The film hasn't opened here in Finland yet, but I thought we should have a thread where you can assign The Matrix Reloaded a star rating from one to five. I know the four star system is widely used in America, but I prefer 1-5 stars because it allows you to rate the film mediocre - i.e. 3 stars. But I hope it won't come to that. :)
Also, I am aware of this (http://www.dvdtalk.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&threadid=292838) thread over at Movie Talk but I thought it wouldn't hurt to have another one that merely asks for a star rating and not, for example, if you'd like to see the film a second time. And this one's in the right forum too!
uteotw
05-16-03, 02:25 PM
I give it a 4: Great effects, moves the story along well, interesting character, but a little too much chit chat and lovey-dovey stuff for me...
goLUCKY
05-16-03, 02:28 PM
It's a great movie as part of a trilogy!
PixyJunket
05-16-03, 03:02 PM
I wanted to give it ** but decided on *** because parts of it WERE entertaining, and you can't dismiss most of the effects. However, the lack of tension, the ridiculous pot-head philosphy, and the general lack of flow of the movie really try to drag it down to **.
Decker
05-16-03, 03:31 PM
First half ** - Boring and confusing
Second half **** - Exciting, fun.....and confusing
I guess that averages to ***.
Decker
05-16-03, 03:33 PM
BTW: I don't think any critics use a 5-star system. It's usually four-star max. On that system, I'd probably be a little nicer and give three stars as well. I really think the film is more honestly "Good" than "Mediocre". Too bad I was expecting "Excellent" :(
retihsuhnt
05-16-03, 03:41 PM
I have to go with a three (3) on this one.
theneobez
05-16-03, 03:48 PM
I thought it was excellent. Totally got me off guard. . .in a good way. It wasn't afraid to do something you weren't expecting. . .and by that I mean do a "safe" sequel. One simple advancing the story as you knew it. Instead. . .it really made you second guess. It's also a movie that requires multiple viewings. I'm seeing it 2 more times in theatres. . .
Tyler_Durden
05-17-03, 09:06 AM
Originally posted by Decker
BTW: I don't think any critics use a 5-star system.Good luck trying to find a critic using a 4-star system outside of the U.S.I really think the film is more honestly "Good" than "Mediocre". I thought hard about equating three stars with "good" instead of "mediocre" in the poll. Mediocre does have a rather negative connotation, but I guess I'm subconsciously trying to battle guys Harry Knowles who call all sh**ty films mediocre instead of sh**ty.
mdc3000
05-17-03, 12:27 PM
Originally posted by Tyler_Durden
Good luck trying to find a critic using a 4-star system outside of the U.S.[b]
.
I was thinking the same thing...most critics up here in Canada use the 5 star system... I think it's a pretty decent system and what I prefer to use.
MATT
Iron Chef
05-17-03, 12:36 PM
4
gcribbs
05-17-03, 02:39 PM
Exxccceellleennttt!!
I really liked the movie and I am still thinking about what happened and what it all meant.
atari2600
05-17-03, 04:11 PM
5 stars! better than i expected. best fight scenes ever. didnt quite get the entire story but thats not why i was watching anyways.
Goat3001
05-17-03, 08:30 PM
I thought it was a good 4 stars. Its a good middle of a trilogy. It leaves you wanting to see Revolutions even more.
collven
05-17-03, 11:35 PM
I said 3 stars. I check AICN pretty regularly, and while I'm not a big fan of Harry Knowles, the guy who runs the site (he seems too uppity for me, always talking about how he is an insider), I totally agree with his review (http://linux10985.dn.net/display.cgi?id=15192) of the movie. Way too much fighting, not enough character. I mean, really, what was the point of the Agent Smith fight, other than to show off with a bunch of CGI. Neo was able to destroy computer code at the end of the first movie, but he seems to have totally forgotten that in the second.
He also revised his review here (http://www.aintitcool.com/display.cgi?id=15211) after seeing the movie again.
Scot1458
05-18-03, 12:41 AM
sucked.
matome
05-18-03, 05:36 PM
I would've rated it 4.5 stars, same as X2
B.A.
05-18-03, 05:59 PM
Originally posted by matome
I would've rated it 4.5 stars, same as X2 You must have read my mind.
fumanstan
05-18-03, 06:07 PM
Very good film. In fact, the more i read threads and thoughts about the movie, the more i love it.
Glennbigdog13
05-18-03, 07:17 PM
two stars at the most... the two big action scenes are fine, but even they become repetitive as they drag on... the story is crap, and the dialogue is terrible--even Lawrence Fishburne cant come to the rescue this time around. When people are laughing in the theatre during what are supposed to be serious dramatic moments, you know you have problems. If you really think that you can make sense of this crap and find inherent truths, then maybe you should apply for the Iraqi minister of information position. I hear they have an opening.
nelsed
05-18-03, 10:12 PM
I think this movie is incredible. I'm not just some fan-boy either. I went in not expecting too much just from what I had heard -- but I know that the philosophical stuff can be a bit much for a lot of people... but if you give it a chance and think about it... it's quite deep... and opens up the movie to a new level.
I mean... I wondered how they were going to put us into another movie and give it any sense of drama... when neo is the ONE!! I mean he's been DEAD ... and is now living... and destroyed an agent at will... how in the world are they going to create anxiety, apprehension or uncertainty in their audience...
Well they did... I mean... at the beginning of the first movie... neo doesn't know who he is... or what his purpose is. At the end he does again. But now they have turned all that on it's head. Neo doesn't know at the beginning, nor does he know at the end... and we are left to wonder what the true meaning of being the ONE is... etc... I think it's brilliant... and the whole conflict between freedom of choice, foreknowledge (oracle and architect), and causality is fascinating. It makes us ask and question even our own reality.
einTier
05-18-03, 11:00 PM
I liked it better than I thought I would, especially after the crummy reviews it got. I gave it four stars, as I think it's an excellent movie.
Here's the problem. The first movie had no hype, and was an amazing piece of work. There's very little you can fault the movie for, and there is never a wasted second. Part two had hype it could not possibly live up to, and there are many wasted seconds, many seconds of "look what we can do" and several places where a few more seconds would have been nice.
So, instead of a great movie, it's merely a very, very good one. Some will realize that, and take it for what it is -- the second part of a trilogy. Some will want it to be as earthshattering as the Matrix was the first time they saw it -- there's no way it can be and still be a sequel. Others will see paths that could have been explored and weren't, and they will say the movie was a failure.
grunter
05-19-03, 12:41 PM
Why no "ass-tastic" category?
What a steaming pile.
Groucho
05-19-03, 12:48 PM
After thinking about it for a while, I voted on the "Mediocre" rating. The big action sequences were a lot of fun, but the movie was overlong and too "talky." I think with a few cuts here and there, it could have been a lot better.
As for being "deep and philosophical," I don't think so. It's about on par with a stoner taking a "Creative Writing 101" class at the community college.
Surf Monkey
05-19-03, 01:03 PM
Originally posted by Groucho
As for being "deep and philosophical," I don't think so. It's about on par with a stoner taking a "Creative Writing 101" class at the community college.
:lol:
Compared to the vast majority of Hollywood product The Matrix Reloaded is Shakespeare.
Buy: