>> Ah, well, if Smith is actually going to *destroy* the Matrix rather than 
>> just take control of it... yes, that would be bad.
> 
>   You mean:
> 
>  The Architect: "Ah, he is only going to take control of it, not destroy it?
> Well, then it's all ok, I should just relax and not worry about a thing."
> 
>   And that would make sense to you?

It's not clear to me that Smith has the *ability* to destroy the Matrix 
itself. If he does, then clearly that's a problem. (And I guess being 
able to transcend the Matrix itself and take control of people outside 
it implies that maybe he can...)

>> No, it's puzzling that there's such a big variation in quality.
> 
>   I see no variation in quality.
> 
>   Or is your definition of "quality" whether you understand the plot or not?

Well, understanding the plot is kind of prerequisit to enjoying the 
film. But I could also mention cut density, for example.

In the first film, how long does Neo spend waiting to see the Oracle? 
The whole journey there, the waiting room, etc. They could have cut that 
much shorter and make the fight scenes in other parts of the movie 
longer. But they didn't.

In the following two films, they did. (How many seconds does Neo spend 
at the deserted apartment saying "where are you?") It had the feel of 
"OK, how many fight scenes can we cram in?"

Don't get my wrong - some of the fight scenes in the sequals are *even 
better* than in the original. You *want* to like it... but the rest of 
the film is so drab, it's kind of hard to.

-- 
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*

Post a reply to this message