Quote:
|
I've got to say - and I don't mean this in any way as a jab to anyone - but every single explanation I've ever heard for people disliking it is boiled down to one of three things: either 1) you missed one or many points that, frankly, were not that hard at all to extrapolate from what we're given in the movies, 2) you're simply upset because the movies didn't end the way YOU envisioned them to - and this is an understandable reason to dislike a movie to a certain extent, but not with as much malice as it seems many do, or 3) you can't look past the very few minor inconsistancies that there are in the movies (and by few I mean a couple, because most "inconsistancies" are actually not if you're willing to put the pieces of the puzzle together).
|
I gotta chirp in a say a few things here. I get the impression that people who praise all the symbolism of the Matrix movies are impressed with these movies because they've never witnessed such depth in a movie before. I often feel people are going through this epiphany with the series, where they say to themselves "Wow! A movie can have underlying themes and visual metaphors! Whodathunkit?"
I'm not an idiot (quite the opposite, in fact!
). I understand the themes and symbolism the Matrix series uses. I pay attention to things like this (in
every movie I watch or book I read, etc... well, the ones where you get something out of doing so). Yes, the Matrix has these things. But I get impression that people ignore the fact that, after the first movie, the Matrix series lacks good scripting, plot, and characters (see my previous posts in this thread). They ignore this because they're too busy trying to figure out all the underlying stuff. That's all well and good, but please don't think that people are idiots for not liking these movies. Our standards are just placed differently. I like my movies to be superfically pleasing as well as deep.
I've seen and read plenty of works that have 10 times as much depth as some people claim the Matrix to have, but do not fail in the categories that the Matrix does (study some Shakespeare, then you'll know what I'm talking about. I apologize that I have to compare him to the Matrix, but some people seem to be putting the series on a
very high pedastol). Anyway, the key difference between most of these works is subtlety. The Matrix shoves its themes down your throat. Take this for example:
Quote:
Agent Smith: Why, Mr. Anderson? Why do you do it? Why get up? Why keep fighting? Do you believe you're fighting for something? For more that your survival? Can you tell me what it is? Do you even know? Is it freedom? Or truth? Perhaps peace? Yes? No? Could it be for love? Illusions, Mr. Anderson. Vagaries of perception. The temporary constructs of a feeble human intellect trying desperately to justify an existence that is without meaning or purpose. And all of them as artificial as the Matrix itself, although only a human mind could invent something as insipid as love. You must be able to see it, Mr. Anderson. You must know it by now. You can't win. It's pointless to keep fighting. Why, Mr. Anderson? Why? Why do you persist?
Neo: Because I choose to.
|
I challenge anyone to tell me that that's good, intelligent writing. Anyone who says it is... sorry, it's just horrible. And the second two movies are filled with this kind of trash.
This is why I don't like the last two movies. Not because I don't understand the (often assumed) depth of the Matrix.
Sorry for the rant. I mean no harm.
