I liked reloaded and revolutions even on first viewing, but I didn’t need them to feel the same way the first matrix movie felt in order to consider them good. Like, The Matrix stood out from pretty much every other movie I had seen before. You don’t get that a second time right away, especially from another movie of the same type about the same thing. They continued and closed the story very well, but none of them were an origin story, and origin stories are pretty much always more awesome than the other movies in the same series, no matter what order they are made in.
The Matrix was unfollowable, and they managed to follow it ok. They were always gonna be worse in comparison, but they aren’t actually bad.
I haven’t seen Resurrections, not for any particular reason, just keep forgetting anytime I do manage to remember it, before I remember it long enough to see it.
Origin stories tend to resonate with people, it’s basically “how did this person go from being a normal everyday nobody, to one of the most powerful people in the universe” and, if done right, you can empathize with their journey.
Some origin movies maybe suck at that, but that is them squandering an opportunity, you get alot of potential baked-in just from the concept alone.
The Matrix was maybe one of the most successful uses of an origin arc, but most origin movies have a similar free boost, whether the rest of the movie supports and earns that boost is up to them. But many still do.
Oh, I think we are talking about different things. I wouldn’t call the matrix an origin film. I would call something an origin film if it takes a pre-established character and tells a story of how they became that character. Batman Begins and Solo would qualify for that, whereas The Matrix is just a original story. They tend to be lazy story writing and spend time ticking off the boxes of things the audience recognises. Then half of them include a clunky way to come up the the characters name or title drop.
Ah, well there is an official classification, that is what I am going by. An origin story can still be called an origin story even if it’s the first story, if it follows the origin story format. If however the first story doesn’t follow the origin story format, then it isn’t an origin story even if it’s the first story.
An origin story is named that based on what happens in it, it doesn’t have to be a pre-quel to qualify.
I liked reloaded and revolutions even on first viewing, but I didn’t need them to feel the same way the first matrix movie felt in order to consider them good. Like, The Matrix stood out from pretty much every other movie I had seen before. You don’t get that a second time right away, especially from another movie of the same type about the same thing. They continued and closed the story very well, but none of them were an origin story, and origin stories are pretty much always more awesome than the other movies in the same series, no matter what order they are made in.
The Matrix was unfollowable, and they managed to follow it ok. They were always gonna be worse in comparison, but they aren’t actually bad.
I haven’t seen Resurrections, not for any particular reason, just keep forgetting anytime I do manage to remember it, before I remember it long enough to see it.
Can you clarify what you mean about origin stories?
Are you saying you like origin story movies? Especially ones that are released as a prequel to another movie?
I think origin movies generally suck, and I thought that was the common sentiment. Origin stories are a waste of screen time.
Origin stories tend to resonate with people, it’s basically “how did this person go from being a normal everyday nobody, to one of the most powerful people in the universe” and, if done right, you can empathize with their journey.
Some origin movies maybe suck at that, but that is them squandering an opportunity, you get alot of potential baked-in just from the concept alone.
The Matrix was maybe one of the most successful uses of an origin arc, but most origin movies have a similar free boost, whether the rest of the movie supports and earns that boost is up to them. But many still do.
Oh, I think we are talking about different things. I wouldn’t call the matrix an origin film. I would call something an origin film if it takes a pre-established character and tells a story of how they became that character. Batman Begins and Solo would qualify for that, whereas The Matrix is just a original story. They tend to be lazy story writing and spend time ticking off the boxes of things the audience recognises. Then half of them include a clunky way to come up the the characters name or title drop.
Ah, well there is an official classification, that is what I am going by. An origin story can still be called an origin story even if it’s the first story, if it follows the origin story format. If however the first story doesn’t follow the origin story format, then it isn’t an origin story even if it’s the first story.
An origin story is named that based on what happens in it, it doesn’t have to be a pre-quel to qualify.
I think you’re going to have to elaborate on what you mean by “official classification”