http://www.slashfilm.com/2009/12/17/watch-this-70-minute-video-review-of-star-wars-the-phantom-menace/

Actually a very good explanation, even tho the guy is trying to sound stupid 
or something, he makes some good points.

-- 
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   Human nature dictates that toothpaste tubes spend
   much longer being almost empty than almost full.

Post a reply to this message

Darren New wrote:

> Actually a very good explanation, even tho the guy is trying to sound 
> stupid or something, he makes some good points.

WHAT IS WRONG WITH YOUR FACE?!!?!

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

Post a reply to this message

Darren New wrote:

> Actually a very good explanation, even tho the guy is trying to sound 
> stupid or something, he makes some good points.

Even though he's pretending (?!) to be stark raving mad, he talks a lot 
of sense...

I don't agree with everything he says. I actually *liked* certain 
aspects of the film. But it was undebiably disappointing. And, until 
now, I haven't been able to put my finger on why.

Now we need him to analyse The Matrix Reloaded. Although, really, I 
guess there's not much to analyst. Neo is invincible. Smith is 
invincible. And they're fighting... why? And they want the Keymaker 
because...? He makes keys...? That do what...? So they can meet the 
Architect...? Who does what...? Babbles some meaningless babble that 
doens't really mean a lot...? And after that happens, the thing we've 
been trying to achieve since the film started... What happens? Not a 
lot, really...? So... uh... I've just watched several hours of film and 
I *still* don't know anything I didn't know before. In fact, the film 
has undone several of the things that were cool about the one before.

The first film made it look like Neo had transcended the Matrix and was 
now an actual threat to the Agents and that big things were going to 
change. But in Reloaded, it looks like the Matrix is now more or less 
deserted, other than millions of copies of Smith, so do we even give a 
**** what happens there any more?

Basically, the first film begins with a mystery, but by the end of it, 
you have slowly established the rules of how this fictional universe 
works. The Matrix isn't real, but it can still really kill you. The crew 
are larger than life inside the Matrix, but while connected they're 
vulnerable in the real world. The Agents are even larger than life, but 
still not absolutely indescructible. But if you kill them, they will 
still come back. But it does buy you some time. And so on and so forth; 
the entire film goes about establishing these rules, sometimes in 
surprising or shocking ways. And then, right at the end, Neo really does 
transcend the rules as you've just come to understand them. And now he's 
going to go out and kick arse.

...um, except that's not what happens in Reloaded. In fact, it seems to 
fall into the trap of constructing a universe which either lacks rules, 
or at least the rules aren't explained. Why would anybody give a fig 
about a pair of invincible fighters fighting each other until one or the 
other gets bored? If you don't understand how the world works, you don't 
know what options a character has open to them. You can't tell if 
something is a serious threat or just a minor problem. You can't empathise.

DAMNIT WHAT IS WRONG WITH YOUR FACE?!

I'm going to bed before I type more stuff...

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

Post a reply to this message

On Fri, 18 Dec 2009 23:31:36 +0000, Orchid XP v8 wrote:

> Now we need him to analyse The Matrix Reloaded. 

Having re-watched all three Matrix films over the past week (had to test 
our new sound system with *something*), let me take a crack at these 
questions:

> Neo is invincible. Smith is
> invincible. And they're fighting... why? 

For the future of the human race; humanity's survival.  Fairly typical 
messiah story plotline in that regard.

> And they want the Keymaker
> because...? He makes keys...? That do what...? 

Because the keys he makes open the system backdoors.

> So they can meet the
> Architect...? Who does what...? Babbles some meaningless babble that
> doens't really mean a lot...? 

The Architect's speech for me basically boiled down to "people wouldn't 
believe in the Matrix if it was too perfect or if there wasn't an 
appearance of choice".  In a more 'meta' sense, it was about fate (and 
whether there is fate or not - summed up a lot by the Oracle when she 
says to Neo "remember, you don't believe in any of this 'fate' crap."

> And after that happens, the thing we've
> been trying to achieve since the film started... What happens? Not a
> lot, really...? So... uh... I've just watched several hours of film and
> I *still* don't know anything I didn't know before. In fact, the film
> has undone several of the things that were cool about the one before.

That was my first impression of the 2nd and 3rd; I still don't feel they 
live up to the "promise" of the ending of #1 (and #1 is still the best in 
my book), but rewatching them, the story made a lot more sense to me now 
than it did when it came out.

> The first film made it look like Neo had transcended the Matrix and was
> now an actual threat to the Agents and that big things were going to
> change. But in Reloaded, it looks like the Matrix is now more or less
> deserted, other than millions of copies of Smith, so do we even give a
> **** what happens there any more?

The system evolved as Neo evolved.  He does transcend the Matrix, but 
Smith does too (when he infects Bane).

The thing that surprised me during the rewatch that I hadn't noticed 
before was who was left after the big fight at the end of Revolutions.  
When it first came out, I thought it was Neo.  It isn't, and that 
actually changed the ending for me rather significantly when I noticed 
who it was.

Jim

Post a reply to this message

"Darren New" <dne### [at] sanrrcom> wrote in message
news:4b2bf983$1@news.povray.org...

>
http://www.slashfilm.com/2009/12/17/watch-this-70-minute-video-review-of-star-wars-the-phantom-menace/

> Actually a very good explanation, even tho the guy is trying to sound
stupid
> or something, he makes some good points.

That may be, but why waste another 70 minutes?

Post a reply to this message

Darren New <dne### [at] sanrrcom> wrote:
> he makes some good points.

  I think one point he makes has a lot of merit: Back when film-making
technology was very primitive (by today's standard), it limited what you
could do so much that directors had to actually concentrate on the story
and character development in order for the movie to contain something
watchable, because special effects alone wouldn't do it. Nowadays when you
can control absolutely everything and have whatever you might want show up
on screen, no matter how crazy, it easily derails the directing. The director
might get so enthralled by his own omnipotence to get whatever he wants on
screen that he forgets that he should actually be filming a story, not a
computer graphics demonstration.

  This same thing happened with the movie Jaws: The shark prop was so utterly
bad and unrealistic that Spielberg ended up using it as little as possible, and
instead rewrote the script to contain more dialogue and character development,
transforming what would most probably have been a mediocre slasher film into
a masterpiece which regularly ends up in best-films-of-all-time lists.

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message

Orchid XP v8 <voi### [at] devnull> wrote:
> Now we need him to analyse The Matrix Reloaded. Although, really, I 
> guess there's not much to analyst.

  Reloaded was greatly misunderstood and got a lot of negative hype soon
after release because it was *different* from the illusion people had for
a Matrix sequel. In other words, it suffered from "they changed it, now
it sucks" syndrome (even though they really didn't change anything).

  With time, thought, most people ended up accepting it as an enjoyable
sequel (and moved onto bashing the third film, for similar reasons).

> Neo is invincible. Smith is 
> invincible. And they're fighting... why?

  Smith has gone rogue and he absolutely hates the guts of Neo. Thus he
wants to hurt him bad. It makes perfect sense for Smith to fight Neo.

  Why does Neo fight back? Because Neo has grown cocky. He thinks he is
untouchable (after all, agents can do nothing against him) and invincible,
so he is ready to teach this rogue Smith another lesson in humility. He
ends up getting such a lesson himself.

  Of course later Smith is becoming a real threat to all humanity, so he
has to be stopped, so why wouldn't Neo fight him?

> And they want the Keymaker because...?

  Because the Oracle told them so. Because they need to get to the Architect.

> He makes keys...? That do what...?

  To get to parts of the Matrix not normally accessible.

> So they can meet the 
> Architect...? Who does what...? Babbles some meaningless babble that 
> doens't really mean a lot...?

  Maybe you should start listening to what he says in detail? It makes a
lot of sense when you try to understand it.

  The machines need people to be conscious (the reason given in the first
movie, using humans as energy sources, is completely bogus and AFAIK a
result of executive meddling; the Wachowski brothers originally had a
more logical explanation, but it was scrapped because executives thought
viewers are morons and wouldn't understand it). In order for people to be
conscious and not go crazy (which happens if you keep people locked in
solitary confinement), they created this life simulator. The Architect
was the main developer.

  Now, what the Architect created was a perfect world where nothing bad
happens ever, but much to his surprise people started dying, and he couldn't
understand why.

  He concluded that the simulated world was too good, too perfect, and the
human mind needs problems, confrontations and crises in order to keep sane.
A perfect life seemed to bore people out of their minds, making them
perform unconscious suicide.

  So he created a second version of the matrix, one which was like a
nightmare, with monsters and werewolves and vampires (it's implied that
this is where such stories are from)... And also this was a similar failure.

  A different program, here named "Oracle" came up with the real reason:
What people need is not problems and confrontations. What they need is
choice. If you completely remove the human capacity for true choice, the
mind rebels against the situation in the only possible way it can (by
dying).

  So the third version of the matrix was built with a genuine choice for
all people, even though this choice was to be made at a near subconscious
level: They could choose to escape from the matrix, or choose to believe
the world they were experiencing was real.

  This capacity of making a subconscious choice seemed to be enough to
keep people happy and alive. Of course a few people actually chose to
escape, which is the whole point of the series. The Architect allows them
to escape because else they wouldn't have a real choice. (It's never clearly
explained why this has an effect, but I assume that some kind of supernatural
connection between all human consciousness could be implied.)

  This setup had yet another unexpected side-effect: Neo. (Again, it's not
clearly explained why, but again it could be implied as some kind of
supernatural global consciousness of the entire humanity thing.)

  Neo is the culmination of free choice of all humanity, and Neo must be
given the choice of continuing the cycle (his consciousness is fused with
the "Source" and eventually a new Neo pops up some time in the future) or
try to free the entire humanity and defeat the machines.

  (Apparently Neo must be given the choice only if he reaches the Architect.
If he dies in the process, that's ok. A new Neo is born eventually again,
and the cycle continues. That's why the agents don't have any problem in
trying to kill Neo. Killing him is just beneficial because it gives them
more time until the next Neo tries to reach the Architect.)

  If you think about the above explanation, and then listen to the
Architect's explanation in the movie carefully, you'll see how he is
explaining exactly what I wrote above. Try it. It's enlightening.

> And after that happens, the thing we've 
> been trying to achieve since the film started... What happens?

  Neo chooses to try to save humanity, unlike his predecessors. The reason
is that this Neo is different (he has a girlfriend).

> Not a 
> lot, really...? So... uh... I've just watched several hours of film and 
> I *still* don't know anything I didn't know before. In fact, the film 
> has undone several of the things that were cool about the one before.

  You simply didn't understand. Try it again.

> The first film made it look like Neo had transcended the Matrix and was 
> now an actual threat to the Agents and that big things were going to 
> change. But in Reloaded, it looks like the Matrix is now more or less 
> deserted, other than millions of copies of Smith, so do we even give a 
> **** what happens there any more?

  Aren't you talking about the third movie now? That was not Reloaded.

> ...um, except that's not what happens in Reloaded. In fact, it seems to 
> fall into the trap of constructing a universe which either lacks rules, 
> or at least the rules aren't explained. Why would anybody give a fig 
> about a pair of invincible fighters fighting each other until one or the 
> other gets bored?

  Maybe the point of the sequel was not to repeat the first movie, but
to explain things instead? If you want the first movie again, then watch
it again.

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message

Jim Henderson wrote:
> Because the keys he makes open the system backdoors.

Am I the only one that laughed as soon as the keymaker opened the door, and 
didn't have to wait for someone to say "back door"?

-- 
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   Human nature dictates that toothpaste tubes spend
   much longer being almost empty than almost full.

Post a reply to this message

Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:
> The thing that surprised me during the rewatch that I hadn't noticed
> before was who was left after the big fight at the end of Revolutions.
> When it first came out, I thought it was Neo.  It isn't, and that
> actually changed the ending for me rather significantly when I noticed
> who it was.

How could you not notice that?!

I enjoyed the whole trilogy, down to the storyline and details.  But yeah, the
novelty of seeing a whole new world unveiling right in front of your eyes as in
the first was obviously gone in the sequels.

Post a reply to this message

On Fri, 18 Dec 2009 16:45:55 -0800, Darren New wrote:

> Jim Henderson wrote:
>> Because the keys he makes open the system backdoors.
> 
> Am I the only one that laughed as soon as the keymaker opened the door,
> and didn't have to wait for someone to say "back door"?

Nope, I picked up on that before they said it. :-)

Jim

Post a reply to this message