# What's so special about the special effects in The Matrix? **URL:** \ **Category:** Cafe Society\ **Created:** [July 2, 2003, 8:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-so-special-about-the-special-effects-in-the-matrix/185739 "2003-07-02T08:16:40Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 18\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![Dunderman](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/ecb155/32.png) [@Dunderman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dunderman)\ **Post date:** [July 2, 2003, 8:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-so-special-about-the-special-effects-in-the-matrix/185739/1 "2003-07-02T08:16:40Z")
I’ve read loads about how special the effects in _The Matrix_ are, and how they’re a revolutionary new technique, how nobody’s really sure who invented it and someone else was doing it at the same time and so on, but I can’t really see what’s so special about it. Sure, it looks cool, but when you get right down to it, isn’t it just ultra-slow motion? Why the ranting and raving? [sub]Oh, and nobody really cares if _The Matrix_ was good or not, or which movie/artist/person/whatever was first with the technique, so let’s keep that out of the thread, mmm’kay?[/sub] ---
**Author:** ![refusal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/ac91a4/32.png) [@refusal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/refusal)\ **Post date:** [July 2, 2003, 10:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-so-special-about-the-special-effects-in-the-matrix/185739/2 "2003-07-02T10:40:43Z")
It’s not just ultra slow motion. Ultra-slow motion would be where you used one camera to capture a sequence of images close together in time. However, this cannot be used to photograph the same moment in time from more than one point of view, which should be obvious. There are also practical limitations on how fast you can move the camera. The special effects sequences for the technique known as “bullet time” are done using a large number of computer-controlled cameras which trigger simultaneously or very shortly after one another, to overcome the limitations with moving a single camera for slow-motion work. Do a google search for “bullet time” for more information, since you don’t apparently want people here to talk about when/where/how/why the technique was invented or whether it was original to the Matrix. In fact you don’t really seem to want to discuss anything. There are about a million Matrix-related websites anyhow. ---
**Author:** ![Dunderman](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/ecb155/32.png) [@Dunderman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dunderman)\ **Post date:** [July 2, 2003, 10:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-so-special-about-the-special-effects-in-the-matrix/185739/3 "2003-07-02T10:45:21Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by refusal \* > \*\*Do a google search for “bullet time” for more information, since you don’t apparently want people here to talk about when/where/how/why the technique was invented or whether it was original to the Matrix. In fact you don’t really seem to want to discuss anything. \*\* I wanted to discuss the technique, but not whether it was original to _The Matrix_ or who was first in doing/suggesting it, since those topics are apparently subjects of holy wars. What I did want to know was why the technique is different from ultra-slow motion, and you gave me the answer: we freeze the image but not the angle. That’s pretty cool when you think about it. Up to now, I hadn’t. Searching for “bullet time” has yielded exactly nothing so far, since everyone just raves on about how great it is without adding _why_ it is great. ---
**Author:** ![Tusculan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/ecd19e/32.png) [@Tusculan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tusculan)\ **Post date:** [July 2, 2003, 10:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-so-special-about-the-special-effects-in-the-matrix/185739/4 "2003-07-02T10:50:33Z")
**Priceguy** , I think what irked **refusal** was that you ask what’s special about the FX in The Matrix, but don’t want to know who was first. The thing is that these FX are special _because_ The Matrix was the first to use them. I honestly don’t see how you can talk about the one without mentioning the other. ---
**Author:** ![Dunderman](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/ecb155/32.png) [@Dunderman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dunderman)\ **Post date:** [July 2, 2003, 11:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-so-special-about-the-special-effects-in-the-matrix/185739/5 "2003-07-02T11:02:44Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Tusculan \* > \*\ ***Priceguy** , I think what irked **refusal** was that you ask what’s special about the FX in The Matrix, but don’t want to know who was first. The thing is that these FX are special _because_ The Matrix was the first to use them. I honestly don’t see how you can talk about the one without mentioning the other. \*\* OK, let’s rephrase. “What is so special about the special effects techniques that have become known as ‘bullet time’ and are best-known for their use in the 1999 movie _The Matrix_?”. I’m asking about the techniques themselves, not the movies they have been used in. I disagree that they’re famous because _The Matrix_ was first with them (if, indeed, it was). They would have been famous no matter who or what was first with them. ---
**Author:** ![Tusculan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/ecd19e/32.png) [@Tusculan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tusculan)\ **Post date:** [July 2, 2003, 11:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-so-special-about-the-special-effects-in-the-matrix/185739/6 "2003-07-02T11:37:27Z")
Ah, now I see your point. But do you agree that one of the reasons it is special is because it was different from what happened before? In that case you should allow for discussion about who was first with the technique. ‘special’ is relative to the technical standard at the time of the movie. Some references that may or may not answer your question (in case **refusal** ’s answer doesn’t fully answer it already): - [Slow=perfection](http://iron.lcc.gatech.edu/classes/tryon/engl1101_a2/whatisthematrix/bullettime.html) - [hollywood.com](http://www.hollywood.com/sites/matrix/feature/type/spoon/id/1715410/page/2) - [Bullet time walk-through](http://whatisthematrix.warnerbros.com/cmp/sfx-bullet_text.html) - [with pictures](http://cartoon.iguw.tuwien.ac.at/tom/quicktime/episode_2/matrix_bullettimewalkthru.html) - [Wired.com](http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/11.05/matrix2.html) These links focus on The Matrix Reloaded, but also discuss the novelty of bullet time in The Matrix. I found them by Googling first for “bullet time”, then for “bullet time Gaeta” (Gaeta being the FX director credited with inventing it: found the name with the first google effort). Hope this is of any use. 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![Dunderman](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/ecb155/32.png) [@Dunderman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dunderman)\ **Post date:** [July 2, 2003, 11:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-so-special-about-the-special-effects-in-the-matrix/185739/7 "2003-07-02T11:53:14Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Tusculan \* > **But do you agree that one of the reasons it is special is because it was different from what happened before?** Of course. > [@](#): > > **In that case you should allow for discussion about who was first with the technique. ‘special’ is relative to the technical standard at the time of the movie.** It’s just that I’ve seen _Matrix_ fanboys and anti-fanboys turn that discussion into a bona fide holy war. I’m so utterly uninterested in that, that I can’t even find the words to describe my complete lack of interest. I just wanted to know what made the technique so radically different. I’ll check your links out, but I think **refusal** gave me the answer. ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [July 2, 2003, 12:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-so-special-about-the-special-effects-in-the-matrix/185739/8 "2003-07-02T12:01:14Z")
As an additional note, _Matrix Reloaded_ dabbles with “photorealism”, in creating CG images that look as closely as possible to realistic persons and objects. Trouble is, it’s still too obviously fake and while a car case that involves swerving around 18-wheelers with millimeteres to spare _looks_ interesting, it doesn’t create the same audience tension as the mass carnage in the more realistic chases in, among other places, _Terminator 3_. There’s a limit to how dangerous you can make a stunt look before totally blowing disbelief suspension out the window. ---
**Author:** ![Petter](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/dbc845/32.png) [@Petter](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Petter)\ **Post date:** [July 2, 2003, 1:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-so-special-about-the-special-effects-in-the-matrix/185739/9 "2003-07-02T13:22:31Z")
Watch out, **Bryan Ekers**. You’re stepping dangerously close to turning this discussion into a bona fide holy war that **Priceguy** is so utterly uninterested in, that he can’t even find the words to describe his complete lack of interest. ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [July 2, 2003, 1:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-so-special-about-the-special-effects-in-the-matrix/185739/10 "2003-07-02T13:56:42Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Petter \* > \*\*Watch out, **Bryan Ekers**. > > You’re stepping dangerously close to turning this discussion into a bona fide holy war that **Priceguy** is so utterly uninterested in, that he can’t even find the words to describe his complete lack of interest. \*\* I’m sure there’s an attempt at sarcasm in there somewhere, but damned if I can find it. Anyhoo, with photorealistic effects, the temptation is to have Keanu step aside while a cruise missile thunders past, but since this is so patently ridiculous, the audience will never forget that what they are watching is, in fact, fake. Having a truck crash spectacularly, though, with flying debris narrowly missing the actors, looks plausible enough that even CGI enhancement doesn’t need to shatter the suspension of disbelief. ---
**Author:** ![KneadToKnow](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kneadtoknow/32/3999_2.png) [@KneadToKnow](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/KneadToKnow)\ **Post date:** [July 3, 2003, 12:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-so-special-about-the-special-effects-in-the-matrix/185739/11 "2003-07-03T12:21:39Z")
> [@](#): > > the audience will never forget that what they are watching is, in fact, fake. You have just summed up my entire reaction to _The Matrix_ films. ---
**Author:** ![Shalmanese](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/45deac/32.png) [@Shalmanese](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shalmanese)\ **Post date:** [July 3, 2003, 1:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-so-special-about-the-special-effects-in-the-matrix/185739/12 "2003-07-03T13:11:54Z")
Maybe I have a higher disbelief threshhold but most of the stuff I saw I had no problems suspending disbelief. Mainly because some of the stuff CANT occur in real life so I would have no idea how it looked. ---
**Author:** ![Kalt](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/b9e5f3/32.png) [@Kalt](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kalt)\ **Post date:** [July 3, 2003, 1:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-so-special-about-the-special-effects-in-the-matrix/185739/13 "2003-07-03T13:16:03Z")
absolutely nothing is so special. in fact, Matrix 2 had the worst special effects I have ever seen in a film. Whenever something “neat” happened the characters turned into cartoons. Did they really think we wouldn’t notice that? The brawl with 100+ agent Smiths was pathetic–the most unrealistic thing I’ve ever seen passed of as live-action. The car chase was miserable. Wanna see a good car chase? Believe it or not, Terminator 3 has one of the best ones I’ve yet to see. And unlike Matrix 2, it looks real. ---
**Author:** ![Achernar](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/e274bd/32.png) [@Achernar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Achernar)\ **Post date:** [July 3, 2003, 2:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-so-special-about-the-special-effects-in-the-matrix/185739/14 "2003-07-03T14:48:24Z")
Right, now for those of us who read past the thread title… I am a _Matrix_ fanboy, but I think everyone will agree with what I have to say. Bullet time SFX existed before _The Matrix_, but it was in that film that they really got good. In all of the previous incarnations, either the camera angle only changed by a little bit during the shot, or the pan was so choppy it looked bad. For examples of this, see _Lost in Space_ and _Wing Commander_, respectively. It’s nowhere near the the smooth 540° pan that we got in _The Matrix_ in the subway scene - I recall that this took a few hundred cameras. Additionally, they don’t only use the stills. They use a computer to interpolate the frames in between. I don’t know when this technique started. ---
**Author:** ![Asylum](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/53a042/32.png) [@Asylum](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Asylum)\ **Post date:** [July 3, 2003, 6:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-so-special-about-the-special-effects-in-the-matrix/185739/15 "2003-07-03T18:36:28Z")
At the risk of incurring the wrath of the OP with a hijack… > [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Bryan Ekers \* > **the audience will never forget that what they are watching is, in fact, fake.** Yuppers, you hit the nail on the head for why I think that most people like the Matrix. Since everything in the world of the Matrix is fake it allows people to do incredible things that would not be possible in the real world. It is recognizing that the Matrix is a fake, and basically one giant videogame, that makes the movies so appealing: here are people doing things that look as close to real as possible without actually being so, yet there are still real world ramifications. Knowing that everything is fake is what makes for most people someone missing a truck by inches or jumping fifty in the air so interesting and, surprisingly, believable. Even though you might not have liked the movies, you have to admit that the concept of the Matrix is clever in that it allows the main characters to be superhuman in a movie that is set in a world with realistic physics, thus delivering action scenes that in another movie would likely be dismissed as cartoonish or ridiculous. ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [July 3, 2003, 7:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-so-special-about-the-special-effects-in-the-matrix/185739/16 "2003-07-03T19:37:49Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Asylum \* > At the risk of incurring the wrath of the OP with a hijack…Yuppers, you hit the nail on the head for why I think that most people like the Matrix. Since everything in the world of the Matrix is fake it allows people to do incredible things that would not be possible in the real world. It is recognizing that the Matrix is a fake, and basically one giant videogame, that makes the movies so appealing: here are people doing things that look as close to real as possible without actually being so, yet there are still real world ramifications. Knowing that everything is fake is what makes for most people someone missing a truck by inches or jumping fifty in the air so interesting and, surprisingly, believable. Unfortunately, it can work the other way as well. Too many of the action scenes in _Matrix Reloaded_ were big on eye-candy but short on significance. As a result, does it matter in the least if Neo kung-fu fights with Seraph, _if the fight is just a waste of time_? Similarly, it becomes clear in the first few seconds that Agent Smith, even in his new virus form, is indestructable. Why, then, does Neo bother to fight a hundred Smiths at all? It doesn’t even advance the story, since it remains unclear _why_ Smith is trying to get Neo. Why would Smith care? It takes only a few minutes for even the best eye-candy to seem humdrum, especially once you establish the cartoon-like nature of the stunts. Since literally _anything_ can happen, nothing has any significance. Actually, it begs the question of why the characters need to be using any formal martial arts at all. Why bother with kung-fu? If you have superhuman strength and speed, just _punch_ the guy. Why bother with all this “dancing crane” crap? That’s almost a side issue, though, since I’d like to see a movie when the high-kicking kung-fu expert gets his ass kicked by the professional boxer. Those loopy kicks are telegraphed for _months_ before they land. But I digress. > [@](#): > > Even though you might not have liked the movies, you have to admit that the concept of the Matrix is clever in that it allows the main characters to be superhuman in a movie that is set in a world with realistic physics, thus delivering action scenes that in another movie would likely be dismissed as cartoonish or ridiculous. Well, I did like the first one, actually. In that movie, the action sequences were cartoonish, but not pointless. People get hurt in them (and not just nameless bystanders, either). And the various Superman movies and TV shows also use special effects to present superhuman characters, so there’s nothing inherently new in the _Matrix_ approach. They just ridiculously overdid it, to the point where the effects actually get in the way of the story. “Oh, look! Morpheus did another double backflip!” Yay. For the next movie, try topping yourselves with plot, not effects. ---
**Author:** ![Duderdude2](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/cdc98d/32.png) [@Duderdude2](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Duderdude2)\ **Post date:** [July 3, 2003, 8:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-so-special-about-the-special-effects-in-the-matrix/185739/17 "2003-07-03T20:17:22Z")
I loved the first movies, but loathed the second. I thought the effects in the first movie were seamless and used timely, as opposed to Reloaded which overused the (obvious CG) effects. ---
**Author:** ![Dunderman](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/ecb155/32.png) [@Dunderman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dunderman)\ **Post date:** [July 4, 2003, 6:39am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-so-special-about-the-special-effects-in-the-matrix/185739/18 "2003-07-04T06:39:15Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Asylum \* > **At the risk of incurring the wrath of the OP with a hijack…** No wrath; I have my answer. Feel free to hi-jack, start a holy war, etc.