this post was submitted on 18 Apr 2025
35 points (100.0% liked)
Cyberpunk
1125 readers
2 users here now
What is Cyberpunk?
Cyberpunk is a science-fiction sub-genre dealing with the integration of society and technology in dystopian settings. Often referred to as “low-life and high tech,” Cyberpunk stories deal with outsiders (punks) who fight against the oppressors in society (usually mega corporations that control everything) via technological means (cyber). If the punks aren’t actively fighting against a megacorp, they’re still dealing with living in a world completely dependent on high technology.
Cyberpunk characteristics include:
- Dystopian city setting where mega-corporations rule
- Full integration of technology into society, featuring cybernetic implants
- Outsider protagonists (punks) who often are very familiar with the technology around them
- Hard boiled detective and film noir vibes and influence
- Themes dabbling in trans-humanism, existentialism, and what it means to be human.
Prefixes for posts
- [AI Art]
- [Art]
- [Book]
- [Game]
- [Meme]
- [Movie]
- [Video]
Icon created by @[email protected] | Banner generated via AI model
If someone is interested in moderating this community, message @[email protected].
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I forget the exact line, but it's in the scene where his boss is informing him they're making a sequel (to the in universe video game) no matter what, and his only choice was to be involved or not.
Yeah, I think the actual content of Revolutions was strictly the Wachowskis's way of protesting being forced to make another one. I think they made it as bad as they possibly could on purpose. I think we'd have gotten a "better" movie had neither of the Wachowskis been involved with it. (Not that we'd have gotten a "good" movie, but it wouldn't have purposefully ruined everything.)
Now that's an interesting question... would the movie have been better if the Wachowskis weren't involved at all? I'd argue the movie would've been better if none of the previous cast came back. The story should've been some new incarnation of The One (not Keanu Reeves) as the cycle repeats (the Architect talks about it being the 6th iteration). Or they could've even moved the world forward by having humans and machines working together but "oh no! the matrix is breaking/failing for some reason and we have to fix it!"
Unfortunately, we all know it was just WB saying "we need a cash cow... Wachowskis! Make us another!" and they had to scramble to come up with a story.
I would have been happier with a movie that explored a combined world. Some of the things we saw in Resurrections that touched in that was very interesting. But they would have had to come up with a new plot that wasn't connected to the previous ones. While I loved Neil Patrick Harris' character and his job with it, I don't like revisitation movies that break the previous conclusions to make them work. This was one of the flaws of the Star Wars sequels - instead of taking a finalized ending and building on it for a new thing, they "oops, it's not really fixed" and started a repeat all over again. And I liked TFA itself, I just didn't like where it led.
No, it was the Wachowkis saying “we don’t want WB making a Matrix movie without us. And, we don’t want another one so let’s make a forgettable turd.” The deal they signed said they had to make another movie or WB could make one without them. They made a crap movie on purpose.