I shall not read (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5907010)

Then Trinity's death at the end of the movie will be a shock for you, I guess.

Re:A review I shall not read (0, Offtopic)

benna (614220) | more than 11 years ago | (#5907054)


Re:A review I shall not read (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5907039)

Now when they say "sex scene" I wonder if they mean after Trinity buys the farm.

Neo always seemed the creepy necropheliac type to me.

TRINITY DIES at the END of MATRIX RELOADED!!! (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5907056)

quarentine that ya slahsfag!!!

cod philosophy (1)

johnmat (650076) | more than 11 years ago | (#5906922)

"Reloaded is crammed full of the cod philosophy that fans of the original loved but which left me distinctly unimpressed." Looks like it still has the philosophy that we all love, but is was not to this reviewer's liking.

Re:cod philosophy (1)

nomadic (141991) | more than 11 years ago | (#5907081)

Looks like it still has the philosophy that we all love

Uhhh...speak for yourself. A lot of us found the philosophy somewhat simplistic. And ruined to a certain extent by the more ridiculous scientific explanations.

"The Philosophy of the Matrix" (1, Insightful)

carlhirsch (87880) | more than 11 years ago | (#5906926)

They must have taken the blue pill.

Re:"The Philosophy of the Matrix" (3, Interesting)

Yusaku Godai (546058) | more than 11 years ago | (#5906979)

The whole "Philosophy of the Matrix" thing has certainly gone too far. Even on the official website there's a section containing articles specifically about the Matrix and philosophy. Sure it borrows certain philosophical ideas, especially metaphysical ones, but it in no way takes those ideas to any depth. I wouldn't say that there isn't a lot you could say about The Matrix from a philosophical perspective, but anyone looking for "depth" in the movie itself should come back to the real world and maybe go to a library or something instead.

Dubious Source (1)

abhinavnath (157483) | more than 11 years ago | (#5906928)

Keep in mind, this review is from the Mirror, one of UK's many crappy tabloids. Generally speaking, I wouldn't trust its coverage any further than I could spit it (not very).

That said, the movie seems to be more or less what I expected - lots of effects, good summer movie. What more could one ask? *cough* LOTR *cough*

Is the movie already in kazaa? (1)

TheBoostedBrain (622439) | more than 11 years ago | (#5906938)

If someone saw it already.....

Re:Is the movie already in kazaa? (1)

benna (614220) | more than 11 years ago | (#5906994)

If its on kazaa its fake. The only place you would have a prayer at finding it this early would be on IRC. and even that I doubt.

Action vs. Philosophy (2, Insightful)

Gothmolly (148874) | more than 11 years ago | (#5906940)

All the premises were set in the original Matrix. Morpheus explained the Matrix to Neo, we had the whole debate of reality vs. perception. Now it's time to kick ass - same as Matrix #1, but with better effects. I look to see a sort of "expanded" set of powers and abilities in Neo (ability to fly, etc.), but its not going to be the same kind of brain-twist that the first one was.

Choose... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5906942)

The Red Pill [] , or The Blue Pill. [] (or, for the New (gnu) Pill [] not currently available in the matrix movies...)

Re:Choose... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5906957)

The real blue pill... [] (for those of you too chicken for the red or new/gnu pills)

I'm sorry... (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5906946)

but I'm not overly hyped to see this movie. I might not even go see it at the theatres, but rather wait until it hits DVD.

Yeah yeah call me whatever. I think the first one was so ground breaking and that, it can't be matched. No matter HOW many Agent Smiths Neo gives a beat down too. Those new white "thingermabobs" that can go invincible and do that sword kung fu-- they don't really appeal to me either.

I think the first Matrix was in and of itself worthy on its own. I understand that some people want to learn about Zion though and the resistance. Oh well. I don't expect a huge amount of "revolutionary" in this, just more special effects.

I'll take Morpheus's advice (2, Funny)

localghost (659616) | more than 11 years ago | (#5906948)

Unfortunately, no one can be told what the Matrix is. You have to see it for yourself.

Re:I'll take Morpheus's advice (1)

Yusaku Godai (546058) | more than 11 years ago | (#5907025)

That was my plan, but then when I went to see X-Men 2 I got blasted with the full trailer. Suffice to say, I melted in my seat, but until then I had been pure of Matrix spoilers. Now I'm just trying to forget what I saw...

Do not try to read the review... (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5906952)

...Instead, you must only realize the truth.

What truth?

There is no review. It has been slashdotted.


Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5907011)

Funny shit!!!

another request for a mod up, (1)

Indy1 (99447) | more than 11 years ago | (#5907075)

first laugh i've had all day. Props to you AC

Re:Do not try to read the review... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5907139)

Well I must say that this is the most critical thinking I've done so far this week.

If only my boss knew that.

Hi (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5906953)

To see some of the pictures of the combat action in the movie, they are archived at

Mission Impossible? (2, Insightful)

moosesocks (264553) | more than 11 years ago | (#5906955)

I just hope that the sequel doesn't turn out like Mission Impossible II did. The first movie had a good (confusing, but definitely intrigueing) plot with a few short (but good) action sequences.

Seeing that the action sequences in the first movie were moderately successful, they capitalized upon them, and as a result, the second movie had a horrible story, a dumbed down plot, and way too much senseless action.

Lets hope the matrix sequel doesn't end up the same way.

Re:Mission Impossible? (1)

Wheaty18 (465429) | more than 11 years ago | (#5907062)

M:I-2 was directed by John Woo, what did you expect, Lawrence of Arabia?

"subtle philosphical ?!?" (1)

Vainglorious Coward (267452) | more than 11 years ago | (#5906956)

[irony gland goes into spasm]

and more seriously (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5907017)

Karma be fucked - the job of an editor is to correct stuff like this. It just makes editor and poster look equally rediculous (sic).

Where's the Spelling Nazi [] when you need him?

The first actual professional review... (1)

ToddUGA95 (316111) | more than 11 years ago | (#5906959)

Was at Ron Epstein reviewed it on 5-2-03. Sorry London Daily! Five days too late!

Actually... (1)

icemax (565022) | more than 11 years ago | (#5906963)

The FIRST review of the Matrix Reloaded was done by the (in)famous Neill Cumpston []

Ha the daily mirror (0, Flamebait)

Loosewire (628916) | more than 11 years ago | (#5906967)

This paper is the lowest of the low, a waste of paper and ink

Why an Action Bent is OK (5, Interesting)

spoonboy42 (146048) | more than 11 years ago | (#5906972)

As I recall, the Wachowski brothers have specifically said that Reloaded will be the most action-focused element in the Matrix trilogy. Given that the three pictures were planned well in advance of the first one being produced, it makes sense that the middle chapter is the rising-tension action piece. Revolutions, on the other hand, is intended to contain the genuine philosophical mindfuckery in the final confrontation with the machines. Furthermore, Reloaded takes place mostly in the Matrix (where lax rules of physics make for all kinds of kung-fu fun), whereas Revolutions will be set mostly in the real world.

Anyway, enjoy this movie for what it is: An exciting flick in an excellently developed sci-fi universe. And also, wait around for the finale to blow the doors off that universe.

Re:Why an Action Bent is OK (1)

Yusaku Godai (546058) | more than 11 years ago | (#5906996)

Was it originally planned as a trilogy? I mean, the first one obviously left things open for a sequel, but I didn't know they had planned anything beyond it until they saw what a run away success it was...

Re:Why an Action Bent is OK (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5907024)

Due to Hollywood being out of ideas, they left gigantic holes in the plot/unanswered questions.

That way, if it sucks - no sequel. In any other event, they'll have a sequel or two. In the event that it becomes wildly popular, expect prequels as well.

For further reference, see Terminator 3, all these lame-assed post-Spidey CGI comic-book-character movies, Rambo IV, and Mad Max 3.

Re:Why an Action Bent is OK (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5907049)

it was planned as a trilogy. Actually, it was supposed to be only one movie, but the story was too long, and had to be made into three separate movies.

Re:Why an Action Bent is OK (1)

sacherjj (7595) | more than 11 years ago | (#5907116)

It was originally planned as a trilogy and they were given the go ahead to make the first one. If it did well, then they would get funding for the next two. It did well. Here they come. :)

Other reviews available (1)

joshua404 (590829) | more than 11 years ago | (#5906987)

Ron Epstein and Steve Simon of have also posted similar reviews. []

Personally, I expected this kind of response. The Matrix was fluke in that it came out of nowhere and surprised nearly everyone. The hype surrounding the sequels set the bar impossibly high. Especially when the W brothers essentially wrote themselves into a corner with the first movie. And that's not a bad thing, it's a great story. They should have simply recognized that going for more would pollute the waters. I think they would have been better off sticking to things in an "expanded universe" such as demonstrated by the Animatrix. Then they would have been freer to explore without dilluting the impact and mystique of the first him. But to each their own, I certainly plan on seeing Reloaded and Revolutions. But I have set the bar low in terms of my expectations for the same kind of experience I got from The Matrix.

saw trailer before XMEN2 last night.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5906989)

..and I can't say I was too impressed. The first Matrix has grown on me since it's release, but I can't say I was too pleased with it right off. It had the absolute narrative length of a half-hour TV cartoon, but stretched out for 2 hours with a lot of special effects.

Is Matrix 2 and HULK the wave of future action movies? I hope not. Too fake.

Subtle psychological theme? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5906990)

Give me a break. I can't tell you what the matrix is? It is a freaking computer.

Cod philosophy (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5906998)

So if someone catches a cod in a forest lake, and no one's around to see it, how do we know how really big it is?

I'm sorry to say it... (4, Interesting)

Wind_Walker (83965) | more than 11 years ago | (#5907003)

The Matrix was really not a philosophical movie. It was an action movie that throws in a few pseudo-philosophical concepts without actually delving into the subject fully. I don't fault the creators for this, but I'm still mad at people who are upset by this "divergence" from the original.

The first time I watched The Matrix I was impressed by the philosopical aspect of it, and wowed by the action. The second time I saw how thin the plot was and how shallow the characters were, but was still impressed by the action. The third time I used my Chapter button on the DVD to skip ahead to the action, because I grew tired of the one-line philosophy.

"Have you ever had a dream that you were so sure was real?" Please. Read fscking Decartes, he does a much better analysis of reality than Morpheus ever could. "Would you still have broken the vase if I hadn't said anything?" Christ, get that woman some Herodotus or St. Augustine. "Fate is not without a certain sense of irony." Give me a gun. I can't take it anymore.

It's pseudo-philosophy, just like Contact is pseudo-scientific. Fine for the mainstream audience, but if you've studied the subject they're touching on it's just plain insulting. So I'm glad to see that they've stopped trying to be philosophical and just stuck with what really made The Matrix successful - mind-blowing action.

Re:I'm sorry to say it... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5907034)

You actually read Descartes? Him and many of the other rennaissance philosophers end up using a one word argument to deny skepticism. Maybe you've heard it.


Don't get me wrong, that's all fine and good if you want it, but I don't buy into the ontological argument (horribly circular reasoning), so depending on the existence of God to get rid of skepticism isn't terribly great to me.

Descartes had a tremendous influence, true, but I've found that many of the people who followed the great bout of christian philosophers (including your St. Augustine, original creator of the ontological argument I believe) were much better. David Hume, for example, was quite fascinating, and he didn't piss me off by using God as an excuse for everything.

I do agree though that it's pseudo-philosophy and such, just commenting on your Descartes bit. Yeah.

Re:I'm sorry to say it... (1)

Yusaku Godai (546058) | more than 11 years ago | (#5907086)

Not to try to make up any parallel between Descartes and The Matrix, it does seem that the only one who can fully control the dream that is The Matrix is The One, a.k.a. God. Of course there's no circular reasoning going on in The Matrix as there's no real reasoning to begin with. They just take a little from here, a little from there, and the end result looks cool.

Re:I'm sorry to say it... (1)

Yusaku Godai (546058) | more than 11 years ago | (#5907057)

I don't mind that the plot is laden with pseudo-philosophy. It certainly makes things much more interesting than your average action movie. But it is annoying when people try to derive any depth from The Matrix. What's better would be to read Descartes, and then use the ideas you learned from him to analyze The Matrix. There's plenty going on in The Matrix that you can analyze from a philosophical perspective, but you have to get that philosophy from an outside source--you can't find it in the movie itself.

Re:I'm sorry to say it... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5907074)

Christ nothing worse than a college student whos just finished Western Philosophy 101. Grow up, and post again when you've got a slightly wider experience of life - fuckwad.

Several reviews have been posted on AICN (1)

evac (459839) | more than 11 years ago | (#5907009)

Harry Knowles' site [] has a bunch of reviews here [] , here [] , here [] , and the funniest one here [] .

What did you expect? (1)

moogla (118134) | more than 11 years ago | (#5907015)

It's going to need to make money. It can't get all philosophical without hurting too many people's feelings. OTH Americans like violence (especially when its inflicted on something that doesn't look like us).

Hell, it was daring of them to make the people into food. The plugs on the guys heads/hands in the first movie made my dad so nauseous he left the theatre.

Hungry for $4.00 popcorn? I can think of something nice to gaze at while you munch. Just get out there already, I'd feel sorry for Reeves if you didn't.
I mean, he likes pot! That's cool -- big ups to my man!

well duh (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5907019)

Everything leading up to the new matrix movies has pointed to just a big action extravaganza.

It will probably be great action but the first matrix was good because it was about more than just action.

You know, however, even if the second matrix totally rocks half the people will just say they hate it to be cool like all those starwars dorks who claimed to hate empire strikes back (even though now they love it and says its the best one...)

right (3, Interesting)

mojowantshappy (605815) | more than 11 years ago | (#5907028)

I can hardly say that the first movie had a stunning, subtle philosophical theme. Our perception of reality is false, instead we are a battery for robot overlords. Very subtle.

Old News (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5907031)

Ain't It Cool News [] has had several reviews, and there are some in the Chud [] message boards if you hunt for them. Hell, Time magazine contains a spoilerific review. Therefore, this is hardly the first.

Plus, I've heard many complaints that Reloaded contains too much philosphical dialog. Bah!

Just a quick hint for those of you who are expecting to be thrilled by this one just like the first: don't. As good as this movie may be, it can not produce the same feeling you had when the concept was fresh and new. Lower your expectations to a more realistic level and you won't come out of the theater dissapointed.

"I've known the man for five years. All I can tell you that I know, certainly I know, I love that motherfucker, but I don't know a fucking thing about him. I'm telling you the truth. That motherfucker's like nobody else on the planet. That's why he's the one." - Laurence Fishburne speaking on Keanu Reeves.

Time review... SPOILER!!!! (4, Interesting)

Shant3030 (414048) | more than 11 years ago | (#5907037)

Time magazine put a review on their website, that supposedly spoils the ending.


Matrix spoiler []

The Oracle is the Mother of The Matrix (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5907128)


640 Agent Smiths ought to be enough for anybody (2, Informative)

sandbagger (654585) | more than 11 years ago | (#5907041)

The first film I saw drunk and was still able to shoot holes in the "plot".

Why use humans at all? If all you need is a powersource, stick in sheep? Less troublesome by half.

The caloric efficiency of using bodies as massive networked energy sources is a concept I don't buy. Cripes. Burning wood has to be more efficient.

Of course, if you choose that route then you don't have a story, my point exactly.

Moreover, who cares what people in the matrix think? If they revolt, so what? If I want a how do you perceive reality story, I'll take "Rosencratnz and Gildenstern are Dead" any day.

Lastly, this is a nitpick I know, but bullets travel at well over the speed of sound. I don't care how fast you pull the trigger, with the action of a semi-automatic, the bullets will likely be 100 feet apart between shots.

Movies (0)

-Rainer38- (660997) | more than 11 years ago | (#5907045)

Most people will try to catagorize each movie on what it concentrates on, but they should really wait until we see the entire trilogy. The entire message of the movies is most important.

How to use the premise (3, Interesting)

Kappelmeister (464986) | more than 11 years ago | (#5907059)

I'd also be disappointed in an all-out action sequel, because of the philosophical underpinnings [] of the original.

I'm writing a movie about the psychology of VR worlds (applied to MMORPGs) and thought it would be a neat exercise to make a list of the ways the Matrix premise could been pushed. These are straight from my notes:
  • An RL (real life) character takes on several MV (metaverse) characters, or at least, someone who doesn't look exactly the same.
  • RL characters continue to kill with impunity in the MV, but discuss the ethics -- isn't it as bad as killing an RL person, since it essentially is? (Why is Neo less than a serial murderer for what he did in the lobby, since those policemen thought they were pretty real?)
  • Neo alters MV world history by materializing at key places at key times, as opposed to just hanging around downtown.
  • The Matrix history is recorded and characters use the records to uncover key revelations about the world and each other. (This world would be very different if there were absolute records of every physical event.)
  • A futher exploration of the mind/body problem. This movie "enforces" the notion that all physicality is part of the mind -- they are not parallel or intertwined. Neo's ability to reform the Matrix is a great device for this -- "there is no spoon" indeed. But is the spoon, then, bent just for him, or for everyone? How might the computer resolve divergent internalizations, interpretations, and mental images? Surely there is a large piece of perception that lies well outside the computer's reach of sensory input -- can't people get out of sync?

But then again... it's hard to sell tickets when you make movies out of musings like those.

My friends liked it (2, Interesting)

sammaytg1 (608758) | more than 11 years ago | (#5907077)

My firends are all basically warez pirates in training so they managed to snag a copy of the preelase and have already seen it. They all liked it and said it was as good as the first one.

Strange... (4, Informative)

11223 (201561) | more than 11 years ago | (#5907090)

Now, this flatly contradicts what this week's Time Magazine claimed - namely, that the first hour of the new movie was all plot and little action, and only in the second hour does it begin to heat up.

Who do you believe? I'll wait and see myself.

Philosophy? (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5907091)

What I liked most about the original was the way it blended stunning action with a subtle philosphical theme about how we percieve reality.

Subtle "philosphical" theme? I'd say more of a junior philosophical theme. The "philosophy" in The Matrix was rather primitive.

It always seems ironic that people say they like Sci-Fi because it makes them think, yet when something with a low-level philosophy like The Matrix comes along, everyone goes ape over the "questions" it poses and how it makes them think, yet The Matrix was about as advanced philosophically as BASIC is an advanced language.

No. I correct myself. BASIC is a more advanced language than The Matrix is advanced philosophy.

Advertising for The Matrix Reloaded has been awful (4, Insightful)

Chuck Chunder (21021) | more than 11 years ago | (#5907109)

They give far too much of it away, not the plot necessarily, but the action sequences and 'new characters'. I don't see they why they are pimping it so badly. People are going to want to see it anyway. The adverts should have been complete teasers. I'm tired of walking into a movie only to discover I know whats coming because of what I've seen on the adverts.

"subtle phillosophical theme" ? (2, Insightful)

Edmund Blackadder (559735) | more than 11 years ago | (#5907115)

the phillosophical theme of the matrix was as subtle as a punch in the face.

And lets face it, if you liked the phillosophical theme you would have preferred Dark City, the matrix predecessor that had a very similar plot (without the action and the kung foo).

You may as well admit it -- you liked the action.

Not the first (2, Informative)

athorshak (652273) | more than 11 years ago | (#5907125)

Ron Epstein, the admin at Home Theater Forum [] has had a review [] up for a couple days. Just click on the Reloaded link on the left frame. sorry for no direct link.

Is it part two or part three (5, Funny)

supun (613105) | more than 11 years ago | (#5907133)

where Neo is finds the buffer overflow error in the Matrix and installs Linux over the existing OS, forcing Mr. Smith to live inside VMWare session?
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?
or Connect with...

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>