tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7059293386881623259.post8212162779687638260..comments2024-03-05T21:05:36.848-05:00Comments on CommentaramaFilms: Film Friday: The Matrix (1999)AndrewPricehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11312364467936820986noreply@blogger.comBlogger39125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7059293386881623259.post-35294828007416165132013-11-02T16:14:09.079-04:002013-11-02T16:14:09.079-04:00This is the book:
Jean Baudrillard's Simulacr...This is the book:<br /><br />Jean Baudrillard's <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simulacra_and_Simulation" rel="nofollow"><i>Simulacra and Simulation</i></a>.AndrewPricehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11312364467936820986noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7059293386881623259.post-25006470817618972692013-11-02T16:12:29.305-04:002013-11-02T16:12:29.305-04:00PikeBishop, I once read a lengthy treatise by a pr...PikeBishop, I once read a lengthy treatise by a professor of philosophy who outlined all the influence within the Matrix. Apparently, it all starts with a French philosopher whose book is the one in which Neo hides the drugs/tapes/whatever when the film starts with the people coming by who will take him to the club.<br /><br />Then it incorporates Gnosticism, Buddhism, and a handful of things like The Cave. It's an amazing mix of ideas that really shows what a truly strong writer can produce, being both super deep but also accessible without giving it any thought at all.<br /><br />It's too bad that the second and third films are not like this at all. They lose their underpinnings and just go for cool and pseudo-philosophy. AndrewPricehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11312364467936820986noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7059293386881623259.post-28252513613390326372013-11-02T15:59:44.095-04:002013-11-02T15:59:44.095-04:00There are also elements of Buddhism in it as well....There are also elements of Buddhism in it as well. Check out "There is no Spoon" which should be on line somewhere.PikeBishophttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05761380937971970762noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7059293386881623259.post-61828436796057551332013-11-02T15:51:45.332-04:002013-11-02T15:51:45.332-04:00PikeBishop, That's one of the many philosophic...PikeBishop, That's one of the many philosophical inputs they included. This film is like a philosophy class packed into an action film. :)AndrewPricehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11312364467936820986noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7059293386881623259.post-2838966461728052362013-11-02T12:42:45.180-04:002013-11-02T12:42:45.180-04:00Anyone ever notice that on one level the film is a...Anyone ever notice that on one level the film is also Plato's parable of "the Cave?"PikeBishophttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05761380937971970762noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7059293386881623259.post-56707106895197419532011-03-18T10:35:16.360-04:002011-03-18T10:35:16.360-04:00Andrew, I've seen the Matrix numerous times an...Andrew, I've seen the Matrix numerous times and agree that it is a great film (especially if your reflections on it haven't been marred by the two "sequels"). You hit the important points pretty well.<br><br>Of course, the philosophical/religious aspects of the film had occurred to me long ago, particularly Descartes' story of the evil genius (as an aside, while his argument for the existence of God is imperfect analytically, practically I think it holds up). I would balk, though, at describing the movie as a Christian allegory. I can understand your argument for why it is--it has many of the basic elements of one. But consider: <br><br>-Neo has to be awakened to realize that he's The One. Moreover, he can now control the reality around him. It's not "Once I was blind, but now I can see," but rather, "Once I was blind, but now I can control what everyone sees." There's something a little inverted in that. In fact, I would argue Neo is modeled less on the Christian Messiah than on Nietzsche's Superman.<br><br>-I was always struck by what one of the minor characters--"Mouse," I think it was?--at one point told Neo, "To deny our impulses is to deny the very thing that makes us human." Plus, the movie focused on him for a moment as he said this, so it clearly wasn't intended as a throwaway line. Now, I always thought that what made us human was our ability to recognize our impulses and control them for the sake of something higher. We're not cold, calculating machines, but neither are we unreasoning animals, which is what Mouse--and by extension, the movie--seems to be suggesting here. As crappy as the sequels were, I think they reinforced this idea. Take these points together, and The Matrix appears to have a somewhat warped view of humanity.<br><br>I may have carried your argument a bit farther than you intended; I figure you weren't saying Neo=Jesus. But I do want to point out some problems with saying the Matrix is a Christian allegory.T_Ravnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7059293386881623259.post-11077249539418232522011-03-18T12:08:30.044-04:002011-03-18T12:08:30.044-04:00T_Rav, A couple points. First, forget the sequels...T_Rav, A couple points. First, forget the sequels, they were convoluted, confused and stupid, and the whole intellectual structure of the first film broke down in those.<br><br>Secondly, no, I'm not saying Neo=Jesus, I'm saying that Neo has been placed into a Christ-like role. But he's clearly not intended to be divine. He's a human who wakes up the idea that humans can be more than mere flesh and blood (or electronics as the case may be) -- he is what eventually separates man from machine in the film.<br><br>On the Christian Allegory. First, this isn't an original point of mine -- it's actually been well discussed and numerous papers have been written on it! Some of these people have analyzing everything from his name (which can be broken into Biblical references) to his words and his actions, and the consensus is that Neo is playing a Christ-like character -- though no one says he is "the Christ."<br><br>Moreover, an allegory need not be perfect to be an allegory. And in this case, I further would assume that the Wachowski brothers either have a different interpretation of Christianity than you do (very likely given what I know about them) or that they have blended him with other religions which are present throughout the film to create a slightly different theological version. But that doesn't change what they have intended him to be.<br><br>Also, he doesn't end up controlling what others see, he ends up setting them free. This is meant as a metaphor for "seeing the truth" not a metaphor for controlling other people. In fact, the film goes out of its way to make the point that his only power over people is to persuade them, not to manipulate them.<br><br>In terms of focusing on the one line from Mouse, keep in mind that Mouse represents an average human who does not yet believe in Neo. He is essentially a pre-Christian human, i.e. pagan. Thus, his world is based on pagan virtues, which are largely seeking pleasure -- food, sex, etc. The only two characters who fully believe in Neo at first are Morpheus and Trinity, and they are much more in line with Christian virtues.<br><br>And let me repeat, forget the sequels, especially the third one. Blech!AndrewPricehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11312364467936820986noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7059293386881623259.post-77124750855263077762011-03-18T12:12:18.763-04:002011-03-18T12:12:18.763-04:00I think the sequels did considerable damage to the...I think the sequels did considerable damage to the original. Left by itself, the original would have been an unfinished masterpiece. They should have left well enough alone, or perhaps made one well thought-out sequel to tie up loose ends. That said, when the original shows up on a non-commercial station, I usually watch it, and continue to enjoy it.LawHawkRFDhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17800255923675295515noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7059293386881623259.post-18951504036574489592011-03-18T12:17:02.448-04:002011-03-18T12:17:02.448-04:00Lawhawk, I agree. The sequels were a disaster and...Lawhawk, I agree. The sequels were a disaster and did a lot of damage to the original. It's best to never see them or to try very hard to get them out of your mind, though sadly that's very, very difficult.AndrewPricehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11312364467936820986noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7059293386881623259.post-6888210470775548662011-03-18T12:17:02.447-04:002011-03-18T12:17:02.447-04:00Great movie.I've seen it a few times, and can ...Great movie.<br><br>I've seen it a few times, and can see where it can be really, really deep, but I just try to enjoy it as it without thinking too much.<br><br>'Course, that's pretty easy with Ted on the screen. Mmmmmm...CrispyRicehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07302075204880024936noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7059293386881623259.post-18278388859247006042011-03-18T12:21:23.198-04:002011-03-18T12:21:23.198-04:00Crispy, Ted! LOL! I had a hard time seeing as any...Crispy, Ted! LOL! I had a hard time seeing as anything other than Ted before this film came out. Even in <i>Speed</i>, I still saw him as Ted. But that's changed and now I see him as a grown up -- largely because of this film.AndrewPricehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11312364467936820986noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7059293386881623259.post-25984300381611721642011-03-18T12:43:59.450-04:002011-03-18T12:43:59.450-04:00Andrew, after reading through everything, I think ...Andrew, after reading through everything, I think I need to clarify. I think The Matrix can be characterized as a Christian allegory in the sense that it performs some of the same functions for viewers as the Gospels do. Certainly, I can see many of the comparisons you bring up. But, I do not think the story was created to mirror Christianity, even in an imperfect manner. (And I know you weren't the first one to make this argument--our pastor actually said the same thing in a sermon a few weeks ago.)<br><br>I say this for a couple of reasons. One is the Wachowski brothers (or should I say "siblings"?), whose, ahem, personal lives, as well as their other work, make me doubt whether they would consider Christianity a positive model. I realize that may be a little unfair. But my main reason--and I may lose you with this part--comes, quite frankly, from those sequels. Yes, they were just awful, but they were somewhat useful in that they gave us a view of what a human society freed from the machines would look like. Honestly, it's not much different from a big pagan cult--remember that slightly disturbing rave in the second movie? There's a lot of head-banging and free love going around, based on little more, it appears to me, than passion and "being true to yourself." And I got the impression institutions like marriage don't exist in Zion. (And to be clear, as much as I'd like to pretend these movies were never made, I don't feel they can be separated from the original. All three were created by the Wachowskis, so it's their baby, so to speak.)<br><br>Even the original Matrix had undertones that struck me as anti-Christian. Morpheus appeared to hint once or twice at church as another repressive institution in which the Matrix could always be felt. Your point that the Wachowskis could have a radically different interpretation of Christianity than my own is well taken, but it's worth asking whether or not it's so different that it merges into something altogether different. <br><br>Again, this doesn't take away from how much I thoroughly enjoy the original movie. Whatever I think of its philosophical implications, The Matrix is so superbly made you can't help but get wrapped up in it. But I stand by my earlier statement, that the movie is at least as much pagan/Nietzschean in its tone as it is Christian, if not more so.<br><br>I could say more about this, but I've gotta bounce. Be back in a few hours.T_Ravnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7059293386881623259.post-19609033099888304362011-03-18T12:45:03.656-04:002011-03-18T12:45:03.656-04:00T-Rav, I need to leave too -- have to see the dent...T-Rav, I need to leave too -- have to see the dentist. I'll respond when I get back (didn't want you thinking I'm blowing you off). :-)AndrewPricehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11312364467936820986noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7059293386881623259.post-58762441250234686592011-03-18T12:51:11.856-04:002011-03-18T12:51:11.856-04:00Yup, great movie! With lots to think about in it....Yup, great movie! With lots to think about in it. Good review, Andrew.DUQnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7059293386881623259.post-49695033103563361742011-03-18T14:45:59.997-04:002011-03-18T14:45:59.997-04:00Cool review! Nice site too.Cool review! Nice site too.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7059293386881623259.post-78125079808142139272011-03-18T15:11:26.358-04:002011-03-18T15:11:26.358-04:00Great breakdown. The Matrix makes Keanu Reeves pal...Great breakdown. The Matrix makes Keanu Reeves palatable. (I know, I know, I'm in the minority, but I'm not a fan.) But I agree, the original was revolutionary. I was in high school, but everyone I know talked about it for weeks (much like Inception, but obviously even more so). Although, I have to say, the whole "freeze the frame while someone is floating in the air and dolly around them" technique has been so overdone since then that it's difficult watching Matrix without cringing. <br><br>But, you're re-convinced me. Not an over-rated movie. :) Even though the sequels definitely were.JGhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03116405895683599572noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7059293386881623259.post-20562743109869163352011-03-18T15:13:17.980-04:002011-03-18T15:13:17.980-04:00DUQ, Thanks! I agree.DUQ, Thanks! I agree.AndrewPricehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11312364467936820986noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7059293386881623259.post-16340296395468695542011-03-18T15:14:49.616-04:002011-03-18T15:14:49.616-04:00Anon, Thanks! And welcome!Anon, Thanks! And welcome!AndrewPricehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11312364467936820986noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7059293386881623259.post-29331625820591637442011-03-18T15:14:49.615-04:002011-03-18T15:14:49.615-04:00ACG, In what way?ACG, In what way?AndrewPricehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11312364467936820986noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7059293386881623259.post-85424732890532891542011-03-18T15:19:39.442-04:002011-03-18T15:19:39.442-04:00JG, Thanks!I agree entirely. I think the bullet t...JG, Thanks!<br><br>I agree entirely. I think the bullet time effect was revolutionary and really cool.... but then it got old very fast when it got used in everything. Unfortunately, that's the way these things work -- someone comes up with a great idea and everyone else just wears it out.<br><br>I actually agree with you about Keanu Reeves. I loved him in <i>Bill and Ted</i>, and I liked him in <i>Speed</i>, but beyond that I haven't really been a fan. He seems to have only one note when he acts -- though that note worked perfectly for this film!<br><br>I agree completely about the sequels, they were poor and did a lot to hurt the reputation of the first film. But if you can put those out of your mind, then <i>The Matrix</i> really is a great film!<br><br>And I'm glad I convinced you it's not overrated! There are a lot of overrated films out there, but this isn't one of them. :-)AndrewPricehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11312364467936820986noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7059293386881623259.post-23900313992964718542011-03-18T15:21:45.241-04:002011-03-18T15:21:45.241-04:00Yes, Bill and Ted, and the Matrix. He's spot-o...Yes, Bill and Ted, and the Matrix. He's spot-on for those. Anything else I see him in, I just can't handle it.JGhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03116405895683599572noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7059293386881623259.post-79527880581262292062011-03-18T15:39:49.931-04:002011-03-18T15:39:49.931-04:00T_Rav, Your pastor said this too? That's inte...T_Rav, Your pastor said this too? That's interesting. Sounds like a pretty modern guy if he's referencing movies. :-)<br><br>Anyway, your points are all valid and well thought-out (as always).<br><br>I prefer to see the original on it's own merits because I think the sequels really took a turn that was dishonest to the original movie. BUT, you are absolutely right that the sequels show "the ideal" human society as a hedonistic/paganistic society, with no real sense that they believe in a higher power except some vague notion of destiny.<br><br>I also agree that the personal situation of the Wachowskis probably makes them less than friendly to at least a more literal/strict interpretation of Christianity (though I honestly don't know much about their personal beliefs). In fact, if I had to guess, I would say their view of Christianity (assuming their view is positive) is heavily influenced with a lot of "individualism," and I would speculate that their Neo is actually preaching "all humans can become divine if you just believe".... which is closer to Buddhism.... or Peter Pan ;-). So while I think they <i>intended</i> this as a Christian allegory and they gave it many of the of trappings, I think you make a valid point that their theology is a huge stretch as far as Christianity is concerned.<br><br>In terms of seeing anti-Christian parts in the first film, I actually hadn't noticed, but I wasn't looking for that because I accepted the overall sense that <i>The Matrix</i> had a pro-religion theme, and I took anything like that as being either unintentionally insulting (the line between pro- and anti- is often a fine line in dialog) or being things the characters would eventually learn was wrong. At the very least, these lines were subtle, unlike something like <i>The Invention of Lying</i> where it was clear they absolutely wanted to insult Christians.<br><br>In any event, I'm glad you enjoy the movie no matter how you feel about the message. :-)AndrewPricehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11312364467936820986noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7059293386881623259.post-42899568429816967442011-03-18T15:39:49.930-04:002011-03-18T15:39:49.930-04:00I loved the first movie mostly because it was so d...I loved the first movie mostly because it was so different than anything else out there; from the story to the filming. Chirst like themes are not just common but typical for most movies so I don't put much weight into it. <br><br>I always felt they made a mockery of religion and any other institutions we "believe in". Until we get out of the Matrix, what is truly real? I read one piece on the series that the whole thing was the Matrix including Zion. How else could Agent Smith get out into the real world? Zion was for those people whose brains rejected the Matrix as written and so was given a different world to "live" in. Therefore, if there is no real life then there is no God, etc. Perhaps there never was a "real life" instead we were created from the beginning to be biological batteries. This goes to the paradise reference and our stories of the Garden of Eden. Perhaps God didn't throw humanity out but we left. The stories in Amamatrix would suggest against this theory but...<br><br>Knowing a little more about the Wachowskis makes me believe that they view religion as a means to bind people down. Whether there is a God or not may be irrelevent since we really can only control our destiny within a narrow field.<br><br>One of the interesting things is that Neo was the only one to figure out that you didn't have to die in the Matrix. Even when his colleagues saw this they couldn't convince themselves of the same conclusion. It was only after Neo realized at the end that to save everyone in the Matrix, he needed to "die". One question I had was if Neo died before the agent Smith virus took hold, would that have rebooted the system and prevented the breakdown?Koshnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7059293386881623259.post-59938216995833120542011-03-18T15:39:49.929-04:002011-03-18T15:39:49.929-04:00JG, That's about how I see it too. In fact, n...JG, That's about how I see it too. In fact, no other role comes to mind where I really liked him? I'm sure there may have been something, but nothing comes to mind.AndrewPricehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11312364467936820986noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7059293386881623259.post-77944533244038662682011-03-18T15:58:40.394-04:002011-03-18T15:58:40.394-04:00Kosh, Great points. In fact, I'm pretty sure ...Kosh, Great points. In fact, I'm pretty sure that the "real world" isn't real in the later films.<br><br>The first moment I came to believe this was when Neo stopped the machines from attacking when they were outside the ship by using just his mind. It doesn't matter how much control he can get inside the matrix, once he's outside the rules of the real world should apply. When they didn't, then I knew something was up.<br><br>Moreover, Agent Smith escapes into "the real world," which shouldn't be possible. When Neo is blinded, he sees the real world in the same computer code that he sees the matrix. The architect also implies several times that the solution to the "anomaly" of people who would not accept the programming was to basically let them realize the nature of the matrix and think they had escaped. I've also wondered at times about the images he shows, as they appear to include images of the future -- specifically Trinity's death. This would indicate to me that Neo's entire life is part of the programming.<br><br>If the "real world" and the matrix are both fake, I don't know that that automatically means an anti-religion statement as we really have no idea what the "real real world" is like. But your interpretation is certainly possible, that humans were created by the machines as a way to provide energy, and that nothing that we think is real (i.e. our religion, history, society, etc.) ever really existed. That's a good question.<br><br>On the Smith character.... I have some issues with what happens to him. I get that he becomes the anti-Neo, being just as free and using his power for evil. But I don't know why the machines couldn't just turn him off? I also don't know what he was hoping to achieve? Or how he planned to defeat Neo with his fists? None of that made sense to me, and it felt like by the time they reached the end of the third film, they really ran out of ideas? Or maybe it's all part of the scenario the machine is selling to Neo to create the next matrix, with the humans now thinking they have create a "real world"?<br><br>In terms of the Wachowskis being anti-Christian or anti-religious, that's definitely possible -- especially given how the sequels were done. I just can't say for sure. But I do know that I certainly don't feel that the original movie was intended to insult religion in any way.AndrewPricehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11312364467936820986noreply@blogger.com