The social media posting of "Matrix 4" has been lifted and an official review has been released. The overall consensus? Well, not much, except that the film will probably generate a lot of controversy. Don't worry about spoilers. But I think the early reactions give us an idea of the nature of the film we are about to see.

To use a term that has become the buzzword of 2021, "The Matrix: the Resurrected" sounds meta at best. Some will think that's a good thing, others will think it's a bad thing. As someone who saw (and liked) "Spider-Man: No Way Home," I can tell you that meta is not necessarily a bad thing. It's just a matter of how it's handled.

So, before Matrix 4 hits theaters this week, let's take a look at some early reactions to gauge expectations for the film (are you ready to see Matrix Resurrection online?). Also, if you've been confused by the reviews of Matrix 4, check out our guide to the Matrix films.

In The Guardian, Peter Bradshaw gives The Matrix Resurrections a 2 out of 5 star rating. And he is quick to give it a negative review, saying, "A limp reboot that offers no compelling reason for its existence other than to snatch a fourth revenue stream from Matrix fans."

And while I wasn't expecting innovation, it's sad to hear that Matrix 4 "has nothing approaching the breathtaking 'bullet-time' action sequences... The sense of anticlimax that clouded cinema audiences at the end of the third film in 2003 is not so much in "Resurrection" as it is in It doesn't remove it."

The film is set up to launch a possible new series, but there is no real creative life in it." As someone who has just seen "Matrix Revolutions," this is disconcerting. Bradshaw's positives are few and far between, including "creative touches (e.g., the very funny name of the VR coffee shop)" and "some degree of charm as a middle-aged love story."

In The Hollywood Reporter, John DeFore describes "The Matrix Reservoirs" as "the kind of sequel Hollywood wants most - essentially the same as its predecessor, with enough novelty to justify its existence - but a constant rehash of a familiar story It is, he explains, "something that thinks it can be reconciled with the industry's need for constant rehashing, while giving in to or ridiculing the industry's need for rehashing. [13] [14] In Polygon, Joshua Rivera writes, "The opening of The Matrix Reservoirs is wonderfully disorienting, a delicious way to recreate the inorganic unreality of the original for an audience that has probably seen or felt its influence countless times writes, "The film is a delicious way to recreate the inorganic unreality of the original. Yes, this compliment doesn't exactly sound like a ringing endorsement. But here's another line from Rivera: "Besides, it's also a kick-ass piece of sci-fi action, propulsive, gorgeous, and yet accessible. [15] [16] Entertainment Weekly's review by Joshua Roskoff gives the film a B+." The line, "A redo that doesn't share enough surprises, but is still very enjoyable," is met with a mixture of praise and concern. If you're in it for the romance, you may be the happiest person in the audience. Rothkopf says, "But 'Resurrection' surpasses its predecessor in authentic, kick-in-the-chest romance: the silence is pleasant, Reeves and Moss lean into an adult intimacy that is rare in blockbusters and more thrilling than any roof jump (although it's also pretty great)." [17] [18] Let's get the hate out of the way. Film critic Kevin Lee called the film "very flawed. It's long, boring, and full of exposition. As a ticket holder, I'm concerned about it.

Dave Chen also said, "#TheMatrixResurrections was a disappointment. " And while he was not entirely negative, it is this line that worries me about the film: 'But the lack of stakes in this film is fatal, and worse, its plot undermines what was accomplished in the OG trilogy."

Even more dislike was expressed by Walter Chow.

More dislike came from Walter Chau, who declared the film "hot garbage."

But don't give up hope. Film critic Lendy Jones called the film "the 22 Jump Street of Matrix sequels." Yet he also praised it as "cheekily meta, outrageously violent, and with a beautifully romantic plot at its core,"

Lana Woschowski's "best sci-fi romance film to date." And this builds my anticipation for the film and makes me understand why the negative reviews might have been so. In a world where meta-filmmaking, especially casting that shatters the cinematic universe of "Spider-Man: The House That Never Returns," is possible, and where other films practically shatter the fourth wall, not everyone enjoys movies.

Yeah, I worried about rewatching the entire "Matrix" films first. Jones didn't, and in another tweet he said, "It's actually great. Ugh. Loved it soooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo much.

Similarly, there is a deleted tweet (posted before the social media embargo was lifted) by Jacob Knight (via Reddit), where he - positively - compares "Matrix 4" to Wes Craven's "New Nightmare". In case you've forgotten, why does it resemble the ultra-meta horror film from 1994 (with a Rotten Tomatoes score of 80%)? Knight said it was a "meta-mirror of a culture that demands/dissects IP-driven reboot sequels to revolutionary sci-fi films. It's suitably gorgeous, raunchy, vulgar, romantic, and has at least three chills-inducing moments. And, using a bit of profanity, he emphatically declares, "I love it."

Now, I don't know about you, but some of those very positive reactions sound like a movie that (I repeat) many people don't want. It's too meta, too complicated.

But Knight enjoyed the film, and it seems that Lana Woschowski has threaded the most complicated needle. I look forward to seeing "Matrix Resurrection" next week on HBO Max (one of the best streaming services).