The Matrix Saga: A Look Back - Page 7

Oh no I didn't mean that. I meant I was talking about me. I love the sequels.

Oh and Neo blowing up a whole ton of smart bombs, but can't handle sentinals?

I'm gonna assume that the a single bomb doesn't require as much power to destroy as a sentinal. Also Neo probably just blew up a few, and their explosions started a chain reaction to blow up the rest.

Neo flying into the electrical storm with an electric ship?
Okay I'm sure there can be some sort of reglious/nirvana/trinity/bliss explaination here. Practically think about it. Get the sentinals off. It wasn't an EMP storm though, so restarting the ship would be no problem.

Now heres the thing, would Neo would of sacrificed himself if Trinity didn't die?

Hey Diva,

I'm not going to argue with you about whether the moment works or not. I had fun with it and while I know that laughter might not have been what the creators were going for, that's what they got. But it was a knowing laugh. I was along for the ride. I caught the reference and moved on. I think that if they'd slowed the the moment down, they would have lost that reference because the moment in T2 is also slowed down for whatever reason. Drama? To extend the effect? Who cares!?

SAIRUS,

That post was all over the place, man! Let's see if I can make sense of it:

I think if that was true, Neo wouldn't keep his hand up as he does. He's obviously concentrating on whatever it is he's doing to the smart bombs. And you can see, if you look, that he's continuously detonating them and they're not just exploding from the force of the first detonations.

Neo can't concentrate on beating the bombs and the sentinels at the same time. We saw what stopping 4 sentinels did to him in a moment of desperation at the end of Reloaded. It's logical to assume that throwing the likes of them off is not easy for him to do.

So because of that, I'll assume he flies above the clouds because he has to get to 01 and that seems to be the only way to do so.

The Dark Sky effect engineered by humans near the end of the 2nd Renaissance is very obviously some sort of perpetual electromagnetic storm. EMP is an electromagnetic pulse which is finite and triggered by a device. Electromagnetic storms exist in nature. In the future, it's not out of the film's logical possibility that humans could master the technology to harness that force.

The circumstantial evidence in the movies and Animatrix also supports the assertion. The humans had no idea that the machines would find a way to survive the lack of solar energy, or they would not have done it in the first place. Similarily, they had to be sure that the machines would not simply move above the cieling of the storm and build solar panels there or something. As is shown by the ship AND sentinels going offline when they enter the storm, this is indeed an electromagnetic phenomenon.

Restarting the ship after it is subjected to electromagnetic energy should not pose a problem, or the ships would be crippled in the event that using EMP would be necessary. Case in point: the Nebuchadnezzar at the end of The Matrix.

Now of course rising above the clouds has its spiritual/philosophical significance. That's abundantly clear and even commented on by Trinity, albeit in the most concise possible way.

Is that supposed to connect to the above, or are you starting a new thought?

In my opinion, Trinity HAD to die to justify Neo's willingness to eventually sacrifice himself for the "greater good". Trinity served her purpose in pushing Neo past his initial doubts, and past the wiles of the machines in Reloaded. That was the purpose the Oracle intended for her. With her dead, Neo is free to go the last yard and finish his part in the story as well. With her alive, Neo may very well have chosen a different path and that could have cost Zion its life and the machines theirs.

I thought that this would be clear.

Yeah, I think this thread has touched upon this issue quite a few times now, the sequels dont resemble typical knock-offs of successfull original movies that we've seen in history (other than the fact that they get more epic with more effects). Infact, I'd go so far as to say they undermine alot of things that occur in the first film, such as the initial audience pondering of Morpheus's actions, being dubious at best, and after Reloaded we're confirmed that everything he believed in, that drove him, was bullshit, just like Cypher said, etc, etc. Sequels that make you look at the first film in a different light are rare these days.

I would disagree with this criticism for 2 reasons:

1) The brothers are big fans of anime, as is plainly evident in their films and documentaries. The use of trademark moves is common in anime and manga (mostly in shounen genre), main characters have their own style, and this is no different and suiting to an anime/live action hybrid.

2) The brothers went to great pains to avoid the bullet time they used in the first film because everyone began to use it afterwards for no reason other than it looked cool, and thus virtual cinematography was implemented for the sequels (people always assume the sequels use bullet time when they dont). I think these actions go against the thought that they would use their previous success in a generic and predictable fashion.

Sure there are injokes that link to the previous, such as Neo stopping many bullets in Reloaded, but I see them more as setup and payoff. A criticism that irks me is that they used less gunplay in the sequels because of the controversy the first film caused (Columbine, etc), which is quite frankly bollocks because 1) There IS gunplay in both sequels, and 2) Neo has no use for a gun anymore, duh!?

To add to this, also remember the Buddhist connection. To become enlightened you must let go of many things, more importantly: desire. Trinity was Neo's desire and once she's gone he is free to escape his body and rise to another level, which is what he eventually does. Its still a good question though, if Trinity was alive, Neo's actions would have been different for sure.

Excellent post, Cog. I agree with everything you said.

I still wonder, though, what some of the less forgiving will think about the questions I raised. But since you and I both seem to be fans, I also wonder if you have any thoughts about the question I raised earlier concerning the bleeding from the mouth device.

Well there's the conventional method of showing extreme danger, red blood spurting from the mouth, almost a cliche of film now, but there could be more to it, though I'm not sure what. I wouldnt discount a deeper meaning, because there's lots of other subtle forms of symbolism in the films, such as various characters wearing shades throughout the film, some people would say its like wearing a firewall, protecting yourself from others seeing the 'windows to your soul' and all that kinda stuff.

I can say though, that whenever blood comes out Neo's mouth, its always at a critical moment, and not just because he's getting hurt, but something is happening to develop his character arc, and he then begins a course of action to turn things round. The best examples are of course in Matrix 1 in the subway station, and in Revolutions in that warehouse building during the Superbrawl.

Its also a convention of anime too, infact it happens more vividly in anime than in live action films, I cant remember many examples of characters spitting out blood in films, but in anime they do it often and in a really striking way. I like how the Wachowskis use/animate blood or other fluids, its very anime style.

btw, I'm halfway through the critic commentary for Reloaded and they're acting childish now, its kinda sad. I do find it funny though whenever they go on a long ramble about something that they're disappointed with or annoyed about, then when they stop to take a breather, the viewer sees something on screen that completely shatters or contradicts what they were talking about. It happens alot during the commentary, I dont think the critics were paying attention the one time they watched the film, and certainly arent the second time while cracking lame jokes (making snoring sounds!), so maybe the Wachowskis should have waited half a decade or so before putting a critic commentary on the DVDs, so that people would have watched the trilogy a few more times, let it sink into culture a bit more before looking back on it.

Good discussion

I too have held off of the Trilogy for a while. I was given the box set for a gift but haven't watched it yet.

What got me back here was that I FINALLY got my hands on a copy of this fan-edit I heard of called "Matrix:Regenerated".

It combines all 3 films into a 4.5hr viewing, and seems very professional. It totally warps the story and leaves out some cool moments, but as a fan I enjoyed it. I had seen clips at a party & even came here looking for it, but no one had seen it yet. If I had to guess, I'd say the events of the original took the first 1hr45min, then the rest was a combination of the sequels. Very nice editing toward the end, but I wasn't a fan of the wrap up. Seemed too abrupt and all of the cut sequences left the narrative a bit lacking. Although since the last hour was pure action it wasn't a big deal on first viewing. First half was truly excellent, though...

What's weird is how hard it was to get. No torrents, no ebay copies - nothing.

Welcome to the aftermath of the Matrix trilogy.

Everything that is wrong with the sequels is very easy to describe. This is coming from a huge Matrix 1 fan. But the release of the sequels has spawned a new breed of Matrix fan that has replaced the previous fans that existed after the first film.

These new Matrix fans now practice a simple mantra--you're only "smart" enough to get the sequels if you disregard the crappy storytelling. Boring storytelling is justified if you invent symbolic allegory for everything. This is totally different from after the first Matrix film, where everybody was in love with the STORY/CONCEPT (as well as the action). The philosophy was a subtle thread you could pick up on if you wanted to, not a force-fed simpleton's version meant to impress the messageboard denizens about how "mind-blowing" it is that Zion resembles Hell. You're not making intelligent films if nobody understands what you're saying.

I could write a crappy, boring, post-modern essay on existentialism with random action scenes scattered throughout. That wouldn't make it a good essay or a "masterpiece." Today's Matrix fans expect everyone else to simply accept the films as masterpieces even though the philosophy is freshman-level and the stories are boring. Left with the truth that the storytelling sucked, all that is left for them is justification of the poor storytelling through expository messageboard posts about all the hidden meanings of everything, as if it changes how poorly done the movies are. I've read all the online essays about the meanings behind the sequels. It still doesn't change how non-entertaining they are, and it never will.

This is why it's so ridiculous for someone to say "Revolutions holds the meaning of the whole trilogy, don't hate it." We're supposed to like a bad movie simply because it holds some imagined meaning for all three films?

A non-boring portrayal of Zion, obviously. What a ridiculous question. Zion was a boring, dirty hole in the ground that we didn't even get a good glimpse of. Not the epic "last human city" implied in the first movie.

Watching councils and chancellors talk and talk and TALK on screen is poor storytelling. This is nothing like the first Matrix, where the story pace was top-notch and always progressing. Zion feels like an extended stopgap we are forced to sit through. NEWSFLASH--nobody was interested in Zion in the first place. We were all interested in the Matrix. Zion in the first film was nothing more than a reason for the rebel ships to exist, and therefore Morpheus and his crew. It functioned perfectly as a non-visible place. It should have been a minor location in the sequels, not the entire focus (the focus should be...THE MATRIX...you know, what the films are titled after).

The Wachowskis made the unforgivable blunder of deciding to change the focus of rescuing humanity from the Matrix ("as long as the Matrix exists, the human race will never be free") to two entire films about saving some sweaty people in Zion we never cared about. The inhabitants of the Matrix--who, in our minds, represented our world in the first film--are completely ignored in favor of chancellors, council members, and ship captains.

The reason the first Matrix was so fun, among other reasons, was the idea that our horrible day-jobs aren't real, and that we could escape any time from this dream world hell-hole and grab a gun and do somersaults in slow-motion against the evil computer system keeping us as slaves, and break the truth to everybody else. Any computer geek watching this movie could feel powerful.

Twisting things around regarding the prophecy was an interesting move in the sequel, but it was so poorly executed that any real emotional impact was lost, with the exception of one good shot of Morpheus watching his ship burn in pieces.

Listen to what you're saying. "You've got to have balls to end a mainstream action movie with a long boring piece of dialogue." Why does it take balls to make something crappy and boring?

This leads me back to my first point, that Matrix fans have invented a justification system for every piece of poor dialogue ("It's referring to this arcane piece of philosophy"), every pointlessly long and alienating scene ("The Zion rave is about humans doing something the machines can't!"), every unanswered question ("What do you mean Neo's magic real-world powers weren't explained? You have to think for yourself in these films!"), and every lame resolution ("The CG sunset is about renewal, caused by Sati whose name has special meaning, blah blah blah").

No amount of smelly allegory will change the fact that the movies sucked. The new mantra is to justify the poor storytelling with the imagined genius of the Wachowski brothers, who can't seem to get anything across on screen without their characters using a question-answer routine.

Questions for Matrix fans that will never be answered:
1.) How, exactly, did Neo stop the Sentinels?
2.) When speaking with the Oracle, why does Neo incorrectly state the number of Sentinels he stopped at the end of Reloaded?
3.) At the end of the trilogy, nothing has changed from when the trilogy began. This is further evidenced if you've played the Matrix Online, where the old conflicts between humans and machines are still ongoing.
4.) If the Architect knows which door Neo will take, why does he even bother giving him the choice? Why mention Trinity?
5.) Why are the Agents attempting to stop Neo if he is supposed to meet the Architect anyway?
6.) Who was the Keymaker, and why did he even exist other than as an excuse for a freeway chase?
7.) Why did Persephone kiss Neo? Oh, I know, if you've read cast interviews you know the reason is that she's a "psychic vampire," blah blah blah. But this is stated absolutely nowhere in any of the films. So, what was the point of including that scene? The film should have cut from the elevator scene directly to the scene where she leads them through the kitchen.
8.) What happened to Neo's world-bending powers? Why does he fight agents if he can stop bullets?
9.) If Agents can dodge bullets, why can't they dodge fists or blades? How does Morpheus land a cut on the Agent's face on top of the semi when that same Agent dodged bullets moments earlier?
10.) How did Morpheus' sword blade magically move lower on the side of the semi for him to stand on and then back up again for him to grab it during the fight? For the detail-obsessed Wachowskis, this was very sloppy.
11.) How many times is Roland going to say "goddamn" before someone shuts him up?
12.) Why does Locke hate the idea of the prophecy so much? You don't know. Would have been interesting to hear the story behind that (like, his father spent all his life out searching for the One the way Morpheus and others did, and Locke never knew his father as a result and had to take care of his mother alone back in Zion...just one idea that would have illustrated the fallacy behind blindly following the prophecy all your life as well as given some much-needed depth to the 2D people of Zion).
13.) How does the Merovingian know Seraph? You don't know. We're just supposed to nod and accept the referenced, but never explained, backstory. When you're giving off-screen backstory, it should have a reason for being there that doesn't involve a future planned videogame.
14.) How did Neo end up in the Trainman's place?
15.) How was Neo jacked in wirelessly?
16.) Why does Link say he doesn't recognize Neo? What's the point of this line of dialogue if it has no bearing anywhere in the rest of the film?
17.) What does the Architect mean when he says Neo was designed? This major revelation is never given another thought for the rest of the two sequels.
18.) Why does the Oracle say Neo might return, if he's dead? Is this science fiction or science fantasy? Oh, right, the Wachowskis wanted to keep Neo around for the Matrix Online videogame (for those who don't know, characters have been going around collecting fragments of Neo's residual-self-image, which apparently exploded into pieces during the Smith battle).
19.) How did Smith get into the backdoor system?
20.) How can a computer program feasibly exist "inside" the physical neurons of a human brain? Why did Bane's operator not see this happening and put a stop to it?

To most people, the response to the majority of these questions would be "I don't know, and I wish the movie would have addressed them." To the new breed of Matrix fans, the response is "You people want everything explained to you! You're just not smart enough to read volumes of essays on philosophy to fill in the blanks of an incomplete action movie! Anime 4-ever!"

To sum up:
The more arcane and indecipherable things are, the more genius it apparently is.

Jebus sweet titty fucking christ.

Either the Matrix films worked for you or they didn't - the rest is truely noise.

Either the Star Wars prequals worked for you or they didn't.

Who really gives two sweet flying fucks in hell what anyone else thinks?!?!

Okay personally -- I adore the Matrix saga.

For me it is the perfect amalgamation of deep philisophical & spiritual ideals that fascinate me deeply and many pop culture stylings I grew up with and adore such as sci-fi, anime and comic books. For me personally I get more from the films each time I watch them on a cerebral level while simultaniously geeking out and giggling like a schoolboy at the uber-cool packaging it all comes in.

Thats just me.

If it didn't work for you hey thats cool - they aren't for everybody.

Thats not being condescending - NOTHING is for everybody - we're all different. Thats humanity.

Personally, (for example) I hate the Star Wars prequals - thats just me talking - I truely don't give two shits who agrees with me and who doesn't.

If you love them thats great and Im truely happy for you. They worked for you. Just not for me.

Some people like strawberry, some like chocolate - hell some go in a caramel direction.

This Nazi-esque "my opinion is actually fact and if you disagree with me you're wrong" that permeates geekdom like a cancer displays the incredible lack of maturity within the community of movie geeks across the globe.

People can't just seem to agree to disagree for fucks sake. It's like some are so frikkin insecure that they have to insist everyone around them agrees with their view 100% or it challenges, and subsequently methinks they fear invalidates, their opinion.

Grow up kids.

You can discuss and disagree without parading your frail egos like some child yelling at a parent "LOOK AT ME" you know.

This isn't aimed at anyone on this thread in particular honestly - Ive just come back to this board after an 8 month hiatus and I guess it was phenominally wishful thinking to hope that film geek discussion may have progressed a little bit past "if you don't seee things 100% like I do you're a retard"

I guess thats wat seperates the geeks from the critics to a degree.

Ah well.

Carry on.

Good to see you back Rain Dog. Whether you believe me or not, it was kind of cool to see your username popping up in a thread again.


You know, not caring about someone else's opinion can be a sign of insecurity too but, other than that, I agree with you completely. Apart from the Prequels. I'm actually rather fond of them. Scum!

Aw shucks Andrew - thanks mate.

Look when I said "not caring" that was more an extreme opposite reaction to the narrow myopia of modern geekdom.

What I mean is these are meant to be discussions - not point scoring exercises.

Grown ups can discuss differing opinions, share varied ideas and, if they don't meet in the middle, simply agree to disagree.

Its the childish aspects I discussed above that saw me off from here a few months back.

I love discussing films with people who love films like I do - not necassarily the same films, just films.

I don't need to feel right or prove someone wrong.

I don't need to feel big by trying to make someone feel small.

I love movies - thats why Im here.

And theres plenty of guys around here I love discussing movies with - yourself included.

That's why I'm back

I agree....good to have you back Mr Dog.
Your frustration at finding that nothing has improved in your absense is palpable.
Welcome Back!
For the record i also disagree with you about the Prequels. If you combine all three films together there is at least 40 minutes solid gold entertainment in those films.











*cough*

BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAA!

You know - I might actually agree with you there.

I'd also argue that probably about 30 minutes of that occur in Episode 3 and involve Yoda and Ewans Obi Wan almost exclusively.

The other ten probably belong to Neesons Qui Gon and Darth Maul.

All that said ( and not to distract this thread too much) - I personally believe Genndy Tartakovski's Clone Wars contain more "Star Wars-ness" in their two series than almost all 3 prequals combined.

But thats for another thread.

If anyone disagrees - thats your entitlement and your perogative.

And thanks for the welcome - I honestly didnt think it would feel as good to be back as it does.

"though the process has altered your consciousness..." Neo steps through the door of light and touches the source. He can now feel the machines' presence whereever he exists, and of course interact with them, in the sentinel's case he simply shuts them off. Like your remote would shut off your TV. The characters with holes are essentially walking antennas, more about that below.

That I think is actually a genuine mistake, pretty funny. Cue more "Keanu is dumb" jokes.

Hmm, I think you missed out on the word 'truce' somewhere. The humans and machines arent fighting each other. The humans would be wiped out pretty easily dont you think? There's simply three sects in a conflict, a civil war as opposed to one on a bigger scale like we saw in the first film. Machines, humans and exiles all fighting for their own reasons. All of them are essentially trying to keep the matrix alive for the time being, of course there are a few rebels trying to fuck things up because they're crazy and shit. Also, another pretty big change, humans now have a choice if they want to leave the matrix or not, the agents wont chase them around like they did in the first film. Did you even listen to the conversation at the end of the last film?

"Oracle: Please. You and I may not be able to see beyond our own choices, but that man can't see past any choice.

Neo: Why not?

Oracle: He doesn't understand them, he can't. To him they are variables and equations. One at a time each must be solved and counted. That's his purpose: to balance the equation."

They dont know about the architect. Smith finds out when he's on the verge of deletion, then comes back all enlightened about the whole situation. If he knew about the reload process why would he say in the first film "Once I get the keys to Zion there's no need for me to be here!"?

The keymaker's an excuse for the One to feel like he's doing something, its part of the game-like path the Oracle's set up. Merv is in on the whole thing and this particular time he kidnapped the keymaker for his own reasons.

There is a TV showing a female vampire minutes before she does do her kiss actually. But I kind of agree, the scene doesnt do too much, guess it shows the faith of Trinity in the cause, that Merovingian was like Neo once, and the concept that machines can feel love, which is foreshadowing for the third film.

"Hmm, Upgrades..." - Neo.

Dude, the Wachowskis could have written the agents as a cloud of fucking nanobots, they wouldnt have had any opposition at all but then there wouldnt have been a movie with kung-fu, get over yourself. And the cut on the agent's face, so fucking what!? Its to make them look more real for passerbys, part of the illusion.

Its a mistake. Get.Over.Yourself. Did this suddenly ruin the movie for you? No dont answer that, just do the getting over yourself thing.

Now its getting even more stupid, and I realise I'm wasting my time typing all this...

Dumbass. Lock gives reason enough, he doesnt care about unproven bullshit, he wants tangible proof, isnt that reason enough? You want Lock flashbacks? Lock monologues? Lock exposition? Lock's just a cynical bastard who is justified in not believing in the prophecy, because hey, guess what? He was right! His mistake was that he didnt believe in Neo.

Ok, I agree with you here, not enough info for the viewer, just a vague indication that Seraph used to work for the Merv, and thats about it. Just makes Seraph look like a badass, thats about it. But it didnt ruin my enjoyment of the film. I didnt suddenly sit up in the cinema and throw up in frustation.

When he took down the sentinels, his mind seperated from his body while it was communicating with the source (in the machine world), and it floated into Movil Ave, which is placed between the matrix and the machine world. Kind of like a zip disc that connects into a PC thing.

Tell me, how do all the characters plug into the matrix without physically doing it? Why do you think Morpheus says "Bring us to broadcast depth"?

Its to indicate that Neo isnt what he was before, he's changed, foreshadowing his new abilities in the third film.

It means the concept of the One was designed. Neo is just a human, not an AI or anything.

Could be reference to anything, his spirit, him returning literally, etc. Its just meant to indicate hope.

When he was on the verge of deletion, he found out about the reloads and all kinds of other shit, he's enlightened just like Neo was.

How can a person learn Kung Fu, how to pilot a chopper? How does a person UPLOAD INFO INTO THEIR BRAIN IN THIS TRILOGY? Same concept, except Bane uploaded an entire CONSCIOUSNESS. An artificial one, but still a consciousness. Read up on Kurzweil or something.

Most people might not get all this shit on first viewing, I didnt. Like I said before, the movies are really dense, packed with information that speeds by and its only after the film's finished and you're sitting back chilling, when you ponder what you just saw and piece it together yourself. Its more fun with other people, so you can brainstorm ideas and stuff. So what if the film's dont ream off scenes and scenes of exposition to spoon-feed the audience, so what if they dont have the best narrative or story you've ever seen in your life, at least they communicate interesting themes and topics to us, they do something at least.

On the surface they are still entertaining and thoughtful films (meh, debateble I know), and underneath they get richer, but you dont have to dig underneath to understand or enjoy it, its just a choice for the viewer. Some people understand everything about the films but still dont like it, it doesnt matter, people are allowed to like and dislike, so really....I dont know wtf the point of all this was... (oO)

My penis is big

I have virtual diarrhea.

I can't decide what's more annoying; the way people jump into every discussion with this same cliched "either you liked it or you didn't" or the fact that they ask who cares what anyone thinks when the obvious answer is we do. Otherwise, why have a messageboard? Why post anything ever? Why communicate since nobody cares what anybody thinks?

More amusingly, the rest of your post is spent discussing why you liked the Matrix, negating your previous declaration about the irrelevance of such opinions.


And now, onto my questions...

Disregarding that this explanation is not given anywhere in the films and is therefore your own conjecture, it still doesn't explain HOW. You're explaining the WHY.

Does Neo have a wireless 802.11g antenna hooked into the back of his head? How is he connected to anything? We're getting into the realm of fantasy, and the Wachowskis were willing to take this route in the name of mystical religious symbolism.



Nothing changes for the inhabitants of the Matrix. They're the forgotten people in the sequels.

The beginning of the Matrix:
Mankind is enslaved by machines for use as a power source.
The sky is scorched, so mankind is forced to live in Zion.
All three factions are fighting in a "conflict" over keeping the Matrix around.
The machines have the upper hand over humanity.

The end of Revolutions:
Mankind is enslaved by machines for use as a power source.
The sky is scorched, so mankind is forced to live in Zion.
All three factions are fighting in a "conflict" over keeping the Matrix around.
The machines have the upper hand over humanity.

All that's changed is the weak label of "truce" tossed out by the Architect in a park scene.

This doesn't answer my question. The Architect clearly knew which door Neo would take. He would have known better than to even mention Trinity.

These kinds of incredibly vague reasonings given in random lines from other characters that may or may not apply is exactly why audience dissatisfaction was so high regarding these movies. The Wachowskis are regarded as geniuses by fans when really they barely plotted anything out, instead relying on endless philosophical references that were vague enough to apply to anything. Fans pick and choose things to describe other things without actually EXPLAINING them.

None of this is stated in the films, so it is your personal explanation. I love how you magically invent an entire confrontation between Smith and the Architect, where Smith comes back "enlightened." This completely contradicts the Oracle's statements that programs can choose deletion or exile--Smith obviously chose exile, never going through the whole "meet with the Source" process. His statement about things "happening exactly as before" actually lean toward the idea that the Agents are aware of the situation.

Smith said what he said in the first film because the first film was a well-written plot that made sense internally. Then the sequels happened.

None of this is explained or supported in any of the films and is your personal opinion to explain what you saw on screen. In addition, it's horribly inefficient. All the Oracle has to do is tell Neo to meet the Architect on a certain floor of a certain building. There's no need for a "Keymaker" middle-man other than as a reason for a car-chase.

Only because the two goons are vampires.

That's it? That's your big explanation for what happened to Neo's wall-bending powers? "Hmm, upgrades?" The guy can stop the force of a bullet, use telekinesis to draw weapons from walls and give himself flight, and he still has to fight programs with his fists?

Translation: "I have no explanation to offer, so I'll dismiss it as 'movie magic.'"

I'm constantly told how well-written the sequels are, but when any illogic is encountered, suddenly I'm told how it's just a kung-fu film and that I should get over it. Whatever.

The classic sign of the person with no counterargument to offer--"Get over yourself."

That's exactly how I felt when I watched the film and heard "goddamn" for the tenth time. But I acknowledge that you have no justification for the klunky, awful dialogue in these films.

My favorite response. First, you call me a dumbass. Already, I know this is going to be good.

Then, you go on to say Lock gives a reason. And then you give none. You simply restate what I was wanting a reason for. I KNOW he doesn't care about the prophecy. I wanted to know why.

Yes, I wanted a Lock flashback. Or Lock exposition (I already gave an example). Something.

Why? BECAUSE 2D CHARACTERS SUCK. THEY'RE BORING. Lock would have been three times as interesting if he had a reason for being the iron-jawed jackass that he was. Otherwise, he comes off as another sci-fi cliche amidst a cast of dozens in these sequels. I wanted to care about this guy we're following through both sequels, who is leading the defense of Zion. This epic Zion leader who is running the defenses against the machines. Am I bad for wanting to give a damn about this character?

If, say, his father had spent his life searching for the One and died at the hands of the machines, I'd imagine Lock would be pretty pissed at anybody wasting their lives on this idea of the prophecy. It would illustrate a whole bunch of points the Wachowskis were obviously trying to get across, and greatly deepen the conflict between him, Morpheus, and the in-between Niobe. But, hey, screw all that character development and depth. More slow-motion CG Smiths!

I didn't say I did either. I just noted that it was another example of the Wachowskis desperately setting up the franchise's future in videogames and comic books.

You're explaining what happened. I'm fully aware of what happened.

I'm asking HOW.

Nobody in the film explains how the One was magically "captured" and contained in a purgatory trainstation. There is no logical explanation. This is because the Wachowskis weren't concerned with logical explanations. All that mattered was that this is their "limbo" metaphor, and screw plausibility or explanation. The sequels took the turn into completely abstract metaphorical constructs that had nothing to do with the grounded logic set up in the first film.

A jack is inserted into the back of their heads.

So that the ships can broadcast their pirate signal and hack into the Matrix.

Now that you've distracted the question, are you going to answer how Neo was able to jack in wirelessly? What do the ships have to do with this? Was Neo magically implanted with a satellite transmitter? Oh, right, "the power of the One goes back to the Source," blah blah blah...mystical bullshit that serves as religious metaphor and not actual, plausible explanation.

How was he changed? What changed him?

Regarding his new abilities, that reminds me of a question I left out--what is Neo's new yellow vision?

Of course, my answer is that it's more mystical bullshit that exists for the religious metaphor and not as a plausible or believable storyline--a theme that runs all through Revolutions.

How do you know? Care to cite anything? Is there a "History of the Concept of the One" essay I missed from the Wachowskis?

Or is this just another new-breed Matrix fan responding to questions with personal guesses and calling them answers? I've been through this cycle before on countless other forums after the films came out. Give me something new.

Hey, nice specifics there. Thanks for the rational explanation. "Could be anything."

According to the Oracle, Smith chose to go into exile instead of facing deletion, so he never saw the Architect anyway. Also, you didn't address the more practical reason for my question--how did Smith get in there without a key? But, hey, I love how the only way to answer any Matrix question is to create fan-fiction on the spot. "Smith saw the Architect and became enlightened! It was awesome!"

Learning kung fu and piloting choppers are entire training exercises that occur instantaneously. The upcoming Path of Neo videogame contributed to by the Wachowskis allows you to actually play Neo's training programs, where he learns the kung fu that leads him to say, "I know kung fu." Additionally, these are programs provided by an external simulator, and input/output experiences are sent into the person's brain through the jack. The mind is a passive receptor in these instances, responding only through input and output. This is completely different from a computer program itself being entered into the brain, because a computer program is a series of instructions dependent on a CPU architecture. Binary instructions aren't magically going to be able to run on human neurons, and even if they could, the entire CPU architecture would also have to be simulated on those neurons for the program to run on it, and as a result, the memory systems and any other architectures that Matrix programs depend on. I highly doubt Bane's operator decided to magically rewire Bane's entire neurological structure to simulate the entire Matrix system in a human brain just so Smith could enter it when he picked up the phone.

Come on.

I did. I saw the sequels multiple times in the the theater. I read up on every essay online and examined all the philosophical references in the movies. The simple truth is that there is not much too these films. The philosophy references are blatant and obvious, and the religious allegory is given with the subtleties of a sledgehammer. Beyond those, the action is boring and the acting flimsy. The plot is awful. The resolutions unsatisfying.

Actually, they do ream off scenes and scenes of exposition, from boring Merovingian speeches to councilman speeches to Morpheus speeches and so on. The philosophy is smashed over your head with a brick, and manages to make it a boring experience.

The problem is that the films decided to be arcane for the sake of metaphor and allegory instead of doing what the first film did--be a good story first, an allegory second. The symbolism should be the icing on the cake.

They were a complete failure that destroyed the franchise of a once-revered science-fiction action flick from the late 90s. One of the biggest opportunities wasted I've ever seen, even bigger than the Star Wars prequels.

Breathe Bonch, just breath! *watches him vomit and pass out*

But seriously, I will get round to replying to your replies when I can be bothered, but for what its worth: sorry for calling you a dumbass earlier, it was unlike me to act like that, I got carried away.

Whoa. I'm SO glad I never saw Revolutions, and generally don't care about the Matrix. This argument is one I'd rather just watch than participate in. You guys are starting to sound like that Architect dude!

BTW, to the guy who said Clone Wars was more 'Star Wars' than the prequels - right on, brother.

I didn't take it personally or anything. Don't worry about it.

I don't take issue with people liking the Matrix sequels so much as I take issue with the way some fans cricitize others for not liking them by implying they're not smart enough to "get it." Sorry I wrote so much, but I do that.

Im glad I amuse you - everyones entitled to their own sense of humour - it also being one of the most purely subjective experiences within the human condition.

If you truely can't see the difference between intellectual discussion and the sharing of ideas and opinions without the need to be "right" or "better" and childish sandpit level "Im right and you're wrong" point-scoring Im not going to draw you a diagram.

If the only way you can feel your opinion is valid is to prove every other dissenting opinion wrong then mate youve got serious self-esteem issues.

In the meantime, I enjoy discussing film - not feeling that Im smarter than someone Ive never met on an internet message board.

This is a discussion board - not an I'm better than you board.

Film geekdom might be taken more seriously overall if it didnt have quite such an obvious and immature inferiority complex.

Sorry if "annoy" you, but this constant need to feel intellectually superior at the expense of anyone who disagrees annoys the living shit out of me frankly.