‘The Matrix’: A Waste of Time


Image courtesy of AP Images

Priyanka Chopra Jonas at the premiere of “The Matrix: Resurrections.”

Joel Garwood, Staff Writer

“The Matrix: Resurrections,” the newest and fourth installment of the beloved Matrix series, is a two-and-a-half-hour R-rated sci-fi/action film, directed by Lana Wachowski and released on Dec. 22 on HBO Max for stream. 

The film features Keanu Reeves (Thomas Anderson/Neo), Carrie-Anne Moss (Trinity/Tiffany), Jessica Henwick (Bugs), Priyanka Chopra (Sati), Jonathan Groff (Agent Smith), Jada Pinkett Smith (Niobe), Yahya Abdul Mateen II (Morpheus) and Neil Patrick Harris (The Analyst).

Warning: spoilers ahead.

The film is set 60 years after the events of “The Matrix: Revolutions,” the third installment of the series, which was released Nov. 5, 2003. The movie saw the return of around a dozen characters played by the original actors and snippets of previously used Matrix soundtracks. 

At the end of “The Matrix: Revolutions,” machines killed Neo, Agent Smith, Trinity and Morpheus. At the start of “The Matrix: Resurrections,” you learn that a program called The Analyst observed that Neo and Trinity were anomalies necessary to the Matrix’s program, so he brings them back to life.

Neo and Trinity are somehow kept alive for 60 years in unique pods in a facility called the Anomaleum; how they are kept alive is left unexplained. To make things more confusing, the pods slowed their aging to around 20 years.

Returning characters such as Niobe are still alive, but they age at a normal rate. If it’s been 60 years, then she’s at least in her mid-80s. The disparity in character age causes great confusion.

Morpheus and Agent Smith also make a mysterious and unexplained return, but the characters were cast as different actors, following the original casted actors’ deaths. The film failed to adequately explain why characters had different appearances.

Despite the overwhelming amount of holes in the plot, the film’s soundtrack, returning actors, costume design and fight scenes did give me a sense of nostalgia, but it wasn’t enough.

For a sequel two decades in the making, the 21st-century installment was disappointing. This movie will leave you wondering; is any of this necessary? 

This film was given a well-deserved 64% fresh of rotten tomatoes. I would rate it a 5/10; don’t waste two and half hours of your time.