A New Hope was released at just the right time. — Page 3

The one and only time I watched The Matrix was back in late summer/early fall of 2003. I liked it then, but I have no idea if I'd like it at all now, especially since I've come to dislike Keanu a fair bit since then.

In any case, it never came close to impacting me the way Star Wars did.

But you're posting on a Star Wars forum.

This isn't a "which is better" or "which do you like better" discussion.  Dude tried to claim that The Matrix (among others, but it's the key one) was forgotten one year later, then tried to claim people don't watch it anymore, or at least nowhere near as often as Star Wars.

Dude is just wrong.

imperialscum said:

Let me put it like this. How many people watches Star Wars, let's say annually, and how many does that with Matrix?

 I think its tough to compare The Matrix to Star Wars simply because one movie is Rated R and the other movie is Rated PG, and just by that The Matrix will never have as big an audience.

If Star Wars was rated R in 1977, then it wouldn't have reached all young kids like myself, and would have been just as popular as a huge blockbuster like Jaws, you are losing a whole demographic. 

Heck, I remember when I went to see Matrix Reloaded in 2003, the Theaters were really cracking down on kids under 17.  I had a bunch of highschool kids come up to me and asked me if I could buy them tickets for the movie the same way I used to stand outside liquor stores before I was 21 years old.

I will say that The Matrix totally owned The Phantom Menace in 1999 as the 'must see' movie, and that is when I started to notice a chink in the armor of the Star Wars brand.  (Then Spiderman beat Attack of the Clones at the 2002 Boxoffice was the final blow to Star Wars being the #1 Franchise it was before.)  The Matrix dazzled people with its special effects that year, along with a really intersting story (it wasn't some dumb Michael Bay summer movie). 

What I think really hurt the Matrix brand is the same thing that hurt the Star Wars Brand:  The Matrix Sequels and the Star Wars Prequels.  I know friends that absolutely love the Matrix but hate the Sequels with a passion!  I liked the Sequels, but most of my friends didn't even bother with Revolutions after they saw Reloaded. 

Liar?

http://originaltrilogy.com/forum/topic.cfm/A-New-Hope-was-released-at-just-the-right-time/post/677343/#TopicPost677343

I didn't mention the other movies because your argument has a little more weight with those...although Avatar is debatable.  You should read up on those nutbar fans.

As for the rest, you can call it slight exaggeration, but the essential point stands.  I forget if English is your first language but you need a refresher either way.

imperialscum said:

TV's Frink said:

Liar?

http://originaltrilogy.com/forum/topic.cfm/A-New-Hope-was-released-at-just-the-right-time/post/677343/#TopicPost677343

As for the rest, you can call it slight exaggeration, but the essential point stands.  I forget if English is your first language but you need a refresher either way.

This proves exactly what I said. I did not even mention Matrix until you highlighted it. In that post I was replying in general to the films Anchorhead mentioned AND all similar that he did not specifically mention. Then you highlighted Matrix and made it "the key one". Not me.

 Oh, so you take back everything you said about the Matrix then.  Cool.

Just because you put a question mark at the end of a statement, it doesn't turn the statement into a question.  Your "question" about who watches what more was not a question at all, it was a theory to advance your (misguided) point.

I refuse to continue this silly discussion any further.  If you feel the need to respond, just read Anchorhead's post about it again.  I'm sure his paycheck is safe.

imperialscum said:

Well I can certainly agree with Matrix having a good story. But the "whole demographic" you speak about (i.e. the teenagers) were (speaking from experience) almost exclusively attracted by its fancy action, violence, slow-motion fighting and shooting scenes. You take that away and you get PG rating but then you lose the interest of most of the kids as well. In Star Wars that wasn't the case.

 I do wonder if ESB would have been PG-13 back in 1980 if the rating existed? I agree that alot of fans were attracted to the fancy action and slow motion fighting scenes in the Matrix, but then there are people like me who really enjoyed the story in 1999, and I think that is the real trick to attracting a bigger audience for any 'blockbuster' movie. 

You look at movie like Jurassic Park, there are many people who loved it in 1993 because no one was able to show Dinosaurs come to life on the big screen like that, yet I loved it because of the overall story and what it said about us as a society (as Jeff Goldblum talks about in the movie how you shouldn't fuck with mother nature and there is a reason Dinosaurs are extinct now.)

Star Wars was able to capture both audiences (Action/Special Effects fans & Story & Character fans) ALONG with young children, so you had that 3rd market of fans.  I give Lucas credit for the success of Star Wars because it is very hard to appeal to those 3 bases of 'blockbuster movie fans' as alot of times a movie ends up appealing more to one base over another base of fans.  (I.E.:  Return of the Jedi catered TOO much to kids, and that is why the movie doesn't hold up as well 30 years later.)

imperialscum said:

Anyway Matrix is out of its league/scale so it unreasonable to compare it to Star Wars. A proper opposite number could maybe be Lord of the Rings. But I have never particularly liked it because its setting was completely unappealing to me (i.e. medieval-like, swords, bows, horses, wizards and such).