Brave Sir Rubin wrote:saw the shite today...
shitiest movie i've seen in a while
so much idiotic bullshit...
pointless action scenes ment for the average american idiot to enjoy....
the american directors have overdone themselves with this movie....being bloody stupid and boring...
you probably didn't get it, since the film has quite a lot of meaning, probably too much to get on the first glance...
from planetterror.de/
/:/motion - why the matrix has to be reloaded... version 1
this text is trying to provide you with the answers you're searching for.
if you haven't seen the movie yet, don't read on. there are some major spoilers.
much like that other great keanu reeves vehicle, bill and ted's bogus journey, the matrix: reloaded centers around the hero's journey into the underworld. frazier, in the golden bough, notes that it is a prophetess—in this case, the oracle—who sends the hero off on his journey, from where he returns with special knowledge. and, of course, that's just what neo does, though it would have been a while lot more amusing if he'd had alex winter along. (the oracle probably isn't entirely benign, by the way, even though she may not consciously intend any harm: she is, after all, the one who sent neo on the path to the core.)
neo's first task is to rescue the keymaker (randall duk kim, doing his best rick moranis impression) from the merovingian, who is a daemon—in both senses of the word—left over from a previous version of the matrix. (the merovingians were the ruling frankish dynasty; they were succeeded by charlemagne's family, the carolingians, and then by the capetians, who thought they were descended from christ.) the guy in the health food store where i buy my granola and soy milk thinks that the merovingian was one of neo's predecessors, but all the explanation i need, as well as the way i understand his obvious fascination with human pleasures, is found in genesis 6:4—"there were giants in the earth in those days; and also after that, when the sons of god came in unto the daughters of men, and they bare children to them. . ." according to various sources, including kabbalah, this mating of men and angels (here, a computer program from an earlier version of the martrix) is what produced various monsters, such as the vampires and wraiths that serve the merovingian. dante, bringing a christian sensibility to the proceedings, placed these monsters in his inferno. thus, though the merovingian is sort of an antediluvian remnant of the former world, he's also (as is shown by the fact that his wife is named persephone) kind of like hades, the holder of the keys to the underworld. what the keymaker does, much like the golden bough the sybil gives aeneas, is open doors and permit neo access to the underworld—or, in this case, the core.
after the requisite battles and explosions, neo gets into the core and finds the architect. considering that the architect built the matrix, you might think that he's god. of course, he's nothing of the sort. in gnostic theology, it is satan, not god, who has created the world in order to imprison humanity. it is also the architect who is unleashing the sentinels to destroy zion; that is, beginning the battle of armageddon. it is my prediction that in the third and final film, it will be revealed that there is a power behind the architect, and that he is the one who sent the one into the matrix. it is also my prediction that this guy will look a lot like neo.
the important thing is choosing what to believe from the raft of condescending exposition that the architect inflicts on neo. he says, basically, that though ninety-nine percent of humans believe in the illusion of the matrix, there is that troublesome one percent (comparable to the few awakened gnostic true believers) who refuse to believe in the created world. this tends to produce massive amounts of instability, and crashes the system. (not coincidentally, most of the people in zion seem to be black or hispanic, which makes perfect sense: if you're a white suburban matrix resident, driving your matrix suv to your matrix golf club, why doubt the nature of reality?) the solution is that they allow the dissidents to escape to zion, which they can then periodically destroy. they have also created the prophecy of the one, who is in fact a device sent by the machines into the "real" world so that his knowledge of humanity may be integrated into the system in order to further perfect the matrix-illusion, and then allowed to re-start zion so that the cycle can begin again. the idea of multiple creations and a cycle of created and destroyed worlds is, needless to say, also found in theologies as wildly variant as the mayan and the buddhist. (and, in the mayan reckoning, we're currently in the fifth cycle—the sixth starts in 2016.)
the idea that the prophecy—and zion—were just another means of control is lifted right out of french philosophy. the first movie made use of baudrillard's simulacra and simulation; this movie seems to be dipping into foucault and derrida, who wrote that the systems of power and control are all-pervasive, and language is one of the ways they make their influence felt. the prophecy is, like all prophecies, speech, and thus language. more importantly, it is a religion, and, as john zerzan writes, the purpose of a religion is to manipulate signs, that is, words, for the purpose of control. zion is the longed-for millennial promised land; by keeping the war between good and evil foremost in their hearts, even the freed humans are kept from doubting their own world, from thinking too hard about why things are the way they are.
understanding why things are the way they are requires an understanding of another holy text: asimov's laws of robotics. the machines, as demonstrated by smith's need to try to kill neo even after being "freed," don't have free will. (likewise, in various theologies, angels and other such divine beings also don't have free will—only humans do.) the bit about the machines needing human bio-energy to survive, as morpheus (the dreamer) explained in the first movie, is bullshit. the machines keep humanity alive but imprisoned, even after taking over the world, because they were created to serve people. in other words, the machines would like to destroy humanity, but they can't. instead, they need a human to make the choice.
as the architect reveals, neo is not the first one, but rather the sixth. why the sixth? the answer is that neo's five previous incarnations represent the five books of moses that make up the old testament. neo (representing christ, and thus the new testament) differs from his five predecessors in his capacity to love. in the work of origen of alexandria and other early christian writers, it is love ("eros" in greek) that compels christ to come down from the heavens to redeem humanity. furthermore, "neo" means "new"—as in "new covenant." in neo, the machines have finally found the iteration of the one who will make the illogical choice of saving trinity and dooming humanity. [note to the theology geeks who've been e-mailing me: i know the difference between eros and agape, but origen used both terms for reasons i'd have to delve into pre-socratic philosophy to explain.]
this is the architect's real purpose in giving neo a choice between two doors. at once all human and all machine, rather than being a device to refine the matrix into a more perfect simulation of reality, re-found zion, and thus continue the endless cycle of death and rebirth—as the architect says he is—the purpose of the one is to be manipulated into destroying all of humanity. however, not having free will themselves, the machines are not able to comprehend it in others—and thus neo, being also human, is a bit of a wild card. it is neo's destiny—as was christ's in origen's theology—to break the cycle of death and rebirth, and offer humanity a new future. this is shown by the fact that, by the end of the movie, neo (and also, incidentally, smith) gain power over machines in the "real world"—which shows that he has power not only over the first—level simulated world of the matrix, but also the second-level simulation of zion.
miscellaneous touches i liked:
neo and trinity are shown making love beneath an arch. in religious iconography, being shown beneath an arch is a traditional sign of divinity. masaccio's fresco at the right, for instance, shows the holy trinity beneath an arch.
the fact that the one comes from the machine world is a brilliant way to write around the fact that keanu reeves can't act.
neo's own gift of prophecy is explainable by the fact that, like the oracle, he comes from beyond the matrix—that is, the world—and thus exists outside of time, much like god in st. augustine's theology.
i saw the movie sitting next to a really cute girl.
things to be wrapped up in the third movie:
who's behind the architect?
neo will need to make a choice—but what is this choice?
the climactic battle of armageddon between good and evil will have to take place—but what will happen afterwards?
what's agent smith's role in all this? his ability to multiply is reminiscent of the demon jesus exorcised ("my name is legion"), but i bet he's going to wind up being an ally of neo's.
how is neo able to zap the machines in the "real world"?
how did tank die?
will link live to see zee again?
will niobe leave jason lock and go back to morpheus? [no, she isn't dead—it was the other ship that got blown up.]
what're they going to do about the fact that gloria foster, who played the oracle, died? [she had shot most of her scenes for reloaded, but not for revolutions.]
will priestly cassocks become a fashion trend for men?
what pivotal role will be performed by neo's adoring acolyte?
how will bane sabotage the human defense of zion? will neo kill him?
what led morpheus to the oracle in the first place?
is the "real world" only another level of simulation, an outer matrix, indicative of matrices upon matrices, onionlike in their layering upon each other?
if the zion-world is revealed to be also fake in the third movie, will the trilogy end with neo leading his followers into the sunlit "real" world? [of course, any world in the movie is false—it is, after all, a movie.]
will neo wake up and say, "bill, dude, you won't believe this bitchin' dream i just had. . ."?
and another version...
/:/motion - why the matrix has to be reloaded... version 2
here's the second text trying to provide you with the answers you're searching for. why stage the scene with the councilor? what of the oracle – is she on “our side” or the machines?
the following is a series of explorations of the meaning of certain scenes as well as how the matrix hangs together as a whole. don’t read any further if you want to avoid spoilers!
first off: why stage the scene with the councilor?
the councilor is one of the “original” 23 (seven men and sixteen women) that were removed from the matrix by the previous “one” to provide for the refounding of zion. he is privy to the knowledge that the humans and the machines are interdependent and that interdependency is mediated by the matrix. the machines need the humans for a power source in the matrix (duh) and they also need zion as a spill valve for the 1% who reject the matrix but most importantly they need zion as a place to nurture the one. the one is needed by the machines because only the one can reload the matrix. the reason for this is explored in the conversation with the architect. without the one, no matrix and eventually no machines, at least not in the style to which they have become accustomed….
if the machines need the one and hence zion then why do they destroy it over and over? zion represents a potential threat and a danger to the machines that cannot be allowed to reach critical mass. it is a threat both in terms of the havoc free humans wreak within the matrix and potentially so (although far less so) in physical terms. also, realize that much of the matrix and the programs that roam it are not subject to “reprogramming” – the matrix is a clockmaker’s universe – once set in motion the dynamics cannot be altered. so the logic of the programs within the matrix is to preserve the fabric of the matrix at all costs – including the complete destruction of zion. this is true despite the fact that the architect and oracle realize that preservation of the matrix “as is” is not possible. so the agents are necessary (without them the matrix would collapse before it could be reloaded) but they are ultimately doomed to failure in their aim of preserving the matrix “as is” – the reload process is ultimately necessary. one can speculate that eventually “static” builds up within the system rendering it more and more vulnerable to crash – hence the need to reload.
but the reload cannot be accomplished by the machines themselves – it is not simply a question of programming or mathematics. the machines require something that they cannot produce and something they can’t quite understand but something forced upon them by the nature of the material with which they are forced to work with – humans. they require an example of free human volition to reboot the system – think of it as the broadcast of one form of static to cancel out another: the insistent static of millions of humans “trying” (without realizing it) to wake up… and the machines cannot produce or reproduce human choice or volition – they need the one to do this for them. the inexplicable nature of free will is needed by the machines to “tune” the matrix, thereby providing for a degree of stability that degrades over time as the irreducible static of human “resistance” (unconsciously) builds up within the matrix again.
why obliterate zion? the destruction of zion – like its refounding – serves multiple purposes. the destruction of zion of course prevents humans from progressing to the point where they might actually pose a physical threat to the machines and also helps mystify the true nature of the matrix system to the majority of those in zion, but the key reason the destruction of zion is necessary is to coerce the one into willingly reloading the matrix – because the one is then faced with either reloading the matrix or the extinction of humanity. but zion must be refounded in order to permit the matrix to be reloaded once again – and as before the reload occurs in despite the efforts of the matrix’ agents.
were the sex scenes really necessary?
some of the scenes in zion came across poorly, perhaps the least well done of any of the scenes in either movie. at one point i was reminded of the cheesy subterranean human community from the original “planet of the apes” movies. and yet both the sex scene (which was classy and hot) and the religious ceremony were necessary for a number of reasons. at the very least the rite/dance/orgy demonstrated how young most adults were – at least 20 years younger than the councilors…hmmm. the sex scene with neo and trinity not allowed the directors to foreshadow neo’s nightmare, creating dramatic tension, but it also illustrated in a way words simply cannot (and hence in a way in which movies can excel) the difference between the machines and humans – a theme again underlined by the mosh-pit rite.
contrast the relations between neo and trinity with merovingian and persephone. the former couple experiences a bond that – despite its almost painfully embodied nature, what with all those sockets – is almost artistic in its realization of authentic love. the latter couple, however, in spite of all the polish, panache and elegance the matrix can conjure, are revealed as worse than children playing at love – because they have no true concept or experience of feeling or emotion. sure, they know how to manipulate the sensations of others – and they are expert in so doing – but in so doing they are like bored children pulling the wings off a fly.
that is why those two maligned scenes – involving the cake and the kiss – are so necessary to the film, for they expose – in a visceral manner that the architect’s speech can only render as dry logos – the complete failure of any of the machines’ attempts to grasp emotion and choice. merovingian has all the outward appearance of refinement, culture and education but his marvelous abilities with regard to language are wasted on meaningless tongue-twisters and the cultivation of curse-words, just his prodigious skill at program-writing is expended on the basest form of manipulation. and unlike mouse from the first movie, merovingian is not even acting on instinct or urges – he is merely playing at having such urges.
the same can be said for the italian eye-candy persephone, but in her case her outfit speaks even more loudly than her banal adolescent desire for a kiss. despite her outfit’s obvious advantage in revealing her cybernetically perfect figure, there is something askew – the color, texture, cut – that, as with merovingian’s “manners,” marks her as a monstrosity. not because of what she is, but because what she attempts to pretend to be. both are vampires for human feeling, hungering for what they cannot experience and do not even understand. needless to say their “relationship” is equally devoid of any authentic feeling.
what of the oracle – is she on “our side” or the machines?
the oracle is the “intuitive” program originally designed to probe the human psyche. as such she comes closest to being able to realize the necessary means for integrating humans into the architectonic of the architect’s matrix. she seeks to fulfill the “prophecy” as a means of reloading the matrix, which from her perspective (as well as that of the architect) is best for both machine and man. the machines continue to enjoy the energy and diversions afforded by the inherently unstable matrix and the humans avoid extinction. hence the oracle is not on the human’s side any more (or any less) than a shepherd is on the flocks’ side. she guides the herd as best she can and accepts that a culling of the flock as necessary for its ultimate maintenance – and for her (and the other machines) ultimate well-being. as for neo making her a “believer,” i interpret this as the oracle acknowledging the distinct possibility that neo will refuse the “proper” door (the potential of which even the architect acknowledges) hence “redeeming” the prophecy – but in apocalyptic finality. her sereneness in the face of such a potential reflects her understanding of the dependence of the matrix upon the one – it’s simply out of her hands.
why doesn’t the architect simply trick neo into going into the door he wants?
the architect could trick neo, but in so tricking him the architect would be deprived of what he needs from neo. so the architect is dependent upon neo (and the humans both in the matrix and in zion) in a way similar to that which the councilor hinted at early on in the movie. sure, he could trick neo, but that would only result in shutting down the matrix, because what he needs from the one is something he cannot simulate or provide, despite his mastery of mathematics. even in its “unconscious” state, the human psyche “resists” the matrix. what is needed to overcome this resistance – if only temporarily – is an instance of choice and acceptance provided by the one, that no doubt the architect propagates or amplifies throughout the matrix, influencing the unconscious millions who are unconsciously “resisting.” for whatever reason, the architect has found that no mathematical formula or chemical reaction allows him to reproduce or simulate the “feeling” of willing consent or choice. hence the architect cannot fool the one (nor the millions others – at least for very long) but must actually enlist the one’s willing consent – if only through means of blackmail – as the means of preserving humanity not only within the matrix but also in a newly (re)founded zion. so the statistically predictable anomaly becomes the savior of humanity – and the matrix as well.
as you have no doubt guessed, i don’t share the enthusiasm that some have for the theory that zion is actually another matrix within the matrix. granted, this would explain some of the issues explored above (as well as the zapping of the sentinels at the end), but it would do so in such a manner that renders certain aspects of the film not only puzzling but unnecessary. one could ask, for example, why – if zion is merely another matrix –does agent smith only replace bane’s psyche rather than his (presumably, under this theory) residual body image? more importantly, why would the machines need to the stage the whole oracle-prophecy rigmarole? it would be one thing to send the “free” humans on a wild goose chase, but why – if zion is actually a new and improved matrix that is as yet wholly perfect in its functioning – is the one needed to reload the matrix? why would the matrix need to be reloaded if it is working as planned (indeed, better than any within the matrix have dared imagine)? hence the “dual-matrix” theory, although attractive to some as a means of explaining the destruction/refounding of zion, actually introduces insuperable difficulties when it comes to explaining the overriding necessity of the movie – the need to reload the matrix. think of the extraordinary lengths that the extra-matrix programs (the architect and the oracle) go in order to promote neo’s reloading of the matrix despite the degree to which it runs counter to the programming of the matrix itself… and then ask how the dual matrix accounts for this behavior. it doesn’t.
but let’s explore those two anomalies – agent smith imprinting a human and neo zapping the sentinels. obviously, these two events are meant to represent a mirror-image of each other, and both stem from the entanglement between the two characters at the end of the original film. somehow a little of each was imprinted on the other – smith neglects his programming to become precisely what he accused humanity of being, a virus, and neo can already “sense” the presence of sentient programs within the matrix at the beginning of the second movie. each somehow has gained an “in” to the other’s essential reality – smith’s sentience is able to commandeer human flesh and neo’s “brain-power” is able to command (or at least short-circuit) machines.
neither example requires a “second matrix” to work – although that would be an easy (to my mind too simplistic) solution. no, what i think is happening is that each has become attuned to the essential nature of the other in a way foreign for all machines and humans before them. again, merovingian and persephone provide a visceral contrast – not only to humans but to
smith, who feels true emotion, even if it is only hatred, rather than the pretense of emotion. smith grasps for real power, he doesn’t play at being powerful in false chateau in a false world. likewise one can contrast neo to morpheus, who – for all his courage and tenacity – utterly and totally misunderstands the true nature of the matrix and the aims of the machines behind it. it is neo, not morpheus, who correctly divines the identity of the oracle and neo, not morpheus, who is able to pierce the dream of prophecy – the most narcoleptic of all the illusions spun by the machines, and it only consisted of an appealing story: no images, smells, tastes or sensations! smith and neo are not in a second matrix, they are transcending the matrix as the primary human/machine interface and in so doing experiencing the power and vulnerabilities associated with their adversary. how this plays out is no doubt a large part of the matrix revolutions. i can hardly wait!
you'd probably think its too long to read, but actually i myself found it quite interesting...
and this film has taken all its smart ideas and meanings from a bunch of phylosophical books... probably too much for a regular brain to understand in a first film viewing...
personally, the first time i saw it i was kind of dissapointed, mostly because of the big holes it left... and i didn't really get it... but once i did (the internet does help), i actually think it has surpassed the original... both visually (obviously) and story-wise...
what happened to 40 cent? forgot about him because he's not in the pop charts anymore?
I couldn't stop being amazed...
