PDA

View Full Version : The Matrix Reloaded



Erik
May 15th, 2003, 02:48 PM
I took the day off to go see this movie (I was about to burn vacation time anyway) and it was very good.

I can't wait to get it on DVD so that I can really analyze some aspects, but it was easily as good as the first movie, although quite a bit different in tone.

Erik

CP/M User
May 17th, 2003, 11:52 PM
"Erik" wrote in message:

> I took the day off to go see this movie (I was
> about to burn vacation time anyway) and it was
> "very" good.

> I can't wait to get it on DVD so that I can really
> analyze some aspects, but it was easily as good
> as the first movie, although quite a bit different
> in tone.

I saw the original & thought it was dribble. Is this
any better?

Cheers.

CP/M User
May 18th, 2003, 01:19 AM
"CP/M User" wrote in message:

>> I took the day off to go see this movie (I was
>> about to burn vacation time anyway) and it was
>> "very" good.

>> I can't wait to get it on DVD so that I can really
>> analyze some aspects, but it was easily as good
>> as the first movie, although quite a bit different
>> in tone.

> I saw the original & thought it was dribble. Is this
> any better?

Oh I see, you liked the original. Having seen the
original & adjudging it as dribble, I simply don't
know what it is about (so watching it was a waste
of time). I might as well shouldn't have seen it.

This should have been placed into the rants column,
because many people may want to rant on about
the Matrix! :-)

I'm simply looking foward to Terminator 3, I don't
know how they are going to fit it into the end
script of Terminator 2 only because I thought Term
2 finished everything nicely, but if it's any good
then they must have found a way. It's been
nearly 12 years since Terminator 2 came out,
so I guess could be good.

But lets look into a short history of long awaited
sequals:

"The Guns of Navarone (1961)"
is an absolute gem to:
"Force 10 From Navarone (1978)"
which critics think is a disaster.
But I'd be the first to say that I didn't mind
Force 10 From Navarone - okay maybe the scene
where the water races down to take out the bridge
the looks a bit primative, but this was done in
1978 for heavens sake! :-(

Now where was I, on yes, the other long I can
think of is Blues Brothers 2000. It may not be
as good as Blues Brothers, but the best thing
I could say about it is it's okay.

Cheers.

Erik
May 18th, 2003, 06:31 AM
I'm anxiously awaiting Terminator 3 as well. It should be interesting.

I'm most anxious for Lord of the Rings: Return of the King. THAT will be an amazing film and should (hopefully) break all box office records to date.

I thought the Matrix (the first movie) was excellent and the second was about as good. If you didn't like the one, you'll not like the other.

Erik

CP/M User
May 18th, 2003, 03:24 PM
"Erik" wrote in message:

> I'm anxiously awaiting Terminator 3 as well. It should be interesting.

Well I just hope it's more than just special effects.

> I'm most anxious for Lord of the Rings: Return of the King.
> THAT will be an amazing film and should (hopefully) break
> all box office records to date.

You really do go for the newer movies, don't you?

> I thought the Matrix (the first movie) was excellent and the
> second was about as good. If you didn't like the one, you'll
> not like the other.

I tend to leave my SCI-FI to Star Trek. Terminator is one of the
few exceptions & anything which has a vintage to it. Many '50s
SCI-FIs were a bit over the top, but there are a couple of good
ones in there. MetroPolis has to be seen to be believed, done in
1926 (or there abouts), it looks rather good (even though it's
a silent movie).

I just saw the Matrix as another special effects job.

Cheers.

Erik
May 18th, 2003, 03:29 PM
You really do go for the newer movies, don't you?


Some new, some old(er).

I hate really old movies (i.e. more then about 35 years or so) since they were generally poorly acted, badly directed and typically had people bursting into song in the middle of a semi-normal conversation.

Of course, I'm showing some bias. . . :)

Erik

CP/M User
May 18th, 2003, 03:37 PM
"Erik" wrote in message:
>> You really do go for the newer movies, don't you?

> Some new, some old(er).

> I hate really old movies (i.e. more then about 35 years or so)
> since they were generally poorly acted, badly directed and
> typically had people bursting into song in the middle of a
> semi-normal conversation.

> Of course, I'm showing some bias. . . :)

I haven't seen a Hitchcock movie like that. All the acting is of
high quality & it has a decent story to boot.

You've been watching Oliver! too much.

You need to watch movies based on their age because I
believe part of the excitment of watching a movie & the
tricks they come up with is the key. Watching a movie in
the past 20 or so years can easily be done with a
computer.

Cheers.

CP/M User
April 24th, 2006, 01:52 AM
Erik wrote:

> I can't wait to get it on DVD so that I can really
> analyze some aspects, but it was easily as good as
> the first movie, although quite a bit different in
> tone.

So I'm guessing you got the DVD & see it over 100 times or
something?! ;-)


Haven't DVDs come down in price?

CP/M User.

CP/M User
April 24th, 2006, 01:58 AM
"Erik" wrote in message:

> I hate really old movies (i.e. more then about 35
> years or so) since they were generally poorly acted,
> badly directed and typically had people bursting into
> song in the middle of a semi-normal conversation.

Speaking of ol' Film musicals, I managed to see My Fair Lady
for the first time - 'bout a month back. I thought it was
nicely done - the opener was classic, unfortunately the
advertisements killed the film - simply too many, this film on
DVD would kick "The commercial TV stations version" hands
down.

CP/M User.

alexkerhead
April 24th, 2006, 08:05 AM
ROFLMFAO!
CP/M, what are you thinking? lol :bigups:
Talk about some serious resurection.

Terry Yager
April 24th, 2006, 08:17 AM
"Erik" wrote in message:

> I hate really old movies (i.e. more then about 35
> years or so) since they were generally poorly acted,
> badly directed and typically had people bursting into
> song in the middle of a semi-normal conversation.

Speaking of ol' Film musicals, I managed to see My Fair Lady
for the first time - 'bout a month back. I thought it was
nicely done - the opener was classic, unfortunately the
advertisements killed the film - simply too many, this film on
DVD would kick "The commercial TV stations version" hands
down.

CP/M User.


I was trying to watch the 'Lord of The Rings' movies a few weeks ago. I gave up halfway thru the second movie, I just couldn't stand all the commercial breaks. It was annoying enough to prevent enjoyment of the movie. Just for the record, I timed 'em before I tuned-out. They were running four minutes of advertizing for every eight minutes of program.

--T

CP/M User
April 24th, 2006, 02:37 PM
Terry Yager wrote:

> I was trying to watch the 'Lord of The Rings' movies
> a few weeks ago. I gave up halfway thru the second
> movie, I just couldn't stand all the commercial
> breaks. It was annoying enough to prevent enjoyment
> of the movie. Just for the record, I timed 'em before
> I tuned-out. They were running four minutes of
> advertizing for every eight minutes of program.

Yeah, it was an interesting start to the television last year
when one of the stations scrapped the idea of having Sunday
night movies (in which the premier movies were shown then).
The promo to have shows on had the station actually listing a
whole list of movies & then saying "Seen it". Generally though
this is because more people are going out to see these movies
- or have the DVDs, which I might add a decent DVD can be had
for under $10 (even if the movie is a little bit older - still
good quality). I figure it's the advertising though which is
the main culprit & movies nowadays aren't exactly short -
people need to go to bed to go to work or school the next day
(well I do anyway).

CP/M User.

CP/M User
April 24th, 2006, 02:40 PM
alexkerhead wrote:

> ROFLMFAO!
> CP/M, what are you thinking? lol
> Talk about some serious resurection.

Hey, I'm thinking there's some good talks still left in this
stuff! :-)

CP/M User.

Terry Yager
April 24th, 2006, 03:26 PM
alexkerhead wrote:

> ROFLMFAO!
> CP/M, what are you thinking? lol
> Talk about some serious resurection.

Hey, I'm thinking there's some good talks still left in this
stuff! :-)

CP/M User.

Well, I dunno 'bout anyone else, but I needed an excuse to rant against networks that over-sell thier air time, just because the show might be popular.

--T

carlsson
April 24th, 2006, 03:45 PM
I saw a home electronics chain over here now advertised DVD players for 299 SEK (53 AUD, 45 CAD, 32 EUR, 22 GBP, 39 USD). It said they will play "most" movies, but probably limited when it comes to burned discs and various odd formats and encodings - surely no DivX. I wonder if the cheapest players will drop further in price, or if they will only improve in functionality until the next technology comes to replace first generation DVDs.

CP/M User
April 24th, 2006, 03:53 PM
carlsson wrote:

> I saw a home electronics chain over here now
> advertised DVD players for 299 SEK (53 AUD, 45 CAD,
> 32 EUR, 22 GBP, 39 USD). It said they will play
> "most" movies, but probably limited when it comes to
> burned discs and various odd formats and encodings -
> surely no DivX. I wonder if the cheapest players will
> drop further in price, or if they will only improve
> in functionality until the next technology comes to
> replace first generation DVDs.

There was one I saw here in a catalogue for $49 (AUD of
course), I'll have to check & see if this player pops up again
to see what it can play. I did some one a couple of weeks back
which played DivX - though I'm unsure if it's that one.

CP/M User.

carlsson
April 24th, 2006, 04:00 PM
Yeah, I figured we don't have the best prices in the world, taking VAT and other issues in consideration. DivX players typically seem to start around 700 SEK today, perhaps a little less when they have a special offer. Not that I need another player - I also have a second hand Philips one but no DVDs to play. Maybe I should rent or borrow one just to "break it in", although it has been used before.

DimensionDude
April 24th, 2006, 06:13 PM
re: inexpensive home dvd players

I have a CyberHome CH300 (or something like that). Paid 39USD for it a couple of years ago at Best Buy.

It will play commercial DVD, DVD -R/+R, -RW/+RW; VCD; MP3 on CD or DVD; plain MPEG files on CD or DVD.

Through a hidden menu it can be set as region-free so I can watch the region 2 discs that a friend has (Doctor Who, Blake's 7, etc).

It's not perfect, there's the very occasional hiccup, but I can't fault it for the low price. The only thing that slightly annoys me is that it doesn't have a display on the player. If I want to play a music CD I must turn on the tv to see what track is playing.

Kent

Erik
April 24th, 2006, 06:20 PM
Well, I've got a couple of cheap DVD players around the house but I'm really starting to think I want an HD-DVD or Blue-Ray system.

I get the ocassional HD movie and they look absolutely great - and these tend to be movies that I wouldn't normally watch. I'd love to see the Matrix in HD, for instance.

CP/M User
April 24th, 2006, 10:06 PM
DimensionDude wrote:

> It will play commercial DVD, DVD -R/+R, -RW/+RW; VCD;
> MP3 on CD or DVD; plain MPEG files on CD or DVD.

Whoa?!? No SVCD? You won't be playing of my movies then! ;-)

Personally though, I think every DVD player should have this.
My Pioneer DVD player I got in late 2003 certainally supports
this, true Pioneer are usually ahead on everyone on this stuff
I guess - depending on when you got your DVD player too.

I can't believe my Digitor TV is still going nicely as well -
had that since early 2004 & was at the time one of the few
34cm tellys I could get with NTSC compatability & a Component
Video Input (for the DVD). To me it's simply a matter of why
do I need HDTV when the Component Video is equivalent of it.
Pictures from old movies aren't goin' to get any better & are
pretty hard to beat with this connection (as opposed to AV
connections) - and with the price of DVD movies being next to
nothing, why not! ;-)

CP/M User.