PDA

View Full Version : Strange Matrix Reloaded News - DVD release??



Beast
07-05-2002, 11:35 PM
With movies going to video so much quicker now adays, it's starting to seem almost like the movie Spaceballs with the idea of "Instant Cassettes". What with E2 coming on DVD in Novemeber, and Resident Evil coming out on DVD 4 short months after opening in theaters. Now some strange Matrix 2 & 3 news is coming out. The following news is from Videoeta.com.

2003 is set to be a busy year for the Wachowski brothers. The directors' anticipated sequel to The Matrix -- The Matrix Reloaded -- is scheduled for release in theaters on May 16 of next year. The third film (The Matrix Revolutions) will then premiere a scant 6 months later. The unusually quick succession of the sequels has lead to strange timing for their DVD release.

Rumors have put the video and DVD release of The Matrix Reloaded only three months after it bows in theaters. Reports say bros Andy and Larry will (in conjunction with those other brothers, the Warners, of course) release The Matrix Reloaded in August. The release is unusual even for the world of The Matrix. Normally, DVDs aren't available until approximately six months after theatrical release.

The DVD will supposedly be movies 1 and 2 with an extra disc of the usual bonus features and what-not. The final film in the trilogy will be released in yet another three-disc set in early 2004, according to published reports. Let's hope the Wachowskis have enough memory in their Palm Pilots to store all those dates for 2003.

MTFBWY and HH!!

Jar Jar Binks

LTBasker
07-05-2002, 11:50 PM
Originally posted by JarJarBinks
The Matrix Reloaded -- is scheduled for release in theaters on May 16 of next year. The third film (The Matrix Revolutions) will then premiere a scant 6 months later. The unusually quick succession of the sequels has lead to strange timing for their DVD release.

I must've missed their release... :happy:

May 16th? Wouldn't have anything to do with E2 being released May 16th this year would it...? :rolleyes:

derek
07-06-2002, 12:25 AM
but are they gonna release parts 2 and 3 separately? i really don't want to buy the first one again.:)

does anyone know why they are releasing both films in the same year? why not just release part 3 the next summer?

Eternal Padawan
07-06-2002, 01:09 AM
I think they are taking a page from the Back to the Future school of sequel releases. Have a cliffhanger ending in part two, then release part three a few months later so as not to peeve audiences off too much. Plus, audiences are fickle. You wait too long between films and the buzz dies and you lose interest. Look at the Harry Potter and LOTR movies. Pretty soon it will be standard practice for studios to shoot sequels as close to the original as possible. Suck the life out of the franchise as quickly as possible and move onto the next one. I wouldn't be suprised if they do what they did on Superman and the others and shoot more than one movie at a time, then edit them at their convenience for multiple releases.

Beast
07-06-2002, 01:17 AM
Well, that's pretty much the only way they can do Harry Potter. Since if they wait to long, the actors will grow up and then they will have to recast. They are going to be filming 3 soon after the 2nd one opens, but they have concerns for the 4th one.

Since the book is almost twice as big as the earlier books, they are planning to cut it into two 2 1/2 hour movies with a cliffhanger inbetween. The Goblet of Fire pt. 1 is supposed to open in November of 2004, and then pt. 2 will open around Christmas that same year. But the actors are starting to get to old, so they don't know whether doing 4 and especially 5, 6, and 7 will be possible with the same actors. :)

MTFBWY and HH!!

Jar Jar Binks

LTBasker
07-06-2002, 01:21 AM
I sense a great disturbance in the movie force. As if millions of videos were suddenly filmed and then put direct-to-video.

Jacen Solo
07-18-2002, 07:12 PM
I hope the sequels will be as good as the first, it was amazing. I saw the teaser for Reloaded and Revolutions and it was pretty neat, I just hope they don't end up like so many others sequels being empty and pointless, just a way for hollywood to make more money.

Jedi Knightrider
07-19-2002, 03:10 PM
Originally posted by derek
does anyone know why they are releasing both films in the same year? why not just release part 3 the next summer?

I think it's also not to fall into the pit of waiting out another year to continue onto other projects. If they just scream through making them and releasing them, then they have the freedom to pursue other interests faster than if they wait.

pthfnder89
07-19-2002, 03:15 PM
Originally posted by JarJarBinks


2003 is set to be a busy year for the Wachowski brothers. The directors' anticipated sequel to The Matrix -- The Matrix Reloaded -- is scheduled for release in theaters on May 16 of next year. The third film (The Matrix Revolutions) will then premiere a scant 6 months later.


That's odd; all earlier news about the film releases have placed Reloaded coming out in May and Revolutions coming out in August, which is only 3 months later. I wonder if their feeling on this matter are clear...:)

icatch9
07-22-2002, 09:38 AM
I'm pretty sure Jar Jar is right. I mean the preview befor AOTC said "The Matrix Reloaded" Summer 2003 and the "The Matrix Revolutions" Winter 2003. Most people didn't pick up on the fact that the privew was of 2 moives. Since it was such a fast preview as wasn't exactly clear.

pthfnder89
07-22-2002, 07:24 PM
Originally posted by icatch9
I'm pretty sure Jar Jar is right. I mean the preview befor AOTC said "The Matrix Reloaded" Summer 2003 and the "The Matrix Revolutions" Winter 2003. Most people didn't pick up on the fact that the privew was of 2 moives. Since it was such a fast preview as wasn't exactly clear.

Actually, the trailer that played in front of AOTC only said "2003". It didn't give any other timeframe.

But I agree that it should have been a clearer trailer; if I hadn't known that it was two movies before hand, I would have been confused (as my friend beside me was). They really should have labeled them Matrix 2: Reloaded and Matrix 3: Revolutions, at least for the trailer.

icatch9
07-23-2002, 07:42 AM
Yea, your right now that I remember more clearly. You had to pay attention to get the fact that they flashed both titles of the movies. I think this is a cool idea. I hate waiting so long for sequils. In this day and age of prequil/sequil I hope movie houses keep this sort of thing up :D.