The first Matrix, released in 1999, grossed $180 million in North America.

Being one of the most eagerly awaited of movies -- a sequel to an enormously popular film -- there was no question The Matrix Reloaded would open big on Thursday.

Though the new film, which received less than stellar reviews compared to the original Matrix, disappointed some moviegoers especially because of its abrupt ending, many Hollywood experts think it will gross about $700 million worldwide. The original film grossed about $450 million worldwide.

The science fiction thriller surpassed last year's smash hit Spider-Man that grossed $39.4 million on its opening day, which was a Friday. Over the weekend, the comic book adaptation, grossed $114 million. Matrix Reloaded, which opened on Wednesday night and was seen by millions who had waited several hours to get tickets, is expected to gross $85 million to $90 million over the weekend. If its Wednesday haul is added, its four-day gross could be higher than what Spider-Man took in four days last year.

 Matrix Reloaded, the film about a group of daring humans battling a machines-dominated illusionary world, has perhaps the most hair-raising and spectacular action scenes ever devised on screen.

Though many die-hard Matrix fans are ecstatic about the new film, industry veterans are concerned about its repeat value. For the film to be a giant hit, it should be seen not just twice but several more times by a significant number of people, especially if it has to fly beyond the $400 million domestic gross Spider-Man grossed in America (about $820 million worldwide).

The new movie stars Keanu Reeves, Laurence Fishburne and Carrie-Anne Moss and is directed by the Wachowski brothers, who were also responsible for the first film.

One reason the new movie ends abruptly is because its sequel, The Matrix Revolutions, which was shot back to back with the current film, opens in November. This is the first time a sequel of a big budget film has followed the original in about six months.

Many critics who admired the first film complained about the follow-up venture.

The '...storytelling stumbles frequently as the movie stops cold for philosophical digressions about fate and destiny and reality,' wrote Kirk Honeycutt in the Hollywood Reporter.

Kenneth Turan complained in The Los Angeles Times that the movie, which cost about $120 million (nearly twice the budget of the original) 'lacks emotional power and doesn't live up to its predecessor.'

While Roger Ebert declared in the Chicago Sun-Times the film is 'an immensely skillful sci-fi adventure,' another admirer wrote he could not feel as enthusiastic about it as with the first. 'While it's exhilarating fun,' Lou Lumenick wrote in the New York Post, 'as an overall piece of storytelling, this reboot never really hits the heights of the ultra-cool The Matrix.'