Re: Matrix Schmatrix

Paul Hughes (
Fri, 09 Apr 1999 19:02:00 -0700 wrote:

> The dumb science problems you mention in your spoilers
are, in my opinion, not too important to the film. They're mentioned in detail for all of about 30 seconds. The 'serious' thrust of the movie, such as was there, was about the nature of reality. Everything else was a

I agree. After all this is the art of film, with its own inherent time and structure limitations imposed on it by it being a '2 hour visual format'. Within the medium of film, the Matrix does an amazing job of conveying many of the more fantastic ideas that we've discussed on these lists for years. Frankly, its the only film to fully convey the disturbing and exhilarating feeling of having *reality turned inside out*. Alice returns from Wonderland to her normal reality as if it was just a dream - the impact isn't the same. Are we currently being run in a far-future uploaded simulation? Are we in fact archived versions of our older, less evolved selves being re-run for amusement by our far-future selves? The Matrix is the only film to address the issue as radically as it does and with such tremendous visual and emotional impact. When Neo awoke in the vat of fluid, I was just blown away and left completely speechless! In 32 years, I have never felt as impacted as from that scene.

> But beyond that, it was just plain fun. Seeing Ted
Theodore Logan copping all those advanced martial arts poses was a scream...

The martial arts were the best I've seen yet - all the more enjoyable when one realizes it is actually Keanu and Lawrence Fishburn actually doing the fighting.

> Must the artificial intelligences _always_ be the bad
> I made up for that by assuming that the Oracle was a
rogue, and
> therefore friendly to us, AI.

Yes, the film remains ambiguous enough, that my mind is still reaming with possibilities over a week after seeing the film. All I can say is "wow"!

Paul Hughes