The Matrix Trilogy

[Penzoline]

It happens every time. Year after year, matrix continues to rile me up. I care to argue it is far more than what the majority of people perceive it to be, and even more important than it is considered.

 

If I actually went on about explaining my thoughts on as to why I think this is, I'd end up writing a fokken book - but I'll indulge you on some levels.

 

Matrix in of its own is a perfect standalone movie and the sequels did not affect it and that's great, but what is not great is how easy it is for people to flock to critize a sequel to something that did not neccesarily need one. The writers obviously had the whole thing panned out before the movies were made, I mean the whole story. The trilogy makes The Matrix into a more substantial universe and has the guts to answer questions in a manner that make you think - ergo; the architecht (see what I did there!?). It never becomes inadvertently dumb(although the last Smith fight in Revolutions kinda, well, does). Whatever the trilogy does, does with love and care.

 

The bullshit the sequels got weren't deserved and I will forever and always stand by that. They are more than just dumb sequels and whoever argues otherwise doesn't care to look further than their own nose. The standalone of the first film didn't automatically equal the sequels being just a money grub sham dumb hollywood shit, because they aren't that. The trilogy was, is and forever will be special. It proved Hollywood we didn't have to settle for story-noaction or action-nostory while doing it's own thing not neccesarily diluting itself with both into mashed potatoes that just tastes like water, the pacing of the movies makes sure of that.

 

I'm sure a lot of people in the psytrance community, whats with many having field days with themes of religion and exploration of the mind, can agree these movies are fascinating ideas brought fourth with a different type of entertaiment typeset. I felt the movies are what I would define as perfect representation of Goa, not the place, not the genre, but the ideas it brings forth - to make you think, imagine. And that is why I fucking love this trilogy and hate to see the hate.

 

I'll just leave the end of this post for suggesting to being open minded, going back and rewatching the trilogy, not ignoring the philosophical questions it puts on you, not ignoring the tremendously fantastic work of the lore, art and even action(I was genuinely suprised how fantastic the action was in Reloaded, even to this day). There are a lot of good articles on the internet about the more deeper themes The Matrix presents us that are often ignored, if you are interested.

 

And before I forget, the Animatrix, if you never saw it, GO WATCH IT. It explains SO MUCH and extends the lore and story even further than the sequels did.

 

For all the artificial razzle-dazzle and genre-mashing of the Matrix series, here’s a small, human moment, where the truth—powerful as it is—doesn’t match up with the fantasy. It’s such a fine distillation of so much of what these movies have been about, as well as an inadvertent commentary on the public reaction to them. Because of our expectations, we can’t always recognize when something phenomenal has occurred.

Remember remember the fifth of... Fuckawesome that is.. The Matrix.

[Veracohr]

I haven't seen any of them for a while, but here's what comes immediately to mind:

 

- The first one was a cinematic milestone, and thus any sequel would obviously be held to a very high standard. And people's tastes are so varied it's no surprise there will be some vocal critics.

 

- I recall reading somewhere that the creators of the movie DIDN'T intend to make more than one movie.

 

- I've read somewhere that substantial aspects of the story are direct, or thinly veiled ripoffs of existing material.

 

 

Again, I haven't seen any of them for a while, but from what I recall, the first movie was a message-bearing storytelling gem encased in an action, sci-fi wrapping. The sequels were just action with little intellectual value, but not bad for what they were.

[technosomy]

mmmmm interesting, but i definatley agree with you penz, i loved the movie and the sequels.

when i went to see it at the movies when it was released, i have to admit i didn't like it!

but the reason why was i think i just didn't understand it, ( a time when i was so stuck in mind) so never saw any of the sequels until years later, when speaking to a friend about it, and he explained his theories on the movie, and i then realised i may have written it off to quickly, so i downloaded original and BANG!

so then got sequels straight after and watched, then...................... i watched them again............... wow, thats all i can say

those movies are so close to the truth....... it aint funny.

you have inspired me to watch them again!

[Ormion]

The Matrix: Best movie ever and a milestone in every cinematic aspect.

The Matrix Reloaded: Superb sequel with quite possibly the best action sequences ever.

The Matrix Revolutions: Anticlimactic and less good, but still nice.

 

- I recall reading somewhere that the creators of the movie DIDN'T intend to make more than one movie.

I think it's the opposite. Wachowski's wrote the first movie with a full universe in mind.

[Rotwang]

I'm sure a lot of people in the psytrance community, whats with many having field days with themes of religion and exploration of the mind, can agree these movies are fascinating ideas brought fourth with a different type of entertaiment typeset. I felt the movies are what I would define as perfect representation of Goa, not the place, not the genre, but the ideas it brings forth - to make you think, imagine.

Sorry to be a downer, but I have to disagree. The philosophical ideas in the movies were old and well-known and IMO the films' sophomoric pontification on those subjects added nothing of value. The first film had a plot that made no sense (How the hell is using humans as a source of energy more efficient than using the stuff you're feeding those humans as a source of energy? Yes, I know they said they fed humans food made from other humans - that wouldn't work, as anybody with a GCSE in physics will be able to tell you. Why didn't the machines just set the matrix in a time before the information age, thereby removing all the humans' means of leaving it or fighting back? Why are Neo and the rest fighting to destroy the matrix when living in the matrix is obviously preferable to living in the ruined present eating slop? Cypher was the good guy, damnit!). Worse than the plot, though, was the disturbing overtone of Nietzschean superiority which enabled the film to portray Neo et al as the heroes while they murdered dozens of innocent people. But I was willing to overlook those failings because they seemed like a necessary hook on which to hang the film's brilliant visual style and innovative action sequences; it was ultimately a dumb action movie (and I don't mean that in a derogatory way) with a daft excuse plot. I would have liked the sequels if they'd been dumb action movies too, but they weren't. They took the ridiculous plot and philosophical pretensions and turned them up to eleven.

[Ormion]

Why are Neo and the rest fighting to destroy the matrix when living in the matrix is obviously preferable to living in the ruined present eating slop?

Ehm...that's the point of the movie.

[Rotwang]

Ehm...that's the point of the movie.

Care to expand? It didn't seem like the point of the movie to me.

[Ormion]

Care to expand? It didn't seem like the point of the movie to me.

Well the movie is about freedom. Are you willing to sacrifice comfort and joy for freedom? That's the whole point of the movie, the whole humans vs machines war is just the tool to tell the story. And I don't think the movie takes sides on who is right and who is wrong. Obviously Neo is the good guy and Cypher the bad one in the movie language, but Wachowski's made the real world as miserable as possible on purpose in order to justify why most people refuse to 'wake up'. I think the parallels with real life (societies, religions, belief systems in general) are more than obvious.

 

For me Matrix has three levels (the exact same levels with my other favourite movie Truman Show).

 

Level 1. Human vs Machine. Soul vs Intellect

Level 2. Human vs his social life and how imprisoned he feels and scared to break free.

Level 3. Human vs God, Reality, Nature (call it as you want). The endless fight of human psyche/mind to be completelly free despite the consequences.

[Rotwang]

Well the movie is about freedom. Are you willing to sacrifice comfort and joy for freedom?

What kind of "freedom" is living outside the matrix? What are people free to do outside it that they aren't free to do inside it?

[Ormion]

What kind of "freedom" is living outside the matrix? What are people free to do outside it that they aren't free to do inside it?

I think you can see it both literally and metaphorically.

 

There are many levels of freedom. You break free from one and aim for the other. If I'm in jail and manage to escape I will be free from prison, but I will still 'imprisoned' by rules and convections. Apparently the good guys in the Matrix see the machines are dynasts that imprisoned them without their will (which is incorrect since it's stated in the movies that the only reason the Matrix exists is because we subconsciously allow it), so gaining the freedom is what they want. They will still be imprisoned though and that's why I believe that the Matrix is a metaphor for reality.

 

When I first watched the movie I immediately felt what the creators wanted to express (the same with Truman Show). I always felt like a prisoner in my life that I couldn't escape, because the system doesn't allow me to. But I'm part of the system too, I refuse to wake up. That's why I love the Matrix. It's like seeing my life in front of my eyes.

[Rotwang]

I think you can see it both literally and metaphorically.

 

There are many levels of freedom. You break free from one and aim for the other. If I'm in jail and manage to escape I will be free from prison, but I will still 'imprisoned' by rules and convections. Apparently the good guys in the Matrix see the machines are dynasts that imprisoned them without their will (which is incorrect since it's stated in the movies that the only reason the Matrix exists is because we subconsciously allow it), so gaining the freedom is what they want. They will still be imprisoned though and that's why I believe that the Matrix is a metaphor for reality.

 

When I first watched the movie I immediately felt what the creators wanted to express (the same with Truman Show). I always felt like a prisoner in my life that I couldn't escape, because the system doesn't allow me to. But I'm part of the system too, I refuse to wake up. That's why I love the Matrix. It's like seeing my life in front of my eyes.

But none of that answers my question. Surely most people who've been in jail would agree that life is better outside jail, both in terms of comfort and freedom, and I could easily list ways in which you and I are more free than people in jail. But how are people outside the matrix more free than people inside it? The power structures that determine the ways in which people are and aren't free in the matrix are identical to the ones put in place by real people in the real world in 1999. Why would anyone think the society that humanity would create in a post-matrix world would be any better than the one in the matrix, even ignoring the many evident ways in which the standard of living would be worse? Bear in mind that any such society would be founded by people like Morpheus, who sees no problem with murdering you and your family so he can impose his vision of freedom on the world, and consider how societies created by those kind of people usually turn out.

[Ormion]

But how are people outside the matrix more free than people inside it?

Well for start it's something they didn't choose. Someone took them and put them in a prison without asking them. That's more prison than real world, not in a practical way, but because they imprisoned their will.

 

But still if you see the plot literally they're not more free. And I don't think the movie implies otherwise.

But if you see the movie metaphorically and replace Matrix with God/reality/nature/society/private life then they're definetely more free (but not necessarily happier).

 

Bear in mind that any such society would be founded by people like Morpheus, who sees no problem with murdering you and your family so he can impose his vision of freedom on the world, and consider how societies created by those kind of people usually turn out.

Morpheus is nothing more than an anarchist. He's willing to sacrifice the 'sheep', the defenders of the Matrix to free the world. It's up to you to agree or disagree with his vision.

[Rotwang]

Well for start it's something they didn't choose. Someone took them and put them in a prison without asking them. That's more prison than real world, not in a practical way, but because they imprisoned their will.

But nobody asked them if they wanted to be "liberated" from the matrix, either, so how is that any better? For that matter, nobody asked any of us if we wanted to be born - does that mean we're somehow less free than if we had never existed? And if it does, why is this a problem?

 

But if you see the movie metaphorically and replace Matrix with God/reality/nature/society/private life then they're definetely more free (but not necessarily happier).

Sorry, I don't see it.

 

Morpheus is nothing more than an anarchist. He's willing to sacrifice the 'sheep', the defenders of the Matrix to free the world. It's up to you to agree or disagree with his vision.

And I disagree with it, strongly. But the film, as far as I can tell, agrees with it. It portrays Morpheus, Neo and the rest sympathetically, and it portrays Cypher as the villain. It makes the audience root for bad guys, with no hint of ambiguity or irony or self-awareness. That's what I object to: the film is wrong.

[Veracohr]

To me it boils down to the simple notion that some people just don't like to be duped, even if living the lie is more comfortable. I sympathize with that; I'd prefer reality over a lie. But I think expecting an action movie to explore all the subtleties of philosophy is asking a bit much. Moviegoers like heroes and villains, and they tend to dislike ambiguity. Leave that to the low budget art films.

[Blair Thaumic]

I'd recommend that anyone who was disappointed by the live action movies watch The Animatrix, in particular the shorts Beyond and Matriculated. Visually, they're stunning -- Peter Chung and Koji Morimoto are probably my favorite living animators -- and the stories they tell are deeper, too. For one thing, they do a better job of tackling the question of whether life without/outside of the Matrix is actually a good thing.

[Rotwang]

But I think expecting an action movie to explore all the subtleties of philosophy is asking a bit much.

I agree. The problem is, they tried.

 

I'd recommend that anyone who was disappointed by the live action movies watch The Animatrix [...]

Seen it. Good animation indeed, but the stories didn't do much for me.

[Penzoline]

Sorry to be a downer, but I have to disagree. The philosophical ideas in the movies were old and well-known and IMO the films' sophomoric pontification on those subjects added nothing of value.

This is irrelevant, very much like many other stories that are told today, their ideas have been known for ages. It's the medium and it's influence that matters, value is more subjective.

 

The first film had a plot that made no sense (How the hell is using humans as a source of energy more efficient than using the stuff you're feeding those humans as a source of energy? Yes, I know they said they fed humans food made from other humans - that wouldn't work, as anybody with a GCSE in physics will be able to tell you.

Like saying Star Trek's warp drives dont make no sense. It's science fiction.

 

Why didn't the machines just set the matrix in a time before the information age, thereby removing all the humans' means of leaving it or fighting back?

Was explained by the architecht, according to the universe of matrix, humans mind couldn't cope with the utopian world. As was extensively explained about having more than one The One. A failsafe mechanism and another way of control.

 

Why are Neo and the rest fighting to destroy the matrix when living in the matrix is obviously preferable to living in the ruined present eating slop? Cypher was the good guy, damnit!).

That is on the eye of beholder but Cypher was generally considered the bad guy, he accepted the fake world, as everyone is of course an individual. As a big part of the theme is choice, the machines don't even allow humans to have it. Obviously Morpheous had made a mistake with taking cypher out - or cypher made a mistake of wanting out. They should have perhaps investigated his personality before unplugging? A human mistake in the actual story, not bad writing. Wanting to live in a fake world or eating slop in the real world comes with an ethical perspective. Matter of the fact is, the fields were disgusting, what the machines did do to the humans was disgusting. One of the stories in the Animatrix delved even deeper into what went down and how horrendeous it was when they took over in "the second renaissance"

 

Worse than the plot, though, was the disturbing overtone of Nietzschean superiority which enabled the film to portray Neo et al as the heroes while they murdered dozens of innocent people. But I was willing to overlook those failings because they seemed like a necessary hook on which to hang the film's brilliant visual style and innovative action sequences; it was ultimately a dumb action movie (and I don't mean that in a derogatory way) with a daft excuse plot. I would have liked the sequels if they'd been dumb action movies too, but they weren't. They took the ridiculous plot and philosophical pretensions and turned them up to eleven.

Again whether you agree with the philosophical questions or way the story approaches it, that's just in the eye of the beholder. The biggest factor that I believe matters is, again, the medium and influence it brought it to. Matrix movies were huge blockbusters. Watchowskis could have easily just ignore even trying to create a story that can make the viewer think and just go that dumb action movie route, thing is, it was special for it didn't.

 

What I also noticed is most complaints about sequels were about them destroying the mythos the first movie laid to the viewer, but in it's lore and universe the mythos was bullshit as explained by the architecht. Whether you think it's a good story or not, that's all about opinions again but fact is, they wrote the whole story before the first movie was even made.

 

But I think expecting an action movie to explore all the subtleties of philosophy is asking a bit much. Moviegoers like heroes and villains, and they tend to dislike ambiguity. Leave that to the low budget art films.

Why should they? That's again what made Matrix so special. Obviously people will disagree with the way they did it but it still at least tried to push some boundaries with the medium back then.

[Lemmiwinks]

haha funny you mention this, I just stumbled on the Screen Junkie's "honest trailer" which pretty much hits the nail on the head

 

"I have no idea what this guy is talking about... is it too late for me to take the blue pill?" LMAO

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fY9UhIxitYM#t=227

[Veracohr]

Why should they? That's again what made Matrix so special. Obviously people will disagree with the way they did it but it still at least tried to push some boundaries with the medium back then.

Maybe you misunderstood me. I meant that the story is fine as it is (clear good & bad guys) and that if they DID try to explore the "maybe Neo & gang aren't entirely in the right" aspect, it would be an unfortunate distraction. I was disagreeing with Rotwang's criticism that the story ignored those aspects.

[Penzoline]

Maybe you misunderstood me. I meant that the story is fine as it is (clear good & bad guys) and that if they DID try to explore the "maybe Neo & gang aren't entirely in the right" aspect, it would be an unfortunate distraction. I was disagreeing with Rotwang's criticism that the story ignored those aspects.

Oh yes lol. I didn't pay attention to the "subtleties" word that you had there.

 

 

How ironic.. ;_;

 

[Rotwang]

It's the medium and it's influence that matters, value is more subjective.

What matters is also subjective.

 

Was explained by the architecht, according to the universe of matrix, humans mind couldn't cope with the utopian world.

I didn't ask why the matrix wasn't Utopian. I asked why the matrix wasn't set before the information age. Humans lived for thousands of years before we had phones and computers and our minds seemed to cope just fine.

 

That is on the eye of beholder but Cypher was generally considered the bad guy

He's generally considered the bad guy because the film portrays him as the bad guy, and audiences are generally happy to accept whatever moral judgements they're told to accept (a point that's occasionally made by better works of philosophical fiction).

 

he accepted the fake world

Why do you think it matters if it's fake or not? As far as you or I know we could be living in the matrix right now. If you suspected that were true, what difference would it make to you? Would you stop enjoying the things you enjoy? Would the relationships you had formed with other people cease to matter? If you banged your head against the wall, would it no longer hurt because the wall wasn't real?

 

As a big part of the theme is choice, the machines don't even allow humans to have it.

Nor did Morpheus. If he'd wanted Cypher and the others to have a real choice he could have told them what actually awaited them outside the matrix, instead of using sleazy marketing techniques. I don't think those security guards whom Neo, Trinity and the others slaughtered had much of a choice, for that matter.

 

Wanting to live in a fake world or eating slop in the real world comes with an ethical perspective.

So does mass murder.

 

Matrix movies were huge blockbusters.

So was The Birth of a Nation. That doesn't mean we have to agree with it.

[Penzoline]

Good points there, although the information-age was a complimentary system to the other form of control. Guess we'll just have to think this was the best solution in the lore or that the robots just werent all that smart, pick your poison.

 

And I have never heard of the movie you mentioned.

[Rotwang]

Good points there

Thanks, you made some as well (e.g. I agree that calling out the film's physics was unfair on my part).

 

And I have never heard of the movie you mentioned.

It's a movie from 1915 that glorified the KKK and caused a massive increase in membership. I'm not trying to suggest that The Matrix had any similarly negative consequences, of course - just an extreme analogy that doesn't quite invoke Godwin's Law.

[Ormion]

To be fair you describe Morpheus as a mass murderer when he was not. Morpheus didn't kill random people. The only innocent people they killed were the cops that tried to get in the way and at least Wachowski's tried to 'justify' that in the red dress scene. Actually apart from the scene when they rescue Morpheus and kill all the security I don't think they actually kill any innocent in purpose.

Why do you think it matters if it's fake or not? As far as you or I know we could be living in the matrix right now. If you suspected that were true, what difference would it make to you? Would you stop enjoying the things you enjoy? Would the relationships you had formed with other people cease to matter? If you banged your head against the wall, would it no longer hurt because the wall wasn't real?

 

But that's the point. Maybe it doesn't matter to you (and possibly to me), but it may matter to others (see Veracohr). Don't you think that people should know the truth and have a choice?

As for Cypher don't forget that the reason he's portrayed as a bad guy is because he tried to kill with his own hands the whole crew. If Morpheus is a villain for killing innocent why Cypher is not?

[Penzoline]

I finally watched Revolutions again now. While I would agree with many common criticism's people put on it, there's is more depth to it than what seems on the surface. The 3rd movie basically makes it clear, although subtly(unlike say the architecth scene), what the mythology actually is; instead of what it was supposed to be(Matrix as a 1 film). I never even paid attention to the whole fact how Neo suddenly sees the machine world as this yellow light and that theres three dominant colors going on all the time, Blue (physical), Green (mind) and Yellow (spiritual). They even go as far as to put the christian cross sign on your face the moment Neo "ascends", for what I believe, just to make the average movie-goer think there's something more going here than just ending the war - that something more was accomplished. There's enough credible sources to own up to whatever the watchowskis did, they did it deliberately, and the whole mythology notion isn't just something people make up it to be even if it wouldn't have had deeper meaning (like often they tend to do that). The problem of seeing this is that the watchowskis themselves dont tend, or even want, to get involved with the public. This creates distance to the intended meaning of the movie, because they don't straight up tell people whats supposed to be what and you know how that goes. They have experessed their desire to stay out of the limelight, and it can be seen just for the simple fact; how many of you actually knew Larry Watchowski changed their gender? I was oblivious to that before I watched this movie, still thinking it's the brothers, like many others, even with recent movies coming out from them. Weird.

 

Maybe I do have some bias towards the Trilogy as a whole since it was a big thing to push me into goatrance, which arguably changed my life, and it came with a visual and an artistic style that I heavily connect with. I never really looked into the story that strongly but as I get older these things pique my interest more and more. Still, that said, I do think the Matrix Trilogy as a whole is underrated, even if some criticism is justifiable.

 

Anyhow, I just loved this little piece of dialogue in revelations.

"Why, Mr. Anderson? Why do you do it? Why get up? Why keep fighting? Do you believe you're fighting for something? For more than your survival? Can you tell me what it is? Do you even know? Is it freedom? Or truth? Perhaps peace? Yes? No? Could it be for love? Illusions, Mr. Anderson. Vagaries of perception. The temporary constructs of a feeble human intellect trying desperately to justify an existence that is without meaning or purpose. And all of them as artificial as the Matrix itself, although only a human mind could invent something as insipid as love. You must be able to see it, Mr. Anderson. You must know it by now. You can't win. It's pointless to keep fighting. Why, Mr. Anderson? Why? Why do you persist?"