The Icon Bar: The Playpen: Sequels
| |
Sequels |
| |
This is a long thread. Click here to view the threaded list. |
| |
|
Adrian Lees |
Message #51012, posted by adrianl at 00:40, 10/2/2004 |
Member
Posts: 1637
|
Dis-disillusion me, please; has any sequel ever been worth watching, never mind better than the original?
I ask because I've just watched The Matrix again and wished that I'd never bought the sequel (Reloaded).... novel ideas are great, parasitic sequels are bad! Discuss... |
| |
 [ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
Jeffrey Lee |
Message #51013, posted by Phlamethrower at 01:07, 10/2/2004, in reply to message #51012 |
 Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot stuff
Posts: 15100
|
Dis-disillusion me, please; has any sequel ever been worth watching, never mind better than the original? Terminator 2, perhaps? Or Back to The Future 2/3? Various star trek films? (Not that they exactly follow the same storyline, but  all the same) Likewise with some star wars films? Aliens? LOTR 2/3? Tremors 2/3? Die hard 2/3? james bond #whatever?
I ask because I've just watched The Matrix again and wished that I'd never bought the sequel (Reloaded).... novel ideas are great, parasitic sequels are bad! Discuss... /me slaps adrian - talk sense, man! 
Although Reloaded may not be judged as being better than The Matrix, it's still worth getting. Plus it's only really half a sequel, since it's there to set the scene for Revolutions.
How is Reloaded parasitic? To me it seems like a logical progression; even though Neo is the one he still isn't invincible, and there's still a lot of work to be done before the Matrix can be destroyed.
I think the main problem with sequels is that everyone expects them to shock them/excite them as much as the original did, when compared to the other films at the time; e.g. if film A is n times better than film B, then people expect A's sequel to be n times better than A was. Sometimes this is simply impossible to do because it'd break all the rules set out in film A, or just seem completely ludicrous. As long as it follows some logical progression from one film to the next, and is reasonably well performed, I'm usually quite happy 
[Edited by Phlamethrower at 01:12, 10/2/2004] |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
Tony Haines |
Message #51025, posted by Loris at 10:11, 10/2/2004, in reply to message #51012 |
 Ha ha, me mine, mwahahahaha
Posts: 1025
|
Max Max 2?
Well anyway... Death to all sequels! |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
Richard Goodwin |
Message #51032, posted by rich at 11:43, 10/2/2004, in reply to message #51012 |
 Dictator for life
Posts: 6828
|
Dis-disillusion me, please; has any sequel ever been worth watching, never mind better than the original? Apart from the ones Phlamey mentioned, Godfather part 2 is widely held to be the Best Sequel Ever[tm].
When the discussion came up after the subject was mentioned in Scream 2 (which I thought was better than the fairly standard slasher Scream), I came up with Silence of the Lambs - Manhunter didn't win any Oscars, and it had bad 80's synth, although Brian Cox as Dr. Hannibal Lecktor - aka Lector - was scarier than Hopkins. And the investigator blokey moved to Las Vegas and became head of CSI!
I also think Blade 2 is better than Blade, but that's relative, and it does have some dodgy CGI at one point. There's more fighting and less getting-to-know-you stuff, which always helps.
I ask because I've just watched The Matrix again and wished that I'd never bought the sequel (Reloaded).... Reloaded was not great, not compared to the original, but Revolutions was just plain bad. The eye candy was well done, but the story was sub-Tomb Raider. Buy Underworld for your goth fetish superhero antics instead. It's cheaper for one.
________
 Cheers,
Rich.
|
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
Richard Goodwin |
Message #51036, posted by rich at 12:05, 10/2/2004, in reply to message #51013 |
Dictator for life
Posts: 6828
|
Terminator 2, perhaps? Really just a bigger-budget remake. According to Scream 2 anyway. But well worth watching.
Or Back to The Future 2/3? Hmm... not really in the same league as the first. But better than Matrix 2 and 3 I suppose!
Various star trek films? (Not that they exactly follow the same storyline, but all the same) No, not various, just 4 (Voyage Home?) and First Contact. Some of the others are truly dire.
Likewise with some star wars films? Yeah, just not the modern ones.
Aliens? It's a judgement call whether this is one of the "sequel better than original" winners. I personally like this much more than Alien, but then Alien was a horror film and Aliens is a (kick-ass!) war film, so it could just be a genre bias.
LOTR 2/3? Yeah, I think #3 is the best of the lot, although you really need to watch the extended DVDs to make a judgement as the theatrical releases were quite choppy in places.
Tremors 2/3? [fx:scraaaaape]Was that the sound of someone at the bottom of a barrel?
Die hard 2/3? The original is still the best though.
james bond #whatever? I think, apart from The World Is Not Enough, the Brosnan Bonds are the best if you're looking for something to watch now - if you look back at the previous ones they look a bit poor in this day and age. But then I never like Roger Moore anyway. Connery was great in his day though.
Although Reloaded may not be judged as being better than The Matrix, it's still worth getting. Plus it's only really half a sequel, since it's there to set the scene for Revolutions. So it's not bad, it just sets up a really bad film? How is that not worth several karma points being subtracted? 
________
Cheers,
Rich.
|
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
Jeffrey Lee |
Message #51044, posted by Phlamethrower at 12:48, 10/2/2004, in reply to message #51036 |
Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot stuff
Posts: 15100
|
Tremors 2/3? [fx:scraaaaape]Was that the sound of someone at the bottom of a barrel?
What's wrong with them then?
Although Reloaded may not be judged as being better than The Matrix, it's still worth getting. Plus it's only really half a sequel, since it's there to set the scene for Revolutions. So it's not bad, it just sets up a really bad film? How is that not worth several karma points being subtracted?
Tsk! I'm reserving judgement until I've seen Revolutions
*adds another couple of items to the list*
Ghostbusters 2?
Indiana Jones 2/3?
[Edited by rich at 14:39, 10/2/2004. crap quoting] |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
Jason Togneri |
Message #51045, posted by filecore at 12:51, 10/2/2004, in reply to message #51013 |
Posts: 3868
|
Terminator 2, perhaps? Or Back to The Future 2/3? Various star trek films? (Not that they exactly follow the same storyline, but all the same) Likewise with some star wars films? Aliens? LOTR 2/3? Tremors 2/3? Die hard 2/3? james bond #whatever? Yep, and Indiana Jones and so on... so many good/better sequels. One problem though. Tremors 2/3? They were crap. |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
Adrian Lees |
Message #51049, posted by adrianl at 15:25, 10/2/2004, in reply to message #51013 |
Member
Posts: 1637
|
Terminator 2, perhaps? Of the 3 I'd say that's my favourite, but that may be partly because I saw it first. What strikes me most having now seen all 3 is that they're all very similar.
.... novel ideas are great, parasitic sequels are bad! Discuss... /me slaps adrian - talk sense, man!
The Matrix was, IMHO, an original film with some really intriguing, novel ideas. I guess any sequel is, by definition, not new.... it's the new ideas that provoke thought which make a film interesting to me; I've never been into special effects, gunplay, car chases etc.
I saw The Matrix in 99, and really wanted to see it again when first working on Cino - I bought the DVD and it was exciting searching through the disc for the video data, unscrambling it and being able to play the video... then later the audio & finally sit back and watch the film properly.
I just couldn't feel like that about Reloaded.
How is Reloaded parasitic? Financially. "Let's make a sequel" isn't an artistic decision!
To me it seems like a logical progression Maybe that's my objection. I don't want a logical progression, I want something new. The logical side of my brain gets enough exercise already with work and reading etc!
Maybe it's just me that needs to avoid sequels? I haven't seen many of the films that you(pl)'ve listed so perhaps there are exceptions.
BTW, I feel the same about music, but more strongly... it's very rare that I like remixes or covers of songs that I love; in fact I'll often dive for the power switch if such is played on the radio! They seem to detract from, indeed spoil, the 'original' (the one I first heard, not necessarily the first chronologically) |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
Jason Togneri |
Message #51051, posted by filecore at 16:00, 10/2/2004, in reply to message #51049 |
Posts: 3868
|
.... novel ideas are great, parasitic sequels are bad! Discuss... The Matrix was, IMHO, an original film with some really intriguing, novel ideas. I guess any sequel is, by definition, not new.... it's the new ideas that provoke thought which make a film interesting to me; I've never been into special effects, gunplay, car chases etc.
Well maybe the sequel expands on ideas that didn't have time in the first film, or adds extral layers to the original's ideas. Just because it's a sequel doesn't automatically rule out it having novel ideas. Indeed, to my pet hate, Tremors 2 had a novel idea - let's make them able to fly! Let's give them a larval stage! Completely novel from the original. Pity it was such a fucking bad film, but because it was crap, NOT because it was a sequel.
To me it seems like a logical progression Maybe that's my objection. I don't want a logical progression, I want something new.And you can't possibly have both.
I haven't seen many of the films that you(pl)'ve listed so perhaps there are exceptions. OT: that's something I like about the Finnish language: they have minä for I, sinä for You singular and te for You plural, so "I am" would be minä olen, You (singular) are would be sinä olet, and You (plural) are would be te olette. It makes life a little easier
Anyway, back on topic:
it's very rare that I like remixes or covers of songs that I love; in fact I'll often dive for the power switch if such is played on the radio!
(the one I first heard, not necessarily the first chronologically) Glad you added that last comment because you'd be surprised at the number of times somebody listens to an old classic, then hears another version which they hate (gah! stupid remixes! etc) only to discover that the one they know is itself a remake of the original. So you can't say that you hate all the remixes and new versions because in fact, a lot of the songs that you like will be just that! Its those artists, and not the ORIGINAL artists, who are therefore the "parasites" here.
|
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
Jeffrey Lee |
Message #51052, posted by Phlamethrower at 16:35, 10/2/2004, in reply to message #51051 |
Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot stuff
Posts: 15100
|
Indeed, to my pet hate, Tremors 2 had a novel idea - let's make them able to fly! Let's give them a larval stage! Completely novel from the original. Pity it was such a f***ing bad film, but because it was crap, NOT because it was a sequel. Tremors 2 had the worms giving birth to heat-seeking and all-eating bipeds. Tremors 3 was when the bipeds then mutated to flying. And it was a bit pants, but #2 wasn't IIRC.
Maybe that's my objection. I don't want a logical progression, I want something new. And you can't possibly have both.
Matrix Reloaded (Spoiler warning, for those who haven't seen it yet...): Logical progression is that the machines are attempting to destroy Zion. Something new is that Smith isn't dead, and has the ability to clone himself into not only other agents, but real people and escape from the matrix into their bodies. Something else new is that the Oracle isn't human, and that Neo is the result of an anomaly in the matrix and if he doesn't 'return to the source' the matrix will fail and kill everyone in it.
What were you saying again, filecore?  |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
Jason Togneri |
Message #51055, posted by filecore at 16:43, 10/2/2004, in reply to message #51052 |
Posts: 3868
|
Maybe that's my objection. I don't want a logical progression, I want something new. And you can't possibly have both.
Matrix Reloaded [snip]
What were you saying again, filecore?
Hmmm. I thought that the tone of that remark was clear from the context of the post... maybe I should have typed it like this:
[sarcasm]And you can't possibly have both.[/sarcasm] |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
Jeffrey Lee |
Message #51056, posted by Phlamethrower at 16:45, 10/2/2004, in reply to message #51055 |
Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot stuff
Posts: 15100
|
Hmmm. I thought that the tone of that remark was clear from the context of the post... maybe I should have typed it like this:
[sarcasm]And you can't possibly have both.[/sarcasm] Ah. I thought I detected some sarcasm, but decided it was best to make sure
*damns W3C for not adding sarcasm tags to the HTML spec* |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
Adrian Lees |
Message #51057, posted by adrianl at 17:02, 10/2/2004, in reply to message #51055 |
Member
Posts: 1637
|
And you can't possibly have both. Something that is a logical progression can hardly be said to be innovative. Both can be present in the same film, of course.
All the same, I stand by my point that there's nothing in Reloaded that's comparable with the realisation that "You've been living in a dreamworld, Neo..."
BTW, at least one scientist has expounded the hypothesis that we /are/ living in a simulation (reported in New Scientist a few months ago... the idea, in outline, is that somewhere in time & space one or more advanced species will have developed simulated worlds, and they will vastly outnumber the one 'real' world... hence, probabilistically we're living in a simulation).
I also liked the idea of deja vu being a glitch in the matrix, but of course it relies upon our perceptions & memory being infallible... which we know is not true. Ever wondered how many of your memories never happened? |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
Jeffrey Lee |
Message #51060, posted by Phlamethrower at 17:30, 10/2/2004, in reply to message #51057 |
Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot stuff
Posts: 15100
|
All the same, I stand by my point that there's nothing in Reloaded that's comparable with the realisation that "You've been living in a dreamworld, Neo..." Ah, well if you'd have said that, *then* I would have agreed with you. I think this falls into my basket of film A being n times better than film B, so people expect A's sequel to be n times better than A. What could you realistically think of that would give you the same feelings as that?
BTW, at least one scientist has expounded the hypothesis that we /are/ living in a simulation (reported in New Scientist a few months ago... the idea, in outline, is that somewhere in time & space one or more advanced species will have developed simulated worlds, and they will vastly outnumber the one 'real' world... hence, probabilistically we're living in a simulation). Yup. *waves to the invisible watchers*
I also liked the idea of deja vu being a glitch in the matrix, but of course it relies upon our perceptions & memory being infallible... which we know is not true. Ever wondered how many of your memories never happened? There's no reason why deja vu can be nothing more than a glitch in the matrix; for all we know, people outside the matrix may not experience it, or they may have realised that more often than not it indicates a change being made.
Of course it's entirely impossible to prove whether our memories have ever happened, since our perceptions and memories are all that we have to go by, they could easily be faked, etc etc etc. |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
Adrian Lees |
Message #51063, posted by adrianl at 17:45, 10/2/2004, in reply to message #51060 |
Member
Posts: 1637
|
What could you realistically think of that would give you the same feelings as that? I don't know, that's my point
Like DeBono's lateral thinking, these ideas come out of 'nowhere' and often appear obvious looking back... but that leap is very hard to make intentionally.
Yup. *waves to the invisible watchers* *(Waves back and tweaks  's reality.*
There's no reason why deja vu can be nothing more than a glitch in the matrix You're right. I'm just saying that I no longer trust perception & memory so infallibly that I feel the need to look for another explanation.
Of course it's entirely impossible to prove whether our memories have ever happened, since our perceptions and memories are all that we have to go by, they could easily be faked, etc etc etc. It's one thing to know that, and quite another to actually *have* a memory that you know (or have been told!) never happened.... feels really weird!
(induced by anaesthesia, nothing illegal, before you start speculating
EDIT: "Missing /quote as line 3"
[Edited by adrianl at 17:47, 10/2/2004] |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
Jeffrey Lee |
Message #51064, posted by Phlamethrower at 17:49, 10/2/2004, in reply to message #51063 |
Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot stuff
Posts: 15100
|
Yup. *waves to the invisible watchers* *(Waves back and tweaks 's reality.*
Hmm. I swear this post of yours was mis-quoted a minute ago
It's one thing to know that, and quite another to actually *have* a memory that you know (or have been told!) never happened.... feels really weird!
(induced by anaesthesia, nothing illegal, before you start speculating Yes, of course, you keep believing that now ...
EDIT: "Missing /quote as line 3" |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
Mark Scholes |
Message #51067, posted by mavhc at 19:23, 10/2/2004, in reply to message #51060 |
Member
Posts: 660
|
Of course it's entirely impossible to prove whether our memories have ever happened, since our perceptions and memories are all that we have to go by, they could easily be faked, etc etc etc. Why? just record your life 24/7 |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
Adrian Lees |
Message #51072, posted by adrianl at 21:53, 10/2/2004, in reply to message #51067 |
Member
Posts: 1637
|
Of course it's entirely impossible to prove whether our memories have ever happened, since our perceptions and memories are all that we have to go by, they could easily be faked, etc etc etc. Why? just record your life 24/7
How could you /know/ that you weren't also misperceiving when watching the recordings?
Perhaps something's preventing you from ever seeing the truth; a form of filter that works not only initial perception but also upon subsequent perceptions of recorded information, to make them consistent with your now corrupted memory!
Certainly the advanced beings controlling Mr 's view of the world could tamper with the virtual DVDs onto which he recorded his 'experiences.'
*A solipsist with a newly-acquired distrust of my own memory.... dangerous combination!* |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
Adrian Lees |
Message #51073, posted by adrianl at 21:55, 10/2/2004, in reply to message #51064 |
Member
Posts: 1637
|
Yup. *waves to the invisible watchers* *(Waves back and tweaks 's reality.*
Hmm. I swear this post of yours was mis-quoted a minute ago
The diversion worked. Good!
|
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
Jeffrey Lee |
Message #53313, posted by Phlamethrower at 15:07, 9/4/2004, in reply to message #51032 |
Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot stuff
Posts: 15100
|
Reloaded was not great, not compared to the original, but Revolutions was just plain bad. The eye candy was well done, but the story was sub-Tomb Raider. Buy Underworld for your goth fetish superhero antics instead. It's cheaper for one. Revolutions wasn't that bad! Definitely better than Reloaded. I would compare it to The Matrix too, but that would be silly since they're different kinds of films. I only have two complaints about Revolutions: Some of the things that went on could have done with some more explanation to make clear why they happened, and the comment by the oracle at the end almost guarantees that there'll be a sequel instead of leaving people guessing or providing closure on the story. |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
Adrian Lees |
Message #53899, posted by adrianl at 06:00, 30/4/2004, in reply to message #53313 |
Member
Posts: 1637
|
OK. I found it so exciting/interesting that I didn't even bother to watch the end. What does The Oracle say?
I really don't get it, because I think The Matrix is a great film, based upon a truly original idea, but both (so far!) of the follow-ups just leave me cold, and I think - in part at least - that must be because I skip past gun-play, sex scenes & 'action sequences'...they just don't interest me.
Now, I believe that you are at least, if not more, intelligent than I am. So, what am I missing? Really. :-S |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
Tony Haines |
Message #53902, posted by Loris at 09:25, 30/4/2004, in reply to message #53899 |
Ha ha, me mine, mwahahahaha
Posts: 1025
|
I really don't get it, because I think The Matrix is a great film, based upon a truly original idea, but both (so far!) of the follow-ups just leave me cold, and I think - in part at least - that must be because I skip past gun-play, sex scenes & 'action sequences'...they just don't interest me. So you watched the whole film in what... 5 minutes? |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
Jeffrey Lee |
Message #53907, posted by Phlamethrower at 12:11, 30/4/2004, in reply to message #53899 |
Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot stuff
Posts: 15100
|
For those of you who haven't seen it yet, don't read the following unless you want some major spoilers (Although I'm sure Adrian and rich would claim otherwise  )
OK. I found it so exciting/interesting that I didn't even bother to watch the end. What does The Oracle say? Can't remember who (Probably that little girl), but someone asks the oracle whether they'll be seeing Neo again, to which her reply is something along the lines of 'I have a feeling we will do'. Bear in mind that this is just after Neo has defeated Smith the only way he can, by killing himself in the process  (Or at least that's the impression they give, right up to that point).
I really don't get it, because I think The Matrix is a great film, based upon a truly original idea, but both (so far!) of the follow-ups just leave me cold, and I think - in part at least - that must be because I skip past gun-play, sex scenes & 'action sequences'...they just don't interest me. I like them because they give greater depth to the world of The Matrix. The first film was all about Neo, Smith and Morpheus - there's only one type of sentinel shown (IIRC), and it's only attack is to get up close and cut through its target. There's only one type of weapon against sentinels shown, and that's the EMP. There's only one type of computer program known, and that's the kind that wants to wipe out the resistance.
In the other films though, you get a whole lot more - bombs the sentinels can throw at things, APUs, more detail on the hovercrafts (e.g. being able to turn off the pads, the ability of the pads to orientate themselves to face a certain direction, etc), guns on the hovercraft, the design of Zion, drilling machines, the fact that there are good and bad programs - and so the fact that programs have feelings too and can emphasize with the humans (OK, I would have been happier if they'd all been evil, but that's just me), mroe history on the matrix itself and the nature of The One - that he's the result of an error in the matrix and contains the code needed to correct the error, ready for the next generation of the Matrix, more information on Smith (That he's a result of the Matrix trying to correct itself), the fact that smith didn't actually die and he now possesses the ability to take over both man and machine, the fact that Neo's abilities extend outside the matrix and into the real world, some information on the machine city - the giant machines guarding the perimeter, all the different types of machine inside the city, and the design of the controller machine. Plus it's wrapped up lots of battle scenes, using what's probably the best CGI I've ever seen
Now, I believe that you are at least, if not more, intelligent than I am. So, what am I missing? Really. :-S To paraphrase rich...
Dude! Machines! APUs! Explosions! Bigger machines! Agent Smiths! Hovercraft! F*cking gigantic machines!
So, erm, yes. The main point of the film is the big battle that's going down between Zion and the machines, and between Smith and Neo. So unless you're into big battle scenes (Or fleshing out the world of the matrix with all the stuff I listed above), it won't really interest you |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
I don't have tourettes you're just a cun |
Message #53913, posted by [mentat] at 13:51, 30/4/2004, in reply to message #51044 |
![[mentat]](/images/smileys/mentat.gif) Fear is the mind-killer
Posts: 6266
|
Tremors 2/3? [fx:scraaaaape]Was that the sound of someone at the bottom of a barrel?
What's wrong with them then?
WHAT?! Tremors wasn't exactly amazing (bit of a dune concept ripoff ) but Trem2 was abysmal and I didn't even know they'd made a 3rd?  |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
I don't have tourettes you're just a cun |
Message #53914, posted by [mentat] at 14:00, 30/4/2004, in reply to message #51032 |
Fear is the mind-killer
Posts: 6266
|
I also think Blade 2 is better than Blade, but that's relative, and it does have some dodgy CGI at one point.
Extremely shoddy CGI - it must've been because even I noticed it!
No way, Blade was much better
Buy Underworld for your goth fetish superhero antics instead. It's cheaper for one. Hmm. It's on my "to-watch" list... |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
I don't have tourettes you're just a cun |
Message #53915, posted by [mentat] at 14:02, 30/4/2004, in reply to message #51049 |
Fear is the mind-killer
Posts: 6266
|
BTW, I feel the same about music, but more strongly... it's very rare that I like remixes or covers of songs that I love; in fact I'll often dive for the power switch if such is played on the radio! They seem to detract from, indeed spoil, the 'original' (the one I first heard, not necessarily the first chronologically) IMO remixes can, if done "well" provide a refreshing / quirky / funkier version of another song.
The current fashion for "vs" mixes has produced some amusing results (eg. eminem lyrics to a britney tune) and AFAIC anything that makes me laugh is worthwhile |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
I don't have tourettes you're just a cun |
Message #53918, posted by [mentat] at 14:16, 30/4/2004, in reply to message #53313 |
Fear is the mind-killer
Posts: 6266
|
Revolutions wasn't that bad! Definitely better than Reloaded. Nuh-uh! Silly.
... and the comment by the oracle at the end almost guarantees that there'll be a sequel instead of leaving people guessing or providing closure on the story. I hope not. It was a rubbish comment at the end of a rubbish film.
I was about to mention the animatrix, but that's arguably a little off topic. |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
I don't have tourettes you're just a cun |
Message #53919, posted by [mentat] at 14:22, 30/4/2004, in reply to message #51057 |
Fear is the mind-killer
Posts: 6266
|
All the same, I stand by my point that there's nothing in Reloaded that's comparable with the realisation that "You've been living in a dreamworld, Neo..." Of course not. But even that is a fairly old sci-fi concept.
... we /are/ living in a simulation (reported in New Scientist a few months ago... the idea, in outline, is that somewhere in time & space one or more advanced species will have developed simulated worlds, and they will vastly outnumber the one 'real' world... hence, probabilistically we're living in a simulation). I hope he/she provided a good definition of "reality" in that report.
I also liked the idea of deja vu being a glitch in the matrix Everyone liked that bit
but of course it relies upon our perceptions & memory being infallible... which we know is not true. Ever wondered how many of your memories never happened? Define "happened"
Memory is infallible, it's just the recall mechanism which is corrupted. A perception, by definition, cannot be fallible or otherwise. |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
Richard Goodwin |
Message #53923, posted by rich at 15:38, 30/4/2004, in reply to message #53919 |
Dictator for life
Posts: 6828
|
Memory is infallible, it's just the recall mechanism which is corrupted. A perception, by definition, cannot be fallible or otherwise. That's not allowing for the storage medium becoming corrupted. Memory is not infallible, it can degrade with time, be physically damaged or be overwritten by another, false, version.
________
Cheers,
Rich.
|
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
Richard Goodwin |
Message #53924, posted by rich at 15:42, 30/4/2004, in reply to message #53915 |
Dictator for life
Posts: 6828
|
IMO remixes can, if done "well" provide a refreshing / quirky / funkier version of another song.
The current fashion for "vs" mixes has produced some amusing results (eg. eminem lyrics to a britney tune) and AFAIC anything that makes me laugh is worthwhile Eminem vs. Bob the Builder was my favourite. There are also some great not-funny remixes - I really like "Song 2 Smack My Bitch Up", which is Blur's "Song 2" mixed in with Prodigy's "Smack My Bitch Up". And of course DJ Dangermouse's "Grey Album", which mixes Jay Zee's "Black Album" and the Beatle's "White Album" into something completely new; no new sounds at all have been used that can't be found on the two source albums, but the result is a unique new meme.
________
Cheers,
Rich.
|
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
| Pages (2): 1
> >|
|
The Icon Bar: The Playpen: Sequels |
|
