Alright, welcome to another Violence Conductor Review. I’m Benjamin Nathaniel Redic II, aka The Violence Conductor, and joining me is Lady Ericka Redic, also known as Generally Irritable. Today, we’re diving deep into “The Matrix Resurrections,” and before we get into the nitty-gritty, we want to give a shout-out to Ming House Wing Chun for hooking us up with these awesome shirts.
So, “The Matrix Resurrections.” I came into this expecting top-tier kung fu action, a continuation of what made the original trilogy iconic. But, here’s my take:
Plot and Storytelling:
- Coming from an action perspective, I was a fan of the original Matrix, but not for its philosophical depth; I was there for the fights. This movie starts off very meta, almost too self-aware, with a lot of awkward dialogue. It felt like a fan service gone wrong, constantly reminding us of the past without the same impact or innovation.
- The premise of resurrection was intriguing but executed in a way that felt confusing. Neo and Trinity are back, but the narrative around their return and the new characters replacing classics like Morpheus and Agent Smith felt off. It was like watching “The Force Awakens” where every cool moment was a callback, making the new stuff seem less impressive by comparison.
Characters and Acting:
- The new actors did okay, but the shadow of Laurence Fishburne and Hugo Weaving looms large. The replacements didn’t capture the same charisma or menace. Keanu Reeves and Carrie-Anne Moss did what they could, but the script didn’t give them much to work with in terms of development.
Action and Choreography:
- This is where I was most disappointed. The action scenes, which should have been the highlight, were uninspired. The choreography lacked the crispness and innovation of the originals. Too much shaky cam, too many slow-motion shots of overused moves like wall-running, and not enough of the clean, martial arts-centric combat that defined the franchise.
- Also, everyone seemed bulletproof in this movie, which took away from the tension and immersion. The wire work was floaty, lacking the grounded feel of the previous films. It was like watching a less thrilling, less connected version of what we’ve seen before.
Visuals and Technical Aspects:
- From a camera work standpoint, there were some cool shots, but nothing groundbreaking. The visual effects were passable but didn’t push boundaries the way the first films did.
Cultural Commentary and Reception:
- The movie seemed to be trying to make some points about control and freedom, but it was heavy-handed and didn’t resonate with me. It felt like the creators were more focused on making a statement than telling a compelling story.
Rating:
- I’m giving “The Matrix Resurrections” a solid 3 out of 5 blades. It’s watchable, especially if you’ve got HBO Max, but not something I’d rush to see in theaters. Ericka rates it a bit lower at 2 out of 5 blades, feeling it didn’t capture the essence or excitement of the original trilogy.
Conclusion:
- In the end, “The Matrix Resurrections” was a missed opportunity. It could have revitalized the series with new energy, but instead, it felt like a rehashing of old themes without the flair. I’m willing to be convinced otherwise, but for now, this one didn’t do it for me.
If you’ve seen it, jump into the comments and let us know what you thought. Did you feel the callbacks were a tribute or a crutch? And for those looking forward to other movies, we’ve got our eyes on “The King’s Man” and “Spider-Man,” which, from what I hear, outshone “The Matrix” in the action department this holiday season.
That’s all from us, The Violence Conductor and Generally Irritable. Like, share, and comment below. Let’s keep the conversation going on what we want to see next in the world of action cinema. Merry Christmas, Happy New Year, and see you in the next review!