“If we shadows have offended, think but this, and all is mended. That you have but slumbered here, while these visions did appear, and this weak and idle theme, no more yielding but a dream. Gentles, do not reprehend. If you pardon, we will mend. And as I’m an honest Puck, if you have unearned luck, now to scape the serpent’s tongue, we shall make amends ere long. Give me your hands, if we be friends, and Robin shall restore amends.”
I wanted to write a long thing about The Matrix Trilogy. I wanted to really get lost in its mythology, its characters, the style it uses, the art, the story, symbolisms, references and all the stuff that makes my brain go all gooey when I get into geek mode. I wanted to try and convey how much I loved and still love all of the movies and the mythology built up around it. And I wanted to try and explain to you, how much this series has meant to me, my craft and my future doings.
But I won’t.
I won’t because quite frankly it isn’t worth the effort. I could write a book about it and it wouldn’t make a lick of difference because the verdict is in and it’s not looking good. At least not to the favor of The Matrix. In fact it looks like a deliberate lynching.
And I don’t understand why.
I like movies. Okay. A lot.
And while comparisons of this and that could be made, comparing it to art, music, history, philosophy, religion etc. I won’t play charades. I love movies because they give me context and pleasure. That’s it. That’s all there is to it.
When I was a kid I first saw the likes of Cameron’s classics The Terminator and Aliens. I am sure that many of you had the same experience as me, in that these movies, like the Star Wars trilogy, somehow managed to live on inside your head. They transported us into that dropship and into that trench. They made us fight for our lives and dream of a world where our lives had a meaning; the fight for freedom.
What I saw on that screen Wednesday night was the logical conclusion to that childhood dream. It was all that I had built up since I was a kid, and to me it was all that that I had made it up to be. This was it, the dark future. This was where mankind had to make its last stand against the machines, the aliens and all the other nasty things that go ‘klang’ in the night.
This had all the fear, desperation, hatred, love and pure kinetic energy that I would ever had expected from it. This was the trench run of A New Hope, the Hoth battle from Empire, the race to the core of the Deathstar from Jedi, the last 20 minutes of Terminator, the last 40 minutes of T2, the last stand in Aliens, the opening of Saving Private Ryan, Bits and pieces of The Longest Day and so on, all rolled up into one.
When I see the complete picture of everything that The Matrix currently encompasses I see a fantastic canvas of modern science-fiction. And I wish I could show that canvas to the people who don’t appreciate it in the same way that I do. I wish I could make you see; make you appreciate what this is, what significance this has. But that’s like explaining the punch line of an in-joke; it’ll destroy the intention.
I have a few regrets. First of all I wish I had someone to share my joy with. I think I blinked three times while in the cinema, my knuckles where white from clenching my legs and my smile was pretty much chiseled in concrete the rest of the night. I wish I could share that with my friends.
Secondly I wish that the average reviewer put as much back, sweat and tears into their work as I do when I get really worked up. I spent probably around 5 – 6 hours writing the Kill Bill entry from the other day, and it’s not even a finished piece. Having shuffled through tens and tens of online reviews I think I can safely say that some of these ‘reviewers’ failed to spend more than 5 – 10 minutes on their ‘reviews’. And that’s including the résumé of the movie, as pointless as that is. Should they do that, then perhaps they would find that they can discover new things about the movies through writing. When I walked out of the cinema from watching Kill Bill I was pretty non-plussed, it took a lot of consideration to reach my final conclusion and it took some determination to reach the final entry. All I ask of them is to love movies as much as their readers. Or weave the space for someone who does. That is if nothing else, the only reason why I still have some respect for Ain’t It Cool News. At least it’s genuine.
Oh yes. One more thing. If I see one more pun with the use of ‘re’-something or the use of such idiotic terms as Wa-chew-ski (as in “They bit off more than they could Wa-chew-ski”), then I don’t know what I’ll do. It pains me to know that these peoples opinions are taken seriously and that they often actually receive payment for what they do.
The Matrix franchise was never a series that aimed for the general public. Magically it managed to become a raging success and that led people to believe that this was a movie for them. Well it wasn’t. It’s for us. It’s for the people who love the poses, the movements, the references and all that other stuff that the general public fails to notice anyway. It’s for the people who bothered to watch the Animatrix from beginning till end. It’s for the people who see the canvas, the people who dreamed a dream when they were kids and the people who wear their geeks on their collar.
And if that makes me an arrogant fuck, a pathetic geek, a fucking fanboy or a sorry loser then so be it.
The Matrix Has Me.
Boy, you sure are coming in aggressively, hopes it helps you run of some steam ;)
I dont really understand your post. How can you both say that this movie is not for you, and still be pissed of by the bad reviews from people it was not for?
Actually there are some of us out here that where kind of looking forward to yur rewiew of the movie…..get writing you lazy git!!
I´m going to see it once more thursday, to soak it all up, ponder and then make up my mind. (actually i´m bringing a friend…she thought it sucked, but I told her “You gotta look better than that!” and she agreed to go watch it once more.
I didn´t do that, I judt borrowed your words….Get bback in the game! A proud geek, would write this stuff for his fellow geeks…not to change other peoples oppinion. We are geeks…resistance is futile!
Simon.
Amen.
Kudos on a great rant. I couln’t agree more.
And of course in bitter sweet irony for all of us that understand exactly what you’re feeling, there are those who don’t. And it’s those people who are out there making their opinion known about how horrible the conclusion was, and how this didn’t happen, or how that didn’t make sense, or how that other thing was a cop-out, how there wasn’t enough fighting, or too much fighting, or not enough philosophy, blah blah blah.
Here’s the reality of it all. It’s a story. And except for two people on this planet, YOU DIDN’T WRITE IT. Do you still want to pass judgement? Then go write a better story that has the ending you want, the plot you want, and the twists your mind can grasp. But you won’t because you’re not creative enough to come up with a fraction of the ideas and concepts in this story. On top of that you’re dedication is limited to the 8 bucks and 2 hours you’ll spend watching things get kung fu and a bunch of stuff get blown up.
If this was published as a book before it was created as a set of films, there’d be a fraction of these people out there giving their criticism, because none of them would have read it. And we’d all be saying, ‘The movies are great, but the books even better.’ This is something i take pride in when it comes to the Lord of the Rings. The fact is that if you read the books, you get it. If you didn’t bother, well then I won’t waste my time trying to explain.
And that’s the same way i feel about the Matrix. If you didn’t bother to spend a couple minutes of your time on thinking about the questions, topics, and possibilities that this story poses, then I’m not gonna waste any of my time explaining it to you.
You know, after reading that I wish someone would explain it to me, because I just don’t get it at all. My first reaction was, “you’ve got to be kidding me?!?!” and then I thought about it and tried to understand how these movies and universe could have an effect like that on someone who seems to have similar tastes to my own.
I mean I didn’t like any of the Matrix films all that much. They were alright, but they didn’t seem too original to me and well I don’t know… They were just alright. The thing is, I’m pretty sure I get what they’re all about and I still don’t have any feeling beyond “eh, that was pretty cool.” Thus the 15 minutes I spent on my review…
I never did get all the hype behind these movies in the first place. I always thought it was some kind of bad reaction to how bad the new Star Wars movies were and nothing more than that.
Anyway, to each his own I guess and you know what they say about opinions…
I just wanted to post to say that this was a great entry.
Mike, not everyone is going to like the same movies that you like. For your own health I think you should just accept this :) I’ve already accepted that you didn’t like Kill Bill (or, at least, not as much as I did) :)
And (you knew it was coming), I disagree. I haven’t seen Revolutions, so I’ll avoid commenting on that, but I have seen Reloaded, and you know what I thought of that film.
You ascertain that in order to “get” the two new films we need to have seen The Animatrix. Fuck that. When you make a movie, it’s OK to throw in references to other things, but you shouldn’t base the audience’s enjoyment of the film on some ancillary crap.
I loved The Matrix. When I eventually got around to getting a DVD player, The Matrix was one of the first DVDs I bought. And, to me, The Matrix: Reloaded was a slap in the face.
The editing wasn’t as good as the first film. The cinematography wasn’t either. The writing was flat out horrible in some parts, and so was the acting (maybe the Wachowski’s should’ve spent more time and energy working on Reloaded and Revolutions and less on little side projects like the tie-in games, The Animatrix, and so on). The fight scenes and action sequences were tame in comparison to their counterparts in the first film. The plot twists felt forced and out of place. In several scenes, the VFX weren’t up to par with what we saw in the first film, despite the fact that Reloaded came out four years after the original. More importantly, the individual pieces just didn’t fit together very well in my oppinion.
I appreciate the subtexts in Reloaded. Really, I do. But they alone don’t make a film.
Great fucking post, Michael. Thank you!
Rask: What? I think you might’ve read this wrong.
Simon: I will, I’m just gathering steam :) — Also I need a copy of Revolutions to properly tie it all up into a nice little package.
Keith: I will take that as a challenge. I’ll see if I can’t tie it in with my review of Revolutions for Simon. But remember “I can only show you the door, you’re the one that has to walk through it.”
Sean, obviously I knew that your post (or at least one similar to it) would be coming along. Our movie tastest are the second-most non-compatible tastes that I have ever had the misfortune of having to try and defend. And I don’t mean that in a nasty way, just that while I have great respect for your skills (you’re obviously very knowledgable about movies), you (like me) have a tendency to believe that if you think things are ‘yellow’, then goddammit things are yellow and nobody is going to tell you otherwise.
Then along comes a movie which says: Things aren’t yellow, they’re green; and you have to decide if you’re willing to ‘swallow the red pill’ so to speak… And you haven’t. You’re still in wonderland; and there’s nothing wrong with that, you just don’t know how to appreciate the Matrix franchise.
I haven’t swallowed the pill that’ll allow me to enjoy Robert Altman movies, but apparently someone has. And while I would like nothing more than to say that his movies are utter crap, I realize that maybe I’m not seeing something.
Which brings us right back to Heilemann’s Law of YMMV… Ahhh, a greater plan is emerging.
Because of this I already answered all your criticisms in the entry. Call it a preemptive strike against people who are like me, but with different tastes.
I’ll save the whole discussion about the VFX, the acting, the plots and so on and so forth until a later time (Though there are some opinions here). Understand that I certainly don’t pronounce Reloaded/Revolutions the all-time king of movies; they have many flaws. But as I said in the entry, and it bears repeating over and over and over till everyone understands that just because this happened to see grand-scale international release, The Matrix might not be their movie.
Everyone Else: Thank you for your time and your comments, I am always happy to know that there are others that feel like me; makes me feel less like an outcast ;)
… I think you’ve might written it wrong …
No, I’m pretty sure that what it says in the entry is exactly what I wanted to say. It after all took me 2 days to write it and about 10 read-through’s before I hesitantly hit the post key.
I agree with you to a certain extent, but revolutions was really a disappointment in my opinion. I watched every damn matrix story and this ending was really slipshot.
The Matrix Revolutions is the perfect film to complete the trilogy. It reveals the ignorance of the critics and masses (read Plato). The Matrix success is that it awaken the psyches (Greek for soul) of many who watch it repeatedly and found that they where keen to concepts of philosophy and metaphysics.
The responsible was therefore left to the individual to study and prepare themselves to be worthy of the effort made primarily to the content. But what effort did you bring, did you read your bible, did you read Plato, did you read Russell, did you read the Prince of Machiavelli, did you read 100 pages this year of any classic philosophy or did you just watch the movie hoping the answer would be spoon feed to you. Remember there is no spoon.
Everyone will agree that the special effects are spectacular but it is the narrative that gives the trilogy its depth and texture.
Ask yourself what do you know of the relationship of yin and yang and how does it play within the structure of the film. Which one is dark and which one is light, which one is feminine and which one is masculine. Do you use these concepts in your own life to be the good man (read Plato dialogue of Socrates). If you have, you will understand what I have written, if you have not then please learn to be wise and speak only when spoken to.
Amen and amen. I can’t wait to read your official review when you get it posted. For all the critics that can’t bother to actually invest themselves in a movie experience (as the Matix must be an experience to fully appreciate it), I wish they could have even a tenth of the appreciation for good film making and use of non-western philosophy, story-telling, and general wisdom. You’re not a fanboy. Fanboys are mindless drones who clasp onto the latest and greatest to simply seem important and hip. You are squarely in the know when it comes to these films. Not many people give credit to Asimov for his vison either, as the Brothers W. will have in their own time. Bravo to those that do see this story for what it is.
While you’re certainly entitled to your elitist attitude, WinTime, you seem to miss the point that the other two movies were in fact popular and this one was not. Since they are all dealing with the same subject, and all part of the same canvas, something has changed from movie one and two to movie three.
As well, it strikes me as odd that the masses appreciation of the original Matrix was not berated by the hard core fans, despite the fact that little Lisa, AL, did not read her bible, her Machiavelli or her Russell.
I have read most of your little checklist and I still think the movie sucks. May I suggest you read The Emperor’s New Clothes (H. C. Andersen), if your vast lust for books hasn’t brought you to it already.
Just because a movie deals with these issues does not mean it deals with them well. And just because a movie requires knowledge before appreciation does not mean the story is well told or worth listening to in the first place.
Besides, if anyone is looking for their philosophical fix from a Wachowski movie, I would urge them to look again. I certainly don’t hope the brothers’ required that their audience would check up on the subjects you suggest before appreciating their films. Considering the intellectual capacity of the competition this movie faces, I would deem that an unwise choice indeed.
It always strikes me as funny how fans clasp on to the opinions of critics when they coincide with their own, and how they immediately rebuke reviews when they do not. WinTime, I detest your judgement of me merely because my opinions are not in line with yours, and I detest the implications it has for democracy.
With that being said, I will be the first to admit that I have not spent every single hour of my life thinking about these films, and naturally a higher appreciation of the films’ smaller details would manifest should I choose to do so. But ultimately, the fault of this latest movie is that it has not made me desire to do so.
If you want an audience you need to speak their language.
Dude, I can totally relate with what you said. I’m one of those nerds/geeks/etc. that like to LIVE out their movies (e.g., Matrix, Star Wars, Indiana Jones, The Goonies, etc.). Anyways, props for your article. I didn’t know exactly what to tell my girlfriend how I felt about the Matrix Trilogy, mainly Revolutions, but you put my feelings into word form perfectly. Thanks.
I’ll have to lean towards Bjørn on this. While I disagree that “If you want an audience you need to speak their language.” (rather I think it should be “If you want to be the audience, you should speak it’s language”), I do think you’re making too much of it.
I believe that most of the ‘philosophical riddles/questions’ can be solved (to the extend that you can solve such a thing) within the context of the movie. While furter reading might give you a greater insight into the subject, you should really be asking yourself why you didn’t just skip the movie and go straight to the book…
Do yourselves a favor and read what I wrote, not what you wanted it to say.
As for the Goonies… Well let’s just say that Spielberg has been involved in productions across the scale :)
WinTime: While you can make the perfectly valid argument, that one may find a deeper understanding of the Matrix Trilogy in reading Platos Allegory of the Cave or various dialogs, Russell’s paradox or some of his other works, Machiavellis Prince, The Art of War or Discourses on Livy, The Holy Bible or elaborate thinking about yin, yang, light, darkness and why Donald Duck only feels naked when his torso is without clothes – I just think You are bluffing!
But hey – maybe I just don’t get You!
Personally I think everyone should read this if they want everything out of the Matrix.
Sorry, Bjorn, but WinTime clearly told you to shut the fuck up unless spoken to if you didn’t understand what he wrote. And clearly you didn’t or you would have agreed with him… innit?
And Bjorn – please learn to be wise.
Nice to see that someone in here keeps the peace. That’s very thoughtful of you Jens.
First, congratulations Mike on a web site well done. You have accomplished what many web sites do not, a place for individuals to participate in the exchange of ideas. Secondly, it seems I have started something and therefore, I will make every attempt to continue the conversation. I live by one rule for debate, attack the idea not the individual, if I break this rule please like me know so I may adjust my writing style.
I have just returned from a walk and mediation in the woods with Bonnie my yellow lab dog. In a Zen moment, the thought that this might be a good week to fast came to mind. I then realized that I still had a big piece of my 46th birthday cake still in the fridge. So in the sprit of the great big Buda, I will fast on my chocolate cream cheese cake this week. (Lol)
In this post, I will response to Bjorn statement, “If you want an audience you need to speak their language.” That is simply crap. A great narrative can never aim for the lowest denominator but must always strive to reach the highest.
Two of my favorite books are Brave New Worlds and 1984. All books that I have taken the energy to find (or maybe they find me) and then read, become references to be used in my personal quest for knowledge). If you have read these books, I recommend Brave New Worlds Revisited, written by Aldous Huxley in 1958, in which he congratulates George Orwell for his 1984 work. In Revisited, Huxley compares the two models and concludes why he believes the future will be more Brave than Fearful.
I will refer to 1984 and the premise of Newspeak. I have concluded from my environment, that the masses (both the educated and uneducated) live in a world of self-imposed Newspeak. While the English language expands, the masses have chosen to limit there knowledge to words only. The masses have stopped long ago in making any effort to understanding and connection of what each word means. (The references to English is two fold, it is my mother tongue and the language that I am trying to master, with limited success0.
The powerful scene in which the audience learns and is awaken to the fact that there is no spoon is the personal knowledge that in the real world the label (the concept) is not the physical thing. This single awaking challenges the individual to reexamine their personal construct. However, in truthfulness how many of the masses, who where awaken by this event accepted the challenge. I do not think many of the critics did but what do I know.
In short, Newspeak is about communicating with fewer words and not more. Learning requires energy and the study of words and meaning. We live in a world where the masses will buy their children or themselves an Xbox or Play Station for $200 US. Both kids and adults will Amuse Themselves to Death (Neil Postman / Roger Waters) playing games and in the words of XXX, come on Dick, it’s the only education we got. However, ask them to purchase the Oxford Shorten Dictionary (My version is two volumes with some 4000 pages and is one of my prized possessions, given to me by my mentor).
In short, short are you FUCKEN NUTS spend $200 US for a Dictionary, and make it a key reference point in the individual quest for knowledge. Come on Dick, we serve the pleasure principal why read the book when we can pop in the DVD.
I do not know if I made myself clear but that’s all I have to say about that.
TO Bjorn
After re-reading your post, you verified my position in your first sentenced with the universal knowledge that Truth Is Never Popular. The masses will never understand the Matrix Trilogy unless they dedicate themselves to non profit study that first feeds the soul and secondly is shared for well fair of others.
Sorry – when I saw Morpheus standing shirtless before the drealocked hordes, arms raised like Moses on Mt. Sinai, shouting: “PEOPLE OF ZION HEAR MEEEEEEE!!!!!!!” I knew it was the death knell for the series. Everything from that point on was a patchwork of scenes rehashed from other sci-films, from Blade Runner to Aliens. Even the famous highway chase reminded me of a less realistic Terminator 2. Reloaded and Revolutions are good action films – but the first Matrix told us that this series would be more than that. The first Matrix revolutionized the genre so effectively that the next two films seemed tired and old hat, with overused gimmicks and outright cliches.
I feel the same way you do about this series. It’s an awesome trilogy and not just because “the fight scenes were cool.” I don’t understand the bashing. I think it’s nearly impossible to accurately review a movie after one viewing and especially if it’s written in the same day you saw it. But that is an industry. People need to know a quick thumbs up or down to spend $10 on this or get a ticket for the Bear instead. With that kind of time restraints, I’m not surprised. Matrix is a great story and I am very happy that BB was able to put into words what I couldn’t. Maybe the bad reviews is exactly what the W. Bros needed for this, kinda takes the air out of the expectations. Time will tell that this is a great set of movies. Kill Bill rocked too. Cheers.
WinTime: Isn’t it Brave New World ?
BlameBush: (I do) What exactly did you expect? I’m curious.
Yes your point is well taken Michael.
PS I am sure you can find other errors in spelling, grammar and in style.
Happy Birthday WinTime.
Unfortunately I still remain unconvinced that the reason Matrix: Revolutions was hammered by critics was that they had not read the, by now rather large, list of books suggested by you.
I do not want to participate in a “Look! My philosophical penis is bigger than yours”-debate, so I will leave your Newspeak references as they are.
I do, however, wish to protest against the notion that Truth is Never Popular. Incidently, the idea of 2 + 2 = 4 seems quite popular to me. Instead I venture that “Truth is Never Popular” is most often used as an easy defence for not explaining a point any better than what it already is.
I’m also quite surprised that my statement “If you want an audience, you need to speak its language” is taken as an advocate for aiming low. I certainly agree that you should take your point as “high” as possible for the audience you’re speaking to, but WinTime and I seem to disagree where “high” is defined.
With that being said, I think no amount of books will help me get over…
1) The snot-nosed college kid who proves himself
2) The politically correct female team saving Zion
3) The fact that Neo is connected to The Source (huh?) so that he can control machines by thought alone
4) The “not in the matrix, not in the real world” train station, which by logical reasoning must be the cables. (The Cables Has You)
5) Bad guys jumping to the ceiling for the sake of it
6) The girl (well, program) who magically, and unexplained, survives Smith on a rampage
7) The corny dialog
8) The acting, oh the horrible, horrible acting (Let’s just say Trinity’s death scene isn’t exactly playing to Keanu Reeves’ strength as an actor)
… to name but a few problems that I had with the movie. Now, in a different mood, with different expectations, and with a mind blank from the two other Matrix movies, this one might have impressed me somewhat, at least by way of the visual effects alone.
But no matter high much high-flying philosophical backdrop you provide for this movie, it was meant to entertain … and to most of the people who went and paid for the ticket, it did not.
I applaud Michael’s post, as it is more a post of desperation over the fact that he cannot make other people see what he sees. But my original protest still stands: The fact that Matrix: Revolutions received a less enthusiastic welcome that the first Matrix has absolutely nothing to do with their lack of reading time.
In my opinion, it has instead something to do with the fact that it is a worse movie than the first one.
And now, with that being said, I will stop posting in this thread as I do not wish to follow it to its flaming demise.
I think you got this review spot on. Out of everyone I know, no one has liked this film, even the more hardcore Matrix fans. Every review I’ve read has criticised the ending, but its strength is its inconclusiveness. Surely we didn’t expect the Wachowskis to hand us the ending on a plate and leave it at that.
Not entering a debate, just pointing out that ‘the little girl’ (whose name was Sati) was indeed ‘killed’ by Smith (much to my joy). However as with all the other people in the Matrix, only her avatar is taken over, just like in the first movie.
The moment that an agent leaves the body the body returns to its initial state (though retaining any damage it has sustained in the meantime).
I just saw the Matrix last night. I wept. It was amazing! It ended the only way it could end. Neo being taken off to Avolon. The once and future king. There is so much depth to these movies, it’s a shame that the reviewers miss it, but that’s why the didn’t like it and why they will never like it. They lack the depth. I saw the movie with 9 friends only one didn’t like it. You should right your piece about the Matix.
Well I think I know Bjørn fairly well and I’m pretty sure that he understood most of the ‘so-called’ surface level stuff such as Neo paying for the sins of mankind (they were the agressors mind you) with his life and stuff like that; though I doubt that he has bothered spending time on uncovering the stuff buried deeper down since his interest in the franchise is fairly insignificant.
I think what many people had problems with were things like for instance the dialouge. They like to think of it as being poor. But where they give a movie like Kill Bill credit for having poor dialouge (as that is obviously its purpose), they believe that Matrix should have had better dialouge… Which makes me wonder if they ever actually saw the first movie?
As with the people who keep bringing up this or that source which somehow already covered most of the so-called philosophical ground that The Matrix covered (mostly they use Dark City, go figure) the dialouge in The Matrix is just as much about delivery as it is about the content.
But yeah… All of this will be in the review once I write it ;)
The Matrix Trilogy is a work an art, and like all art, the purpose is not to deliver answers but to induce question in the eye of the beholder.
Salvation, Love and Belief are the Three Major Universals within the Matrix Trilogy.
Neo delivers Salvation, Trinity love and Morpheus belief. All three films remain constant and the charters never waiver from beginning to end in their universal representation. From this mettapattern, we are able to filter out the special effects and other notions and events as mere noise to be analyze through a different spectrum. The results of these energy patterns either positive or negative, I leave to each individual to elaborate and discuss at a latter time.
Today, in the modern school of world thought, the concepts of Salvation, Love, and Belief and the proclamation of Jesus Christ as Lord and Saviour are both unfashionable and political incorrect. However, after 2000 years, the universal question remains, does the love of Jesus Christ deliver salvation to those who believe? The Architect’s question to the Oracle “Did you know” was answered “No, but I believed”
I believe, and like Morpheus my beliefs do not require you to believe.
As a long time believer in Jesus Christ, my personal experience is that the universal concepts of Salvation, Love and Belief are wonderfully expressed and articulate in the narrative and history of Jesus Christ. It is also my experienced that these same concepts have been the cause of many wars throughout history, family feuds and an uneasiness of those who are presented with questions that naturally arise from the concepts of Salvation, Love and Belief in everyday conversation.
And maybe in the end that is why the critics (the enemy) did not like the third film; they did not want to face the reality of the final question. Does salvation come through the love and belief of Jesus Christ the Savoir? Like the Oracle, I do not know, I can only believe. What I do know is that the question makes the unbelieving uncomfortable, tormented and sometimes even violent. That is nature of the question.
As for the films final metapattern of yin and yang and a new beginning expressed by the innocence’s of the inner child, it was a 2001 ending.
PS
With the introduction of the word Trinity, the Wachowski Brothers have insured the introduction of God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Ghost. There is no escaping this fact, the question is why?
I can understand the frustration of most people seeing M3. There really do seem to be some serious flaws in it. For me it comes down to the writing. Certainly the story — more specifically, the plotting — of M1 is so tight, it’s hard not to feel somewhat let down by the less tightly-woven plotting of M2,3. Not that I dislike them; but there were no moments in M1 like the one in M3 where the kid runs around screaming “The war is over!” — that moment, for me, lessened the movie, far more seriously than any other aspect others have criticized. The moment is simply false, false in an unconsidered way. Who would believe this screaming lunatic racing around? A better reaction would have been “Isn’t that that crazy Neo-lover boy who drops bullets?” — I would be the first to admit that the WBs might have meant something by this, might have done this purposefully. Regardless, the moment doesn’t work for me. I can’t believe this lunatic who obviously doesn’t know what he’s talking about (couldn’t the machines return?), and I can’t disbelieve him either, because to all outside appearances, he’s correct. I don’t mean that the character shouldn’t have done that. Him being a devotee to Neo, of course he’s going to run around screaming like a lunatic when he sees what he believes to be a miracle. But not everyone else in Zion is devoted to Neo; as the WBs make very clear, many are straightforwardly hostile to the belief in Neo as a savior. It would take time for all the Zionists simply to trust the observation that the machines had stopped and weren’t going to return, let alone the miracle that somehow Neo had made this happen. (Note too, neither Neo nor Trinity return, which means whatever acts Neo performed for Zion are going to be fabricated into wholecloth mythology — the point being that the Zionists are not going to have any facts at their disposal, and without them, many of them will not be convinced that Neo succeeded in doing anything. I guess it’s possible that they will hear a story from the machines of how Neo went into the Matrix and gave his life to stop Smith.) Far better would have been to have the kid scream his way through Zion’s tunnels, while everyone else looks sort of dazed. No, to me that lunatic moment seems more and more like a mistake. The question that occurs to me is then: if this moment was a mistake, where else? How deep?
Because there’s still a lot to consider in M3 (and M2). I’m very curious really as to what was going on throughout it; because it isn’t spelled out, and there are ample hints in it that should tell us we shouldn’t think it is. Puzzles are an acquired taste though, so of course most people will be frustrated by the movie. Part of the appeal of M1 was in how the WBs wedded, without seam, the physical and the metaphysical. All the fighting was a direct result of situations the characters got themselves into, hence of their motivations as characters. All the spiritual/theoretical concerns were distilled down into a single character’s doubt and choice. It really elevated that character’s humanity into the mythical — so that when even Morpheus actually exclaims “He is the One!” — as though he can’t believe it — it’s unbearably exciting. It all worked magnificently. (Sure, there was a bit of deus ex machina in Trinity’s Kiss of Life, but by that point in the movie, that was okay.)
All I have to say is that your rebutle is beautifully written, thought out and worded. I agree with you totally. Revolutions was the beautiful “perfect” – to use the only adjective I use when describing the movie to others – ending to the Matrix trilogy. It was beautiful. I laughed, I cried, I sat at the edge of my seat, and I loved. I went in with a clear head. I had read every theory and idea I could get my greedy little paws on. Finally, I came to the conclusion that I would never be able to predict what the third movie would be like. When the time came, I walked into that movie theater, a mix of violent emotions (I had gotten into a very minor car accident only twenty minutes before the movie, but I was rattled just the same). One thought came into my mind. “Make my night boys. Inspire me like you did with your first film.” And they did. I will forever be a fan of these films. They were perfection.
The Matrix will always have me.
the matrix is extremely sexual. keanu reeves in wearing a dress in reloaded. his love interest looks more like a man then keanu does (except the body, talking about the face here) to describe her face i would say she is “having neither male nor female characteristics” the marivingian goes to the ladies room and his woman goes to the men’s room. there are all sorts of sexual things going on, just to add one more in reloaded the rave scene shows lesbians, remember the wachowski’s directed bound a lesbian thriller (great movie). and let us not forget that the geekier of the two wachowski’s himself is a crossdresser. Ok, don’t get me wrong, it isn’t bad. I don’t care what makes this movie zing like it does, but if you’re like me you can’t help but wonder if it isn’t because of it’s sexuality that it becomes so real. Remember one thing about becoming unplugged from the Matrix, when you wake up in that gelatenous goo you are #1 a virgin #2 extremely pale and without any skin creases #3 you’re hair would be extremely long.
i’m rambling….
done.
i feel the same; wanted to say how good it was for me, but i read all the negative stuff, and realised, that its not even worth it, trying to justify the movie to a hostile audience. Very nice piece, but do post a review anyway
what a strange comment…
Anyway, I agree and all that, i know allot about the series. But when i watched revolutions there was one thing i didnt get, maybe if i see it again i will understand but let me ask anyway.
Since Smith is the Anti-neo, and as neo gets stronger, so does smith, since he is made to balance out neo(thats the idea i got from what they said) Then why didnt instead of doing a whole fighting scene with smith, why didnt he simply kill himself, and therefore eliminating the need for smith, and eliminating his power. that would work for everyone wouldnt it?
Oh, and the whole machine looking like a human face when it was talking to neo, that was a little bit silly i think.
Well the way I see it is that Neo doesn’t walk into that thing (figurativly speaking) knowing that his death will cancel out Smith. And even if he did, I certainly wouldn’t blame him for trying to beat the shit out of him…
The Deus Ex face is a matter of taste I guess. Personally I see it as a means of easing the communication between man and machine. Though I would probably have preferred the machine not feeling the need to ‘degrade’ itself to the level of humans. One would think that they had learned something the Second Renaissance ;)
thats what i was thinking about the face…
Anyway, I was thinking that neo wouldnt be that dumb to not realise his death would cancel out smith, so there must be some reason that he didnt just kill himself. But i sorta dont like the whole battle battle, then smith blows up for no apparent reason, kinda ending.
Attributing Smith ‘blowing up’ to no apparent reason is like saying “Then at the end of 2001 this baby appears for no apparent reason.”
I really need to see this one again, i saw the other 2 and watch all of animatrix, and analised the crap out of it, but i need to see this one again, or wait till its out on video/dvd. I still havent got the game either.
this film rocked my titties
Michael,
I’m not posting to argue nor am I here to support your opinions. What I see is a person deeply affected by a series of films. I know that feeling as you described. Our appreciation for certain films seems so very close. It takes certain kinds of people to react to situations in certain ways. Some people walk past a homeless person pleading for spare change with indifference. Others stop and help. Some think a rose is the most beautiful flower to have ever graced this Earth. Others think dandelions are.
This movie initially focused on realities and lies and the attempt to understand one from the other. There is no one truth here and there is no one opinion. If you were given the power to share your feelings with everyone about these films all that you would have succeeded in doing is to have given them a few moments of happiness, which would still stand as irrelevant to what they thought of a movie. Nothing more.
I can completely empathize with the need to show people your perceived truths when there seem to be so many who don’t “get it” but I’m often forced to realize that life isn’t filled with solid truths. Life is grey and I am always reminding myself to allow others the freedom to express opinions without degrading them for it. Not for their sake, mind you, but for mine. Life just isn’t as enjoyable when I focus on the follies of others.
I followed the entire Matrix story. I became entranced from the first film and followed it through its many incarnations. I was aware from start to finish that it wasn’t unique in story but in presentation and I loved its artistry. Despite it all, I didn’t like the final film but that has nothing to do with you, the film or those involved in it. It is my expression and my experience and though others may loathe that it differs from their own, even make remarks to suggest my inadequacy my experiences and telling of it remain unchanged.
There is no red or blue pill here. It is not an either/or. Revolutions was to each person what they made of it. Be pleased that you loved it. Feel sorry for those, like me, that did not recapture those dream-like moments of our youth.
To the Don
You can only take the red pill once
I got to your site through matrix essays, and I must agree with you. I don’t think I’ve ever sat so still in a movie, nor sat through the ending credits openmouthed such as I did in revolutions, you have truly captured my emotion regarding that movie.
TheDon:
I don’t expect anyone to automatically like the movie just because I do, that would just be plain ignorant of me :) — Rather I suggest that while you might not like the movie, that doesn’t mean it’s a bad movie; and that was really my primary beef with what most critics seemed to be saying.
We all have our own pet peeves and I’m certainly not trying to force anyone into seeing what I see, I’m just trying to prod the general idea that everyone has to have an opinion about everything seems to be so prolific with the Internet crowd. That’s one thing, what’s worse is that, ‘Dammit, I’m right!’. (And I’m not saying that I’ve never stepped into that trap; au contraire).
While I certainly understand that – and I think I’ve expressed this many times – some people are going to dislike the Matrix franchise, I am just asking these people to look again. They might not like what they see, but they might understand why other people like it.
I for instance don’t like the Godfather as a series. I think it’s way overrated and only mildly interesting. I do however respect it for the qualities that it has and the pleasure that some people derive from it. Same goes for Goodfellas… I don’t see anything interesting in that movie, but I do understand that other people like it and why. (Yeah, I’m not into the whole mob thing). Wizard of Oz… I see why it’s a classic, but I don’t like it.
Better yet though, let me give you an opposite example.
Equilibrium. The critics hated it. I loved it. It’s no Shichinin No Samurai, but it kicked my ass around in the cinema and I have subsequently enjoyed it several times on DVD.
Equilibrium! I saw that at the video store the other day, i went to pick up another movie and then came back to look at it again, but sadly someone had just taken the last copy, if only i had grabbed it when i first got a glimpse of it.
Anyway, One of the quotes on the cover mentioned it had simmilarities to the matrix. I’m woderering since you’ve seen it, Is it simmilar just to the extent of the martial arts and cinematography style, or is there some sort of story simmilarity? i would’nt mind getting an idea of what its about.
Don’t you just love .htaccess for blocking IP’s?
Ah yes, a sidenote. As I have previously bitched about, Equilibrium is known as Cubic in certain countries (such as Denmark).
The Portugeese. They believe that this is their public forum…
Conversations take place in English. Non debatable.
It’s similar only on the surface. I’ll say it this way; it got made because the Matrix was a hit, but it’s not the Matrix.
Who’s debating?
What are you talking about in your post? Your reviews are better because you spend hours and hours on a review? You can’t even spell “loser” right. Some people only need 15 minutes, some movies aren’t worth the time to ponder and the Matrix is one of them…the last two movies, that is.
You think that because you grew up on Aliens and Terminator or whatever that you can ‘understand’ the Matrix and others can’t? Puh-leese. I like a good movie that makes me think, and the Matrix only left me with impossible plot holes. I even watched the Animatrix and it did nothing to help the plot holes. A movie should be self-contained enough in its ideas that you don’t have to make up scenarios for every little detail like the Wachowski Brothers do. Mind, they have their heads up their own arses right now, I’m sure.
That’s extremely elitist. The movie didn’t work on so many levels…plot holes like swiss cheese. It wasn’t even about the Matrix, but the ‘Battle of Zion’ instead…who cares, what about the world’s people trapped in the machines? The whole thing was a huge and colossal mess.
First, before I unload this rather large comment, I would like to say that I am both a huge Matrix fan and a film student with some philosophical studies under my belt – so give me a little credit before thinking I’m some movie bashing nerd.
I hated Revolutions…especially in retrospect. I too invested a lot of my time (and money) not only into the viewing of The Matrix but also into the philosophical content. I can’t tell you the hours I’ve spent with my friends discussing both Matrix I, II, and III. Until recently, it had been a pleasure. For this, I’m going to assume what the Wachowski’s wanted and consider both Reloaded and Revolutions one long movie. So anyway, where do I begin.
Let’s just talk about the filmmaking. Revolutions was an exercise in uninspired, Hollywood blockbuster filmmaking. Don’t get me wrong, it LOOKED stunning, but that might be the problem. I have a feeling that the Wachowski’s spent way to much time wanting the picture to look good (probably stemming from their contempt with the constant bullet-time copying) than actually working on a solid script. The dialogue is broken and drags. The pacing is bad. The actual direction of the actors is weak and poorly done. Characters are introduced and tossed aside like spent tissue paper. Some of the action scenes (specifically the “Burley Brawl” and the final fight with Agent Smith) are either goofy or unnecessary. C’mon – am I the only one who noticed the terrible CGI when Neo was fighting all those Smiths? Did anyone else think the Superman II rip-off at the end was silly? The action would have been great, if they had not gotten carried away and kept it on the ground. Instead of silently using metaphor, the viewer is bludgeoned by it constantly. I thought I was getting beaten with a cross at the end of the flick. The first movie made you think, the sequels could have been called “The Matrix for Dummies.”
Let’s dig into this more specifically. Six characters (the Key-maker, the little girl, the Trainman, the Merovingean, his wife, the ghost twins) are introduced quickly, with no background or explanation of motives/existence and are needlessly discarded (with the exception of the Key-maker…maybe.) All of these characters, sans the annoying little girl, are very intriguing , but were never fully developed. Bad writing.
Morpheus, one of the main characters, is damn near unheard of in the third movie. He takes a back seat to everything. Pity, because he was one of the more engaging characters in the film. We spend more time with the squeak and Z than with him. You know it takes some work to make Lawrence Fishbourne look bad, great work guys.
The Trinity death scene…so close. I thought Keanu did a hell of a job, considering he was blind folded, until the W Bro’s told him to collapse on her and give a sob. How embarrassing. Oh, and did anyone else notice that once Trinity was dead, Neo went on, business as usual, with any feelings of remorse or loss? Talk about a waste of motivation. He left the source in the second movie to SAVE HER and when she dies it appears he goes to the machine city out of obligation rather than vengeance.
Smith seemed to have no real motivation for taking over the Matrix other than curiosity and hatred for Neo. It was touched on in Matrix I, when he was grilling Morpheus, that Smith despised humanity and wished to get out of the system. Well, he had his chance – he was due up for deletion, but he came back. Why? Not too sure. “He felt compelled,” but that’s not a real REASON, that’s a glossed cop-out. Damn, even Hugo Weaving (an amazing actor by the way) appeared bored out of his mind with the sappy lines and stupid references to love, he just did a better job of covering it up than all the others.
The battle for Zion…cornball. Looked great, but that doesn’t excuse its incompetency. The machine army was not menacing at all. A quarter-million machines could take out a few machine guns and Mech Warrior robots in half a second. Suppressed fire or not, the Wachowski’s needed to hire a military analyst for that one. It would have appeared more frightening to have the machines mow over the humans instead of trying to make a hero out of everyone. Oh and btw, why the hell didn’t the squiddies use their lasers?
And how about that ending. What a letdown. You can spout of all the philosophical mumbo-jumbo you want about balance, but there is no real resolution here. The argument that Neo’s death created a harmony between man and machine (peace) is bogus. The machines are still in control. 5.99 billion people are still enslaved by the system, but no one, including Morpheus (the real “freedom fighter”) seems to care. All the characters are more concerned with their own well-being than the slavery of their fellow humans. I don’t remember the exact quote (not from the movie) but it’s something along the lines of “no one is truly free if there are those that are still oppressed.” Wrap your minds around that one. That and what’s stopping the machines from blowing the snot out of the humans at the end? A truce? Right, a diabolical A.I., hell-bent on the destruction and enslavement of the free man is going to pass up that kind of opportunity.
Many of the catchy ideas that the Wachowski’s did come up with (Smith taking over the Oracle, Neo in the trainstation, Neo’s power over the machines in the real world) were, once again, glossed over and given no explanation. I understand the need to allow the audience to question and come up with ideas for themselves, but when that is the entire movie you only have one thing: holes, lots of holes. A lot of intriguiing possiblities could have come these ideas: WHAT did Smith gain in copying the Oracle, WHY (not how) is Neo in the train station, and WHY (again, not how) does Neo have the powers he does in the real world. It’s depressing because for the first half of Revolutions I thought they had something good on their hands, then the Wachowski’s turn around and forget the cool things they’ve come up with and lay that egg of an ending on us. Weak. I was so suprised that two people so intellegent, two people who created an indepth universe and complex story, could end it on such a cheap, simple note.
As for Michael’s comments on how the Matrix was never a movie for the average movie watcher and that’s why people don’t like the ending. Whatever. People don’t like Revolutions because it doesn’t have a real ending, and that was the purpose of creating the sequels. The first Matrix had the ability to leave the audience with an ambigious ending. The ideas were too complex to end it right there, so the directors felt it necessary to leave the audience with questions. However, when you set upon the task of creating a conclusion and a definite finale to the first movie you NEED to do that and the Wachowki’s didn’t. The film has an ending, but no resolution. I (along with a majority of people) didn’t wait four years and six months to see the machines lay down their arms and CHOOSE not to kill the humans because they’re playing nice. As a stand alone series of films, Reloaded and Revolutions might have been alright, but when you attach them to the stigma of The Matrix you have to do better than what was presented. They won’t go down as the worst movies ever made, the Charlie’s Angels series holds that title, but they might just do down as the greatest disappointments.
p.s. – if you want a carry on a discussion, feel free to post back (i’ll try and respond quicky) or write me an e-mail.
One thing that summs up the Matrix re-done 5 hour odyssey is the question.
Why did the machines bother to create a talking face to a BLIND Neo in the machine city?
ps.
Neo holding his hand up to the massive machine army, blowing them up:
“I can’t do this, it’s too much”
Trinity:
“Use both hands!”
Harp: I apologize for the spelling error(s), however I’ll just stand behind this flame-retardent wall that says “I’M DANISH YOU NITWIT!”.
Good way to start critique…
Fuck yes.
No, I didn’t say that.
Now go back and read the damn thing again; and don’t come back until you’ve understood the whole thing start to finish. And please be a bit more polite next time around, after all your sentence construction isn’t exactly of Shakespearean proportions.
Now…
k.m.: That’s one hell of a comment, I’ll try to cover it as best I can. But I don’t hold any answers, just my own opinions. You’re bound to disagree with some (or most) of them, and that’s fine :) — Contrary to you I don’t have any philosophical studies to back up most of my claims, and only a small portion of movie studies other than my own passion. So bear with me ;)
First of all I agree with you that Reloaded and Revolutions are as such one long movie, and really they don’t work particularly well without each other’s close company.
On looks: I definitely think that The Matrix is a case of style over substance and I don’t think the W’s should be making any excuses on that accord. First of all because I think it’s the best looking sci-fi movie in a great many years, both in terms of it’s style, it’s unique cinematography (which is so closely tied to the choreography that it makes Spiderman look like an embarrassing fan film) and it’s use of colors and retro interior environments as well as this sort of generic urban metropolitan environment.
Being involved with graphics (both 2D and 3D) my self, I do feel that I have a good eye for spotting effects. And while – as you point out – the effects for the burly brawl are easily spotted as being just that, I really don’t have a problem with that. I certainly don’t think they look bad, just not convincingly real. Take a look at Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade, just after the ‘Jones boys’ unhook themselves from the blimp and engage in a dogfight. The effects for that scene are just downright bad. I would venture as far as to say that they even manage to be bad for their time. But no one’s bothered about that.
There are many reasons for that and it’s a large discussion in itself (and some would say not a proper comparison, but needed to went my newfound frustration with that scene somewhere ;)). However, my point is that effects are of no particular importance to a movie. Some people like to put a lot of significance on them, and there’s no doubt that they stand out as a sour thumb when the rest of the movie is less than what you expected.
With that said I’d like to point out that the Matrix sequels have some of the most stunning visual effects I’ve ever seen. And I doubt most people even notice 80% of the effects in the movies. So really, if I hear one more ‘critic’ balk at the effects I’ll kick his (or her, I don’t discriminate when it comes to kicking asses) ass.
In terms of the script, it’s definitely not as tight and well-rounded as the first movie. But seriously, let’s not glorify that either. You’re annoyed at the corny dialogue, well what did you expect? That is the style of the movie. It’s a mixture of pseudo-philosophical fortune cookie outbursts (‘Welcome to the real world’, ‘You think that’s air you’re breathing now?’, ‘Free your mind’), bravado/heroics (‘I’ll tell you what I believe, blah blah blah’) and sobbing naive love-lines (‘You see you can’t die, because I love you’). (I’m quoting those from memory, so bear with me). It’s not Waking Life, but then again it never claimed to be.
Now there’s some confusion as to whether the franchise actually was planned out as a trilogy or not. There is no denying that the first movie is rather different from its sequels and it’s hard to say what the original plan actually was. But even so I will go as far as to say that not even the first movie tried to make itself out as anything but an action movie with some – in movie terms – fairly profound thinking behind it.
So honestly the dialogue in Reloaded/Revolutions (I’ll call them RR from now on) is exactly what I expected. It’s kinda corny, kinda naive; but it’s honest.
In M1 we had this mode-jerking going on. We started in the real world, found out that it wasn’t the real world and moved to the real real world. Then we found ourselves in the construct, then in a dojo, and then back in the matrix and so on. Constantly moving back and forth between different locations, playing with reality.
I liken the way that RR handles it secondary characters to something of the same. And contrary to others films, these characters aren’t fleshed out by their background, but by their surroundings and – very important – their names and the people and environments they surround themselves with. Their details aren’t kept from us, they’re just not displayed openly because the ‘solution’ (so to speak) to each character is available if we just look hard enough. This is slightly different from M1 in that each viewer will bring their own interpretations to the table.
For instance, in Reloaded we first meet Seraph when Neo enters the tea house. We know nothing about him, and essentially he seems like just another ‘cool’ character who does kung-fu. And you can certainly view it like that, and that won’t be wrong. If you choose to do that then (and yeah, here it comes) you’re a blue-pill. You’re happy to accept the movie at face level and that it doesn’t live up to people’s expectations at that level is a shame. It is a bit more experimenting than what the general audience (and I mean that in a non-degrading manner) is used to.
On one hand it’s too much kung-fu, on the other it’s too much talk. Loose/loose.
However if you decide to play the game – metaphorically speaking – then Seraph soon builds a character of his own. We learn in Reloaded that he’s not a program and that “I protect that which matters most”. Now its up to you to interpret what that means. He’s standing at the backdoor near the Oracle when he says it, so is it her? Or is it Neo? Is it something more metaphorical, like the future or is he an agent for the system? After all Neo was meant to be integrated with the source and reload the matrix, so perhaps Seraph is a protector of the system?
His name suggests that he is of the highest order of angels or the equivalent. Here’s what Dictionary.com has to say about that (religion isn’t one of my stronger sides, so you’ll forgive me for using such ‘cheap’ methods rather than quoting from memory ;)):
Source
When Neo first sees him with his ‘code-vision’ we see that he burns. This entry mentions burning love, probably for their creator and/or master, and them standing above the king on his throne always at the ready. Again you could ask yourself whether he is serving Neo or the Oracle or some third entity. It doesn’t say it here, but Seraphim have 3 pairs of wings. In Revolutions, at Club Hel(l?), we learn (as we had seen for ourselves, but this underscores it) that he is ‘wingless’ much to the amazement of the kung-fu-fodder in front of the club.
So where does all this fit into things?
Well that’s where the real fun begins.
You see, when Neo dies (and yeah, the cross was a bit much) the cables that support his body fan out and create – in ‘machine-vision’ – a pair of wings. This obviously has some significance, but what? It can either mean that he has died and gone to heaven… Hmmm. Perhaps it is a signifier that it is not until you have fulfilled your destiny as the one, by reloading the matrix, that you get your wings and thus your true divinity. Whatever the significance there seems to be a relation of some sort between Neo and Seraph…
And of course you can go on like that with everything, and I mean everything, in the series. Obviously this works for some, but not all. And that’s really – I think – what I mean when I say that these movies aren’t for everyone. It just takes a lot of work to really get something out of them, as it does if you want to get everything out of the Silmarillion. Speaking of which, allow me to make a comparison. And forgive me for beating a dead horse, but this is a particular important issue in understanding why ‘we’ like RR so much.
The Balrog in Fellowship of the Rings, the one residing in Moria, aside from making a great movie monster and a worthy demise for Gandalf, has no character. Of course, it being a mere ‘monster’ one wouldn’t really expect more from it than just that. But once you dig deeper there’s just this whole mythology lying behind it, and it strengthens its presence in Fellowship infinitely. Just the simple fact that both Gandalf and the Balrog are Maiar opens up all these tasty ideas in my head.
Of course the difference is that Tolkien created his own mythology for his world where the W’s use the existing real world mythology to give depth to their story.
So while you’re right that none of those characters really get an exhaustive on-screen treatment as such, the real fun comes from dissecting them afterwards. Finding out what their role is, how everything is connected behind the scenes.
Does this make any sense? I hope so.
You say that the first movie made you think, whereas the sequels are ‘for dummies’. I couldn’t disagree more. There is so much to take in that I’m constantly finding new tidbits everywhere, as if they were right there in front of me all the time and I failed to notice them because of the forest. Like the song playing in the Oracle’s kitchen in Revolutions; “I’m Beginning to See the Light”… I mean obviously that’s a ‘blatant’ hint, but the enjoyment comes from putting it into the overall canvas of the movie.
And that’s the second point.
The first movie can pretty much stand on its own. It has a few open ends here and there, but overall it’s a complete movie that you don’t have to fold too much before it makes sense. RR is completely different.
First of all you have to make the leap of faith that made you enjoy Pooh when you were younger (hell, I still enjoy it ;)). You have to be able to not care too much about the details, because quite frankly the ‘reality’ of the Matrix doesn’t work at all.
Like: Humans don’t make good batteries since they spend more energy than they put out. If the sky is blocked with an ‘EMP cloud’ then we not just draw energy from that? How does carbon based life work without light? Where does the oxygene come from; and so on and so forth until you’re blue in the face.
This should be no more a stretch of the imagination than believing in the creation of the universe, it’s just a leap of faith :)
With that in mind; RR isn’t a story that, if read from beginning till end makes much sense. It leaves huge questions to be answered throughout. Like how did Neo stop those sentinels in the real world? You never get that answer; you have to look for it within the movie yourself. And this will sound like a stretch for some, but the answer is in the movie; but the answer that you decide on might not be the same that I want to believe in. Most people just don’t give a shit and pronounce the movie as being crap.
This is of course just how I see it, but that’s what you asked to read about so there you have it. First draft :)
As for the different emphasis on secondary characters in most of Revolutions (with the main trinity of characters taking backseat to Niobe, The Kid and Locke), well I don’t have any ‘metaphysical’ explanation for that. I like it, you didn’t, that’s the way it goes. I loved seeing Zee and Niobe in action. I love strong female parts (which is one of the reasons that I love Cameron’s early work) and I really think they pulled it off well in Revolutions. But I agree, it’s a strange choice to take in the last act of the story; I can only suspect that they believed that the main characters had gotten their share of screen-time in Reloaded.
It’s worth noting that Keanu’s girlfriend, who had given birth to their stillborn child, died during the shooting of RR. So quite frankly I don’t think Keanu was acting in that scene… But then again I loved the rave/love scene of Reloaded so what do I know?
I thought it was pretty clear in Revolutions (and I wish I could quote it for you). He’s because that is his purpose. His motivations don’t really have to reach much deeper than that; he is after all ‘just’ a program. The Oracle tells Neo that Smith is the result of an equation trying to balance itself. Neo is life, Smith is death. Neo is the One, Smith is the Many. Neo is humanity, freedom, rebellion; Smith is the system, the ultimate conformity, control. And so on and so forth, you can go on for hours like this if you’re so inclined.
Standing in the crater Smith leans over Neo and says “Why Mr. Anderson? Why? Why do you persist?” to which Neo retorts “Because I choose to”. And that’s the crux of why Smith is there. He isn’t there because he chose it, he’s there because he was compelled. He had to come back. It’s his purpose.
On top of that he’s a smug bastard which helps him justify his purpose ;)
Personally I thought Weaving looked like he loved his role…
Well it’s Star Wars all over again isn’t it? It’s a lone X-Wing against the Deathstar, it’s the Ewoks against the stormtroopers, a single fighter against an AT-AT. It doesn’t make a lot of sense, and I’ll be the first to say that I prefer it when it does. But again the Matrix isn’t so much about being real, it’s mostly just about being cool… You either like this or you don’t. Just remember that this isn’t The Longest Day, this is a comic book. It makes about as much sense as Batman beating Superman, yet ask Bjørn what happened when they met up and he’ll gladly tell you that the least sensical outcome happened…
And again, if you wanted to – and some people do – you could tear these movies apart with their logical holes. No cover on the APU’s? They’re wide-open! Why didn’t they keep an EMP in the dock (or two)? Why didn’t the machines just nuke them? Why not build nuclear power plants instead of using fields of human crop?
Because that’s not cool!… And if that’s not a satisfying answer, then hey; what’re you gonna do.
Yes! There is no real resolution. But do you get a resolution at the end of 2001? Or Blade Runner? Or Solaris? Hell no. It’s up to you to read the resolution from the material that the movie provides you with. It’s like trying to figure out whether or not Deckard is a replicant (that is, before Ridley Scott blew the lid on that one), it’s personal interpretation.
You can argue that the machines remain in control and again it’s about personal interpretation. You might not believe that the machines will keep true to their answer, after all why should they? They could crush the humans like the bugs they are. But what does that say about you? It tells me a hell of a lot if I’m ever going to play multiplayer Civ3 with you that’s for sure.
Me, I believe that the machines will remain true to their word. Again I dive into the movie for the answer to that. The Oracle asks the Architect what will happen with the people who want to be freed, and the Architect tells her that they will be free to go as they please. She then asks him “Do I have your word?”, he looks insulted at her and almost barks: “What do you think I am? Human?”
I read that as “I’m true to my word, I’m not backstabbing like humans”. Others might read it as “I don’t give words, I’ll do as I damn well please”.
The ending is ambivalent for a reason, questions are left unanswered on purpose. This isn’t Return of the Jedi with the Ewoks dancing around a campfire, this is open to interpretation to the individual. Like a Rorschach test ;)
I’ve pretty much already answered this (in-length too). I believe that all the answers are in the movie, you just have to look harder. I suggest reading Revolutions thread at Kottke (as well as the older Reloaded thread) and I think you will slowly catch my drift.
It’s all in there.
I quite honestly think that you’re preempting the W’s. Joel Silver talks a lot, more than he should probably, and he did say that there was going to be definite resolution to things, but I trust that guy about as far as I can throw him – and he’s chubby ;)
You’re right though. I said that Matrix wasn’t for the average movie goer, you said that “People don’t like Revolutions because it doesn’t have a real ending”. But if you stop considering the Matrix series as what you want them to be and start considering them for what they are, then isn’t my statement correct?
I must say that I think it’s a bit presumptuous to tell the director’s what they need and don’t need to do. In 1982 the critics blasted Blade Runner. Like they hated it. I’m fairly sure that besides being annoyed at the horrible studio-induced voice-over there were quite a few that were going “He NEEDED to tell us what the unicorn was all about. He NEEDED to tell us what that poetry was about. He NEEDED to tell us what Gaff’s role was.”
But did he? Hell no. Poor craftsmanship aside, the movie shouldn’t embrace the audience, the audience should embrace the movie; that is how you grow.
That said, I do think that RR has holes. It’s pacing is odd and as a whole it works better after the fact than during the fact. But my outburst was never meant to signify that this was the best series of all time, merely that the treatment it has been getting at the hand of the critics is utterly undeserved and mainly signifies that if you’re being sold as mainstream you’d better be mainstream or else you’re going to get the shaft.
Phew… :)
Why did the machines bother to create a talking face to a BLIND Neo in the machine city?”
Neo can see machines using his ‘machine-vision’… That would be why :)
k.m.: My apologies, but I complete forgot to include this bit:
The unexplained bits and pieces that for one reason or another seem to make no sense in the larger picture, can in my mind again be compared with Tolkien’s Tom Bombadil.
While his true nature and raison d’etre are somewhat abivalent in terms of his relation to the surrounding world, the mythology of Middle-Earth and the furtherment of the story; he is nonetheless an integrated part of The Lord of the Ring.
I do not presume to make a direct comparison between Tolkien’s works and The Matrix story, but the notion is the same with the elements that seem to lack particular purpose.
Found your site through MatrixEssays and I couldn’t agree with you more. It’s hard to make people understand what I feel about the Matrix. They see it as only a movie (well, it is but there’s more into it).
Indiana Jones films did not rely on effects therefore people did not complain about “fake” looking scenes as much as they would if the plot and characters fell apart.
The Matrix was about effects. If you strip it down, philosophy, plot and characters are b-o-o-o-o-o-oring. When effects are not fluid, people will bitch because bitching about the concept would be redundant, IMO.
Finally, your comment: “I doubt most people even notice 80% of the effects in the movies,” is a down right odd comment to make. How could people not notice the effects?! Gangs of New York had seemless effects by adding old city scapes and the like making those effects invisible but Matrix possibly uses the most blue screen sets aside from Star Wars. It’s a series of films based on effects. In fact, some argue that is their crutch.
Of course now that I’ve brought up the taboo, I await my ass kicking. ;)
bazlit: Well I believe that it in fact is ‘just’ a movie :)
TheDon: The Indy filmed were effects films to a large extend. By the mere virtue of Lucas being the producer it becomes an effect film :) — Basically every single climax scene was an effects scene!
There is a difference between knowing that something has to be an effect and noticing a special effect. You obviously know that whenever the Logos is making its way through the sewers that has got to be CG, but you don’t ‘notice’ it because quite frankly it’s perfect.
But there are effects that you don’t notice because they’re not noticable, and I’ll give you a couple of examples to ponder and then you tell me if most people noticed these being effects.
In Raiders Indy boards a plane from the US. It’s one of those planes that land on the water, and so it’s ‘docked’ by a pier. But the thing is, the plane isn’t actually there! Those two-prop planes weren’t available, but since that’s what they wanted a matter painting was used.
Another one. During the opening speeder chase of Episode II Anakin looses his lightsaber. Obi-Wan swings by and grabs it. Now it’s fairly obvious that all the backgrounds and what not are CG, but what you don’t notice is his hand. See the best shot they had of him reaching up to grab the lightsaber had his hand go out of frame, so instead they added a CG hand…
That’s what I’m talking about. Those kinds of small touches that no one notices. They’re EVERYWHERE in the Matrix movies, but you don’t see them. So don’t tell me that the Matrix had poor effects because it sure as hell didn’t! :)
If you want to talk about a movie with effects replacing storytelling, let’s talk Episode 2. The whole Sound of Music scene was just riddled with half-decent effects that were overall pretty damn pointless.
That you feel the philosophy, characters and plot to be boring; well there’s nothing I can do about that that I haven’t already tried to do.
And to be quite frank, Gangs of New York was a piece of crap. Utterly boring and so redundant and irrelevant that I had to look at my watch 3 – 4 times during it to see if it was near its end, and I usually never check my watch when I watch movies (I find it a bit inpolite).
The problem with negative movie reviews, the thing that really gets in the way of a honest opinion is expectation. Sequels get the brunt of poor reviews because there is expectation, a comparison to its predecessor. Now some movies are genuinely bad but that is not the case with the Matrix series. These three titles work. If they didn’t, I don’t understand how you can tell so soon after viewing it. It seems to me that it is difficult to write a scathing review of a movie so soon after release because of your expectation of how that movie should have played out before you even sat down to watch it. Yes, you did have an expectation. Everyone did. The only exception I can think of is if the production quality was actually so poor that you could trash it immediately but even then great movies were born. Clerks. cough
You give Matrix 5, 10, 20 years go back and see it and you will see a fine piece of work or it will at least change your current opinion. Even if that opinion changes for the worst, then you know that your original review was pointless (if you’re going to change it).
2001: A Space Odyssey was trashed pretty hard soon after its release. Some to this day don’t get it but that’s ok. There are movie reviewers who trashed 2001 after its released and have since recanted after giving it another try.
So why is it this way? Because people had an expectation when seeing 2001 and it was a movie unlike any other. The natural reaction was to trash it. “This isn’t a movie!” In the conventional sense, that is true, 2001 was not the traditional movie and I say is that a bad thing? Many movies are supposed to be art. Art isn’t supposed to be conventional. We want new sensations, not old rehashed ones. Give Matrix a few years after the buzz dies down, after all the talk, after all the promotion/marketing and watch it again. Let the current movie formula that viewers try to apply to what they think is a good flick change over time (and it will) as movies will change in the next several years (and it will) and see if you have the same view.
Off topic: I also subscribe to Michael’s unpopular liking of the Zion rave scene. I think it was very necessary to contrast the lives of humans vs the calculated existence of the machines. It was a way to outline the differences between the two worlds which becomes the perfect setup for what was about to be a major conflict.
To the people that tell me that the whole rave scene was just dumb and didn’t belong, I usually reply, “Your age is showing.”
Cheers.
Sherlock: Well said; all of it!
There is a difference between having an odd or confusing ending and not having one. Yeah, maybe Joel Silver shot himself (or Wachowski’s?) in the foot when he said Revolutions would be a definite ending. Then again, it goes back to the basic principles of filmmaking. Ambiguous, odd, or confusing endings are fine when you don’t set out on the endeavor of creating a real conclusion. My main argument, which I might not have made clear, is: why make the sequels if you aren’t going to REALLY end them? In the grand scheme of things Reloaded and Revolutions serve no purpose.
In response to your retort on character introduction, I understand that you can’t always give every single detail into every new character’s life, but at least give us a hint. Also, don’t try to make up for it halfway through the movie (as they tried to when Smith said to Seraph “I remember chasing you around,” or something like that.) Oh, and Neo did say Seraph was a program.
In terms of movie making, you can’t expect your audience to do homework before they watch a picture, especially if it’s a $300 million dollar blockbuster. There is a fine line between allowing the audience to think for themselves and confusing all those who don’t know certain principles of philosophy or religion. The Wachowski’s crossed that line in RR. It’s BAD FILMMAKING when you do that. The sequels might have been excellent as a novel or possibly condensed into a book of philosophy, but as a visual story, where you use mise-en-scene and dialogue to further the plot, the W Bro’s failed in establishing principle concepts.
One more thing I forgot to mention. It’s also bad filmmaking to leave the main character off the screen for more than ten minutes. Neo and Trinity were off for thirty or so during the whole Zion battle sequence. Blame the editors for that one; they did a horrible job of establishing tension. Might it have been cool to juxtapose the Zion battle along side Neo’s fight with Bane/Smith? Just a thought.
Sorry, another thing I forgot to mention. Michael, I agree, the effects in the Matrix are mind expanding. That scene in Reloaded where Morpheus fights the ghost twins with a samurai sword and they go from real to ghostly is amazing. I spent a lot of time think about how they filmed that in one fluid shot. I agree that the cinematography is breathtaking. The fight scene in the Merovingian’s mansion was OUTSTANDING – to me, the best looking part of the movie (yes, even better than the freeway chase.) I will constantly be influenced by ALL the Matrix movies in terms of the visuals, but that doesn’t excuse them for the poor execution of such.
Basically what I’m getting at is the CGI was sometimes overdone. I thought the Burley Brawl would have looked better without fake-Neo doing spins in the air and leaping on all the Smiths’ heads. The CG when he was flying in Reloaded was AWFUL. The Wachowski’s may not have realized that we are still not at the technological state to make an entire human look real by computer animation alone. They could have green screed and added a fake background (like when Neo speeds off to save Trinity) but they got too caught up in the moment. I’m not saying the effects are bad, I just think the placement and timing thereof took away from the story rather than adding to it.
I heartily disagree (does it surprise anyone at this stage?). I don’t think sequels necessarily have to end anything. Rather they should expand on the original themes, much more than that I don’t really expect. You mention ‘basic principles of filmmaking’, but what does that really mean? That you have to adhere to the norm? Or that there are certain rules that, if you don’t follow them your film isn’t really a film? Of course not. Rules are made to be broken. If you don’t break rules you don’t grow.
That said, there are ways of breaking the rules and not getting away with it :)
I thought I made it clear that there are hints EVERYWHERE. Seriously, check out some of the discussion going on around the net, you would be amazed at the details that’re hidden beneath the surface.
That isn’t ‘making up for it’, that’s adding another piece to the puzzle. And no, Seraph isn’t a program. Neo asks him “Are you a program” and he says no (or just shakes his head, I forget) to which Neo asks “What are you then?”, “I protect that which matters most”.
I honestly don’t think that the movies require any homework to function as a standard, or even pretty damn cool, action movie. But you’re likely to walk away with an odd feeling that there was something going on that you weren’t in on.
If you’re like me then you’re going to want to find out what that was, and that suddenly forces you to learn a whole lot about religion and philosophy; even if it is just ‘basic stuff’ as many philisopher-wannabes are fond of telling us.
Again, it goes back to my point of The Matrix movies, RR in particular, not being standard fare blockbusters. They’re really just cult movies with massive budgets.
You can’t judge RR as a ‘standard’ blockbuster, because it’s not! (Well you can, which is why it’s getting such poor reviews)
No no no. Did you watch these movies?! Mise-en-scene is about controlling every little thing on the screen (and in the audio) to convey exactly what you want the audience to experience. And I swear, I don’t think I’ve ever seen a film that has been so purposeful in its use of movement, poses, color and light and camera movement to achieve its purpose: A moving comicbook.
I read a book by Stan Lee and John Buscema called How to Draw Comics the Marvel Way in which there is a lot of talk about the posing of your characters. Through various examples it shows you how to pose you villain so that he is as villainous as they come, or where to put the arm to show that the punch coming up is going to make someone swallow their teeth.
When I watched Matrix again after that, and this was before Reloaded, I suddenly saw a whole new side of it. This movie was just ever so meticulously crafted, with great care, to always give you the best angle, the right speed, the most powerful pose to illustrate the moment. Everything is just perfect!
This was one of the things that just blew my out of the water when I watched Reloaded, where it’s even more predominant. Notice how, when in the Matrix, Trinity always stands in a certain way, how her arms sway back to accentuate her curved back and how when she turns she has creates this beautiful arc with her body, straight from her toes to her head. This is no accident, this is the best crafted comic book movie that was never a comic book. It quite frankly makes Dare Devil and Spiderman look bad.
But again, you have to appreciate these things, and I can certainly understand why some people don’t. Rikke for instance don’t really care too much for Matrix; she thinks they’re okay, but that’s it (and that’s probably just to make me shut up)
See this is where I, again, disagree :) — In most cases you’d be best off with switching back and forth, but I found myself think during the Zion battle “That’s odd, they haven’t switched back yet! I LOVE THIS!”
I don’t know, maybe I’m special, but I don’t care too much about what’s not on screen, all in due time. I’d rather stay in the moment, get the complete experience all in one go than go back and forth. IMO that’s what broke the climax of Return of the Jedi and what made the opening of Saving Private Ryan so powerful. It was unrelenting!
Yeah it was, wasn’t it? I was just flabbergasted when I saw that. Particularly the one shot where the camera shows the entire room and all the characters are just jumping in slow motion, swords and clubs raised, running sideways along the walls and what not. Absolutely amazing.
Well I’ll let you get away with that, the human effects were slightly detracting now and then. I just enjoyed everything else so much that I didn’t care.
Ok just to point out some stuff..
Neo said ‘are you a programMER’.. and seraph said no… he didn’t say program.
Then he went on to say that he would guess that the oracle is a program, and so is ‘he’ he refering to Seraph’
I just saw Revolutions. You win, Mike. It kicked ass :)
Impz: Ah yes, you are of course entirely right! My bad.
Sean: Weeee :)
C’mon, Spiderman’s direction wasn’t that bad, even compared to the Matrix trilogy. Daredevil yes, but Spiderman had my race pulsing as the web slinger swung his way across New York…
Have to say, Reloaded was so much better the second time round for me, and watching all three movies in a row comes highly recommended.
By the way, Michael, I’m Andrew Smith from Abertay…you may or may not remember me– a good mate of Jason’s. Hope you don’t mind, but I nabbed your 3rd year work from the lab, it was going to be binned. You want me to post it over?
Liquid: I think you mean Spiderman had your pulse racing, not your race pulsing :)
Liquid: Yeah I remember you :) — If you’re willing to send it over that’d seriously kick-ass. My address is on the about page, feel free to mail me if you need more info or something.
And no, Spiderman wasn’t that bad. (And even if it was it would get a break due to Raimi being the man behind the Evil Dead series). I just have a slight aversion towards it due to a few things. (a) It made insane amounts of money for a movie it’s type, a good deal more than I thought it deserved (b) I really don’t like Green Goblin as a villain© It’s pretty much an ‘easy-shot’. Not that it isn’t well-done, but it’s definetly a pop-movie by design.
Though I still say that it has nothing on Matrix.
Sean: Of course not, it makes his race pulse… What’s so wrong about that :P
Every movie can have its one liners analyzed, its visual effects and symbology picked apart, the metaphors diced into single-serving pieces edible by the masses, but a movie fails when the sum of those parts don’t add to a whole. The RR series fails in that.
There are some decent metaphors, some average allusions to ideas beset in the pages of philosophical lore, but when it comes to the gestalt of the films, I’ve gotten more worth from the toliet after a night of hard drinking.
I think you forgot to add: In My Opinion.
You still all do not get it. You pretend to understand symbolism but you cannot answer back precevive the simple truth of the Matrix
With the introduction of the word Trinity, the Wachowski Brothers have challenged us to consider God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Ghost. There is no escaping this fact, the question is why? I dare anyone to comment on this post and (see posting 33)
The fact is to understadn the film and the trigoly you have to have some knowledge of the story of Christ.
I DARE YOU
Bl0xx0r3d.
I would just like to say, now having just tuned in to the discussion, I am greatful to Michael and k.m. for your discussion. I finally saw M3 on the 17th.
I left the theater exhilarated but felt a bit sick (nausea by JP Sartre anyone?). The ending and all the mesiah references bothered me. But slowly I was able to work out why I felt this way, which I won’t bore you going into detail.
However, your dialogues helped that sickness go away faster than it would if I had been left alone with my own head to ponder.
I am so totally sucked in by the Matrix. I don’t think that it will be out of my head, my thoughts, my skin for a while. I can’t wait to sit down and watch all three.
When I first walked out and about a day later I felt like “No, it was bad, I did not like how it ended.” But if I am still thinking of it now and searching for other people’s thoughts on the movie, then it can only be brilliant.
Thank-you
Thankyou for writing this. Seriously.
I’m a HUGE Fangirl when it comes to these movies. Revolutions is, perhaps, my favourite movie of the trilogy, and I am disgusted at the amount of bad reviews that it has been recieving. It is not a bad movie. I loved the entire trilogy, and I feel bad that it is regarded as something of a joke amongst so called ‘critics’. They believe that they understand movies. Sure, they understand it if the answers are handed to them on a platter. They understand movies that are mainstream, that are Hollywood, that are not meant for a cult audience. Of course, this doesn’t apply to all of them, but most of them are like this.
Thankyou for giving me yet another reason to love these movies. It’s so nice to see that there ARE people out there who love, live and breathe the trilogy.
(By the way, the puns and jokes revolving around sequences and names from the movies are starting to bug me, too. You’d think they could act their age, huh?)
Thank you for the kind words, I’m so delighted to know that these things are of at least some importance to people out there :)
You can talk to me. I’m with you. I’ve lived and died against the aliens, flown against the Deathstar, gasped at Bladerunner and lived more fiction than maybe I should. But I did it because I liked it, I wanted to do it and it made me the man I am today. At least we geeks have dreamed our dreams and sometimes dragged them into the real world by our effort and imagination. When I work twice as hard after being inspired by some fictional film or close a sales deal through some witty quote I live the life I choose. In the way I choose.
Rhymelord: whoa, just plain whoa.
The most unfortunate thing about reading that is that you’re preaching to the converted. Most of the people that will read that are those that love and live movies and the matrix just as you do, I know because I am one of them. I’ve watcehd them time and time again, each time gaining a greater insight as to what the trilogy is all about and I think that I could go on watching it forever and I will never cease to learn from it. I think the general public didn’t want to admit that they didn’t ‘get it’ and so they have dubbed it as a flop. I guess us Zionites will just have to be content with the fact that there are other people out there who appreciate it just as much as we do, it is simply unfortunate that ‘the others’ are the ones being paid to diss it.
I bet you didn’t expect any more comments on this post, over a year later. Heck, if you disabled comment emails and you don’t check your dashboard in time, this one might get by you.
Even so, I want to let you know over a year later, that your post still matters. The jokes they cracked are long gone but you can still see one episode or another of The Matrix Trilogy on cable almost every night of the week.
The first movie’s instant success was inherited in the form of hype by its successors and it was only their depth, fathomable by we few, which scared out of the many a string of bewildered criticisms.
But we won, Michael, because the message creeps and seeps into everyone eventually. The Matrix has them now, too.
Cheers!
See… and now Andy has berought ME into the fold too.
Micheal – I share your pain, I love these movies, have the Ultimate collection, and could spout on about them for hours without trying.
But I jsut get looked at wierdly when I try and do that sigh