Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
The Matrix Media Movies Sci-Fi

The Matrix: Revolutions Theatrical Trailer 671

Escape Tangent writes "The full theatrical trailer for The Matrix: Revolutions was posted just moments ago at thematrix.com. Choose your poison, then oogle at the eyecandy. Here are links to the high, medium, and low resolutions. Sorry folks, Quicktime 6 only." This trailer is much longer than the earlier TV spots, but they're still available.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

The Matrix: Revolutions Theatrical Trailer

Comments Filter:
  • by Snake_Plisken ( 666881 ) on Friday September 26, 2003 @04:37AM (#7061940)
    Talk about letdowns, the was the most overhyped movie I ever saw - a shame, I really wanted it to be more than it turned out to be. Ah well - third time's a charm.
  • Is it me? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Hackie_Chan ( 678203 ) on Friday September 26, 2003 @04:49AM (#7061982)
    Is it me or does it look like the movie will end with a typical Hollywood ending? Kind of sad really since the movie is so untypical Hollywood in every way -- this movie actually made me think for a change!
  • by Zog The Undeniable ( 632031 ) on Friday September 26, 2003 @04:55AM (#7062003)
    OK, there may not be a player for Linux (which I assume is what the fuss is all about) but, for Windows users, surely it's nowhere near as evil as RealPlayer? At least Apple don't make you navigate pages of misleading adverts directing you to a paid-for version, nor does your video open in a window with more toolbars than Photoshop (you can turn them off, but all you wanted to do was watch a video, not configure a piece of software).

    QuickTime has that annoying "Why Go Pro?" dialog and can hijack some of your file associations if you don't read the setup questions, but that's about all.

  • by Iron Monkey543 ( 676232 ) on Friday September 26, 2003 @05:13AM (#7062066)
    that Matrix reloaded was more about looking slick and wearing sunglasses than story? When I first saw matrix 1, they didn't need any of that to wow me. It was cool enough seeing some "hacking stuff" going on! Now it's all about fighting (which is abissmal compared to some Jet Li classics) and looking chic. I think Revolutions will probably do the same thing for the teen masses with short attention span, but it'll be bearable if they got some neat stuff in it that M1 had.
    Put neo back in a suit and tie or sumthin. He starts acting like Trinity from m1 and m2. Stiff faced. I guess the matrix does that to ya
  • Not for me thanks (Score:5, Insightful)

    by MrFenty ( 579353 ) on Friday September 26, 2003 @05:14AM (#7062072)
    I'll pass on this opportunity. Don't get me wrong, I'll see the movie as soon as it comes out, but too much of the surpise element of Matrix 2 was ruined by watching the trailers and the various "making of..." shows on the TV.

    It meant that when I saw the movie, too much of it was already known to me, so that some scenes (esp. the car chase scene) didn't have a gee-whizz element to it. That said, the playground brawl scene with lots of Agent Smith's was still a shock.

    I'll pass and hope to be surprised/pleased at the movie theatre, rather than at home watching "the making of matrix 3" style programmes.

  • by shaunyb ( 646779 ) on Friday September 26, 2003 @05:31AM (#7062123) Homepage
    i always find that Quicktime's audio is sub-par. i agree that it's video is quality, though
  • by Channard ( 693317 ) on Friday September 26, 2003 @05:45AM (#7062155) Journal
    Basically, they say Neo is trapped in a world between the real world and the Matrix. And the whole damn skidoo comes down to him and Agent Smith.

    So basically, just like the first film? No doubt this'll get modded as troll/flamebait, but I didn't see the need for sequels at all. The Matrix was a good film, with an open ending that I thought suited the nature of the film perfectly, and left what happens next to the watchers imagination. The sequels just seemed like sequels for sequels sake and I feel actually detract from the imagination and impact of the first film. Not least because they somehow had to bring Neo down from being all powerful at the end of Matrix 1 which casts doubt that the directors/writers intended the series to be a trilogy in the first place.

  • Re:Is it me? (Score:1, Insightful)

    by botzi ( 673768 ) on Friday September 26, 2003 @06:36AM (#7062255)
    Kind of sad really since the movie is so untypical Hollywood in every way


    Are we talking the same movie here???? If you don't remember The Matrix is a zillion dollars productions with bloated CG effects & action scenes + practically no acting. Yeah, it's sweet, but don't say it ain't Hollywood.....

  • by 1s44c ( 552956 ) on Friday September 26, 2003 @06:46AM (#7062291)
    They tried the same shit 20 years ago with Back to the Future and what happened to that

    It became a classic and people remember it 20 years later.

    People still say things like - '*some big thing* - Great Scott!'

  • Re:Is it me? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by rpillala ( 583965 ) on Friday September 26, 2003 @06:46AM (#7062295)

    The Matrix had its moments, but Reloaded was absolutely a typical hollywood movie. Consider the car chase. Of course it was obscenely expensive to make, but it was still standard movie action. I was expecting strength of mind to have some bearing on fighting ability (the Matrix supposedly can be bent to one's will) but Morpheus is still doing things like getting knocked down and finding weapons lying around. Also consider the choice at the end: "Save the girl or save the world." And consider Neo's response: "there's got to be a third choice." This is all very much what Hollywood has been handing us.

  • by zoeblade ( 600058 ) on Friday September 26, 2003 @07:16AM (#7062364) Homepage

    Sequels are generally bad, yes (Terminator 2 aside), but this was always meant to be a trilogy. There's a difference.

    Watch the first one again and notice the subtle shot of the architect's video wall just before Smith interrogates Neo. Watch the second one and notice the nearly-as-subtle shot of someone being taken through the restaurant, who's going to feature more prominently in the third film. They're more interwoven than you think.

    The first one introduces the characters. The second puts them in a bad place. The third one gets them out of it. that's a trilogy, not a good film with two poor sequels.

  • Comment removed (Score:1, Insightful)

    by account_deleted ( 4530225 ) on Friday September 26, 2003 @07:34AM (#7062412)
    Comment removed based on user account deletion
  • You know..... (Score:2, Insightful)

    by -noefordeg- ( 697342 ) on Friday September 26, 2003 @07:38AM (#7062432)
    The bible is _just_ a book.
  • Re: A theory.. (Score:5, Insightful)

    by gidds ( 56397 ) <slashdot.gidds@me@uk> on Friday September 26, 2003 @08:36AM (#7062662) Homepage
    Please. Talk about reaching.

    Indeed. Most of it was interesting and imaginitive, but the numerical stuff is a) clearly desperate, and b) ignores the relevance of synthesiser names. Trinity (made by Korg), Prophecy (Korg), Matrix (Oberheim), Prophet (Sequential), Virus (Access), Mirage (Ensoniq), Proteus (EMU), and SH-101 and TB-303 (Roland) are all relevant to the film -- a few of those are probably coincidental, but I'd be prepared to bet that the authors at least had at least a couple in mind.

    Also c) it ignores the relevance of Orwell's Room 101, and the simple Neo=One=Room 101 and Trinity=3=Room 303 connections.

  • by Mark_MacRae ( 86757 ) on Friday September 26, 2003 @09:13AM (#7062904)
    The first movie was fantastic, the second one was poor, and the third looks like it's going to at least be as bad as #2.

    The "kung fu" scenes are getting really old, and the biblical story that is coming out is too much to take. I'm going to take a pass when revolutions comes out. I'd encourage others to do the same. These big budget marketing campaigns won't make me go spend $10 on something I know isn't worth watching.
  • by EvilTwinSkippy ( 112490 ) <yoda AT etoyoc DOT com> on Friday September 26, 2003 @11:10AM (#7063873) Homepage Journal
    Ack no! At the risk of trolling, the faustian overtones of the Episode 5, and the uncertain ending make it my favorite of the 3.

    4 was cool, but a little less polished than 5 and 6. 6 was a giant setup for the massive battle at the end of the film. Granted, that's true with every trilogy, going back to LOTR.

    Then again, LOTR in book form can make the last book as long as it wants. It doesn't have to try to compress the entire story to 2 (ok 3) hours. If the writer needs more story before, or more wrapup after, he/she can add more chapters. In the movies, you just end up with a money shot battle, some setup and afterglow.

  • by Lord Kestrel ( 91395 ) on Friday September 26, 2003 @01:11PM (#7064935)
    Very nice work there on writing that.
  • by bpbond ( 246836 ) on Friday September 26, 2003 @03:09PM (#7065973) Homepage
    >they somehow had to bring Neo down from being all powerful

    It's the classic mistake, isn't it? DC Comics did it with Superman, Lucas did it with Luke, fantasy writers do it all the time. Once the hero becomes too powerful, once they can employ "magic" (flying, etc.) that violates physics, how do we as readers/viewers maintain any interest? In Matrix Reloaded, the Smith/Reeves fight scenes were boring, whereas in the first movie they were enthralling. Similarly, now that we know Neo can reach inside someone and pull out bullets, who gives a shit, now, if a good guy is in danger?

    At least they're not time traveling. Yet. That truly is the narrative kiss of death (see Terminator movies).

"May your future be limited only by your dreams." -- Christa McAuliffe

Working...