Matrix Revolutions 1/6/04?

Discussion in 'DVD Video' started by SDamien3, Nov 21, 2003.

  1. SDamien3

    SDamien3 Guest

    Latest rumor on the Digital Bits suggests the nose-diving 2nd week performance
    of THE MATRIX REGURGITATIONS has prompted the studio to fast-track a few-frills
    DVD version for release on January 6, 2004 ... making this the quickest
    theater-to-DVD turnaround in the history of big-budget blockbuster-mongering.

    I'm sure this not-quite-announced move also has a lot to do with fighting
    bootleggers by issuing a quick DVD to compete with the instamatic camcorder
    copies already flooding the market ... but, embarassingly, it also speaks
    volumes for the dismal reception of the film itself, and I suppose the sooner
    WHV pumps out the DVD, the fewer the people who'll forget about the "Matrix"
    sequels altogether. Better to release it while the wave of theatrical publicity
    is still somewhat palpable.

    The rumor page goes on to say that there could possibly be a subsequent
    extras-laden box set of all three "Matrix" films in the works for sometime
    later in 2004. For those who'll still give two craps, I imagine.

    ;)

    cheers,
    steven
    SDamien3, Nov 21, 2003
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. SDamien3

    SDamien3 Guest

    Ooops. Update a day later: Digital Bits now ammends rumor page to say
    REVOLUTIONS will likely be ANNOUNCED in January ... for release later in 2004.
    Not quite as embarrassing as a 2-month theater-to-DVD window, but the movie
    still blows, ey?
    SDamien3, Nov 22, 2003
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. SDamien3

    Rutgar Guest

    On 22 Nov 2003 16:37:31 GMT, pamfart (SDamien3)
    wrote:

    >Ooops. Update a day later: Digital Bits now ammends rumor page to say
    >REVOLUTIONS will likely be ANNOUNCED in January ... for release later in 2004.
    >Not quite as embarrassing as a 2-month theater-to-DVD window, but the movie
    >still blows, ey?
    >


    yey.

    - Rutgar
    Rutgar, Nov 22, 2003
    #3
  4. SDamien3

    TSKO Guest

    its too bad.......w/ the last 2 movies in the trilogy....the "ball had been
    dropped" IMO.....

    The first was great.....and then got progressily worse...

    So much potential w/ those flicks....



    "Rutgar" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > On 22 Nov 2003 16:37:31 GMT, pamfart (SDamien3)
    > wrote:
    >
    > >Ooops. Update a day later: Digital Bits now ammends rumor page to say
    > >REVOLUTIONS will likely be ANNOUNCED in January ... for release later in

    2004.
    > >Not quite as embarrassing as a 2-month theater-to-DVD window, but the

    movie
    > >still blows, ey?
    > >

    >
    > yey.
    >
    > - Rutgar
    TSKO, Nov 23, 2003
    #4
  5. SDamien3

    Rutgar Guest

    On Sat, 22 Nov 2003 21:20:52 -0500, "TSKO" <> wrote:

    >its too bad.......w/ the last 2 movies in the trilogy....the "ball had been
    >dropped" IMO.....
    >
    >The first was great.....and then got progressily worse...
    >
    >So much potential w/ those flicks....
    >


    Yes. I haven't had this big of a let down from a sequel, since
    Alien-3.

    - Rutgar
    Rutgar, Nov 23, 2003
    #5
  6. SDamien3

    Steve Scott Guest

    FWIW, I thought the third while not nearly as good as the first was a
    HUGE step up from the second.

    On Sat, 22 Nov 2003 21:20:52 -0500, "TSKO" <> wrote:

    >its too bad.......w/ the last 2 movies in the trilogy....the "ball had been
    >dropped" IMO.....
    >
    >The first was great.....and then got progressily worse...
    >
    >So much potential w/ those flicks....
    >



    --
    Cocaine isn't what it is cracked up to be.
    Steve Scott, Nov 23, 2003
    #6
  7. SDamien3

    Justin Guest

    Steve Scott wrote on [Sun, 23 Nov 2003 03:24:54 GMT]:
    > FWIW, I thought the third while not nearly as good as the first was a
    > HUGE step up from the second.


    Odd. I thought the 3rd sucked the 2nds dick

    The effects may have been a little better in the third, but the story
    sucked even more, and the characters lost even more depth.
    Justin, Nov 23, 2003
    #7
  8. SDamien3

    Rutgar Guest

    On Sun, 23 Nov 2003 03:31:56 GMT, Justin <2go.com>
    wrote:

    >Steve Scott wrote on [Sun, 23 Nov 2003 03:24:54 GMT]:
    >> FWIW, I thought the third while not nearly as good as the first was a
    >> HUGE step up from the second.

    >
    >Odd. I thought the 3rd sucked the 2nds dick
    >
    >The effects may have been a little better in the third, but the story
    >sucked even more, and the characters lost even more depth.



    Yes. Sometimes "more" doesn't necessarily mean "better".

    - Rutgar
    Rutgar, Nov 23, 2003
    #8
  9. Rutgar wrote:

    >>>FWIW, I thought the third while not nearly as good as the first was a
    >>>HUGE step up from the second.

    >>
    >>Odd. I thought the 3rd sucked the 2nds dick
    >>
    >>The effects may have been a little better in the third, but the story
    >>sucked even more, and the characters lost even more depth.


    >
    > Yes. Sometimes "more" doesn't necessarily mean "better".


    Which's why Warner officially announced we're NOT getting one on 1/6/04--
    They're going to bluff with just the *one* "official" SE version later
    in 2Q'04, and get out while they can.

    Derek Janssen
    Derek Janssen, Nov 23, 2003
    #9
  10. SDamien3

    Steve Scott Guest

    On Sun, 23 Nov 2003 03:31:56 GMT, Justin <2go.com>
    wrote:

    >Steve Scott wrote on [Sun, 23 Nov 2003 03:24:54 GMT]:
    >> FWIW, I thought the third while not nearly as good as the first was a
    >> HUGE step up from the second.

    >
    >Odd. I thought the 3rd sucked the 2nds dick
    >
    >The effects may have been a little better in the third, but the story
    >sucked even more, and the characters lost even more depth.


    Interesting how perceptions vary. It seemed to me the second one was
    much heavier on special effects to the detriment of the story. The
    effects seemed less in the way of the story on the third one.

    I guess that's why there are about a thousand different colors of
    paint.

    --
    What you perceive, exists.
    Steve Scott, Nov 23, 2003
    #10
  11. SDamien3

    TSKO Guest

    And the sad thing is...I am going to buy it....not cause I like it or
    anything....but I feel I have to just to have "the complete trilogy"

    I am such a sucker


    "Steve Scott" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > On Sun, 23 Nov 2003 03:31:56 GMT, Justin <2go.com>
    > wrote:
    >
    > >Steve Scott wrote on [Sun, 23 Nov 2003 03:24:54 GMT]:
    > >> FWIW, I thought the third while not nearly as good as the first was a
    > >> HUGE step up from the second.

    > >
    > >Odd. I thought the 3rd sucked the 2nds dick
    > >
    > >The effects may have been a little better in the third, but the story
    > >sucked even more, and the characters lost even more depth.

    >
    > Interesting how perceptions vary. It seemed to me the second one was
    > much heavier on special effects to the detriment of the story. The
    > effects seemed less in the way of the story on the third one.
    >
    > I guess that's why there are about a thousand different colors of
    > paint.
    >
    > --
    > What you perceive, exists.
    >
    >
    >
    >
    TSKO, Nov 24, 2003
    #11
  12. SDamien3

    Codswallop Guest

    On Mon, 24 Nov 2003 01:49:43 GMT, TSKO wrote in alt.video.dvd:

    > And the sad thing is...I am going to buy it....not cause I like it or
    > anything....but I feel I have to just to have "the complete trilogy"
    >
    > I am such a sucker


    Just do what I try to... Pretend the 2nd and 3rd never happened. That
    way, there is no "trilogy" to complete.

    --
    - Cods


    (un ROT-13 to email)
    Codswallop, Nov 24, 2003
    #12
  13. SDamien3

    Steve Hanson Guest

    Steve Scott wrote in <>:

    >On Sun, 23 Nov 2003 03:31:56 GMT, Justin <2go.com>
    >wrote:
    >
    >>Steve Scott wrote on [Sun, 23 Nov 2003 03:24:54 GMT]:
    >>> FWIW, I thought the third while not nearly as good as the first was a
    >>> HUGE step up from the second.

    >>
    >>Odd. I thought the 3rd sucked the 2nds dick
    >>
    >>The effects may have been a little better in the third, but the story
    >>sucked even more, and the characters lost even more depth.

    >
    >Interesting how perceptions vary. It seemed to me the second one was
    >much heavier on special effects to the detriment of the story. The
    >effects seemed less in the way of the story on the third one.


    Really, you got that out of watching what seemed like interminable
    (and boring) battle scenes involving computer generated squiddies? At
    least the second movie had a little variety. And no death speeches
    that went on long enough to merit their own DVD chapter.
    Steve Hanson, Nov 24, 2003
    #13
  14. SDamien3

    TSKO Guest

    another piece of info...

    I was just looking at the new coverscans on Digitalbits.......and there is a
    coverscan for the new Matrix SE dvd that is coming out.....no street date...


    "Codswallop" <> wrote in message
    news:Xns943D89110DFAcodswallopcom@139.132.1.4...
    > On Mon, 24 Nov 2003 01:49:43 GMT, TSKO wrote in alt.video.dvd:
    >
    > > And the sad thing is...I am going to buy it....not cause I like it or
    > > anything....but I feel I have to just to have "the complete trilogy"
    > >
    > > I am such a sucker

    >
    > Just do what I try to... Pretend the 2nd and 3rd never happened. That
    > way, there is no "trilogy" to complete.
    >
    > --
    > - Cods
    >
    >
    > (un ROT-13 to email)
    TSKO, Nov 24, 2003
    #14
  15. From on top of The Wall I yelled "YOU! YES YOU TSKO <>!
    Stand still laddie. Oh, and which one is Pink?"
    > another piece of info...
    >
    > I was just looking at the new coverscans on Digitalbits.......and
    > there is a coverscan for the new Matrix SE dvd that is coming
    > out.....no street date...


    If I recall right tho that was the artwork from the
    canned SE they were going to released just before
    "Matrix Reloaded" hit theaters. It was nothing more
    than "Matrix" and "Matrix Revisted" packaged together
    once again but with a few more extras added.

    --
    Brian "Demolition Man" Little
    Brian \Demolition Man\ Little, Nov 25, 2003
    #15
  16. SDamien3

    Peter Briggs Guest

    Steve Scott <> wrote:

    > FWIW, I thought the third while not nearly as good as the first was a
    > HUGE step up from the second.


    Oh, God...no!

    I was disappointed in Reloaded (largely due to the original Matrix being
    extremely well-crafted, and hard to top), but going back and watching
    Reloaded after Revolutions made me realize that Reloaded's a far better
    film than I first knee-jerked.

    I can't see myself watching all of Revolutions over-and-over.
    Peter Briggs, Nov 25, 2003
    #16
  17. SDamien3

    Peter Briggs Guest

    Steve Scott <> wrote:

    > Interesting how perceptions vary.


    Indeed, as:

    >It seemed to me the second one was
    > much heavier on special effects to the detriment of the story. The
    > effects seemed less in the way of the story on the third one.


    I felt that the third film existed only to showcase the (admittedly
    terrific) fanboy Zion shoot-em-up. There's so many plot-holes and
    half-baked, not-thought-out-properly scenes in Revolutions, that the
    Wachowskis ought to be ashamed of themselves.
    Peter Briggs, Nov 25, 2003
    #17
  18. SDamien3

    Peter Briggs Guest

    Steve Hanson <> wrote:

    > And no death speeches
    > that went on long enough to merit their own DVD chapter.


    Indeed. That "particular" death sequence is the one special thing that
    really pissed me off about Revolutions. (And did you notice that
    Morpheus barely gets to do anything in Revolutions? He's all over the
    place in Reloaded, but Revolutions doesn't even give him a couple of "my
    faith is really shaken" scenes.)

    Anybody reading the new comic-book anthology? (Okay, it's really only a
    hardcopy of the website stories, but.) At least there's some nice work
    in there (and I lived in every place mentioned in the Neil Gaiman story,
    which is very deja-vu weird)...and the promise/threat of an upcoming
    Reloaded/Revolutions artbook (another overpriced but very desirable
    monster book to take up valuable shelf space)
    Peter Briggs, Nov 25, 2003
    #18
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Peter Briggs

    "Matrix Revolutions" (minimal spoilers)

    Peter Briggs, Nov 6, 2003, in forum: DVD Video
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    424
  2. Strutter

    Matrix Revolutions DVD...

    Strutter, Nov 27, 2003, in forum: DVD Video
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    375
    12/10
    Nov 27, 2003
  3. Tom Woodward

    WWW:Matrix Revolutions Details!

    Tom Woodward, Jan 10, 2004, in forum: DVD Video
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    548
    Tom Woodward
    Jan 10, 2004
  4. Doug MacLean
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    478
    Doug MacLean
    Jan 13, 2004
  5. Bos
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    477
    Just a friend
    Feb 6, 2004
Loading...

Share This Page