The Matrix

[Georgi]

Regarding the lobby scene... isn't it kind of the point, that it's so easy for Neo and Trinity to kickass? Because, they're not fighting agents, they are fighting normal security guards who are confined by the rules of the matrix, while our heroes have learned how to bend those rules? The security guards aren't supposed to pose much of an opposition, the only people who can come close to being a threat are the agents.

Oh yeah, and it had to be relatively quick and painless ( ), in order for the two of them to get through the lobby before the agents realised what was going on. And don't forget Neo's not the brightest guy around... the way they do it is more his style than a stealth attack

So, I figure it fits in ok. And it looks cool.

*hides from Fable's flames*

[Mr Sleep]

Quote:

Originally posted by Vehemence: <STRONG>It's a movie for god sake. Doesn't anyone just watch movies for the experience any more? Analyse this, analyse that... sheesh! No wonder we aren't going anywhere in the world today, where all still chasing our tails trying to figure out how it's stuck on! </STRONG>

Well i watched the ORIGINAL 'The Haunting' ages ago and jsut kind of got on with it. I sat down and analysed the film on Saturday and came as close to loosing control of my bowels it is more scary when you analyse it, the only film htat has ever done that to me.

[Vehemence]

Oh Goody... got someone Fable, let's dance

Quote:

You're the only one who's forgetting something, Vehemence: that everybody here is entitled to an opinion of their own. Considering learning to respect the abilities of others who dare to disagree with your mindset and don't like what you think great. Maybe you're learn something. Maybe not.

No no, I didn't forget. I'm well aware that each and everyone is allowed their opinion (hence me expressing mine). In fact going against the dominant analytical trend in this thread with my entertaining reasoning is just showing an alternate opinion to everyone else who would quickly analyse and pick on certain elements.

Quote:

The film's story was not meant to be satirical. It was meant to be a cyperpunk thriller, and believable within the framework of its own universe, like The Maltese Falcon, or Star Wars. We were supposed to feel tension when the good guys and the bad guys shot it off and did ninja numbers at one another. Instead, the people I was with, including myself, without exception howled in disbelief at the film at this point. (And others points, too--you've neglected to respond to the contradiction in film text I mentioned, earlier.) We all considered it a terrible waste of money, so we rented an old Laurel & Hardy comedy and laughed our asses off.

I'm sorry but where oh where did you get the impression that I meant that it was satirical by this quote of mine:

Quote:

They did the cartwheels and massive dodging because it looks cool!

Meant to be a cyberpunk thriller? Yes, so things looking cool would fit right in here wouldn't you say?

"Believable within its own universe" Yep, I believed it. I'm sorry, I don't have a degree in thermodynamics or physics, so I'm probably not the brightest lightbulb when it comes to these issues, so you'll excuse me if I just enjoyed the fact that they were in a computer program which according to Morpheus, laws could be broken... hence cartwheels, dodging etc etc. I think that more than satisfies the "believable within its own universe" thingie wouldn't you?

Quote:

We were supposed to feel tension when the good guys and the bad guys shot it off and did ninja numbers at one another

I'm sorry, where you the director? Producer? Maybe the writer? No... hmmm... so by what right do you claim that we (as in all of us) are supposed to see it that way? Perception is highly individualistic and to make an assumption as to how we're supposed to interpret something is more arrogant than anything I have stated.

Quote:

Oh, but wait: we couldn't do that. Because supposedly we like to analyze films, and can't enjoy 'em. Right. Cancel the above. Of course

Glad you agree

Quote:

It might surprise you that some of us really go for fantasy, including light entertainment; even write it ourselves, and get it published; but that we just don't find the stuff you think great is--how shall I delicately put this? ah, yes--GOOD

Fantasy... matrix... fantasy... matrix... Yep, sorry, how did we get into fantasy? I thought this was a, what did you call it? Punk Thriller? The fact that you don't find the stuff that I think great is not good is obvious and at the same time, expected. So what's that got to do with it? I was simply pointing out that some of us go for the entertainment value. Are you saying that if you don't like it you analyse it?

Quote:

First, it was both the hero and the heroine.

Picky picky picky

[QUOTE...Or how about Scenario #3...? (Yeah, there really are more than two ways, Your Way and The Utterly Wrong Way, to look at things.) Neo and the heroine rush in. They use hair-trigger reflexes, lots of weapons, but even bigger smarts to dodge the locations where they think the bad guys are hiding, knocking them off one by one. Lots of tension, and a great sense of release when it's over. What a pity a sequence like that wasn't filmed, because the directors-producers-writers (same folks) were only interested in the techno- side of stuff[/QUOTE]

But now your neglecting their choice to go with the "techno- side of stuff". They did that because it fits with the movie. Plus it was... ENTERTAING!

Quote:

The idea that somebody has to agree with what you believe comprises entertainment or they're automatically wrong is probably the most original concept you've ever had

Ouch... so much for playing nice. Don't let this get too personal Mr. Radio Man... there's plenty of wet fish in a bucket with your name written all over it

Incidently, I never said everyone has to agree with what I was saying. I was simply putting forth another way of looking at things. The idea that some people go to watch the movies for the entertainment. You saw the promo, you watched the movie... you knew what you were getting yourself into. Don't deny that.

[Gruntboy]

There are very few flawless films. I watched the Matrix and thought it kicked heinie. There are plenty of cr*p films you could be criticising. You're all welcome to your opinions but I just sit back, let myself be entertained and let the Dolby Digital 5.1 and my Widescreen TV do its lovely, lovely work.

If I want accuracy, I'll watch "The World at War" and thoroughly depress myself.

There are easier pass times than picking gnat sh*t from pepper that is the criticism of the Matrix. You don't think Hollywood ever tells the truth, do you? From a recent movie magazine:

"I'm in a web chat room for movie buffs and this American guy asks me how my country [UK] can justify its war crimes as evidenced in The Patriot. I ask this guy if he really believes everything Hollywood portrays on the screen. He says YES! Private Ryan saved Europe and Ben Affleck saved the day at Pearl Harbor."

[Anatres]

Wow! fable and Vehemence. Nice point-counterpoint. Although it's starting to heat up a bit - but that's a good thing.

Personally, (notice I said personally as in 'me' 'my opinion' 'my feelings' (if you will)) look to movies, TV shows and most written fiction for their entertainment
value. If, in the case of some TV, I learn something in the process that's OK too.

I'm a Systems Analyst in my 'work-a-day' world so I have a tendency to stay away from that process when I'm after pure entertainment. If that entertainment causes me to suspend my belief in reality so much the better.

I happen to agree more with Vehemence's position than fable's in this case. Somethings scream for analysis and some loose all their value when over analysed. To my mind it seems that one can look on the world of entertainment with a too critical eye. Searching for the 'deeper meaning' or the 'reality' in a vehicle that isn't intended to represent 'reality' in the least little bit does, once again in my opinion, seem to detract from the 'entertainment' value.

One last point, if you go to a movie to analyse it for it's adherence to a sense of 'reality', and that's your intent, then enjoy that process. If you watch a movie for the 'entertainment value', whether it be the Matrix or The keystone Cops, then that is your 'personal' experience and brooks no debate from me.

[fable]

Quote:

Anatres writes: Wow! fable and Vehemence. Nice point-counterpoint. Although it's starting to heat up a bit - but that's a good thing.

Nope. Not to say heat in a conversation is always bad; it's sometimes pretty damn good. But that's when both people are being fairly represented, and their ideas are under discussion. Instead, I'm just being personally attacked as an "analyst" by people who are ignoring everything I write that disproves these remarks. The subject isn't the film; it's me. If I got angered in my last post (and I did), it's because I don't like being mis-represented, or told I'm automatically wrong by somebody who can't stand an opposing view, and automatically pigeon-holes it--while refusing to deal with the points it raised. After all, you don't need to analyze a film to know you don't like it, and it never hurts to figure out why you didn't like it after you get through watching it.

Vehemence, as soon as you answer the specific points I've raised in both my posts, here, I'll discuss this--or anything--with you. Until then, please, feel free to ignore whatever I write, and rest assured, I'll do the same for you.

[ 06-25-2001: Message edited by: fable ]

[fable]

Quote:

Gruntboy writes: There are very few flawless films. I watched the Matrix and thought it kicked heinie. There are plenty of cr*p films you could be criticising. You're all welcome to your opinions but I just sit back, let myself be entertained and let the Dolby Digital 5.1 and my Widescreen TV do its lovely, lovely work.

I don't know anybody who looks for flawless films, and the fact that I'm a fan of anime should have given that away, long ago. I just look at a film, see if I like it, and figure out afterwards why I did, or didn't. The criticism is all post mortem. During the film, as my wife and friends will tell you, I just experience, and my reactions are more uninhibited than most folks, especially when I like something a lot. I've been voted Most Embarassing Person to Attend a Good Comedy With in my circle for six years running. I've even been told to shut up by patrons who didn't get gags or didn't laugh at 'em, which I thought were screamingly funny. My reactions are visceral.

So I sit back, too, and I'm entertained--or not. In the case of Matrix, my friends and I simply howled our laughter at points where the dialog contradicted itself or the actions didn't suit the film. Like I wrote earlier, I'm still trying to figure why the hero thinks it would be noble to release everybody from the computer, when his instructor-guru has already explained that he was at the edge of being able to accept reality when he was released: the older you get, the more likely you'll just mentally collapse upon being "freed." Maybe the hero just wants to free 'em and stick the world over 18 in a giant asylum? Or maybe the writers/directors needed to make him sound noble, and didn't bother thinking about whether it contradicted what was said earlier...?

That didn't require a great deal of thought to hear it. Somebody in our crew simply said: "Wait a minute! Didn't..." and we laughed and rolled our eyes again. And we felt the same way about the "cartwheeling" action sequence, and the Corrupted Traitor who adapts the most tired cliche of talking endlessly as he's about to kill the hero and heroine, until their friend revives (from death, it looked like) and shoots him.

Now, if having a different opinion from the majority of people in this thread (or anywhere) makes Matrix-hasters pariahs, so be it: I'll don a hairshirt and a sign saying "Has Unclean Opinions." But at least, dislike our views without misrepresenting us. We're not looking for perfect films. We're people like you, same three arms, green blood...um, well, anyway, we're just people who are looking for good films, and we found Matrix to be a very bad one. Enough said.

[ 06-25-2001: Message edited by: fable ]

[Anatres]

Fable writes…..

‘Nope. Not to say heat in a conversation is always bad; it's sometimes pretty damn good. But that's when both people are being fairly represented, and their ideas are under discussion. Instead, I'm just being personally attacked as an "analyst" by people who are ignoring everything I write that disproves these remarks.’

First, I hope your referral to ‘personal attack’ was not aimed at me for any remarks I made. It was not my intention to ‘attack’ anyone. Obviously, since I am one, ‘analyst’ doesn’t have a ‘bad’ connotation to me.


Fable continues……

‘ After all, you don't need to analyze a film to know you don't like it, and it never hurts to figure out why you didn't like it after you get through watching it.’

In my case, notice again I am referring solely to myself, the ‘why’ I did or didn’t like a particular entertainment endeavor requires no conscience analysis on my part. I can pretty much determine the why viscerally. If I need to ‘defend’ that feeling, then I’m embarking on a discussion that probably points to the other’s agenda being other than why I did or didn’t like a particular film. These are situations I would rather avoid unless we can get to the real ‘heart’ of the matter.

[fable]

[quote]Anatres writes:
In my case, notice again I am referring solely to myself, the ‘why’ I did or didn’t like a particular entertainment endeavor requires no conscience analysis on my part.

I wasn't including you, above, Anatres, in my comments. As to conscious analysis: well, I'll bet in the end you do as much as I do, because as soon as you pose the question "why," the conscious mind has to furnish some answers. If you mean that you don't engage in any deep, post-structural BS which gains some people their doctorates in schools that should know better, I'm with you on that. But if somebody were to say to me, "Heh, Fable, you like Buster Keaton, and you like Charlie Chaplin. You say they were wildly funny comics. Which do you like best, and why?" -I'd have to do some analysis to explain the differences that I see.

I can pretty much determine the why viscerally. If I need to ‘defend’ that feeling, then I’m embarking on a discussion that probably points to the other’s agenda being other than why I did or didn’t like a particular film. These are situations I would rather avoid unless we can get to the real ‘heart’ of the matter.

That pretty much sums up my feeling, here. I simply posted my opinion of Matrix, and suddenly I was slapped with a label, and treated as if my opinion was the result of something I've fought against in print, on radio and tv for over twenty years! (Between pseudo-intellectual BS on the one hand and populist no-nothingism on the other, may the Gods defend us.) So I decided that the best way was to avoid discussion. No offense is meant to anyone, but I don't like being convicted without a jury of a crime I didn't commit by a prosecutor who is also judge and jury and has never even spoken to me.

[ 06-25-2001: Message edited by: fable ]

[C Elegans]

Just two words: internal consistency

Like most people, I want to sit back and be entertained, intrigued or in any other way engaged in and absorbed by film I see or a book I read. If I sit there and constantly view the film from a meta perspective, thinking "this is a film", the fun in reduced for me.

I think Blade runner and Brazil are two good, interesting and entertaining films. I think Matrix is a boring and uninteresting film. Why?

This has nothing to do with how credible the scenario is. Blade runner or Brazil are not exactly social realism. But IMO, they have something that Matrix lacks: an internal, "within the film-reality", coherent story. Things like bad acting and incoherent events simply reminds me it's a film.
It's no different from playing BG, if I sit there and constantly think "this is a computer game and Imoen is a graphic animation combined with a few wav-files and a script", it wouldn't be much fun playing BG.

[KidD01]

I remember watching Total Recall 2070, It's kinda disturbing to see you can get android and computer to serve your needs. And society getting computerized.

[Mr Sleep]

I think C' Hit the nail on the head if one can become embroiled in a beleiveable plot and become involved with the characters then the film works that much more influentially.

PS Did anyone see total Recall 2074, that was an excellent series, another one lost to the studio exec.s

[EMINEM]

@Georgi
So what's the significance of Morpheus' ship christened "Nebuchadnezzar?"

Nebuchadnezzar: king of Babylon 605-562 BC, destroyed Jerusalem in 586, and brought the survivors back to Babylonia for 70 years of captivity. He was stricken with insanity for his overweening pride, and lived liked a cattle and ate grass until he acknowledged the sovereignty of God Almighty.

Okay, what's the connection? In Isaiah, N.'s army is described as God's chosen instrument of vengeance against the Jews for persistently violating the first commandment by practicing idolatry. Morpheus' crew hardly respresent an invading army to be feared. There's only himself, Neo, Trinity, Tank, his brother, the platinum blonde chick, an Italian mobster, the little guy who goes on about the real taste of chickens, and the turncoat with the goatee.
Perhaps the insanity connection makes better sense: they're crazy to go up against those AI octopuses when their only means of defence is an electromagnetic pulse that cripples their ship in the process. What if more octopuses show up afterwards? They're screwed! Perhaps the exile connection? If so, they got it backwards. Humans in the Matrix are in cocooned stasis needing to be freed, not freed humans being forced into stasis. Other than the fact that it sounds cool when you say it aloud; "Nebuchadnezzar"
"Nebuchadneezzar" (good name for a lawful evil Sorcerer and/or Necromancer, by the way), I fail to find the significance.

@Elegans
"Canoe?" Ha! That's funny. Come to think of it, it makes sense calling him that. His acting is flat-bottomed, and you gotta wonder at times if he has both oars in the water.

@Thorin
The quote is from Spaceballs, a Mel Brooks film, and the best Star Wars spoof ever produced! I laugh when I think of some of the dialogue burned into my visual cortex from repeated watching:

Lord Hlmet: Now Lonestar, you will see that evil will always triumph because good is dumb!

My favorite scene fromt he movie comes after Lonestar escapes from the Spaceball mothership via hyperspace:


Lord Helmet: What happened?! Where are they?!

Colonel Sanders: I don't know, sir. They must have a hyperdrive on that thing!

Lord Helmet: And what do we have on this thing? A cuisinart?!

Col. Sanders: No, sir!

Lord Helmet: Well, find them! Catch them!

Col. Sanders: Yes, sir! Prepare ship for light speed!

Lord Helmet: No no no! Light speed is too slow!

Col. Sanders: Light speed too slow?

Lord Helmet: They got a head start on us, we'd never catch them that way. We're gonna have to go right to... Ludicrous Speed!

(Universal Gasp)

Col. Sanders: Ludicrous speed? Sir, we've never gone that fast before, I don't think this ship can take it!

Lord Helmet: What's the matter Colonel Sanders? Chicken?

(Pause)

Col. Sanders: Prepare ship... prepare ship for Ludicrous Speed! Fasten all safety belts! Seal all entrances and exits! Close all stores in the mall! Cancel the 3-ringed circus! Secure all animals in the zoo...

Lord Helmet: Give me that [microphone] you sorry excuse for an officer! Now hear this! Ludicous Speed...

Col. Sanders: Sir! Hadn't you better buckle up?

Lord Helmet: Aw, buckle this! Ludicrous Speed... GO!!!

VROOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOM!!!!!


@Vehemence and fable
The more time I spend on this forum, the more I realize the disavdantages of communicating via the internet. It's easy to misconstrue another person's response to your post as a sarcastic gibe, inflammatory statement, or ridicule of one's personal opinions when in reality such thing was never intended. Because we don't speak face to face, we can't see each other's expressions, much less interpret their thoughts in the manner it was meant to be conveyed in the first place, leading to heated arguments that consume more of our time and reflection than they're worth.
Assume the other person is not meaning to insult you, and if you feel or think otherwise, just remember Proverbs 12:16 - "A fool shows his annoyance at once, but a wise man overlooks an insult..." and moves on to better things.

RE: The Matrix Lobby Scene. I actually found it disturbing after the adrenaline rush from witnessing all though bullets fly started to die down. It kind of reminded me of the (in)famous scene in Pulp Fiction where John Travolta accidently shoots a kid in the head point blank, splattering blood and brains all over his clothing. Because the shooting occurred in a humorous context, however, the audience laughed! Instead of outrage and disgust, the theater erupted in laughter! In the Matrix, I sense the same irony at work. We're made to understand (or at least, I am) that the security guards and SWAT teams are computer generated holograms and not actual human beings, so wiping them out in glorified cold-blooded acrobatic shooting frenzy is justified, even, shall we say... necessary. It's much easier to stomach this scene if viewed with this in mind. The only problem is... to me, they're still human beings, not generated holograms. My suspension of disbelief doesn't go that far, and so I interpret Neo and Trinity's slaughter of human beings as Neo and Trinity's slaughter of human beings.
Thus, my subsequent reaction after giving it some thought.

@Vehemence
Try as you might, you simply cannot NOT analyze a motion picture, or a book, or photograph, or any form of art for that matter, to a certain extent. T.S. Eliot said it best when he wrote, "To criticize is as natural to human beings as breathing."

...

[Xandax]

Quote:

Originally posted by EMINEM: <STRONG>&lt;snip&gt; In the Matrix, I sense the same irony at work. We're made to understand (or at least, I am) that the security guards and SWAT teams are computer generated holograms and not actual human beings, so wiping them out in glorified cold-blooded acrobatic shooting frenzy is justified, even, shall we say... necessary. &lt;snip&gt;</STRONG>

As I understood it these guys are humans living in the matrix duing the job they think they have, but they don't have because it is the matrix.
The only computerbeings are the "men in black" wich are a sort of anti-virus. All other are human minds in the matrix.
The only holograms per se was the ones in "neo'" training programs. (ei. blonde in red dress)

IMO

[ 06-26-2001: Message edited by: Xandax ]

[Georgi]

Originally posted by EMINEM:
<STRONG>@Georgi
So what's the significance of Morpheus' ship christened "Nebuchadnezzar?"</STRONG>

I don't know, we never worked it out I was just pointing out that any in-depth analysis of the Matrix ought to include an attempt to work it out, since other names (Morpheus, for example) have their relevance... Why bother to tell the audience the ship has a name like that when it doesn't mean anything?

<STRONG>The quote is from Spaceballs, a Mel Brooks film, and the best Star Wars spoof ever produced!</STRONG>

Which, when you think about it, isn't the best accolade it could have... Seriously, I used to think it was good, but I saw it again recently and most of the humour was pretty tired.

Oh yeah, and since the film specifies if you die in the matrix, you die in real life, then they are killing real people in the lobby scene.

[ 06-26-2001: Message edited by: Georgi ]