Critics’ reviews

The Matrix Revolutions (2003)

11 reviews from 11 publications. Critics’ score 46: 0 positive, 6 mixed, 5 negative.

Back to our review of The Matrix Revolutions

46
Positive
0
Mixed
6
Negative
5

The consensus leans towards disappointment, with the reviews divided between mixed and negative assessments rather than outright enthusiasm. Praise clusters around the visual effects and the staging of the siege of Zion, which several critics find exciting even when the surrounding story fails to engage them. The more receptive reviews see a stronger second half after a tedious opening, while Hugo Weaving’s performance earns a favourable mention from Total Film.

The main reservations concern confusing or weak plotting, drawn-out action and a conclusion that offers too little dramatic satisfaction. The sharpest disagreement concerns whether the spectacle supplies enough emotional involvement: Slant Magazine finds affecting collective human drama in Zion’s defence, whereas The Guardian finds the battles dull and the ideas exhausted. Even the warmer assessments retain substantial caveats, particularly about the spiritual allegory and the romance; the divide is over how much the film salvages, not whether it fully succeeds.

RogerEbert.com
64*

The page is blocked, so the critic’s verdict cannot be verified. No praise or complaint can be reliably identified from the available text.

Read the full review →
Screen Daily
3 November 2003 · Mike Goodridge
64*

The accessible page identifies this as Mike Goodridge’s review, but the paywall conceals his verdict. No specific element praised or criticized is visible.

Read the full review →
The New York Times
5 November 2003 · A. O. Scott
64*

The URL identifies a review of the film, but the page content is inaccessible. Its verdict and any specific praise or complaint cannot be verified.

Read the full review →
Slant Magazine
1 November 2003 · ★★½/4 · Ed Gonzalez
62

Gonzalez finds the first half rough but says the film becomes an exciting, emotionally engaging spectacle. He praises the collective human drama beneath Zion’s battle, while criticizing the heavy-handed spiritual allegory and the unconvincing romance between Neo and Trinity.

Read the full review →
Radio Times
★★★ · Jason Caro
60

Caro finds the first half tedious but says the film gets the trilogy back on track in its second half. He especially praises the technically and artistically impressive siege of Zion.

Read the full review →
Total Film
5 November 2003 · ★★★ · Total Film
60

The review finds the finale an average sci-fi film that falls short of its promised revelations and spectacle. It praises Hugo Weaving’s performance, while faulting the drawn-out action and weak plotting.

Read the full review →
Empire
1 January 2000 · William Thomas
30*

Thomas finds the finale a solid but disappointing genre offering that narrows the original’s broad appeal. He praises the exciting Sentinel attack on Zion, while faulting its focus on secondary characters and the story’s dependence on outside material.

Read the full review →
The Guardian
7 November 2003 · Peter Bradshaw
25*

Bradshaw considers the film a disappointing, lumbering conclusion to the trilogy. He praises flashes of the directors’ old flair, especially the surreal train-platform sequence and nightclub fight, but says the battle scenes are dull and the film runs out of ideas.

Read the full review →
Time Out
· NB
25*

The review is sharply negative, finding the film glib and self-reflexive. It singles out Keanu Reeves’s continued befuddlement as part of the problem.

Read the full review →
Variety
2 November 2003 · Todd McCarthy
25*

McCarthy judges the finale a deflating and dramatically unsatisfying end to the trilogy. He praises its visual imagination and spectacular effects, while faulting its plotting, dialogue, and lack of meaningful resolution.

Read the full review →
Eye for Film
6 November 2003 · Angus Wolfe Murray
25*

The critic finds the story incoherent and the film a disappointing, overblown conclusion to the trilogy. They praise the Zion battle sequence as magnificently staged, while criticizing the lack of humor and the film’s confusing plot.

Read the full review →

Ordered by the weight we give each publication, then by score. Scores are normalised to 100; * means inferred from an unrated review. Summaries are ours, not quotations; follow the links for the reviews themselves. How we rate