After "Reloaded" and "Revolutions" I knew that the odds were better than good that "Resurrections" was going to be awful. Still, I went against my better judgment and went to see it. Part of it has to do with a false hope and part of it has to do with the dearth of movies to watch in theater.
The movie is called "Resurrections" because "duh," Neo (Keanu Reeves) is resurrected along with Trinity (Carrie-Anne Moss). I won't even go into the ridiculous mumbo jumbo spouted out to explain their resurrection. It all made as much sense as the Architect did in "Revolutions." Just know that Neo was magically back as was Trinity. Morpheus (Yahya Abdul Mateen) was back in some cyborg manner and Agent Smith (Jonathan Groff) was a younger version. I think it's telling that both Laurence Fishburne and Hugo Weaving were not a part of this project. I think they saw the script and thought better of having such a stain on their resumes.
You know a movie is bad when they spoof themselves within the movie. You'll occasionally see that in vapid sequels that are fresh out of ideas such as Scream 3 and 4 or "New Nightmare" (A Nightmare on Elm Street 6). In the beginning of "Resurrections" Neo was back to being Thomas Anderson. He was a game designer who had designed a game called "The Matrix." Basically, the three previous Matrix movies were all just designs of his. His coworkers spent way too much screen time discussing what the Matrix was supposed to mean and what a new Matrix video game should be. It was quite pathetic seeing the movie try so hard to make it seem like everything that had occurred was all Mr. Anderson's imagination. It was a forced plot if there ever was one.
To further drive home that the movie wasn't going to generate anything fresh and new, there were frequent insertions of scenes from Matrixes past. There were probably a dozen or more clips from the older movies thrust into "Resurrections" to either refresh the viewer's memory or add content that was actually good. All that does is denigrate the movie at hand because you're constantly being reminded of how good it was. It's as if the production team gave up already and conceded that what people yearn for is the original but we will never be able to amount to that, so here are some clips from the original as a supplement. Even the way the archive footage was shoehorned in there showed a lack of creativity or concern.
I could rant on about the putridness of this movie, but what would be the point? It was long, slow, boring, talkative, emotionless, and unexciting. Nothing about it was new, fresh, or stimulating. The fighting was the same as were the outfits and copious bullets fired. This movie was just a stale remake dressed as a sequel, but I deserved what I got because I knew better.