3 ms·

Do not watch the fourth. Not kidding. It's not worth the curiosity. Yes the 2nd and 3rd were great despite critics. The fourth is a "WTF who wrote this garbage

by ck2 4y ago

Do not watch the fourth. Not kidding. It's not worth the curiosity. Yes the 2nd and 3rd were great despite critics. The fourth is a "WTF who wrote this garbage money grab" the entire time, it's not even "fan service" because it destroys everything with poor writing and terrible acting, feels like someone was shouting "we'll fix it in post" after every first take rushing to the next shot to churn it out. Remember how epic the music was in the first three? The fourth is like that kid from Bob's Burgers mashing on a keyboard. Remember the epic dialog from Hugo Weaving and those chilling rants from Agent Smith? Yeah absolutely nothing, nothing even vaguely faintly like it in the fourth, it almost undoes the entire franchise.

jamal-kumar 4y ago
I'm really of the opinion that they did that on purpose given the philosophical underpinnings of the original. Like, to make a point, because Warner Bros owned the rights to their franchise and were going to make some banal crap anyways, with or without the Wachowskis.
- hnbad 4y ago
  That's literally why. Also 2 and 3 were mostly bad because releasing two part movies wasn't a thing at the time and thus the films had to be forced into (unsatisfying) single-movie narrative arcs despite having an obvious overarching narrative. Re-watching 2 and 3 as a double feature years later makes them less of a trainwreck and more of a mildly underwhelming but watchable and solid sequel to a movie so good it was impossible to follow up on. It finishes the story, literally ends the universe it created and ties up the loose ends. On the other hand 4 is the sequel that never should have been but ultimately exists to seal the franchise permanently shut because any attempt to build on it can only be read as a soulless cashgrab because there is now literally nothing left to tell. WB didn't want to let its IP die so the Wachowskis had to drive a stake through its heart and kiss it goodbye.

by ck2 4y ago

jamal-kumar 4y ago

I'm really of the opinion that they did that on purpose given the philosophical underpinnings of the original. Like, to make a point, because Warner Bros owned the rights to their franchise and were going to make some banal crap anyways, with or without the Wachowskis.

hnbad 4y ago
That's literally why. Also 2 and 3 were mostly bad because releasing two part movies wasn't a thing at the time and thus the films had to be forced into (unsatisfying) single-movie narrative arcs despite having an obvious overarching narrative. Re-watching 2 and 3 as a double feature years later makes them less of a trainwreck and more of a mildly underwhelming but watchable and solid sequel to a movie so good it was impossible to follow up on. It finishes the story, literally ends the universe it created and ties up the loose ends. On the other hand 4 is the sequel that never should have been but ultimately exists to seal the franchise permanently shut because any attempt to build on it can only be read as a soulless cashgrab because there is now literally nothing left to tell. WB didn't want to let its IP die so the Wachowskis had to drive a stake through its heart and kiss it goodbye.