[no spoilers]

I just saw bad santa last night. Let me tell you: This is a really REALLY funny movie. More on it later today... a better review. :)

At 11/14/03 09:33 PM, biteme2514 wrote:

At 11/14/03 08:46 PM, Remisser wrote: How many posts do you need to join this group?

It's not really a matter of how many posts you have these days. We've let in tons of people that have less than what one would call a high number of posts. All you really have to do is be an NG user that actually follows the rules. That having been said, if you're interested in joining us, what you have to do is pretty simple. First of all, this club is a little different from all the other clubs in this forum. We have a little something called a Recruit stage that we put a lot of new people through before we decide to make them an official member. What we do is get you to post around here for about a week and we just watch you to make sure that you're not causing any trouble or anything. Just as long as you don't spam, don't get banned and generally just follow the rules around here, you'll be a member in about a week. Naturally, it helps if you post a lot around here too. Welcome to the club, Remisser!

Maybe I can skip the recruitment stage. Heh. I'm an audiomod in the audio portal, so NG already trusts me. I'm buddies online with liljim. He and I talk a lot online, mainly about the virtues of the game connect 4. Heh. :) But, sure, monitor me. :)

HAHAHAHAHAHA. It's good to be right.

THIS WEEK:
ELF is number one...
MASTER AND COMMANDER is number two...

and the MATRIX? 16.3million and in third place. How's that for a drop? a 66% drop from what it earned last week. If it's still in the top ten in two weeks, I'll be surprised, in three weeks, I'll be flabberghasted. I'm glad people were able to see through the trite BS that is the matrix revolutions.

How many posts do you need to join this group?

I think it'll be the sign of the endtimes at 15,000 posts.

anyone anyone? ;)

has anyone seen ELF yet?

At 11/11/03 02:13 PM, Peach_Lock wrote: Better still, if he'd have taken the danged Blue pill, it would have saved a lot of time...Lol.

How about if he just didn't follow the damned rabbit in the first place.

And here's another thing: What exactly does Neo give to that guy at the door in the first matrix? What is he selling? That to me seems more interesting than the second and third matrix combined.

At 11/10/03 07:51 PM, lefty2030 wrote: All that i can say Remisser, is that you are a jackass. Revolutions was awsome.

Oh and you have more of a chance of getting struck by lightning then writing a decent movie review.

So, let me get this straight. I give the time and effort to write a review, and your review is just that "Revolutions is awesome." Jesus, wonder when the newspapers will be banging down the door for your excellent writing skills. You're so eloquent.

As for me getting struck down by lightning before writing a decent movie review: Just because you don't agree with me, doesn't mean that I'm a bad reviewer. I gave my opinon and you're entitled to yours. But, let's give this some thought here...

MY PREDICTION FROM LAST WEEK MONDAY:
I wrote this for aint it cool news, a prediction that Revolutions would be startlingly disappointing at the box office. It would do it's best work in its first weekend, but would drop like a rock and it's first week wouldn't compare to Reloaded's first weekend.

Revolutions only made 50 million this weekend.

Now it's going to drop like a rock. It won't be number one this weekend. That's the next part of my prediction.

Oh, and if you are questioning my movie reviewing credentials, who has a review on the front page of aintitcool.com right now? Me, or you?

At 11/10/03 09:29 PM, DontTouchMe wrote:

At 11/4/03 12:40 AM, Remisser wrote: [mild... very mild spoilers]
I saw both ELF and Matrix: Revolutions... here are my reviews:

MATRIX
-------
dull fighting scenes with the sentinals that are trying to breach Zion.

gahhhh.......dont listen to this 4 year old ppl. The Matrix Revolutions was like the most amazing movie Ive seen in years. If you havn't seen it yet, then do so. And by the way, when the little mech things, that looked like 100% real (and not like computer graphics at all) that were defending the dock were badass. That was like the best scene. The thing that bothered me is that the centinals always went in wierd loops while they swarmed the dock(just a total waste of time). But anyway, dont listen to him, this is a really good movie.

You know what's funny, when someone decides to completely 'disprove' an entire review by focusing only on one line. That's hilarious. Instead of dissecting any of the merits of the review, you try to downplay me as a "4 year old"; I'm sure you were the first in line for Starship Troopers, buddy - but we've already been there, done that. Those scenes were great CGI-wise, but let's be honest: Just because something has great CGI doesn't mean it's automatically awesome. "OMG!!! THOSE FX ARE AWESOME!!!!!" Yeah, if that's all you're looking for in a movie, go play videogames and stay out of the movie theatres. It's people like you why movie studios are pandering to the lowest common denominator. Even when they try to put SOME intellegence into the scene: "The thing that bothered me is that the centinals always went in wierd loops while they swarmed the dock(just a total waste of time" -- you think it's a total waste of time. Obviously the machines have adopted a 'hive' mentality of one unit, one mass. For the machines to go all over the place would be a less focused attack. They focused their powers on certain sections at certain times and, if you didn't notice, they were about to win. It's a great study of the hive mentality... look, instead of you going against the "great graphics = good movie" you've adopted the hive mentality and you can't think on your own. When you grow up, maybe your tastes will mature and you can have the same tastes as this four year old, you two year old.

At 11/10/03 01:58 PM, 70TA wrote: The Matrix: Stupid Boring Dog Shit Part III. Maddox was so right about this.

I'd just like to point out at this time my involvement with part of maddox's site:
http://maddox.xmission.com/commujism/

;) First picture displayed.

At 9/23/03 12:47 AM, Raza wrote: Heya all, I just found out about the apz and thought, why have more then one crew? Why don't you and audiomage merge. We are all musicians, and we are all on NG's. Amoungst other sites I am sure.~ P.S. Hiya Drac~ ^-^

On the flip side of the coin, all the flash artists on newgrounds are on newgrounds... and they all have many different groups... why don't they merge? One word: Diversity.

At 11/9/03 01:18 PM, bentleylad wrote: maybe its because insteasd of wating 5/6 years unlike matrix to reloaded (1997-2003) we waited 5/6 months and so we werent as eager to see the next instalment.

Matrix came out in '99 brutha. :) 4 year difference.

At 11/9/03 11:01 AM, -78- wrote:

At 11/9/03 10:58 AM, coolblue305 wrote: dddduuudddde u said "I wouldn't waste money on this film" but u did didnt u how else could u review it? fool

ur an idiot he was suggesting we dont waste our money on it.....u should be shot backwards and naked from a cannon through a cornfield

Hahahaha. Good response...

I notice you live in Philadelphia -78-... you can enter to win advance screening passes to tim burton's "Big Fish" here:
http://www.ew.com/ew/freescreening/0,10766,525790,00.html

And Cold Mountain starring Nicole Kidman here:
http://www.ew.com/ew/freescreening/0,10766,536566,00.html

It's usually easy to win... and you get an ADMIT TWO pass. If you're under 18, I believe all you need is someone to accompany you to cold mountain if you win. :P

At 11/9/03 10:58 AM, coolblue305 wrote: dddduuudddde u said "I wouldn't waste money on this film" but u did didnt u how else could u review it? fool

I run a community in Boston called "Free Screenings", where companies that promote the movies allow us to see the movie for free and in advance - it's so the press can get to see the movie before everyone else so they could have a nice and tidy review the day the movie comes out for the newspaper. So: I see any movie I want to for free and usually well before the general public (example: Today I just say Looney Toons: Back in Action... Tuesday I see Master and Commander: Far Side of the World... Thursday I see: The Cat in The Hat (a full week before it comes out...) I'm also going to see Gothika next week... All for free. So you're the fool because you pay money. Don't call ME a fool.

Most of the third Matrix felt like a cheesy scifi channel film from the late 90's. (For me...)

That's another thing that irked me. As well as this:

The better film for philosphy based plot would be eXistenZ. Anyone seen that?

At 11/8/03 10:20 AM, Newgrundling wrote: 4.) I already classified this statement as false, because it does not hold true for everyone. It is a pity that you felt detached, perhaps if you wrote a list of the problems you had with the 3rd matrix and why, then we could all save a lot of time, because then I could just go through and respond to each point and example, instead of making you think I’m misrepresenting what you’ve said.

Instead of quoting and requoting a lot of text between the two of us, I think it best to tackle main questions of your responses...

The problems I had with the third (and parts of the second one) are this:
The acting is bad. It seemed really high caliber in the first film. When I describe the first film's acting I like to point to the Italian form of art called Commedia Del'Arte. Each character was assigned a basic "stock" part, had an standard costume [leather and vinyl for the Matrix], and they all established their own peculiarities. Keanu Reeves as the unlikely protagonist and one half of "The Lovers", Carrie Ann Moss as the other half of the lovers , Joe Pantoliano as the traitor, Hugo Weaving as the antagonist, et cetera... They all formed together as stock characters, but the story they performed amounted to great tragedy, and ultimate triumph. In the third film the actors are picked off... The Lovers dead [a good Shakespearean reference, at best], The Traitor long dead by this time, The Antagonist dies. Everyone that was imperically important is dead. Not only that, but one of the main deaths in the film feels forced... they chemistry isn't there... I think Carrie Ann Moss is a brilliant actress, but Keanu has always been a weak link for me... he was good in the first film... inside the Matrix... take him out of the Matrix and into the real world and expect him to express emotion and he is terribly wooden. Maybe instead of milking the romance with horrible 'pulp romance novel' language, they could have just had her die and him show his emotion. "We made it Trinity..." to say that, then only realize in blind horror that something is terribly wrong. I wish I had a screenshot of where she was punctured because if she was punctured in the lung - talking wouldn't have been an option. She was impaled in a few spots, if I remember correctly. Morpheus' change from prophet to zany goony freaky prophet in the second film was unsettling to me as well. I could keep going more and more in depth on that perspective later.
The fight scenes just kept becoming more of a repitition. An expected thing.... I... jeez. A lot of my dislike for the film is that it left me empty at the end. Something I can't terribly explain. I felt cheated. The story was so... so gripping and powerful to me on so many levels in the first film. The second and third films didn't leave me reeling. I wasn't asking my inner self so many questions about life and reality and religion as I was with the first one. I just wasn't feeling it, I guess. That you got something out of the second and third films irks me. I really wanted to love the sequels. I did. I bought posters and everything before even seeing Reloaded. Watching the trailers for Reloaded gave me goosebumps. It absolutely revved me up. Then, at the end of Reloaded, and INIFINITELY more so with Revolutions - I just sat there, mouth agape. I felt nothing. If the Brothers W. were shooting for a feeling of nihilism, they accomplished that.

One last thing: You stated that humans now get the choice of living in the fake world, or in the gritty grimey real world... where in the third film did we get to know that the humans had a choice? If they all chose the real world, what would the machines use as a power source?

At 11/8/03 09:16 AM, QuarterMelonClock wrote:

At 11/8/03 07:53 AM, Remisser wrote:
I'd be curious to know what, specifically, the Matrix 2 and 3 brought to the table for you. What new philosophies it posed.

Here we have god (The Architect) who has built this Garden of Eden (The Matrix) and set in place rules (ie. Physics, gravity etc.) But instead of following blindly, they are tempted by the serpent (Neo) and find they can break these rules and also leave the garden. This also gives some meaning to the Rave/Sex scene, the demonstration of primal urges, in an underground cavern… With lava... familiar scene?

Alright, let's go with your sentiment. Let's say the Brothers W. were trying to invoke the spirit of the Bible. That would be a rehash of an old story, which you yourself said that this was not. I know you meant it's not a rehash of the first film, but it would still be a rehash of a story - so then what is the point? If I wanted a Bible movie, I'd watch Jesus Christ Superstar (one of my favorite movies, actually... just met the director a month or so ago at the test screening of his new movie "The Statement" [with Michael Caine] - he's a really cool guy, but I digress...) But, like I said, let's go with your notion.

God [the Architect] offers a world much like the one in which we live in. Not really a "Garden of Eden" since we reject perfection, but a perfection of a different sort. The Devil [Neo] tempts others to leave this perpetual Garden of Eden for the den of sinners in the real world. If this is true, how is the real world like Hell, aside from the "lava"? The humans ultimate goal is to take back the world from the machines and resume life as normal on the surface, but working with the machines. It's too weak of a theory to believe that the Brothers W. were grasping for a Bible based movie. Maybe they liked some of the theology behind it, but what is the ultimate point?

...but I’m tired and Larry Wachowski is a transsexual. :|
I haven’t looked but I’m sure there’s material relating to this floating around.. I couldn’t be the only one to see this…

http://www.tgcrossroads.org/news/?aid=719

At 11/8/03 10:21 AM, Newgrundling wrote: I might spend more time elaborating upon this topic, but not right now.

I'll post later in response to your response to my response... et cetera... :) But, I think it's funny... I never expected such eloquence on the BBS. ;)

At 11/7/03 09:33 PM, Newgrundling wrote: You said that “You feel no connection to these characters… you feel detached” and I completely disagree. I was extremely into the movie, and especially during the latter half of the movie, VERY connected to the characters and their situations. It was equivalent to being on the edge of my seat, except I was reclined, watching the movie – but very tensed, and into the movie, feeling everything. I can’t help it that you felt bored and detached simply because they didn’t bother with the cookie-cutter fight scenes as much in this movie, and again, I feel you’re missing a great deal feeling this way.

You're mincing my words. I never said: "It sucked because of the fight scenes." - The fight scenes are icing on the cake... if the icing is stale, you can still scrape it off and enjoy the rest of the cake... but you'll feel a little disappointed... but if the cake is stale and moldy, too, you're going to feel horrible. The Matrix Revolutions had stale icing and a moldy cake.

I feel my money was extremely well spent, and will be any future times I see it, and again will be worth the money when I buy the DVD. I feel that everyone is entitled to their opinion and I by no means expect every person to feel the same way (be it liking or disliking) about ANY movie, I just feel that you’re an unfortunate minority in the case of this excellent movie, which very masterfully completed the Matrix trilogy.

I'm not in a minority. It's more of a 50/50 split with the second movie. The third movie: I don't know what the split is with who liked/disliked the movie... won't know until everyone weighs in (online, in trade newspapers) on what they thought in the coming weeks. But if the newspaper reviews are any indicator... it'd be a 70/30 in the dislike's favour court. There were not this many bad reviews for Reloaded. Reloaded had it's share of bad reviews... but not this bad so far.

I’m not alienating your opinions, I just disagree with them. Neither of us is right nor wrong, simply stating what WE believed, and that belief is respectively true for each of us. I can see where, for someone who enjoys the Matrix movies strictly for the “juicy fight scenes,” how this movie has disappointing elements, but since I’m not that way, and don’t really see much logic to that train of thought, I can’t agree with you.

And, like I said time and time again, I never said I enjoy the matrix soley for "juicy fight scenes." You misrepresented and misquoted me... took things out of context and didn't read between my lines. The Matrix should have taught you to look closer at your surroundings... don't just glance and take things for the surface value. And don't misquote me. :)

I look forward to your response.

At 11/7/03 09:33 PM, Newgrundling wrote: I just saw the Matrix III (Revolutions) a few hours ago, and my opinion differs from yours. I haven’t seen Elf, so I didn’t bother reading that commentary, nor do I plan to respond to it.

As I've been saying, we're all entitled to our own opinion. No opinion is wrong.

Your biggest problem with this movie seems to be that it’s not the same cookie-cutter “kung fu” choreographed fighting movie as the previous two. I wouldn’t expect nor enjoy a movie that simply was a “formula movie” intended to please movie-goers such as yourself who don’t want to be surprised, merely to get exactly what they have gotten before. That’s a real pity.

Now now, you're interpreting what I said very incorrectly. In fact, most of the movies I enjoy thoroughly (Memento, Pulp Fiction, Pi, Fight Club, The Singing Detective - which just got released yesterday in a limited amount of theatres... I highly recommend it for the gonzo arthouse filmmaking that it is) follow a very skewed formula that audiences have a very hard time to grasp. Not only that, but the movies I love have unexpected endings or circumstances, and pose interesting questions. It's a pity I've been misinterpreted. But, to continue, you didn't think the second and third movies were formula movies? I think they followed a strict formula: Man and machine fight, but grapple to understand each other. Yes, ultimately, there seems to be some understanding on the machines part at the end, but the only person who truely understood the machines is now dead. The first film showed the struggle, but asked many more questions (as I've mentioned before): Why are we here? What if this whole universe is an elaborate dream? Et cetera. The second and third felt forced... a way to get more money. Hollow.

There are only two major “kung fu” fight scenes, and of course the “fight scene” for Xion, but that’s a different style. You seem to enjoy the Matrix movies for these fight scenes, and that’s really a pity. You’re missing the best part of the movie: The allusions, religious implications, predictions, warnings, technological possibilities, and other thought-provoking, debatable concepts.

You are missing the things that make the movie horrible. The plot holes. Before I jump into that pool, let me re-iterate: I'm not into the Matrix strictly for the fight scenes. As for the fighting scenes in the Matrix: I didn't like a lot of the Matrix battles in Reloaded. And Revolutions, the in-Matrix fighting had verve, like I said. Verve I felt was lost in Reloaded in most scenes. The fight for Zion was... How shall I put this... boring. Graphically, it was a feat to behold - but it got boring quick... but I digress, the main part of this paragraph is the plot holes: and there are many.

-spoiler alert-
Example - The machines have a truce with the humans at the end of revolutions. Now, Neo is dead, but the humans just assume the war is over (which it's not, it's more of a truce) because of Neo. Okay, I'll roll with that. But the machines still need energy to survive. The machines are still harvesting humans for energy. It's loose ends like that... that really sting. Okay, so let's say Germany and the world during WWII had a truce, but they were still putting Jews in internment camps. What's the point of the truce? Nobody dies, but you still have thousands if not millions of prisoners. That's a gaping plot hole, if you ask me. (A small plot hole was: Neo shouldn't have been stuck in the train station. Yet the train conducter was "God" there. Okay, he created the train station... but Merovingian created his part of the Matrix too. We're to assume Merovingian is stronger than the trainman (as his part is credited) - since the trainman follows Merovingian's orders. Didn't Neo escape Merovingian's castle, simply by flying? Why didn't he attempt to fly out of there? He didn't try at all. Neo is in the Matrix, can fight Agent Smith... can fight hordes of baddies... but one trainman punks him out with one punch? Jeez, why aren't we seeing a big fight scene with this guy?
-end spoiler alert-

I'd be curious to know what, specifically, the Matrix 2 and 3 brought to the table for you. What new philosophies it posed.

[split into a second message due to the limit on message size]

Newgrundling, I'll respond with more depth tomorrow when I wake up (I'm about to go to bed...) But suffice to say this:

If I were in it for the "juicy action scenes", I would have loved the second film more than the first. But I do not love the second one. I felt gyped of the philosophy and emotion of the first film in the second one. The fight scenes seemed empty in that film...

But, once again, I'll be more verbatim tomorrow.

At 11/7/03 01:33 AM, Mr_Silv3r wrote: well, actually, i whipped out my copy of the original matrix the other day, and by comparison with reloaded, it sucked balls... rip that shit into you... if youre so pissed off with the second and third ones because they didnt live up to the first... why dont you actually watch the first again in youre living room, then try to tell me how much better it is than its offspring... yeah thats right bitch

It's your opinion reloaded is better than the original, just like I've got the opinon that the first one is infinitely superior.

You said -
:you ever heard of Bertolt Brecht? no? shut the fuck up non - culture boy

The answer is not no. I am German in heritage and take pride in my ancestry and culture. Brecht was a Communist, but - not holding his politics against him - he was a good writer. While his plays were geared towards alienation of the audience as a way of invoking thought - this, in turn and in thinking, gave you a bond with the topic and characters. The first Matrix made me think (What if this is all an elaborate dream? (though, who doesn't think that, even before the Matrix...) Why do we shuffle through life purposelessly? Why are we such a marketing culture?) - the second and third ones evoked no thought but had nice action scenes, and a lot of reiteration of previously posed analytical thinking questions. It felt like a dry carbon copy draped with a shroud of "pretty graphics." But, cute special effects and a thin story do not a movie make.

Lastly, if you plan on pulling out names of dead playwrights you probably just learned about yesterday from a drama teacher, try reading some of the works of that author in the original intended language, and try not to be insulting.

At 11/6/03 11:16 AM, SecretAgentBob wrote:

At 11/5/03 11:30 PM, Remisser wrote: Here's something that bothered me about the second and third films of the trilogy:

The detachment of the characters was done on purpose. Neo had become detached almost completely with the real world. He was worn out - drained. What little "zest" for life he had before was gone. Ever since he learned the truth he fell into a sort of silent depression because he knew he was going to need to sacrifice everything, and even then things might not come out right.

Okay. Let's go into this saying your interpretation is correct. I ask you this: What is the point of watching a movie or reading a story where you feel nothing for the characters? You don't love them, you don't hate them... they're just... there. What's the point? There is none. You need to be able to establish an emotional bond with the characters, positive or negative. A neutral "blaise" feeling towards the characters makes for a really uninteresting experience. But, your statement is inaccurate. Neo was not 'drained.' Remember Reloaded? He looked far from drained when he was shagging Trinity. Ever see the Animatrix? He was the one that was waking people up "en masse" to the real world. That hardly sounds like a person who has lost a zest for live. He should be a little more vibrant... bristling with life and fury against the carnage going on around him. Do you get ANY sense of that in the third film? I definitely did not. The second one had glimmers of that. Which is why I somewhat liked the second one. But I was still disappointed in it.

You said you haven't seen the movie, so it's stupid to give your opinion of it.

I never said ANYTHING like that. Quote me on it. I saw it Monday. I started the thread on Monday. That's two days before the general public viewed it. Did you not read the first post? I also saw ELF which comes out tomorrow.

:After the first 15 minutes, the movie falls into non-stop action, and while it's certainly not very "matrixy" action, it's one of the best battle scenes I've ever seen on screen. Everything in this movie is different from the first two - so everything you see is original, rather than re-using old fight scene ideas.

Non-stop action? You must have seen a different movie. Not the matrix revolutions. But the most laughable statement: "everything you see is original, rather than re-using old fight scene ideas." HA. I say. Ha. Trinity doing that same kick from the beginning of the first film... The slow-mo bullet time punch seemed very tired... yeah, it was cool to see his fist burst the raindrops, but it was all very "been there, done that." The fight scene in the club seemed like a re-use of the old fight scene ideas. I'm not saying I didn't like the zero gravity club fight, it was one of the only scenes I liked (except for the afforementioned Trinity kick, which would have definitely put her in danger. These guys were moving fast, so realistically, he would have dodged it.) - but it was the return to routine.

It might not work well as a Matrix sequel, but it sure as heck is a great action movie, and I suggest everyone see it if only for the sheer amazing-ness of the special effects.

If I wanted awesome special effects, I'd play a video game. If I want an awesome plot, I see a movie. The movie had the former, not the latter. And isn't most of the second movie, and all of the third one basically that? A video game? What's so fun in watching someone else play a video game that you won't get a chance at playing?

At 11/6/03 07:12 AM, dogmega wrote: Some sequals do not make it in the grade of the first movie.
Don't expect too much when you watch a sequal.

That's a baseless statement. The real statement is to not expect too much when watching ANY movie. Sequels are often good:
Terminator 2 (and I enjoyed terminator 3 as well)
X-Men 2
The Indiana Jones Trilogy
Star Wars Return of the Jedi, Empire Strikes Back
Back to the Future 2
Blade 2...

all of those were terrific sequels in my book.

At 11/6/03 03:06 AM, Ryu-no-Kaosu wrote: ok every1 basically my story is a mix between resident evil and parasite eve im auctually working on the charecter bios right now

How original. If the story is anything like your typing, i em sure we r in 4 a wyld ride.a rllercoster uv fun!!!1111 lolololol!!!1

At 11/6/03 06:56 AM, BrownCow wrote:

At 11/6/03 06:52 AM, Remisser wrote: ...side note, they should make Johnny Mneumonic a trilogy. :)

not is shouldent ya know why? becuse i dont know what the hell it is :P

123

Wow... you mangled the English language in an impressive manner. Try this: "No they shouldn't." -- if you speak English as a first language, say "Not is shouldent..." You'd sound like a foreigner.

Johnny Mneumonic was another film with Keanu Reeves. It's hilarious. check out the info on imdb.com

...side note, they should make Johnny Mneumonic a trilogy. :)

Here's something that bothered me about the second and third films of the trilogy:

I felt detached from the characters. In the first film, remember how it felt when Dozer was killed by Cypher? Then when Cypher unjacked Apoc... remember how it felt when Switch bent over Apoc's lifeless body and said "Not like this..." before Cypher unjacked her as well? I felt that, man. I could feel the hurt. The pain. I just did not get that same emotion in the second or third films. Even when Morpheus basically sacraficed himself to the agents in the first film so Neo and the others could escape... that fight hurt too. It was intense.

To put it in perspective: There's only about a two minute run time difference between The Matrix, and The Matrix: Reloaded... but Reloaded seemed like it lasted an hour longer. And Revolutions is the shortest of the three, and it lasted an ETERNITY at points. The Matrix whizzed by and was amazing. A total package in and of itself.

So, two questions: Do you feel at all the same way? Would you like to see any Matrix spinoff movies?

At 11/5/03 01:53 PM, BrownCow wrote: i am skiping school to go see the new matrix

Tell me what you think. :)