Whatever the criticisms, one thing cannot be disputed: The film was a cultural phenomenon and the special effects set a new precedent that has been emulated to this day. Overrated? Sure. Hell, I don’t care, I still think it’s a goddamn good film.
I don’t even think it was that good a movie. Sure there is some neat stuff in it but i just didnt like it. My dad and brother in love it.
The Matrix didnt do any thing new. But it did it bigger and better then what had been done before.
Robert Jahnke III, Citizen Kane didnt do anything new but it is still considered widely as the greatest film of all time. Its not a matter of being the first, but the first to exemplify a certain genre, style, or technique. For better or worse, Matrix completely redefined the genre and the way in which the industry approached similar films for years to come.
I had to chime in on this one.
Dark City and The Matrix? I don’t see the connection. No, I mean, I really, really don’t see it. There’s a loose aesthetic connection in the neo-Noir spins each film develops, but in terms of theme, plot, or even some kind of overarching message, I think the links are tenuous, to say the least. Maybe it’s an interpretive thing.
As to the concept being the same, a few thoughts on why I disagree, using my less than stellar intuition and analytical skills (that’s right, I’m not saying my theory is best, or that anyone has to agree, but I’m still putting this out there). The underlying mental provocation in Dark City seems to involve the sticky questions behind our humanity and the soul; you know, all the good metaphysical stuff. From my perspective, it’s a more intriguing proposition than The Matrix, simply because I believe the Wachowski brothers present a scenario that’s fairly easy to get your head around, which means, you’re not still trying to work it out once you leave the cinema. Most people rapidly make the “That could so happen…” connection between the premise on offer and their day-to-day experience.
Important questions posed by Dark City: “Who am I, really?”, “What makes me who I think I am?”, “What makes me human?”, “What is the soul?”
And by The Matrix: “How do we know what we think is real is actually real?”, as well as, “How does the Matrix know what Tasty Wheat tasted like?”, and, you know, stuff.
Dark City has ‘ghost in the machine’ undertones, whereas The Matrix follows more of a traditional ‘brain-in-a-vat’ scenario, sliced and diced together with bits of Monomyth. Once the denouement is reached, the core questions left by the filmmakers regard the self in terms of our perception of reality, and even more significantly, our perception of reality as a whole. It’s high school philosophy (the veil of perception and all that jazz), but it’s intriguing in the context of the film.
You can rail against the Hero’s Journey stuff at your own leisure, but if you’re like me, you’ll probably find Neo, Peter Parker and their ilk more empowering than overbearing in respect to the everyman they spring from. The twisted logic behind this follows a line of reasoning that moves past the idea of Neo being a savour figure and marches headlong into him acting as a cipher for the feats of greatness that ordinary people are capable of when they break the shackles of the reality they’ve created for themselves and start to believe in something better. This applies to everyone, so Neo (to me) is a respectable protagonist in the first film, where he remains more Spiderman than Superman…although, someone clearly didn’t think that was a good thing in the follow-up[s].
T’s conclusion is pretty damn relevant, but that particular writeup smacks to me a little too much of a practised, articulate, analytical eye operating on the basis of selective cynicism. With a sufficient dose of the aforementioned qualities, most people wouldn’t be too hard-pressed to train their sights on a film that they didn’t like and shred it a little bit but, in the same vein, you can go in the countervailing direction and give a film, in the critical sense, the benefit of the doubt. I’m not saying you should; I’m just admitting the principle I’m working on as I write this. I think The Matrix is a great film, with moderately lofty ambitions that don’t quite gel in the symposium of its various influences. As to the second and third films’ attempts to dovetail all of these influences and “EVERY COOL THING, LIKE, EVER!” (I’m certain someone said this in a production meeting. If not, they should have, because it explains a lot) into a cohesive post-Cyberpunk, representative realism, Dragonball-Z inspired extravaganza…well, these efforts were less successful. When I watch the first film these days I find it, of all things, very understated.
As to the original issue of anti-consumerism, I personally don’t see it, but maybe, like I said, that’s just an interpretive thing. It just one of those things where if it’s not an explicit theme, it’s almost certainly too ambiguous to make an issue out of. You can see anti-consumerism hard at work in Bambi if you look close enough, if you get my drift.
Anyways, kids,
Devil’s advocate, over and out.
ahah I think Deej successfully demolished this thread, good stuff!
Crap Monster – I understand your point, as i stated" it did it bigger and better then what had been done before" and i understand why it is considered a “classic” and the term MATRIXESQUE and all it stands for.
Still dont like it. And if someone tells me something is MATRIXESQUE i don’t care to see it.
wow…the matrix…on THE AUTEURS!!!!!!!!!!!
Jeez you guys. I’m sure you could rant about this worthless garbage on countless IMDB forum threads.
the matrix? really?
Corduroy Suit – Yes. The Matrix. Really. Believe it or not, it actually does qualify, for reasons aforementioned.
And now I really want to see this Dark City.
Lester you definitely should see it. I think the older DVD is still going for like 5 bucks, if you can find a copy.
Will definitely check it out. Looks like I have this weekend’s pick.
I like the first MATRIX – it looked cool and quite entertaining for a film. I saw the second (or third, not so sure), still enjoyed it esp. the stunts. Eye candy mostly, for me that’s about it, but I completely understand the huge popularity. Even most of my friends were devoted fans, and they often ask if the whole Matrix thing is real, and whether our lives are actually artificial make-believe.
Which makes me wonder – if it bother ‘em so much, would they rather enjoy the juicy steak in the “artificial world”, or spend their whole life fighting and being hunted by millions of robotic serpents in the “real one”?
Just a thought… well it’s just a film, right?
Crap Monster
Stephen, I completely agree with you about the fanbase. I feel its almost why so many people are immediately turned off by the film(s).