Why I still love the Matrix
-Aside from nifty little Nokia telephones, there is no product placement.
-It is a beautiful movie with a carefully selected color scheme that works great for establishing and conveying moods.
-The fight scenes were revelutionary in how they combined major influences in Western action movies and in Hong Kong gong fu.
-Movies like Twister, MIB, and Dr. No employ special effects that become dated. You watch them several years after the initial release and can see the flaws. But there are thoes movies like Jurassic Park, Backdraft, the Abyss, Die Hard, and the Matrix that somehow are able to preserve their special effects. It looks completely real. Aside from advances in bullet time and other revolutionary playback rates, the Matrix just looks great. The Matrix was produced nearly 7 years ago when we were rocking the 386 pentium. That is impressive.
-My final commentary relies heavily upon the theory of reader response. Within the past 70 years, literary criticism has looked into the relationship between the author and the reader. Dr. Rankin correct me if I am wrong, but a significant point in RR theory is the death of the author. As soon as I pick up _Old Man and the Sea_, what Hemmingway initially intended is bunk. It is up to me as the reader to bridge the gap between the words and my own personal understanding. RR theory investigates what readers bring to a text: fluency of a language, past experiences, past exposures, comprehension, emotions, etc. The comprehension I have of most texts that I read in passing are heavily influencded by my take on RR. (Critical readings include my reading of the bible, certain theological and philosophical texts that require the inquiry into truth-- everything else is in passing.) I pick up a book, and let the words and thoughts take me places that the author did not intend. I go to movies to think. I read books to inspire and cultivate/nourish elaborate dreams or desires. I don't pick up _Brothers Karamozov_ and read a story about Billy Bobby and his Daytona days. I allow the characters, dialogue, ideas, themes, motivs guide me and lead me internally as I read. That is why I am currently reading _Brothers Karamozov_, _Out of Africa_, _The Rising Tide_, and I would love to start _Taming the Tongue_. I don't have to finish the books to feel accomplished.
So back to Matrix. Viewers are allowed to make their Matrix movie, truly their own. Sometimes I have watched The Matrix to watch the fight scenes, sometimes for plot, sometimes for philosophy, sometimes for signs, sometimes to encourage revolutionary thoughts, sometimes for theology, sometimes for worldview, sometimes for asthetics, sometimes for it all. The Matrix was created by geniuses, and in my opinion is genius. Seriously, if they can get Cornel West to grace them on the set for all three movies, that has to say something. If you don't know who Cornel West is, look him up.
-It is a beautiful movie with a carefully selected color scheme that works great for establishing and conveying moods.
-The fight scenes were revelutionary in how they combined major influences in Western action movies and in Hong Kong gong fu.
-Movies like Twister, MIB, and Dr. No employ special effects that become dated. You watch them several years after the initial release and can see the flaws. But there are thoes movies like Jurassic Park, Backdraft, the Abyss, Die Hard, and the Matrix that somehow are able to preserve their special effects. It looks completely real. Aside from advances in bullet time and other revolutionary playback rates, the Matrix just looks great. The Matrix was produced nearly 7 years ago when we were rocking the 386 pentium. That is impressive.
-My final commentary relies heavily upon the theory of reader response. Within the past 70 years, literary criticism has looked into the relationship between the author and the reader. Dr. Rankin correct me if I am wrong, but a significant point in RR theory is the death of the author. As soon as I pick up _Old Man and the Sea_, what Hemmingway initially intended is bunk. It is up to me as the reader to bridge the gap between the words and my own personal understanding. RR theory investigates what readers bring to a text: fluency of a language, past experiences, past exposures, comprehension, emotions, etc. The comprehension I have of most texts that I read in passing are heavily influencded by my take on RR. (Critical readings include my reading of the bible, certain theological and philosophical texts that require the inquiry into truth-- everything else is in passing.) I pick up a book, and let the words and thoughts take me places that the author did not intend. I go to movies to think. I read books to inspire and cultivate/nourish elaborate dreams or desires. I don't pick up _Brothers Karamozov_ and read a story about Billy Bobby and his Daytona days. I allow the characters, dialogue, ideas, themes, motivs guide me and lead me internally as I read. That is why I am currently reading _Brothers Karamozov_, _Out of Africa_, _The Rising Tide_, and I would love to start _Taming the Tongue_. I don't have to finish the books to feel accomplished.
So back to Matrix. Viewers are allowed to make their Matrix movie, truly their own. Sometimes I have watched The Matrix to watch the fight scenes, sometimes for plot, sometimes for philosophy, sometimes for signs, sometimes to encourage revolutionary thoughts, sometimes for theology, sometimes for worldview, sometimes for asthetics, sometimes for it all. The Matrix was created by geniuses, and in my opinion is genius. Seriously, if they can get Cornel West to grace them on the set for all three movies, that has to say something. If you don't know who Cornel West is, look him up.
Yep, they definitely make some good films. I also seem to get a different message from it every time I watch it(which has been many... especially back in college). Usually, I come away with the obvious religious parallels of Neo's death and resurrection to save the humans. You brought up a good point though, is this observation what the directors intended or is it what I am bringing into the film from my own knowledge? Would someone from the Middle East see the same parallels that I do? Probably not. But you would probably have to assume that the W brothers know their audience. They know that 80% of Americans consider themselves christians, so do they bring religious parallels into the story to touch the largest audience or merely as a part of good storytelling? In 50 years, if The Matrix is on the top of AFI lists, what will people be saying about it? Is it more than just an old action movie?
ReplyDeleteAnyway, I just saw Matrix on TV the other day and thought the same exact thing about the effects. They still look purty to this day. I can still remember being blown away when I first saw they lobby shootout and the roof scene!! It is also refreshing to see a good action movie where they don't have to use a shaky cam to portray action or intensity.
Unfortunately, Matrix 2&3 special effects took a turn down the wrong path and already look dated(Neo vs the 100 Smiths is almost laughably CGed, but it is still cool). Stick with the classic.
Not trying to be a naysayer, but I try not to classify anyone in Hollywood as a genius or laud their achievements too much, they will always disappoint you. As much as I like the Matrix and VforV and the W brothers as directors; I am inclined to not support a transsexual who divorced his wife to live with a professional dominatrix. Of course, if you were to only see movies based on what you think of the cast/crew; you wouldn't ever see a film again!
It should be interesting to see what they do with their next film, Speed Racer, in 2008.
Wow, this is way too long of a comment. Sorry Patrick!! Keep the good posts coming! I enjoy your blog!