• themeatbridge@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    22
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    3 months ago

    My kids are 11 and 9 and have no idea what the Matrix is. I feel like this is targeted at me.

    It might be a little too violent for the 9 year old. Especially the deaths of Switch, Apoc, and Mouse. “Not like this” his hard.

    • TheImpressiveX@lemmy.mlOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      45
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      Unfortunately, your kids can’t be told what the Matrix is. They have to see it for themselves.

    • proudblond@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      3 months ago

      We have 8 and 10 and we have just been thinking that maybe the 10 year old could handle it. Sadly the 8 year old is really sensitive so no time soon.

      • rezz@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        3 months ago

        10 years old is entirely too young for this film. Mature 13-14 year old is definitely the earliest anyone should watch this.

  • MeatsOfRage@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    14
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    3 months ago

    I hate my local theater because they never participate in this stuff but they’re still playing Twisters which has been available on VOD for weeks now.

    Edit

    For the record I’m not knocking the quality of Twisters. I thought it was a pretty good summer blockbuster. I’m more knocking the quality of my theaters programming choices, playing movies to empty rooms while never doing special events.

      • keyez@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        3 months ago

        I really enjoyed it, saw it twice. was a classic summer blockbuster with good actors and the CGI for the storms was insane and really well done

      • Maven (famous)@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        3 months ago

        It was significantly better than the original film at the very least. Both of them were stupid but at least the new one didn’t make me hate the main character the whole time.

        • ours@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          10
          ·
          3 months ago

          At least the original had groundbreaking VFX at the time.

          The new one looks great but it’s nothing new. I enjoyed it for the popcorn disaster movie it is and we can do much, much worst with those (looking a you Roland Emmerich you hack).

          • IninewCrow@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            3 months ago

            Lol … with coming climate change, we won’t need VFX … we’ll just tune into the local evening news in the future.

            Everyone will get bored with make believe movies because real life will look so much more epically disastrous.

    • FiveMacs@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      3 months ago

      It’s a good thing that they aren’t trying to cash grab you

  • mindbleach
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    3 months ago

    I saw this in theaters when the third one came out. Did the whole marathon-to-debut thing. My brother fell asleep during the first one. It is… deliberately paced. Fantastic to go in on blind, and certainly admirable in all of its decisions, but there is a reason it did even better on home video. (Though I’m not sure how many copies they sold, since DVD players will spontaneously generate a copy if left in a dark room.)

    That theater did the same thing for Lord Of The Rings, but there was no way my dad was gonna sit through that.