I see no reason for the guns to be limited to the time period, or even to the fact that they would work in real life at all. It is, after all, a computer world.
Why the hell didn’t Neo ask for a BFG 10k, or maybe a Redeemer?
Also, why did they put the bomb in the elevator? What were they trying to do, collapse a building that they were on the top of?
I believe they were trying to prevent being ambushed from below. Kill the elevator=stop more security from coming up.
My boss, video director, thot it was amazing, so I went with high expectations.
I honestly couldn’t figure out why the movie was made. The special effects sometimes bored me (like the remake of “Fantastic Voyages” blood vessel shots – that was a lousy movie 40 years ago). The plot was composed of tatters of various, limping limpid sci-fi ideas. (I can usually at least vaguely remember the plots of even so-so movies, but this one . . . )
I remember something cute about choosing a blue pill or a red one – not what it meant. And some nice weirdness at the beginning when the main guy had to bolt from his office.
The acting and photography was ok.
The DVD was available at the library – but it was one of those movies that didn’t bear seeing twice – especially not with indulgent commentaries explaining how the “work of genius” came about – revealing that the ramshackle release was actually the result of chaos, misdirection, lousy casting, etc.
Yeah, but they don’t need to blow up the elevator to do it. I’m pretty sure that shooting the elevator cables off was quite enough to disable it.
But it is a computer word defined by the machines to match ‘exactly’ a specific period in time or reality. The program would not understand the parameters of a BFG, Laser Gun, Photon Torpedo, Warp Engines, X-Wing Fighters, etc.
On the more practical side, even if it did do so, I can see the need to create as little attention as possible by using conventional weapons of that period. Although killing a dozen cops and blowing up a lobby would generate attention, it would be explainable to the population due to the use of modern weapons and explosives. Trash the lobby and kill the cops with a BFG and you have a far greater problem to deal with. Remember, in the movie it is presented that there are some people “inside” the matrix who suspect things are not as they seem and that the shock of ‘reality’ would be too much for them to accept.
Creates a diversion. The explosion was noticeable to the three Agents working on Morpheus. As a result, two agents were sent to investigate the incident.
You ALWAYS blow something up to create a diversion. 
Now, someone please explain to me why I am defending The Matrix at 4 in the morning? Lack of a life or 404 errors at my favorite porn sites are not valid explainations, thank you!
I liked it, but was not blown away by it for the following reasons:
-
Neo is the least interesting character ever. In fact, he’s not a character–he has no personality, no quirks, no definining characteristics. He’s just a blank slate for teenage boys to project themselves onto.
-
The screenplay follows the Hero’s Journey to a fault. The plot often reads like an ad for a “learn the secrets of the screenwriters” course, including scenes because they are demanded by the Heroe’s Journey formula but not by the actual story at hand. (E.g. the Oracle.)
-
Human beings are … batteries? Who got paid for that little gem?
Dude, they’re people. It doesn’t matter that their bodies are in those stupid pods and their brains are being fed artificial sensory information; they have human minds and live human lives in the Matrix.
Regardless of its silliness, The Matrix has definitely been an influential movie. The innovative visual touches have become cliches through imitation, and movies with fight scenes that are supposed to take place in the real world use Matrix-style tricks. I guess in Hollywood, imitation is the sincerest form of money-grubbing, uncreative crap.
This was dealt with in the movie. They are a permanent part of the matrix and are all potential agents, so there is no reason not to kill them.
Huh? They had the ability to load whatever they wanted into the Matrix the whole movie. We didn’t find this out “in the end”.
Well, this is basically the point of the whole movie. The Matrix is a computer program. Because it is a program it has rules that even the agents are subject to. Because the humans are well, human, they can adapt and out-think the computers.
From reading the replys in this thread that get specific, I am getting the impression that those who don’t like this movie just didn’t understand it.
I fell asleep watching the Matrix. My brother-in-law (who is a new member of the board) blames it on the fact that we were watching the movie off of a dvd from his laptop on a Saturday night, but I figure if it was good it would have kept me awake.
That was the measure I used to judge Minority Report (in many ways a similar movie)- on “The Matrix” scale, it came out great, since I didn’t fall asleep.
Great googly moogly, is this really the system of morality advanced by the film? Now I’m really glad I haven’t seen it.
I swear that there was more than one agent around Morpheus when Neo shot them with the helicopter gun. Luckily (or unluckily, depending on your viewpoint) there was another person near the room that an agent could steal the body from.
Maybe I’m remembering wrong, though. I guess I’ll have to rewatch that scene.
Yeah, it just went over our heads.
Now I remember. Agent Smith said “find them and destroy them” when the fire system went off.
I still remember more than one agent getting shot, though. I mean really, did he really need that much ammo to take down a single agent?
Oh good. They’re not evil, they’re just Nazis. “They’re lives will never ammount to anything so it’s okay to just kill anyone we want!”
Why not drop a nuke in the middle of the Matrix city and be done with it then? Shut down the Matrix and the machines in one shot without risking the lives of the uber-men who’s clear superiority gives them the power to decide who lives and who dies.
You don’t understand why this position is morally objectionable?
When I came out of the cinema, my enthused friend (who’d already seen it three times ) said “So whaddaya think? Huh? Huh?” I answered “well, I already saw that movie not long ago, only it was called Dark City… And how did Cypher get in and out of the Matrix without any help?..” (That was my friend’s first realisation that there were plot holes.)
I actually enjoyed the stylized cityscape of Dark City a bit more – it just had a more gothic, film noir approach and creepier bad guys (and Riff Raff was in it!)
I liked some of the details in the comic book style of the violence of The Matrix (like the sexy close-up shot of spent shell casings bouncing off the floor “kching-kching-kching” in pseudo slow motion), but I wasn’t tremendoulsy impressed overall. Visually it had its cheap thrill moments. Good looking people in neat clothes. I didn’t think it was crap – it kept me entertained – but I wasn’t hopping up and down like my friend and wanting to dress like Trinity for Hallowe’en. (My friend wanted to be Neo/One for Hallowe’en.)
What i find annoying is the slow-mo bullets with the air ripples being used in every movie. Just stop it already, please!
I hear ya. One of the very few complaints I had about Fellowship of the Ring was this one scene where Legolas lets off an arrow and then we follow it, arrow-cam style, to the orc. I saw the movie several times and each time found this jarring. It was way out of the style of everything else and didn’t seem to fit at all.
Likewise, I am so frickin’ sick of every comedy movie thinking it needs to do a Matrix-kick-spoof thing. It’s tired. It was tired back then and it’s tired now. Congratulations, Shrek, you now have a stupid, dated reference in your movie.
Wait! Batteries are people!!!
But really, I liked the movie, but I don’t think I’ll see it again, 'cause I don’t think it was a particularly good movie.
To quote Lamia, and respond to her:
Yes, it is (someone can correct me if I’m remembering wrong).
The movie basically says it’s better to live a “free” life than one of illusionment (don’t know if that’s a real word… sounds like a new chewing gum), and that it’s better to die than live life in chains. Nothing new there, but the train of thought continues with the idea that to “free” mankind, it’s ok to kill all those people who will never be free. I mean, if only they knew what kind of horrible lie they’re living, they’d want to die!
And about the “why did he just think up guns” question, I don’t think it would have mattered what he thought up. Wasn’t the point really that Ted Theodore Logan had to have his little breakthrough/transformation before he could be truly effectual at all? At that point he could have had a wet noodle and beaten those guys, where a nuclear bomb wouldn’t have before.