Thursday night I saw The Matrix Revolutions. I did have a good time at some parts but I thought it was really cheesy at times. I am still planning on seeing it with Peter and pals on Sunday. It was the end of the series and it did sort of bring closure but it did not clear up some of the questions that have been haunting the three movies and The Animatrix.
I am going to do my best not to reveal any major spoilers in this review.
I know that it was the second part of the two sequels and it was written directed and shot at the same time as The Matrix Reloaded. It just did not seem like it was up the the same caliber of the first two movies and it seemed like a typical Hollywood sequel at parts.
First of all I just want to say that the dialog sucked. There was no cool dialogs and no real new philosophy and there are some real groaning one liners. It did not explain history or plot holes like how the machines are getting around by Newton's second law of thermodynamics. But ah well.
The final fight seen was cool and the invasion of Zion robot suit war was cool.
Yeah some people died but I am not going to say who croaks just yet.
There was so many Christian mythology in this flick it is shrill and exploitive. My eyes rolled at the end of the movie with the final "Neo is Jesus" stint. It was worst than The Force Midiclorians in the StarWars prequels. They took the concept of the Christ figure and boiled it down so it could be digested at a third grade reading level.
Not was nearly as cool as the first two movies but it will still be popular and will sell a billion copies on DVD. Some folks think that that one of the directors is a pre-op transsexual but I know they are going to make some other cool flicks.
Again whenever whenever Hollywood makes a movie for nerds you will find people who hate the flick and obsess over them. No it is not perfect but they still got your money for ticket and popcorn.
I just think that it could have been slicker and it sort of talked down to the viewers. Of the three movies I like this the least but it was still worth seeing in the theater.
Watch Little Buddha and then watch it again. Apparently they were going for the life of Buddha, in a sci-fi light.
I still think it has more to do with the life and death of Christ instead of Buddhism.
you know, the whole Neo as Christ thing was so obvious in the second movie, i'm sorry to hear it's more of a dominant theme in the final chapter, but hey, i still wanna see it and will most likely enjoy it despite that ;)
I felt they were going for some kind of Robert Altman, Magnolia kind of deal in a sci-fi light. Everything was so diffused I could hardly care about any one of the characters.
Dear Jake;
I have to say I enjoyed this film more for its theological content than for its rather stunning effects. As a doctorate fellow in theology I found that the expressions of the movie were a perfect representation of theology as it is known to the present, though I wouldn't expect lay persons to appreciate it in as much depth as others.
What I wonder is why so many critics find it a negative that Christ is alluded to (so properly) in this film; whether there is any reason other than mere pre-conditioned discomfort with sincere Christian spirituality. Furthermore, I have yet to see a logical account of why this spirituality and theology makes it a bad movie. All I hear are angry, baseless assertions. What I think in fact is that this movie is one of the best I have seen yet in 40+ years of moviegoing, and because it is filled with such wonderful spiritual expressions it does not surprise me that the uneducated, un-philosophical, and impious critics of the world rush to denounce it. The reality of the Matrix is greater than the film itself, that humans sometimes would prefer to destroy the truth than to accept peace and happiness from its providend. I am reminded of Plato's famous cave allegory in this sense. It is sad when a movie is made that is in fact too good for its own audience. A movie about Christ will ikely share in His fate; death at the hands of the unrighteous, resurrection in the spirits of the faithful, and perhaps the salvation of a few humble souls.
Would you be able to come to the defense of these critics, or direct me to any real logical and philosophical account of why it is anything but a seamless work? I must partially disagree with you, there is no 'new' philosophy in the movie, yes, but that is because there is no such thing as 'new' philosophy; the truth is the same as it has been for all eternity, and that is expressed overtly in the film. However your article is fairly good, as logical an article as can be expected from film critics without the benefit of extensive philosophical rumination.
Sincerely yours,
+ Fr James
ps. I don't mean any of this as vitriol, I am however sincerely seeking an account grounded in principle. I think this film deserves a fair exa mination and I would be happy to promote anything you can provide in the way of well-grounded reason on this topic.
I don't think it was deeper alagory of Christianity than The Lion Witch and the Wardrobe.
Well it depends really on how deep you consider the Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe (Myself I am a big Lewis fan so a bit partial).
I do find these works both draw on a lot of sources that are so ancient the allusions go nearly un-noticed; though less so with the Matrix than Lewis' chronicles. Lewis and the Matrix both allude to authors like Dante, St. Bonaventure, Aquinas, contemporary works, and represent a sort of Platonic/neo-Platonic philosophical construct ad praxis, that is, in practice. I could list the biblical and numerological allusions in the Matrix but this would be very much too prolix.
In short though I suspect your comparison is rather apt. Perhaps you can expound upon it?
+ James