[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Matrix
----- Original Message -----
From: <barkera at nsk-corp_com>
To: Kyle Howe <howe.38 at osu_edu>; <over-the-rhine at actwin_com>
Sent: Thursday, April 15, 1999 3:32 PM
Subject: Re: Matrix
>Is being merely above average wrong? It's just that with the tired
TV-into-
>movie retreads and Arnold Schwarzenegger's latest bang-bang-shoot'em-
>up action flick masquerading as SF, I find it refreshing that the cinematic
>offerings of late have begun to get back to the deeper and philosophic
>SF that was lost after the incredible success of Star Wars. As great as
>that show was, nearly all that came after focused on special effects and
>action while being especially light on story. 'The Matrix' is still shaky
in
>the story's continuity, but it's a good try and a step in the right
direction.
>As for the action, it's at least explained away why the characters can do
>what they do instead of having us rely on supposed super-human powers.
blasphemy, you mentioned Star Wars in the same passage as the Matrix?
And i guess if you are shooting for and are satisfied by "merely above
average" which defines the American culture i guess, then there is nothing
wrong with this movie. i guess i wouldn't expect much more if i was brought
up solely within the culture that spawned TGI Fridays, Budweiser beer, and
Chevy cars... In fact within the frame of reference of merely above
average, then i say the movie is perfection itself. it is definitely
perfectly above average.
>Not in general, but in the realm of SF cinema, I believe it does.
are you are on crack? even just considering sci-fi's, Matrix can't even
carry the jock strap for at least a dozen movies i can think of.
>No, only in some of the technical categories that'll get swept by the new
Star
>Wars flick, I'm sure.
once again, how can you even mention the name Matrix in the same category as
Star Wars?
>>and let me tell ya, i watched a second time, for personal reasons, and i
>>fell asleep the second time around.
>Well, it's just not your cup o' tea. I'm sure I'll see it once or twice
more.
thanks for sharing...
References: