What’s up with denying the trilogy? The shitty PC era movie I get it. But the sequels were excellent, the symbolism and how smith is defeated it’s brilliant. I bet you wanted a copy of the first movie.
The thing is that “excellent” is something they are not… Look I enjoyed the movies too, they can be quite fun. Some aspects are great, the action and stunt work is in my opinion flawless for the time. Some other things were great too and some others not so much. But in general, really they are not good movies if we try to be a bit neutral, and at the very least they can’t follow the complexity of the theme from the first movie while making it look so simple like that one did. It may just be the case of standing too close to the sun, the movies as part of the trilogy just can’t compare. So people have a feeling of rejection to them. And probably the one thing people find it tough to come to grips with is the fact that the first movie had great action, that helped the movie go forward, while the others just seem to have random action scenes that are just not part of the story. It’s just about how they are added into the story.
But don’t let that bother you, enjoy the movies, I still do, they are just not the masterpieces the first one was.
And no, its not about wanting the first one again, in essence, I wish the movies would have managed to expand the story in a refreshing way like the Animatrix did. But they just fall flat instead, simple mindless fun that kinda finish the storyline quite OK for me.
Now the fourth part… That was brilliant, a brilliant crap, but brilliant nonetheless. If my guess is not wrong, it was a great middle finger to the movie execs that wanted to squeeze more money out of the movies.
What’s up with denying the trilogy? The shitty PC era movie I get it. But the sequels were excellent, the symbolism and how smith is defeated it’s brilliant. I bet you wanted a copy of the first movie.
You call it a trilogy because you reject the fourth one
I call it trilogy because I reject the first one
We are not the same
Jokes aside, I would call 2&3 a long movie, which makes it a trilogy again. One mistake is to see them as separate
The thing is that “excellent” is something they are not… Look I enjoyed the movies too, they can be quite fun. Some aspects are great, the action and stunt work is in my opinion flawless for the time. Some other things were great too and some others not so much. But in general, really they are not good movies if we try to be a bit neutral, and at the very least they can’t follow the complexity of the theme from the first movie while making it look so simple like that one did. It may just be the case of standing too close to the sun, the movies as part of the trilogy just can’t compare. So people have a feeling of rejection to them. And probably the one thing people find it tough to come to grips with is the fact that the first movie had great action, that helped the movie go forward, while the others just seem to have random action scenes that are just not part of the story. It’s just about how they are added into the story.
But don’t let that bother you, enjoy the movies, I still do, they are just not the masterpieces the first one was.
And no, its not about wanting the first one again, in essence, I wish the movies would have managed to expand the story in a refreshing way like the Animatrix did. But they just fall flat instead, simple mindless fun that kinda finish the storyline quite OK for me.
Now the fourth part… That was brilliant, a brilliant crap, but brilliant nonetheless. If my guess is not wrong, it was a great middle finger to the movie execs that wanted to squeeze more money out of the movies.