Home
search
more | tips

Main Boards | Help | Terms & Conditions
New User | Log In
IMDbPro Message Boards

You love movies and TV. You're a great software developer. So remind me why you aren't working at IMDb.com?



Board: Marcus Chong



Subject Posted by Date    
Matrix Sequels
  by triskela   (Mon Jul 4 2005 07:08:29)
Ignore this User | Report Abuse Reply

Marcus Chong was sorely missed by me in the Matrix sequels. It was one of the first things I didn't like about Reloaded - the minute I realized Chong was out, I thought "Uh oh..."

I don't know Chong, nor do I know how reasonable or unreasonable his dealings with the filmmakers were. What I do know is that these movies made everyone rich and I also know that they could have made a slightly better set of films with Chong included in the sequels. They lost the actress playing the oracle (not a contract dispute, but an untimely death...sadly) and that was a significant blow also. They needed every continuity aid they could lay hands to, I began to feel the breaking of the fourth wall very palpably and I think others did to. The illusion began to fail and my faculty for suspension of disbelief was pushed to its limits.

I heard the dispute arose over $250,000. What did such an amount really mean to the makers of the Matrix since they were awash in money? When I heard that amount was the basis of the dispute, I was pretty disheartened to realize that those made fabulously wealthy were not apparently inclined to share the wealth with those that were at least partly responsible for everyone's financial success. That seems a shame. Greed should not rule over artists in this way, even though I understand that filmmaking is also a business. But like I said, everyone was rolling in money anyway. They had the money to spare.

Somewhere else someone mentioned the Crispin Glover and Back to the Future sequels mess. It's important to remember that Glover won that dispute. If the makers of a movie don't want to pay someone's asking price to make a movie, then they don't get to use his likeness or mannerisms either. And hey, continuity of that type matters to some of us. These actors are not just cogs in a big machine, they are possessed of unique gifts and attributes and deserve compensation commensurate with what everyone else is earning with these blockbuster successes.

Is there some reason these Hollywood *beep* can't share the wealth?

Marcus Chong was not a background character - he was one of the key players in the first movie. He was Neo's trainer and everyone's main support while they were in the Matrix. He actually had a lot of screen time and I think the audiences liked him a lot. A lot of the audiences responses were suggested by Chong's performance - he was our surrogate audience member in the movie. He wasn't a main actor on the stage of the Matrix itself, he was the guy back aboard ship watching it all on the computer screens. Kinda like us watching it on the big screen. Filmmakers use characters like that very purposefully - when they smile, we smile; when they wince, so do we. The audience identified very closely with Tank.

That's an important role; but you have to understand the role to see how important it was to the overall success of the first film.
Re: Matrix Sequels imdb-579   (Sat Aug 13 2005 06:00:27)
Re: Matrix Sequels LadyDi2U   (Thu Aug 18 2005 04:22:46)
Re: Matrix Sequels eddy77   (Fri Sep 9 2005 16:20:23)
Re: Matrix Sequels jason_alan   (Mon Jul 14 2008 08:39:32)
Re: Matrix Sequels derekwilliams1974   (Mon Jul 14 2008 09:02:59)
Re: Matrix Sequels JimmyZappa   (Wed Mar 8 2006 09:33:52)
Re: Matrix Sequels Geeky Randy   (Wed Sep 21 2005 11:51:44)
Re: Matrix Sequels imdb0291   (Tue Oct 11 2005 13:53:13)
[Post deleted] deleted



 
 


Back to the top