![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
Posted by GCR from spider-tf012.proxy.aol.com on December 12, 1999 at 08:08:45:
In Reply to: What's with all these jokers invading this forum? posted by Brett (Maverick) Lambert on December 12, 1999 at 06:57:28:
: It seems that there is this huge invasion of joker's searching this
: forum and posting anti-Indy comments. This has never happened before.
: Well, sure, in my 10 months posting here, there has been the
: occasional, once-in-a-blue-moon comment going "Indy sucks" in the
: past, but never with this frequency.
: Now, some of them I find hilarious such as the dude who wants no Indy
: Jones 4 and will "protect the purity". Another saying The Mummy is
: way better, and The Matrix is way better and on and on. Now, I loved
: The Mummy (a worthy homage to Indy), never seen The Matrix though.
: Now I'm wondering all you people who respond to these post and go
: around saying nobody will talk about The Matrix or The Mummy in 20
: years or whatever, what makes you TRULY think that? Sure, maybe The
: Mummy won't be discussed so much, but why not The Matrix? It seems to
: have grown a cult following, made lots of money, and all of my friends
: love it, and tell me there is actually a story inside all these
: special effects, and makes you think. It seems in 20 years the movie
: will become one of them classics. But don't worry guys, Indy will be
: remembered.
: ---------------
I too thought the Mummy was a good movie to just sit back and enjoy, since it was a very Indy like old-fashioned adventure and all, and, when it came out on video, I'm not afraid to say I bought it. I have also seen the Matrix, and I also think this is a very good film, the special effects were very good, and the story (rather unique) was also interesting. The Matrix, however, should not be compared in any way to the Indy trilogy, as the they are very, very different. The Indy films were fast paced, interesting, action-packed (by the way of fist fights, chases of all sorts, shoot outs, and booby traps) old fashioned adventures, while the Matrix was sort of a sci-fi/ action (by the way of shooting, gunfights, and some martial arts). And while both could be called ACTION films, they are definately on two opposite ends of the genre. Hell, when the Indy films were supposed to take place, no one had ever heard of a damn computer! Basically what I'm trying to say is this- The Mummy will always draw comparisons to the Indy films, due to the similar style, the Matrix will not, and thus should not be compared. It's like comparing Jurassic Park with Leathal Weapon, what the hell do they have in common? I do agree, however, that people will still remeber the Mummy and the Matrix in the years to come, but for different reasons. The Mummy will probably survive thanks to Dudley...oops I mean Brendan Frasier's popularity, while the Matrix will survive due to the cult following you have spoken of. Anyway, better stop before I confuse myself...
-GCR