4 ms·
Didn't they do a number of short-pieces in various styles in Animatrix? That was interesting enough (for at least some of them, and a few tied into the video ga
by ci5er 7y ago
Didn't they do a number of short-pieces in various styles in Animatrix? That was interesting enough (for at least some of them, and a few tied into the video game "Enter the Matrix"). I don't know why they would extend the franchise to a major sequel after killing or neutering all of the main characters.
It reminds me of the Spider-Man 4 news I just heard, with the 44 year old Toby McGuire, because Disney and Sony couldn't come to terms on the MCU license rights.
Maybe everyone should think about developing new content. This is starting to get tiring. (Although I did enjoy Abrams' first Star Trek reboot).
- sverige 7y agoHollywood investors are some of the most risk-averse types ever. If it pays x% return fairly predictably, they're going to keep making the same things over and over until it doesn't. For example, I also saw today that yet another Rambo movie is about to be released. Forty years of profits, can't argue with that! I don't think there's many from that crowd who invest in tech startups.
- ci5er 7y agoThat makes sense. Especially since these blockbusters have all gotten so capital intensive! > I don't think there's many from that crowd who invest in tech startups. I meet a fair number of LA types that want to invest in SV types, and that is a portfolio play (one win can cover 9 losses), but they appear to at least "want to play" with the people who make outragous returns off minimal up-front (think: the leverage of instagram at point of purchase -- it's romantic! that's the stuff of gold-rushes right there)