Pretty close to what I'm thinking, actually:
And if we continue to see Matrix movies whose titles keep up the "Re" trend ("The Matrix Reloaded," "The Matrix Revolutions," and now "The Matrix Resurrections"), what titles can we expect next?
The Matrix Reactivations?
The Matrix Redistributions?
The Matrix Reduplications?
The Matrix Rectal Invasions?
The Matrix Reimplantations?
The Matrix Regenerations?
The Matrix Republicans?
The Matrix Reciprocations?
The Matrix Reinvigorations?
The Matrix Refrigerations?
The Matrix Redecorated?
The Matrix Retardations?
The Matrix Regurgitations?
I could go on, but you get the idea.
The Matrix... Really?
ReplyDeleteThat being said, I am kind of curious about this one. I always thought it was a shame that they never made any sequels to such a ground-breaking film. This may rectify that issue.
I assume that your phrase "to such a ground-breaking film" actually refers to the Matrix trilogy of films, i.e., including "Reloaded" and "Revolutions," yes? If you meant only the first film, well... I'd actually agree with that sentiment: the two sequels that came after "The Matrix" were far inferior, although I did see some good points about the second film (in fact, I think the original trilogy shouldn't have been a trilogy: it should have ended on the cliffhanger at the end of "Reloaded"). I wrote a bit about this earlier.
ReplyDeleteI have no idea what you are talking about. They never made any sequels to The Matrix, for whatever reason. It's up there near the top of my list of stand-alone films, maybe a spot or two above Highlander.
ReplyDeleteI kinda thought that's where you were headed. Had to be sure, though.
ReplyDeleteIn case you haven't seen it...
ReplyDeleteIt all makes sense now.
ReplyDelete