Why V For Vendetta Is A Better Matrix Movie Than Resurrectio

V for Vendetta is a better spiritual successor to The Matrix trilogy than the fourth Matrix film thanks to its action, philosophy, and lead actor.

V for Vendetta was one of the Wachowskis' most beloved ventures after The Matrix trilogy, and it actually felt more like a classic Matrix movie than The Matrix Resurrections. The film starred Hugo Weaving as the eponymous V, alongside Natalie Portman as Evey Hammond. Despite The Matrix Resurrections continuing the legacy of the Wachowskis' most famous franchise, V for Vendetta felt more like a spiritual successor to The Matrix series than its fourth installment.

The Matrix Resurrections featured extensive changes to the established Matrix canon, including a machine civil war and a group of machines that joined the side of humanity.

Additionally, it focused far more on the love story between Neo and Trinity than any past entries. As a result, its action was toned down and its philosophical debates became more simplified, recycling the free will debate that was prevalent in the original trilogy. Additionally, Lana Wachowski's fourth Matrix movie referenced the former films heavily, even including entire shots and scenes from The Matrix and its two sequels in an attempt to recall important past events.

Despite its significant callbacks and links to previous Matrix films, The Matrix Resurrections felt like it was from an entirely different franchise. By contrast, V for Vendetta felt much more like a Wachowski sisters film (despite being only written and produced by them, and directed by James McTeigue), as opposed to Resurrections, which was clearly directed by Lana alone. The most notable difference was the films' focus on philosophy, which was a crucial part of both The Matrix trilogy and V for Vendetta. Resurrections still contained many philosophical debates, but they were never explored as well as they were in the original trilogy or V for Vendetta. As an adaptation of Alan Moore's famous graphic novel, V for Vendetta had a strong focus on analyzing the philosophy behind anarchism and fascism which was far more compelling than anything present in Resurrections.

The absence of Hugo Weaving went a long way to making Resurrections feel disparate from the Matrix trilogy. Jonathan Groff was a good choice to replace him as Agent Smith, but he ended up feeling like a completely different character who lacked Weaving's menacing delivery. As such, V for Vendetta actually felt more like a Matrix movie thanks to the charismatic presence of (a masked) Weaving as its lead anti-hero, V.

However, the main reason that V for Vendetta was a better Matrix movie than Resurrections was its action. The film's quick-paced and stylized choreography was reminiscent of the Wachowskis' work on The Matrix, as it turned V into a pseudo superhero in addition to a plotting anarchist. By contrast, critics noted that The Matrix Resurrections simply didn't provide the quality of action audiences were expecting from a Matrix movie. Kung fu scenes were stripped down and made fairly dull, and Neo most often deflected projectiles with his powers instead of actually fighting.

V for Vendetta remained a classic in the Wachowskis' filmography, and though the film had its critics, it was also beloved by many. The film represented the Wachowskis at their best, delivering high-concept philosophy with immensely satisfying action and a charismatic lead actor. Regrettably, though The Matrix Resurrections admirably tried new things, it was ultimately an inferior Matrix movie and lacked many elements commonly associated with the franchise: something V for Vendetta did not.