Has anyone seen the Matrix Reloaded issue of Time magazine?
They are both owned by WB, yet the article goes on to lay out every single plot line of the movie, well before the movie comes out.
I expect this from internet sources, but not from major publications.
When I first read about this, I assumed someone had leaked articles from an advance edition to be released after the movie opening. But no, there they are right on Time’s own website. Could be some bogus information to generate more hype, but that would be a risky strategy and I doubt they would use Time magazine for such purposes.
Since Time is part of TimeWarner, I’d say it’s simply a way to show off (and justify a cover story) without ruffling the studio’s feathers (since there’s an semi-official gag order on reviewing the film in print still).
I read the Time article because I was informed beforehand that the Spoiler warning is marked in Big Bold Letters. Easily skipping over those parts, I was able to read the rest in the online version without having anything given away. FTR, the spoiler starts middle of page 2 and continues to middle of page 3 if you read it online.
“Plot”? “You keep using that word- I do not think that word means what you think it does”.:dubious:
The whole problem with Matrix is the completely stupid & absolutely unbeleivable “plot” , which just about ruined the film for me. After all- the whole thing was a “dream” anyway, and nothing really mattered so…? And- generating energy from human bodies? That violates ALL the known laws of thermodynamics. And- if the humans didn’t KNOW it was a “dream” and were happier in that “dream” wgy take them out of it into a life which is far worse- which after all- as far as they know could be just another simulation. :rolleyes:
Come on, be real. No one watches Matrix for a “plot”- you watch it *in spite of * a “plot”. You watch it for the outstanding action sequences. They could have given you a copy of the script, and you’d still watch it.
I liked the plot :D.
So sue me :p. I don’t care if it was unrealistic, it was an entertaining story.
…and I thought I had a hard time suspending my disbelief!
Look who’s talking. You’re criticizing the premise, not the plot.
That’s really more of a philosophical disagreement you have with about 85% of humanity than it is a plot flaw.
As for the thermodynamics thing, that’s just a McGuffin. So ignore it.
Achernar- OH? Suppose somebody came to you, and said “This entire life of yours- and everyone elses- is just a dream by the White Queen”. In reality, you are a man in a bottle who is only half alive. If we break you out- the real life is at best bleak. Oh- and maybe the bleak “real” life is the dream, and what I am saying is the “dream” is the real life". So would you choose to “wake up”? If- indeed- maybe “waking up” is volunteering to enter a nitemare?
Besides- maybe the “real” life in the matrix is the “dream” and the Matrix is the reality? Can you prove otherwise? Or maybe both aren’t real.
Hitchcock defined the McGuffin as “The thing the spies are after.” A perfect example of a McGuffin is The One Ring. I don’t think The Matrix really has a McGuffin, per se. Zion is kind of a McGuffin because the Agents want to know where it is. Neo himself is kind of a McGuffin, too. But the “thermodynamics thing” is not a McGuffin. It’s just stupid.
Seeing as how they’re both part of the movie, I’ll go with C.
Time seems to have trouble with giving away movie bits. Weren’t they the bozos who began their review of Pulp Fiction with something like
****** spolier alert ******
"Like a hypodermic needle through the heart, . . . .
****** spolier alert ******
That’s much worse than anything to do with the Matrix, IMO, as it gives away about three different layers of surprise in the movie.
I have to agree…although that was kind of shitty of Time to do, I seriously doubt more than 10 people will be going to see the film for anything remotely to do with plot.
Special effects, yes.
“Plot…uh, isn’t that the dirt in the cemetery where they bury the dead guys?”
That violates the laws in the Matrix created world, not in the REAL world.
Hey, I didn’t say I disagreed with you; I said that 85% of humanity would. Ask someone, Would you be willing to live in a perfect world with just one catch - you were being lied to? I think you’ll be surprised how many say no. Anyway, The Matrix did have someone who represents your point of view. His name was Cypher.
vibrotronica: Okay, I guess I was misinformed about what a McGuffin is. I was using this definition I found online: “McGuffin is a term for the device or plot element that catches the viewer’s attention or drives the logic of the plot, especially in suspense films. According to Hitchcock, the McGuffin can be ignored as soon as it has served its purpose.”
No, you weren’t really wrong, Archernar. The definition you provide is a better and more appropriate one. Essentially, the Wachowskis needed mankind to be enslaved by machines. Why? It really doesn’t matter–they bring up the energy harnassing idea because they have to use some reason, but it’s a reason that’s as quickly dropped as it’s introduced because it’s wholly irrelevant to the action of the story and the themes they want/try to address.
Well good, I was just going to see the effects.
Plot? Whats a plot?
I have to agree, I don’t particularly care if the plot is bad. 
But I still really don’t want it spoiled.
I dunno, my mum’s planning on seeing it for plot alone – she could care less about special effects and cool fight scenes.
spoiler alert!!!
there is no spoon…