|
Post by Jambowayoh on Jan 12, 2022 10:22:49 GMT
In retrospect it does feel like a cheap parody with a script written on someone's bag at the back of the bus on the way to school. But it feels like it was done on purpose, but that's me trying to be generous.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 12, 2022 10:32:21 GMT
It was definitely done on purpose - it's not bad because it's lazy, it's bad because it's a profoundly unsatisfying coda to a much-loved series of films. It was designed to be that way so that everyone at Warner shuts up and leaves the franchise alone.
I was thinking about it in the context of The Force Awakens and The Last Jedi - films that drew from the well of the originals and played back very similar themes (and even scenes!) but did just about enough to move the franchise on and give it a clear future. Resurrections does the first two, but crucially it absolutely and intentionally buries the franchise. Hell, it almost dismantles it.
In some ways, I'm surprised it was released at all. It's such a blatant "FUCK YOU" to Warner.
|
|
|
Post by Vandelay on Jan 12, 2022 10:45:06 GMT
I think the biggest problem, and this is probably just me, I thought it was engrossing, an loved the self referential elements. But I cannot remember what happened at the end. I vaguely remember parts, but it just didn’t make a big impression. Agree with that. I found the first half to be pretty great (with the caveat that I'm a sucker for self-referential/meta stuff and appreciate it isn't for everyone). From the real world onwards though, it seemed to forget all that and not really follow through with any of those bits from the opening section. I do wonder how much studio interference was involved, as the opening half really felt like a director/screenwriter with purposeful commentary on reboots and nostalgic sequels, whilst the second half is as if someone said "that's nice, but can we have our reboot/nostalgic sequel now please". I recently watched Wes Craven's New Nightmare and it is good comparison point. That's a film that really goes full into breaking down that fourth wall, critical of what the Elm Street series had become, and it sticks with it all the way through, quite literally going full circle by the end and tying its final scene in with the very first. By comparison, Resurrection is pretty much a different film by its final moments, with barely a sinew connecting it with where it begins.
|
|
|
Post by beastmaster on Jan 12, 2022 10:49:55 GMT
Another FU to Warner is that it's not done very well at all. HBO MAX simultaneous release didn't help but it flopped hard and the filmmakers have confirmed there are no more sequels.
|
|
|
Post by baihu1983 on Jan 12, 2022 17:27:33 GMT
Yeah looks to be around a $100m loss for them. Seems the HBO plan has done more harm than good last year? Think Mortal Kombat and Dune are the only 2 that still made money at the box office?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 12, 2022 17:37:27 GMT
There's subscription revenue that can't be ignored though. Dune made money because people wanted to see it, and it was good. Matrix Resurrections wasn't good, so it's unlikely it would have performed even if the HBO Max option weren't there. Tenet thought it was too good for streaming and nobody went to see that either.
HBO Max is a good way to get eyes on a film that one might have trepidations about, but at the end of the day your film still needs to be good and have a positive word of mouth. It's like the Netflix model. People are talking positively about The Witcher, so it gets picked up for new seasons and spin-offs. People trashed Cowboy Bebop so it was cancelled after a week or two.
|
|
|
Post by drhickman1983 on Jan 12, 2022 18:18:04 GMT
I didn't even find it unsatisfying, I thought it was an irreverant and breezy epilogue, but oddly enjoyable.
Which after the last two sequels tried very hard to be THE MATRIX is the best possible direction it could have gone.
I'll probably watch it again at least once.
|
|
|
Post by drhickman1983 on Jan 12, 2022 18:20:34 GMT
Tenet thought it was too good for streaming and nobody went to see that either In the case of Tenet, it doesn't help that it's a genuinely shit film and one of the most disappointing experiences I've ever had. I'd actually rather rewatch The Matrix Revolutions than Tenet. Apologies for the tangential rant.
|
|
Blue_Mike
Full Member
Meet Hanako At Embers
Posts: 5,360
|
Post by Blue_Mike on Jan 13, 2022 17:08:00 GMT
Am I alone in thinking that maybe the reason certain films seem to look cheaper these days than their lower budget predecessors did, is because now that things are filmed in such higher resolutions to begin with, you can see the quality of the sets and props more closely than you could before?
|
|
|
Post by 😎 on Jan 13, 2022 17:14:55 GMT
They’re not filmed in higher resolutions. Even though they’re not really cross comparable, analog film has a higher “resolution” than digital.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 13, 2022 17:19:40 GMT
The film projectors and DVDs were definitely lower resolution than what we have now though, so you know what he means.
There is some truth to that. I remember watching Burton's Batman when HBO Max launched and being able to see the strings that made him glide.
I've not seen Jurassic Park since the 90s and I'm afraid to rewatch it as the dinosaur CG blew me away at the time.
I do think Matrix Resurrection's CG just didn't evolve from the earlier films though. There have been loads of better examples in recent movies.
|
|
|
Post by 😎 on Jan 13, 2022 17:24:55 GMT
I think it varies. The original Matrix films in 4K still look great with the quality of the sets etc in mind (even if the CG has aged). It’s just a combination of everything really. Films are more expensive to make nowadays so shortcuts abound everywhere. CG makes up more of the film. Also filming during a pandemic doesn’t help matters.
For what it’s worth, Jurassic Park still holds up because of how many effects are practical.
|
|
|
Post by unrealkilla on Jan 13, 2022 18:19:05 GMT
Am I the only cunt that actually liked this movie?
|
|
|
Post by drhickman1983 on Jan 13, 2022 18:29:32 GMT
Am I the only cunt that actually liked this movie? I liked it too.
|
|
|
Post by brokenkey on Jan 13, 2022 19:24:35 GMT
I also have enjoyed it, twice.
|
|
Blue_Mike
Full Member
Meet Hanako At Embers
Posts: 5,360
|
Post by Blue_Mike on Jan 13, 2022 21:08:43 GMT
The film projectors and DVDs were definitely lower resolution than what we have now though, so you know what he means. There is some truth to that. I remember watching Burton's Batman when HBO Max launched and being able to see the strings that made him glide. This.
I recently watched the 2017 blu-ray version of the first Pirates Of The Carribean, and quite early on there is a point where you can clearly see that one of the swords is wood painted to look like metal. Visible brush strokes.
|
|
anephric
Junior Member
The first 6 I took out with a whirlwind kick
Posts: 1,511
|
Post by anephric on Jan 13, 2022 21:12:10 GMT
The film projectors and DVDs were definitely lower resolution than what we have now though, so you know what he means. Digital projection may have standardised projection quality a bit more, but certainly film projectors weren't 'lower resolution' in the 90s. Photochemical film prints inherently lost quality for every generation they were away from the answer print, but 35mm film still holds more 'resolution' than the 2k DCPs we had for years in cinemas. It's only fairly recently that some cinemas have gone 4k, the majority still only project in 2k, so essentially Blu-ray. Decent 35mm and especially 70mm projection craps on that. The problem was that you had such a massive variation in quality of projection, which digital somewhat reduces.
|
|
anephric
Junior Member
The first 6 I took out with a whirlwind kick
Posts: 1,511
|
Post by anephric on Jan 13, 2022 21:25:41 GMT
One of the things about going back to the negative and producing 4k home media based on that is that, back in in the day, cinematographers knew that what they were photographing on set was going to get printed down through at least two or three generations to get to a theatrical print, so things like visible makeup or a wire or two weren't given that much concern, because it would get printed down. Or why you'd see garbage mattes around spaceships on home media, but not theatrically because the cinema print was darker and intended to be shown at a certain lambert level of brightness (prints used to sometimes come with precise instructions for projectionists) and they'd really goose the gamma (a 'hot' transfer') to make it be brighter and pop for the majority of viewers with shit CRT TVs watching through composite connections.
|
|
|
Post by damagedinc on Jan 13, 2022 22:27:59 GMT
Tenet thought it was too good for streaming and nobody went to see that either In the case of Tenet, it doesn't help that it's a genuinely shit film and one of the most disappointing experiences I've ever had. I'd actually rather rewatch The Matrix Revolutions than Tenet. Apologies for the tangential rant. Woah woah tenet is brilliant..don't blame your lack of cohesion with entropy as a "shit film" haha
|
|
|
Post by Jambowayoh on Jan 13, 2022 22:32:07 GMT
A brilliant film, errr right. I mean I fucking love Nolan despite his overwhelming ability to go right up his own arse but this was him going right up the arse and coming out the other end to go back up his arse again.
|
|
|
Post by drhickman1983 on Jan 13, 2022 22:35:53 GMT
In the case of Tenet, it doesn't help that it's a genuinely shit film and one of the most disappointing experiences I've ever had. I'd actually rather rewatch The Matrix Revolutions than Tenet. Apologies for the tangential rant. Woah woah tenet is brilliant..don't blame your lack of cohesion with entropy as a "shit film" haha It's utterly turgid, so bad it actually made me like his earlier films less. I mean, it's not Transformers 2 bad or something like that, but I expected better of Nolan.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 13, 2022 22:38:48 GMT
I only liked Memento and the Batmans from Nolan. Maybe Inception as well, but from Interstellar and on, it was obvious he's just Shyamalan with a much better art design team. Everything gets tossed out for a last minute "what a tweest" moment.
|
|
|
Post by drhickman1983 on Jan 13, 2022 22:56:21 GMT
Nolan's best film is still the Prestige, but Memento and his Batmans are okay (though I only think Batman Begins is actually really good. Dark Knight was carried by Ledger's performance). Inception was fun visually. I quite enjoyed Dunkirk though it's the least Nolan-esque thing he's done. Interstellar had some nice bits but dragged on far too long. But generally there was something I enjoyed about his films. Tenet was just horrible. The basic premise is frankly dopy, but I could live with that if the film had some fun with it. I mean it's pretty much that episode of Red Dwarf, and makes as much logical sense. They even have to handwave how dumb it is away in the film with the line that went something like "Don't try to understand it. Feel it" It's a stupid premise pretending to be chin-strokingly smart. Add into the mix utterly blank characters who lack any character traits, a script that leaps between pseudo-intellectual info dumps and utter cliches - and thats assuming you can hear any of it clearly as the sound mix is genuinely fucking awful. I don't even think the action set pieces were that good. The airport one was okay. Everything else was just fucking crap. The climactic scene with the daft temporal pincer movement just came across like some office staff playing paintball at a team building exercise. Except some of them were running backwards bEcAuSe ThEy hAvE rEvErSeD eNtRoPy. Never mind that you barely see a single enemy combatant so it just looks like they're firing aimlessly at buildings. ... Sorry, I really hated that Tenet film, and even now I still feel the need to vent about it
|
|
|
Post by baihu1983 on Jan 15, 2022 22:15:33 GMT
I liked Tenet but at the same time it's the only Nolan film I've not watched more than once
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 18, 2022 14:28:42 GMT
Swerved Tenet because of the apparently awful sound mastering. Not sure whether that's a good call or not...
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 18, 2022 14:34:16 GMT
Anyone have any idea when this is going to be available to stream? I have a boy that really can't wait to watch it. Me too if I'm honest.
|
|
|
Post by baihu1983 on Jan 20, 2022 21:10:10 GMT
Guess would be around March
|
|
Tomo
Junior Member
Posts: 3,481
|
Post by Tomo on Jan 20, 2022 21:17:05 GMT
Tenet was dogshit.
|
|
|
Post by dfunked on Jan 20, 2022 21:21:48 GMT
Tenet was similar levels of shite to this. At least you could understand the people wasting your time in this...
|
|
|
Post by BoyNukem on Jan 25, 2022 16:41:34 GMT
What a strange film. I had to stop it 20 minutes in and check I was watching the real thing. I thought it might've been a lengthy SNL skit or something similar. I legitimately thought it was a joke. Part of me still does. Even ignoring the embarrassing action and fx, I have many questions. Were they in the real Matrix or in a partition? How did Neo remake Morpheus inside whatever Matrix they were in? How did the blue girl get into that modal where Morpheus was? How did they get into the key master's corridors without the keys? How did Neo do anything without with the analyst or Smith noticing? How did they get Neo out of the Matrix again so easily despite the analyst knowing what was going on? If Morpheus is made up of floating little machines in the real world, why does he physically struggle climbing that wall near the end instead of just floating up? Did he think that was air he was breathing? I wouldn't be surprised if the answers are in there, but I was too busy either laughing or cringing to notice. It was nice to see Christina Ricci in something again at least.
|
|