Posted 09 November 2003 - 04:04 AM
Call me up for generalising. Seeing this movie unlike the first or second isn't about simply watching an action sci-fi film, it raises questions about belief, faith and ideology. You can't watch this film like you can the first or second and not analysis it and actually enjoy the film.
(Whoever said it's left open for a fourth film, i'm sorry but your wrong)
Which is good, the first two had elements to analyse if you chose this one thrusts them upon you.
But I tend to think that people who don't like the second or third films miss the subtext or ideology of these films.
These films work well because they follow the path or journey of a hero (much like why star wars was so successful.)
The Matrix premise itself is stemmed in mythology of both Roman Catholicism and Budist principles.
Buddist beliefs hold the idea that life is only "real" in the interpritation of the senses of the mind and body. eg. touch, sight, taste etc
The first film explored this pretty extensively with the explanation from Morphus about the machine world and that all human's were "plugged" into the matrix to live. The "jacking" in to the matrix symbolises a connection between the real world, and the dream world. There's much made out of sleeping or "waking" in the first film, waking symbolises enlightenment, or knowledge.
As to the origion of the matrix. It's well explained in the first film, and built upon on the second. Basically the whole journey of "the one" has occoured before. Five or six times to be precise, and each time the machines have breached and defeated Zion and the matrix has been restarted by the "source" or archartech (spelling?) and has allowed some people to begin repopulating Zion.
This might sound pointless but it works in the triology's ideology because the first film brings up the idea that while life inside the matrix is a dream, people feel that something is missing, or feel abstract from their world. By having people in the real world free these individuals inside the matrix, they are being presented with choice.
Choice as discussed in the second film is key to human nature. Because the matrix is based on mathematics principle. At the end of the second film the Architect explains that when the population of the matrix didn't have choice the world was perfect and that their natural human nature rejected perfection.
So, the oriacle introduced the concept of choice. Which resulted in a mathamatical anomaly, that being Neo (or the one)
Basically, the oriacle and architech are the "mother and father" of the matrix.
Now because of the concept of the one or neo (neo is made out of letters used in spelling one) we have a christ or buddist figure that is a saviour.
Much of the films (all three) are based on the concept of faith. The more faith you have the more you can break the "rules" of the matrix because you can see the matrix for what it is, a fictional world, or computer code.
Neo is able to defeat smith in the end of the first film because he has faith or belief (something Morphus tells him he needs). In having belief Neo is no longer awed by the concept of the matrix (as he is in the training program in the first film) but almost bored by it, because he can see the truth in it. see how bored and effortlessly he defeats Smith when he sees the matrix for what it is that it simply is computer code. This allows him to break the rules as i mentioned before.
Balance is also a theme throughout the trilogy. You cannot have peace without chaos or wisdom/freedom from the matrix without faith/belief
Now because Neo can break the rules of the matrix, in the second film. The Matrix is unbalanced, that's why Smith who in the first film talked about how humans were weak and felt emotions needs to "clone" himself to be able to meet Neo's level of power. We see Neo become more enlightened and almost Budda like in the second film. He can fight off dozens of Agents without raising a sweat.
There is a transformation between Agent Smith and Neo. Smith takes on all the human characteristics he despised in the first film and shows blind rage for killing Neo, where Neo becomes more emotionless in the second and third films and takes on Smith's "machine" like characteristics. This is about balance.
Which brings us to the third film and end of the trilogy and the series. By being stuck between the real world and the matrix Neo has in a sense "died" again like in the first film and is resurected.
By travelling to the source and machine city Neo does something that's never occoured before in the previous Matrix systems. He doesn't accept the choice in front of him or what's expected and instead makes another. By doing this he allows the people of Zion to live, however, it comes from his own sacrifice.
Pretty depressing stuff really. By killing Smith, Neo kills his opposite. In doing so, he knowingly kills himself. Smith (on the ship in the real world torments him that they are the same) So there's no fourth film. The cycle has been complete, however now the Zion can live in peace without attack from the machines.
Because, the principles of choice that the matrix is built on cannot factor out the anomaly of "the one" and that the people plugged into the matrix need to have a "choice" of being unplugged even if it's an unconcious choice.
Thats why even though people might miss the end of the film where Neo's lifeless body is being dragged along the ground and mistake him "seeing" (where its really a hightened level of enlightenment) for being alive, its the belief and spirit of "the one" not this version of "the one" that's still alive.
Hope this clears some things up for people.
)
