The trilogy is far better than the latest abomination of a movie that came out a few years ago. I felt like that one was created solely to cash in on the franchise name.

[–] [email protected] 28 points 9 months ago (3 children)

Yeah, it was. They even said so in the movie. It could only have been more obvious if Lana Wachowski had looked into the camera and said: "Yes, I am only making this movie so that the studio doesn't make it worse."

[–] [email protected] 20 points 9 months ago (1 children)

I have never seen a movie argue so vehemently against its own existence before. It's worth seeing just for that.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 9 months ago

This is actually why I think it is "underrated". I mean it isn't a good movie or even a good story to begin with, but this insanity seems so intentional, so meta, so self destructive - it's worth seeing.

Also, call me crazy but I think that it would have made an unironically interesting theater play. A lot of scenes scream theater and would have worked much better in that setting. The whatshisname the french guy blabbing his monologue during that fighting scene is so obviously theatrical, and the clips from the first movie being projected in a theater would also work with just half the cringe.

[–] CitizenKong 13 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

I like the theory that she purposefully make it so bad the franchise was killed but in a way that executives would still think it's a great movie that will make a lot of money.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 9 months ago

Until someone will "reboot" it. 😒