Thread
Matrix DVD Release.
yeah yeah yeah... I know, I bought it now because sooner or later I would have and it's always better to buy dvds like the first week before the price is back to retail.
My only complaint (about the dvd release not the movie) is it's lack of special features and commentary during the movie.
I would have liked to hear someone talk about it while it was playing, going a bit in depth to the shots and story elements.
just my 2 cents.
My only complaint (about the dvd release not the movie) is it's lack of special features and commentary during the movie.
I would have liked to hear someone talk about it while it was playing, going a bit in depth to the shots and story elements.
just my 2 cents.
The computer effects in Reloaded looked better on TV but the story is still weak. Too much unnecessary uses of slow motion make me sleepy 
I think Matrix Reloaded is a victim of being in the middle with no start or end dot. Same things happened to LOTR:TTT, Indiana Jones 2, etc
I agree about the lack of special features for Disc Two. They could have added more.
I think Matrix Reloaded is a victim of being in the middle with no start or end dot. Same things happened to LOTR:TTT, Indiana Jones 2, etc
I agree about the lack of special features for Disc Two. They could have added more.
I stopped by Target to pick up the disc.
Two rows of empty shelf, and two rows jam-packed with "fullscreen" versions. Good planning there, media buyer. (Of course, Target being Target, I still walked out of the store $84.00 lighter.)
You couldn't swing a dead cat in Best Buy without knocking widescreen Matrix DVDs off the shelves. The cat caught on The Italian Job and a long-overdue copy of Fight Club as well.
Two rows of empty shelf, and two rows jam-packed with "fullscreen" versions. Good planning there, media buyer. (Of course, Target being Target, I still walked out of the store $84.00 lighter.)
You couldn't swing a dead cat in Best Buy without knocking widescreen Matrix DVDs off the shelves. The cat caught on The Italian Job and a long-overdue copy of Fight Club as well.
Quote:
|
Originally posted by Adam Betts: I think Matrix Reloaded is a victim of being in the middle with no start or end dot. Same things happened to LOTR:TTT, Indiana Jones 2, etc I agree about the lack of special features for Disc Two. They could have added more. |
I disagree about TTT, I thought it rocked. Indiana Jones II wasn't bad because it was stuck half-way through the story; it just sucked (compared to the other two). Also, I thought there were enough special features, and understand that the sort of �ber-geek who watches the film, then watches it again four times with the different commentaries, is the kind of guy who should wait for the 'ultimate edition' or whatever.
So, basically: meh.
I'm so F@#$ing tired of them releasing a DVD, then releasing a special edition... and THEN releasing a box set with "never before seen XYZ"!!!
I'm already prepared for a LOTR Special Edition Box Set with 4 extra CDs of bla bla bla.
I know I don't have to buy, but quit repackaging the same old crap but a TINY bump.
I'm already prepared for a LOTR Special Edition Box Set with 4 extra CDs of bla bla bla.
I know I don't have to buy, but quit repackaging the same old crap but a TINY bump.
Quote:
|
Originally posted by Adam Betts: I think Matrix Reloaded is a victim of being in the middle with no start or end dot. Same things happened to LOTR:TTT, Indiana Jones 2, etc |
Temple of Doom was not part of a 3 part story arc, like LOTR and The Matrix, or even Star Wars, just another adventure of the same character. Heck, it's supposed to be set earlier than Raiders, isn't it?
It's widely acknowledged that Empire Strikes Back is the best of the original 3 Star Wars movies, and it's smack dab in the middle of a 3 part story as well.
I can't see that being a middle part is an issue, since how many people are going to go off and see TTT or Reloaded without having seen the first one?
Quote:
|
Originally posted by GoGoReggieXPowars: Temple of Doom was not part of a 3 part story arc, like LOTR and The Matrix, or even Star Wars, just another adventure of the same character. Heck, it's supposed to be set earlier than Raiders, isn't it? It's widely acknowledged that Empire Strikes Back is the best of the original 3 Star Wars movies, and it's smack dab in the middle of a 3 part story as well. I can't see that being a middle part is an issue, since how many people are going to go off and see TTT or Reloaded without having seen the first one? |
I second that. Empire was the better film but New Hope was just a great story by its self.
Quote:
|
Originally posted by GoGoReggieXPowars: Temple of Doom was not part of a 3 part story arc, like LOTR and The Matrix, or even Star Wars, just another adventure of the same character. Heck, it's supposed to be set earlier than Raiders, isn't it? It's widely acknowledged that Empire Strikes Back is the best of the original 3 Star Wars movies, and it's smack dab in the middle of a 3 part story as well. I can't see that being a middle part is an issue, since how many people are going to go off and see TTT or Reloaded without having seen the first one? |
Actually, Empire Strikes Back have a different director and a new writer so it really doesn't count.
In one of the interviews with Phil Jackson, he said that one of the biggest challenge while making LOTR:TTT is trying to make it a film of its own without being weak in the contents. He did this successfully by giving LOTR:TTT a three-story parallel. But if you have to choose two part which you like the most, it'll probably be LOTR:FOTR and LOTR:ROTK. It's not that LOTR:TTT isn't good, it's just that first and third have more contents and real story climax.
Back to the Future 2 is also a victim. There's several more examples but I can't remember them at the moment.
Bump.
They announced the THE ULTIMATE MATRIX COLLECTION a couple weeks ago. Ten discs, featuring over 35 hours of additional bonus crap:
DISC ONE - The Matrix
DISC TWO - The Matrix Revisited
DISC THREE - The Matrix Reloaded
DISC FOUR - The Matrix Reloaded Revisited
DISC FIVE - The Matrix Revolutions
DISC SIX - The Matrix Revolutions Revisited
DISC SEVEN - The Animatrix
DISC EIGHT - The Roots of the Matrix
DISC NINE - The Burly Man Chronicles
DISC TEN - The Zion Archive
Linkage. Scroll down to September 26th, 2004, for all the details.
They announced the THE ULTIMATE MATRIX COLLECTION a couple weeks ago. Ten discs, featuring over 35 hours of additional bonus crap:
DISC ONE - The Matrix
DISC TWO - The Matrix Revisited
DISC THREE - The Matrix Reloaded
DISC FOUR - The Matrix Reloaded Revisited
DISC FIVE - The Matrix Revolutions
DISC SIX - The Matrix Revolutions Revisited
DISC SEVEN - The Animatrix
DISC EIGHT - The Roots of the Matrix
DISC NINE - The Burly Man Chronicles
DISC TEN - The Zion Archive
Linkage. Scroll down to September 26th, 2004, for all the details.
Quote:
|
Originally posted by Ozmodiar: Bump. They announced the THE ULTIMATE MATRIX COLLECTION a couple weeks ago. Ten discs, featuring over 35 hours of additional bonus crap: |
Here's some linkage for you
http://forums.macnn.com/showthread....threadid=219044
Quote:
|
Originally posted by GoGoReggieXPowars: Temple of Doom was not part of a 3 part story arc, like LOTR and The Matrix, or even Star Wars, just another adventure of the same character. Heck, it's supposed to be set earlier than Raiders, isn't it? It's widely acknowledged that Empire Strikes Back is the best of the original 3 Star Wars movies, and it's smack dab in the middle of a 3 part story as well. I can't see that being a middle part is an issue, since how many people are going to go off and see TTT or Reloaded without having seen the first one? |
I've always been of the opinion that the second film in trilogies is almost always the best. For exmaple: Reloaded, Temple Of Doom, American Pie 2, Empire Strikes Back, Batman Returns (I realize there were four of them), The Two Towers, etc. Why this seems to be the case, I'm not sure, but it's always struck me that the second film in trilogies usually are the best. The big exception to this rule is the second Back To The Future.
Quote:
|
Originally posted by Jim Paradise: I've always been of the opinion that the second film in trilogies is almost always the best. For exmaple: Reloaded, Temple Of Doom, American Pie 2, Empire Strikes Back, Batman Returns (I realize there were four of them), The Two Towers, etc. Why this seems to be the case, I'm not sure, but it's always struck me that the second film in trilogies usually are the best. The big exception to this rule is the second Back To The Future. |
You thought Reloaded was the best of the 3?
Quote:
|
Originally posted by SafariX: The new one looks like "The New Hotness" with a darker atmosphere and no bat-nipples. |
for a second there I thought you were manofsteal...
http://batmanbegins.warnerbros.com/
it doesn't really look that good to me but I haven't read the script. they have a good director though.
Quote:
|
Originally posted by GoGoReggieXPowars: Here's some linkage for you http://forums.macnn.com/showthread....threadid=219044 |
Man. And I was so proud of myself for doing a search before I made a new thread about it.
Quote:
|
Originally posted by Adam Betts: The computer effects in Reloaded looked better on TV but the story is still weak. Too much unnecessary uses of slow motion make me sleepy I think Matrix Reloaded is a victim of being in the middle with no start or end dot. Same things happened to LOTR:TTT, Indiana Jones 2, etc I agree about the lack of special features for Disc Two. They could have added more. |
Quote:
|
Originally posted by MacNStein: You thought Reloaded was the best of the 3?
|
Can't deny that. I thought the ending of the third was ****, and with the exception of the Zion battle, which in some ways seemed entirely pointless, it was the worst of the three. Having said that, I did enjoy it, but felt completely let down by it.
