The critics unload

Mark Caro, Chicago Tribune: “People will see ‘The Matrix Reloaded’ if only for a demonstration of what a megamillions budget and state-of-the-art special effects can buy. But although the technical aspects don’t disappoint, the human ones do. Action scenes can’t be heart-stopping if the story hasn’t gotten your ticker going to begin with.”

John Anderson, Newsday: “Being bulldozed by faux-tech double-talk is part of the sci-fi experience, and what ‘Matrix’ fans presumably want is action. There’s plenty. Too much, in fact.... [The Wachowski brothers’] action sequences become ludicrously long -- mirroring, in a way, the gassy dialogue.”

Todd McCarthy, Daily Variety: “Studded with remarkable action set pieces and graced with any number of felicitous performances.... But anticipation is so high, and the cultural attention span so fickle, it’s fair to wonder if reality can quite match the fantasy of expectation, especially since ‘Reloaded’ is more conventionally plotted, more reminiscent of other films and less novel and mysterious than its predecessor.”

Glenn Kenny, Premiere: “If you think the Grand Passion of Anakin Skywalker and Padme Amidala is hampered by limp dialogue and indolent execution, well, Neo and Trinity make those two look like Tristan and Isolde (or even Han Solo and Princess Leia) by comparison. Which wouldn’t matter if the Wachowskis hadn’t tried to go there. But they want so badly to go there that they undercut everything the people, who thought ‘The Matrix’ redefined cinema, found cool about it.”

Adam Gopnik, New Yorker: “The thing that made ‘The Matrix’ so creepy -- the idea of a sleeping human population with a secondary life in a simulated world -- is barely referred to in the new movie; in fact, if you hadn’t seen the first film, not just the action but the basic premise would be pretty much unintelligible.”

Kirk Honeycutt, Hollywood Reporter: “While upping the ante considerably in the action and effects department, storytelling stumbles frequently ... as the movie stops cold for philosophical digressions about fate and destiny and reality. These remind one ever so much of tortuous university lectures in symbolic logic.... “