The ultimate matrix set

[Grant]

see here

http://www.thedigitalbits.com/rumormill.html#0812

particularly like the idea of a commentary track where critics rip the sh*t out of it...LOL!

I might look for it in the January sales!

Grant :)

[the dude]

The packaging looks cheap and tacky for a major studio release

[MarcMorris]

Only the first MATRIX in the series is worth owning IMO.

[mrarmageddon]

I didn't mind the sequels they weren't bad just not in the league of the first.I'll only buy this in a saleas I've got all 3 already.

[Paul WJM]

It seemed like they thought that throwing everything known to man at the screen for the sequels would make great films, yet for all that they seem somewhat emotionally unenticing. I was really disappointed and that conclusion to the whole saga was so mundane I almost heaved up my crisps.

The first one is a sci-fi classic. The sequels are just displays of too much money in the hands of people who had no idea where to take their initially captivating concepts, other than into cliched and ultimately boring territory. Shame.

[Vaughan]

I think the sequels are better than say, the sequels to Mad Max. Matrix established a world in the first film, and fleshed it out nicely. The end was predictable - but it had to close the loop. The second film is the lesser of the three. There are amazing scenes in the third film. It's not a bad trilogy I think, people had insane expectations, imo.

Emotionally, even the first film was seriously flawed, and that is one of the bad things about the Matrix overall. Emotional interaction is stuck down at the level of a 14 year old.

[mushie]

I only just got round to watching REVOLUTIONS and apart from the usual sci-fi waffling dialogue, i found it too be pretty good. Of course the first is best by far, and the acting seems to get worse with each movie but it's still an enjoyable trilogy IMO.

[the dude]

I couldn't compare the Mad Max films to the matrix trilogy. mad max is far the better of the films including beyond thunderdrome

[Mark Y]

sci-fi? sf please (sticks nose in air and sniffs) ;)

[Vaughan]

--I couldn't compare the Mad Max films to the matrix trilogy. mad max is far the better of the films including beyond thunderdrome--

Actually, I disagree. Mad Max messes with the Mad Max world, and goes off on a totally different direction - not helped by carrying over only ONE member of the cast. Mad Max Thunderdome is one of the wost films I've seen in the last year - utterly stupid, senseless, and braindead.

Still, each to their own. Matrix is definately flawed at some points - but as an original piece of fiction - not too bad. If you think about say, the LOTR trilogy, there was already a world famous piece of literature to uide the filmakers. Matrix didn't have that, and they did a not too bad job, imo. Parts II and III neeed editing down, imo (the box inexplicably promises to EXTEND them). However, I think it was (is) "cool" to like the and praise the first film, and "cool" to dislike the second and third. All I can say is, I read a lot of criticism of the films, but when I actually watched them with an open mind, they weren't too bad. I certinaly enjoyed them, overall, more than the Mad Max trilogy.

[zanner]

i thought the first film was excellent, the other two mediocre...:) ...zanner.

[drterror666]

The Matrix movies have to be some of the most overrated pieces of s**t masquerading under the title of Sci-Fi/Action I've ever seen. The first one was bearable, even though the 'messianic' storyline has been done to death, but the sequels? This didn't deserve to be a trilogy. I even preferred Dark City to The Matrix!

[mbellishment]

Mixed feelings here... I aint seen any of them and was waiting for a complete set to come out... now Im not so sure...:(

[Vaughan]

Well, I love Dark City too - some comparing Matrix and Dark City works for me only to make the point of how good they both are :D

Obviouxly the Matrix is not for everyone, and that's totally cool. As I said, I think people just soured on the sequels because they took so long to come out. If they had come out right after the first film, they'd have been applauded. Still, it's all academic now :)

[mattclarkson]

having first watching it when first released,like most thought it was an excellent film.but having viewed it in recent months,i found it to be boring and dull.

in my opinion its a film that doesnt stand the test of time,its quite badly acted(except for joey pants and larry fishburne),and the story is a slight bit naff.

the sequels shouldve been excellent but this si hollywood we are talking about-there seems to be less actual outstanding films made,just films made to make money.

when will they realise people want an all round film experience?

sorry bout the rant there but felt i had to get it off my chest!;)

[Grant]

This has just reminded me. One of my sons borrowed the first disc off me months ago and never bought it back! Thats how much I missed it.....:D

Grant :)

[Paul WJM]

Dark City is one of my favourite movies. Interesting because it wasn't a massive hit and seemed to leave the general public cold. Lack of success with more intelligent sci-fi probably dictates the kind of audience-friendly crap that usually gets made and dished out to us over recent years.

Another interesting sci-fi which dared to be a little different (I thought) was Vincenzo Natali's Cypher, which I caught at the cinema towards the end of last year.