Matrix Trilogy or Star Wars Prequels
 

I revisited the Matrix trilogy and, like almost everyone else, was initially underwhelmed by the sequels. Maybe because the first Matrix built up so well to a point that both Reloaded and Revolutions were set up for a disappointment.

I saw them all again after getting the Ultimate Matrix collection and was actually quite impressed this time since the direction of the films were uncompromising and consistent, and it did seem that the Wachowski Bros. have planned the whole story of the trilogy regardless of whether the first Matrix succeeded or not.

The Star Wars prequels are great in their own right and it has gotten a lot of detractors as well. The climax of the prequels boil down to Skywalker's turn to the dark side and becoming Darth Vader while the Matrix trilogy somewhat became anti-climactic even before Revolutions ended.

What do u guys prefer?

I'm going to go with the Matrix Trilogy. I think the strength of the first Matrix outweighs the 3rd Star Wars, and the two sequels are far better than the first two prequels.

No disagreement here.

I would have to go with The Matrix Trilogy simply because The Matrix is in there. Both sequels were awful and all of the Star Wars prequels were equally bad (and possibly worse).

The Matrix ranks up there with the original Star Wars in my humble opinion.

I've never been into the whole Matrix thing, and yes i have seen all of them.
So I am going with Star Wars.

I despise both the Matrix sequels and Star Wars prequels. Matrix wins by default on the basis of the first film.

I'd strongly disagree with that. Love the first Matrix film. The last two were godawful. There were some great moments in the first two prequels that in my humble opinion outdo the moments in the Matrix sequels. But this is a "which do you prefer" thread. So arguing is pointless. Opinions differ.

they had similar weaknesses (forced dialogue, unengaging action sequences), but I prefer the matrix trilogy.

Matrix big time, even if you didnt care for the 2nd and 3rd you gotta admit the both contain some of the best action scenes in a movie. star wars gotta say the visuals always look cgi, dialouge is much worse and boring,

I voted for the prequel trilogy.

Even though Episode I wasn't great, it was still kind of fun. I loved 3 and 2 wasn't that bad either.

Looking back, I didn't like the matrix trilogy; sure the 1st one was good, but the other 2, no matter how hard they might've tried, weren't that great, in my opinion. I felt like someone took a "introduction to philosophy" book, skipped to the last 4 chapters and then wrote a script.

So.. Keaunu or Hayden?


;)

These are the two reasons I chose The Matrix trilogy.

1. The Phantom Menace is not apart of that trilogy.
2. Attack of the Clones is not apart of that trilogy.

End of discussion.

I think a poll of Star Wars Prequels and Silent Night Deadly Night trilogy would be more fair. Matrix 1 is way too good to even compare to the prequels.

You realize with your typo (a part vs. apart) you essentially said the opposite of what you meant? :shrug:

I choose Star Wars. The whole story of the Prequel Trilogy (three films together) is way better (IMHO) than the Matrix storyline. The first Matrix movie is the best movie of the 6 movies up for discussion here, but the 2nd and 3rd Matrix movies were so forced. It was like they were attempting to cram as much religious allegory into the storyline that it ended up being obvious and ultimately ineffective.

As trilogies, both sucked. The first Matrix movie was great. A classic if taken as a standalone movie. But Unloaded was a bloated mess with that 30 minute series of action sequences in the middle as its lone highlight. And the Wachowski Bros....errrr, siblings wrote themselves into such a corner with the first two films that they had to resort to a laughable deus ex machina ending for Convolutions.

As for the prequels, the only one I enjoyed was Episode II. TPM gets worse everytime I see it, as does ROTS. ROTS actually has a lot in common with Convolutions. Lucas did such a poor job of writing in the first two movies(at least in terms of setting up the pivotal 3rd act), that he was left with no choice but to have Anakin turn for the flimsiest of reasons. Both have laughable death scenes for their female leads, although in the case of ROTS, at least Padme's death was brief. Then again, at least Trinity's demise wasn't followed by Neo screaming "NOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!". Both Convolutions and ROTS neutered formerly badass characters. Morpheus was reduced to playing Nien Nunb to Jada Pinkett Smith's Lando for most of Convolutions and Darth Vader.....well, just refer to my previous comment. Both also took interesting characters introduced in the 2nd films(the Merovingian in Unloaded; Count Dooku in Episode II) only to dispatch them within the opening reels of the 3rd.

So to sum up, I liked one movie in each trilogy. At least with The Matrix, I can watch the first film, enjoy it, and ignore the sequels. With the prequels, I only liked the 2nd one which pretty much necessitates ignoring the entire trilogy. That's cool though. 20 years from now when people talk about The Matrix and Star Wars, I figure most people will hold 3 or 4 movies total from both series in high regard. Hell, a lot of fans already feel that way.

I voted "both are great" though my real choice would be "both are ok."

The Matrix was very good, the sequels were just ok.

With Star Wars the first 2 were just ok, and the third was very good.

Matrix Trilogy easily wins based on the first film being a classic and the second film being pretty good.

Besides, the Star Wars prequels never happened. I repeat, they never happened. -wink-

As trilogies, I think they both are failures. For the Matrix, the first movie will be considered a classic standalone movie 20 years from now, and the sequels will be something just for the diehard fans, but overall are not that good.

Star Wars prequels have one pretty good movie, Revenge of the Sith, cause Lucas decided to divide the plot points to the trilogy 20%, 20%, and 60% for the final film. (Those are Lucas's words, not mine). The Phantom Menace & Attack of the Clones are just average movies that only Star Wars diehards love, and Revenge of the Sith appeals to more Star Wars fans cause it finally is the story why Darth Vader turned.

I think the Star Wars Original Trilogy and The Lord of the Rings Trilogy set a high bar for trilogies that are hard to match. Most trilogies have one classic movie in them: Back to the Future, The Matrix, Terminator, Raiders of the Lost Ark, and Jurassic Park. The others have sequels that some are better than the others.

I guess I would have to give it to the Matrix, since it atleast it has one classic movie, and the Star Wars prequels couldn't produce one classic to appeal to anyone other than diehard Star Wars fans. And this is coming from a diehard Star Wars fan.

The Matrix Trilogy. No contest.

I just can't stand Hayden and Natalie in the Prequels.

Matrix trilogy although i dont like the 3rd one.

Matrix. I actualy enjoyed the sequels :)

The division was more like 5%, 20%, and 75% (IMO).

(It's one area where The Matrix and the Star Wars prequels are alot alike - both have only enough plot for 2 movies, but it's instead stretched into 3 movies.)

Matrix, but only because of the first film.

I hate both films made after The Matrix and I hate all three prequels to Star Wars.

They both sucked.