If you have seen any of the more recent HK action flicks and any anime, the you would realize that “The Matrix” is about as derivative a movie as you can make (besides “Willow” I mean 
). Go watch something like “Tai-Chi Master” or, even better, “Storm Riders” and tell me that “The Matrix” can touch it with a ten foot pole. Also, the storyline is pretentious as all get out and Keanue couldn’t act his way out of a damp kleenex cocoon. The F/X are well done, BUT I need substance to keep a movie together for me.
Why are you whining about the martial-arts scenes? The actors did pretty well ** considering that many of them were just learning kung-fu just for the movie**. The moves were very-well choreographed to simulate that Neo, Morpheus, Trinity and the bots can stretch the limits of what their virtual bodies can do in the Matrix.
Why martial arts? Because it is realistic and accepted in the virtual Matrix world (simulating 2000) that people can do miraclulous manuevers after they studied martial arts.
And Neo and the bots can dodge bullets, so they won’t work.
Perhaps I’m a bit more sensitive than most to the outside world and how it affects me. But I saw The Matrix just after the incidents at Columbine unfolded. I cringed through the entire last scene, replete with trenchcoats, guns, death, and collapse. The future teacher in me screamed out, “This is what’s wrong today!”
But that’s my 2 centimes.
Why am I complaining about the martial arts scenes? Because they were an inept ripoff (I don’t care if the actors just learned martial arts. You should see what non-fighters are made to pull off in HK) of an established style, but are now being touted as “original” and “groundbreaking.” That many people regard Ang Lee’s “Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon” as “Matrix-y” makes me violently ill. The Matrix is merely an okay movie; the aftermath of The Matrix makes me seriously irate.
The bit about humans as some sorta everyready energizers was just so stupid, so lacking in logic & scientific reasoning, that the rest of the movie could not revive it.
:mad:
Yeah, that’s it, that’s what’s wrong. It’s the movies these kids are watching and not the parents at home who don’t take the proper time with their children. :rolleyes:
I am so tired of people blaming TV and movies for people’s behavior. Bottom line – people are responsible for their own actions, not Hollywood.
I must have seen Silence of the Lambs more than a dozen times, but never once have I felt the urge to kidnap and skin anybody.
First off, it should be pointed out that the “sci-fi/action” movie genre is a particularly hokey genre. About the only things that are even more hokey are the martial arts genre, WWF wrestling, or Three Stooges reruns. You have to accept the limitations and conventions of any particular genre if you’re going to enjoy the movies in that genre. If you’re willing to accept those limitations and conventions, then The Matrix is one of the top movies of all time within its own genre, and it even has wide appeal outside of that particular genre.
Okay, so the martial arts action in the movie was flawed. Big deal–it wasn’t a martial arts film. I could also point out major flaws in The Matrix regarding the gunplay and other combat action as well, but it wasn’t a war film or a Western either. I understand that some people get put off a film when they see flaws in the portrayal of some facet/action/material where they are particularly knowledgeable. But any film in the world can be picked apart in that manner. Finding abundant flaws in The Matrix in the martial arts action or the gunplay or the love affair or how women are portrayed or whatever isn’t enough to make it a bad film. Especially when you’re talking about the sci-fi action genre.
The human-battery premise was pretty weak, I’ll admit. If all they need is a body for a battery, why not use cows instead of humans? Or algae? Then they could do away with the matrix altogether. Personally, I think the human-battery premise was a dropped thread which can be picked up in a sequel and used as a premise for additional plot complications. It actually has considerable potential. The use of humans as batteries may be serendipitous–the machines may have additional needs for the humans and the matrix other than as batteries. The machines may have a particular need for the matrix itself and the human neuroses that are played out there. Otherwise, why would a machine bother to work? It would just turn itself off and rest. The machines may need access to the psychological material played out in the matrix, as well as the electrical energy in the bodies. In other words, I think there’s more to that premise than was offered in the movie, and I’m willing to suspend my disbelief for the time being.
Meanwhile, all this has nothing to do with the main premise of the movie, which was actually handled fairly brilliantly. Let’s look at this main premise from another angle. For example, a religious angle.
The Bible says something to the effect that if a man’s faith is strong and pure enough, he can move mountains. Some religious believers believe this–literally. But when they try to actually do it, or to perform some other kind of physical miracle, they find themselves unable to do it. So they conclude that their faith isn’t strong enough; they are too attached to the sinful life around them; they are heir to sin. So they try to withdraw themselves from sin and purify themselves, but it’s never enough. They still can’t move the mountain.
It’s a romantic religious tragedy of a sort: They know for a certainty that they can move the mountain if they could ever renounce sin and their earthly heritage, but sin and their earthly heritage are all around them and inside of them. They can never quite remove themselves far enough from sin to grasp the power within themselves. So they remain stuck in limbo, seeking out prophets and messiahs to bring them a little closer to that spiritual state they desire.
This is the conundrum of the computerized matrix. Morphious, Trinity, and the other rebels know that the matrix is a fraud. They know that the rules can be broken, and that they could break the rules of the matrix if they could just renounce and ignore the world that the matrix offers them. But they can’t–the facade of the matrix is too real. It’s around them and in them. They can taste food and feel pain in the matrix. Intellectually, they know that it’s just an illusion, but the power of the illusion is too real to ignore. At best they can only bend the rules a bit. So they look for someone who can ignore the world so completely that he can tune out the facade, no matter how powerful it may be. They look for the ultimate solipsist. (Solipsism: A state of mind where the individual believes that nothing exists but himself.) They look for someone with his head so far up his butt that he doesn’t even perceive the world around him.
Eventually everything centers around Neo. He’s a computer geek who is totally disconnected with the world around him. It’s all just a computer game to him. He always pushes the limits further and further, notching up the action one more level, taking on more and more combat and pain and struggle, bending the rules further and further, because the world never was particularly real to him in the first place. Eventually it comes down to a race: Will the bad guys discover the rebels’ hideout before Neo can achieve that total state of messianic/solipsistic disavowal of the world (the matrix) around him? And the ultimate symbol of total disavowal is, of course, the ability to ignore and renounce his own death within the matrix.
This is the core of the movie, and it was a tough subject to handle intelligently and still maintain the pacing and excitement of an action thriller. Yes, naturally it borrows heavily from other genres; yes, naturally the philosophical aspect gets watered down; and yes, naturally, a lot of subplots are underdeveloped and threads are dropped. Hell, you can only fit so much in two hours. But the movie is a genuinely competent treatment of a complex theme (solipsism and renouncement of the physical world around oneself) which itself lies at the very heart of the world’s major religions (spiritualism and renouncement of the sinful world around oneself).
So personally I’m satisfied with the intellectual content presented by the film, especially within the context of an action adventure.
And yes, I loved the martial arts scenes and shoot-em-up scenes. They were significantly flawed when compared to pure martial arts or war movies, but I accept the limitations of the sci-fi/action genre, and I absolutely loved those particular scenes as presented in that particular movie.
And yes, I’m satisfied with Keanu Reeves portraying a computer geek with his head so far up his butt that he almost can’t interact with the world at all. For once, Keanu’s wooden acting abilities actually served him to good effect.
A few general comments for all Matrix haters:
Every movie has flaws. Show me a flawless movie and I will show you a movie that hasn’t been made.
Every movie borrows from previously treated subjects. Newton himself admitted “standing on the shoulders of giants” in order to perform his vast scientific accomplishments.
The Matrix is no different. Its merit resides on taking a compelling concept and developing it further, to a point in which the line separating reality from imaginary becomes blurred and imperceptible. The scenario it depicts is so plausible that even if we don’t buy it we are not able to categorically refute its validity, just like we are not able to objectively disregard God’s existence. There is no convincing proof either way. Hypotheses referring to the existence of the Matrix and God are as valid as those neglecting their presence (I am agnostic for all of you keeping count).
Did Plato do that with his Allegory of the Cave? No, his argument was metaphorically interesting at best, but he didn’t provide a reasonable scenario under which it could be interpreted as real. It was philosophical speculation at its purest manifestation. The Matrix, on the other hand, carries that initial premise of an occulted reality lying outside of the scope of our sensorial perceptions and gives its life, positing a highly reasonable, frighteningly plausible situation in which mankind has forged its own doom. It actualizes Plato’s argument to dissect the fundamental crises afflicting modern society. Borrowing from Hamlet it asks: to continue the current unrestricted path to technological advance without stopping for a minute to assess its underlying implications or not to, that is the dilemma.
In that vein, the erroneous treatment of protoculture is not relevant, the underlying message that the movie lends to us is. The thesis it postulates is rather simple, yet deeply poignant: the danger of self-destroying ourselves is more real than we thought. As a matter of fact, we might have already destroyed our civilization without even realizing it. Now, What can be more thought provoking than that, Space Vampire?
What is the matrix? A reality questioning philosophical inquiry that poignantly asks, what if there is an imperceptible mist that blinds our brain from the most horrifying of truths, the dehumanization of the human race, while rendering it an intellectually passive slave to its own monstrous creation, a Victor Frankenstein subjugated by the very spawn it gave life to?
Ok, so I was a little touchy yesterday. Sorry.
But quasar, we answered your question. Yes, every movie has flaws, and nothing is completly original. But the Matrix was EXTREMLY flawed, and EXTREMLY derivitive, and extremely pretentious, to boot. The questions you mention had been gone over, better, in several recent movies, and the “images” that you liked were blatently stolen.
I’m sorry if that’s not the answer you wanted, but there you are. Your “What is the matrix” question is just Plato’s alegory of the Cave, which should have been gone over in some detail during high school at some point.
It just wasn’t as deep, as creative, or as smart as you seem to think it was. Now, that MIGHT be because you havn’t seen what it was stealing from, as they’re not very mainstream. James Cameron does that kind of thing all the time.
And JTR, being an “Action/SF” movie dosn’t excuse it’s stupidity. If they wern’t willing to put any effort into the “thematic” bits, they shouldn’t have put them in. And there HAVE been smart SF/Actioners . . . Blade Runner, Macross Plus, Akira, and EVA all come to mind. There’s no inherent reason any genre movie HAS to be stupid. Hell, look what Unforgiven and westerns . . .
And just because it’s better than Fortress and Wing Commander dosn’t make it a good, or even a watchable movie.
–
“Suddenly, Independence Day is looking like a highly neuanced movie . . .”
I don’t know. I’ll guess we’ll have to agree to disagree. I’m not a culture vulture. I have a predilection for big blockbusters that are well done, as opposed to what I perceive as your partiality for small artsy movies that are intriguing. I saw a couple of the movies you mentioned, and I can barely remember what they were about. At least movies like 2001, Clockwork Orange, Terminator, and Matrix stick with me.
Judging by your suggested list of improvements for The Matrix (your “Special Lucky Bonus” from yesterday’s posts), I see you loading up the film with all kinds of intricate plot devices, essentially creating some kind of high-end cross between Star Wars and Dark Angel, replete with Electra complexes, evil father figures, and Dostoyevskian Grand Inquisitor-style cynics who run the world. That’s not my own style. I liked the cleanness and crispness of the existing Matrix–a cerebral chess game between man and machine that occasionally explodes into ultra-violence. Character development? I don’t need it. Just give me an interesting premise, and I’ll fill in the gaps with my own imagination.
Beauty is in the eye of the beholder… 
Good debate, by the way. Have a good weekend!
Ura Maru
Yes, you did. I appreciate your commentaries and respect their validity. I just not share your overall viewpoint of the movie.
That is exactly the kind of answer I wanted. I was simply curious as to why some people such as you didn’t like it. I expected well-reasoned answers and that is what I have being getting for the most part. Keep them coming folks!
I don’t know what you are trying to say here. I believe I already explained why The Matrix adds a new dimension to Plato’s idea, creating a pragmatically valid view of our future society out of his philosophical speculations.
The aforementioned Platonic view just describes a scenario of ignorance, it simply manifests an erroneous conceptualization of reality. The Matrix goes beyond that, it points out the causes that could make that scenario a reality. It uncovers society’s defects and presents a vivid and horrifying warning as to what the potential consequences stemming from those defects could be.
Or, from another point of view, Plato is the Oracle that foresees humanity’s dehumanization, its abstraction from reality and fall into oblivion. The Matrix is the interpreter that analyzes the Plato’s prophecies, detects the early symptoms of its fulfillment and warns against its dangers. It expands on Plato and develops a moral thesis from his speculation.
A lot of people seem to stick on this. A lot of people apparently tuned out during Morpheus’ exposition and missed this line:
“…combined with a form of fusion, the machines had found all the power they needed”
…or something to that effect. “Human batteries” were not the sole source of power for the machines.
I will say that one thing I thought was somewhat annoying about the movie is the fact that the Agents, supposedly manifestations of the Computer (or whatever) itself, couldn’t hit the broad side of a barn with a handgun. They may well have been bound by the laws of physics, but they should also be able to calculate trajectories a heck of a lot better than they apparently did - I mean, really, how hard should it be for a super-computer to do the math required to hit Neo while he was climbing a fire escape?
I liked the Matrix. It was one of the few movies that I felt deserved my 8 dollars and the money I spent on nachos and cheese. I’m really surprised that people hated it.
Actually, the Wachoski’s created bullet time specifically for The Matrix. They admitted so in an online interview a while back. Since they wrote The Matrix script before making Bound, they could have designed the effect a few years ago which would explain your confusion regarding the “authorship” of Bullet time.