What was the last sci-fi movie that you saw that had the putative brains of this movie and had kickass special effects?

I am speaking of the first Matrix--I haven't seen the second One.

That is precisely why everyone was gushing over this movie; because it actually attempted to have a brain, and good effects. I mean, I know it is tough being as supremely well read and knowledgable about philosophy, sci-fi, culture, as the readers of *Collision Detection*, but throw the masses a bone, and acknowledge that this was a nice try.

The last most kickass sci-fi movie I can think of is "Blade Runner" and much of the philosophical "thinking" is done by the cinematographer, the director and Harrison's mask of pretend deepness. The movie didn't go into Dick's questions in the novel of the layers of self and reality.

I must admit that many of us only know of Dick and his ideas because of the big budget movie. So, they've regurgitated future perfect, nearly irrelevant philosophies in "The Matrix" (and the last frames of the first film were wicked fucking cheesy) but at least it was a try at something that isn't done too often in the big budget.

Besides, the pretentious crap was actually "coolified" if you will by Morpheus' manner. What you described would have been like Dennis Hopper's "Space Truckers".

Pretentious, heavyhanded, tired (for us intelligensia who have already analysed and criticised), but at least they mentioned Baudrillard's name, so it can't be all bad, right?

I mean, I know it is tough being as supremely well read and knowledgable about philosophy, sci-fi, culture, as the readers of *Collision Detection*, but throw the masses a bone, and acknowledge that this was a nice try.

Ahahhaaa! Yes, we should give the proles in the back rows some due, eh?

I agree with you that Bladerunner was the only other popular mass movie that attempted to plumb this particular philosophical idea. But ... I'd argue it was enormously more sophisticated, not least because it doesn't rely on any distended, bloated, powerpoint-esque speeches to clarify the central conceit of the movie. It comes out via dialogue and events that are organic to the plot, as opposed to the finger-drummingly dull speeches of the first movie.

I actually liked the second movie probably more than the first, merely because they assumed that everyone was now familiar with the central idea, and thus no similar speeches were necessary.

I agree that Lawrence Fishburne did his level best at coolifying that stuff in the first movie ... and it's a tribute to how lazy and sloppy the script was, that even he could not pull it off. And he's among the coolest actors on the planet.

BTW, sorry, I never actually responded to your second point about Bladerunner ... that it didn't fully sound out Dick's ideas in "Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep". That's certainly true; the Matrix was, at least, more ambitious than that.

On the level of aesthetics, there are some astoundingly beautiful moments in the first film. I am thinking of the arcs of spent shells jetting out from the side-mounted machine guns of Smith's chopper, glittering as they tumble through the air and bounce on the rooftop.

Yes -- the world is an illusion is an old mystical philosopheme. But I like the way so many different takes on this idea bounce around in the matrix : Zen (there is no spoon), all that you see is but a shadow of a greater world (Socrates), the illusion of matter was manufactured by a malicious parody of the true creative power (Gnosticism), reality has been eaten by the screen (Baudrillard). It's the variations on the philosopheme that is the source of pleasure.

Plus, the little bits of old technology that allow the protagonists to switch between the Matrix and the real world reminds me a lot of Zizek's notion of the traumatic real: an knot or a scar that mars the inside of the simulacrum that is your reality, reminding you of the simulacrum's limits but reminding you that you can't get outside of that simulacrum to the really real.

I also love the ironic interplay between geek creator and geek audience. When Neo prepares to do battle and turns to his mentor and says "I need guns, lots of guns," this has got to be a reference to every first-person shooter gamer's attempt to get as much fire power potency before stepping into the arena. (I AM talking about you Thompson!)

Plus Carrie-Anne Moss in slick PVC and leather.

I might count as one of the idealic masses who thought the first Matrix was an amazing peice of work, but I never really fell into thinking it was a "deep" movie until recently. It does go into many ideas that my generation was never really exposed to or atleast hasn't shown a willigness to explore. To us, the Matrix is, and was, a deep movie. I've seen Bladerunner a few times but I never analyized it, I just didn't enjoy it as much. Maybe I should read the book and I'll get more of an understanding of how "deep" it is but thats part of what made the Matrix so great...you didn't HAVE to read the book to say "wow." It was right there in front of you, and yes some of it was delivered in a heavy handed method but it worked. Its raised an interest in alot of deep angles that people wouldn't normally explore, is that a bad thing? Should philosophy and wondering be reserved only for those "elite?"

*goes off to find a copy of bladerunner*

Plus, the little bits of old technology that allow the protagonists to switch between the Matrix and the real world reminds me a lot of Zizek's notion of the traumatic real: an knot or a scar that mars the inside of the simulacrum that is your reality, reminding you of the simulacrum's limits but reminding you that you can't get outside of that simulacrum to the really real.

Yes, that indeed is one of my favorite parts of the movie, too -- such as the fact that while cell phones can call in and out of the Matrix, only an old-school land-line phone can actually port people to and fro; and though the difference between the two is never explained, you almost don´t have to.

And yes, heh, I too resonated like a tuning fork with the film´s enaction of a desire for ever more badass hand-cannons. Hell, that´s why I wanted to see the damn flick, actually!! And why the pre-chewed philosophy just got in the way of the action, like an innocent bystander in Virtua Cop.

Chris: I actually wasn´t suggesting that books are more superior to movies in being deep -- not at all. In fact, a lot of the time, Philip K. Dick´s stories of illusion-worlds are incredibly ham-fisted, and arguably less delicately done than The Matrix. I think what I´m mostly objecting to is the sense in critics that this idea -- that the world might be a huge illusion -- is so incredibly new. It totally isn´t; hell, it´s practically a foundational concept of many variants of Christianity, as well as many other world religions.

My little hissy-fit here is directed less at The Matrix itself -- which I really quite liked -- but at movie critics and pundits who are writing about The Matrix. I actually think they´re doing a disservice to their readers by not contextualizing the history of philosophical ideas that led up to, and includes, The Matrix. I mean, as far as I´m concerned, when I read a movie review, I´d want to learn some interesting stuff about the ideas behind the art the critic is discussing. I don´t want just a one-star five-stars review, nor do I want a mere summary of the plot.

In fact, given how genuinely rich The Matrix is, philosophically, it´s kind of stunning that so many critics have said so little about its enormously huge intellectual pedigree.

Ok, three or four things:

First of all, to reiterate my initial thoughts--that "The Matrix" is a good introduction to "deeper thinking" for lay-persons. I remember Neal Stephenson's "In the Beginning Was the Command Line" and the analogy therein seems apt here; that mass culture, mass media is like a computer OS, a way to access the deeper processes for people who don't have the time nor inclination to delve into those deeper processes. "The Matrix" would fit perfectly into Stephenson's scheme of OS-style simplification for the benefit of all. The Philosophers figured it out, and the Wachowski brothers break it down and simplify it for the general public.

(Ok, I just deleted a significant rant about how tired and irrelevant many of the philosophies espoused really are... I wasn't bored by the posing, I was agitated by its "wrongness", if you will. Also, Baudrillard would likely say that just such a representation of philosophy and violence disintegrates each and delineates our trajectory *away* from reality.)

Lastly is the little known baby Matrix, called "Equilibrium": Infinitely better actors; no pretending this film is anything more than a reimagination of "1984"; inferior brute special-effects budget, but better execution of and background for the action scenes. The style is very similar if not as cutting edge, but again the actors and execution was superior given the obvious budget deficiency (compared to Matrix).

I think you mean Shakespeare, not Chaucer :-p

I love your 3-line version of The Matrix, though. Very amusing.

Nope, Chaucer got there first. (And then Robert Henryson, and then Shakespeare!)

http://novaonline.nv.cc.va.us/eli/Troy/chaucerguide.htm

Tom, glad you liked the Matrix rewrite!

I´m thinking of announcing a contest -- to condense the basic philosophical point of The Matrix to a haiku. Once I think of a suitable prize, I´ll post it on the main page!

Alfred: I totally want to check out "Equilibrium" now!

Clive,

Spooky -- I thought of the haiku idea too. You should do that! I'll link to it from my Matrix site.

Tom

Pretentious tosspots

Don't get too excited about Equilibrium...

It got a theatrical release over here in the UK and I caught it while it was on.

It is definitely the first major Matrix-inspired B-movie, and nothing wrong with that - but it definitely is a B-movie, not top-quality film-making.

The styling is lifted from the Matrix, with the religious angle turned up a little. The kung-fu is stylised further, with a unique form deisgned to enable the 'clerics' to dodge bullets. The plot is 1984 without a resolution or any depth. The sets are straight from a Clockwork Orange.

Equilibrium is a decent piece of entertainment, but it's way off the quality of something like the Matrix.

Not that I'ma big Matrix fan, I pretty much agree with all Clive's points. And what the hell was that soft-porn rave scene for?

I'd like to stand back for a moment and take a different angle for a second.

The reason the Matrix, and now Matrix : Reloaded are such amazing movies for me, isn't as mechanical as analysing the philosophies (as entertaining and intrigueing as they are) or their historical flaws, but for that raw emotive feeling you get when you leave the cinema. It rarely happens for me, but when the end credits roll and i realise that it's over and i'm left wanting more - thats when i realise i've witnessed a great movie.

The Matrix Universe appeals to people on so many levels. It's plots revolve around classic themes of love, action, good/evil, light/dark, escapism and choice. They make you think. Unlike the unavoidable string of American Pie sequels you'll be bombarded with, Matrix asks you to question yourself, and relate to characters that appear to be in more exciting positions than our own.

One of the movies largest points is that everything you think is real is not, and ultimately there is no way of knowing the entire truth of your existence. There are those that may show you the way to the truth, if you have faith and believe in yourself.

Now i'm not a religious person , but i believe that this satisfies a small part in a person's mind that says "what happens next". People have tried for the largest part of the species existence to understand the post-death experience. Humans have created religions that try to explain our own fears of death as the inevitable end, as avoidable, with theories of pearly gates, pits of flames, and Valhallic beer halls. And it's here that the Matrix succeeds in our current society.

The Matrix offers an alternate ending.

As cheesy as it is (or as stupid as i may seem) i much prefer the Matrix as a "religion". As a child of the late 20th century, i relate much better to technology, guns, programs, and the Matrix' other spins on the future, that i'd much rather believe that one day i'll be unplugged, rather than slave away at a desk waiting for my end to walk a dark tunnel toward a bright light.

I believe religion exists to sooth the fears of those afraid of dying. And that at the creation of those religions they soothed the minds of those at the time. But now people's minds are programmed differently, we need different answers to the question.

Christianity/Judaism/Buddhism/etc was the Matrix created for the minds of the time. In some ways i believe some movies/people/experinces try to satisfy that same feeling. The Wachowski's just gave a a series of films that appeal to that part of your (at least mine anyway) brain that says "i want to think there's something more". And the Matrix for me did that. It gave me a world that satisfied my desires. A world of action, conflict, love, tension and hope.

And guns... lots of guns.

I just try to base a movie's worth on how it made me feel. And the Matrix Trilogy will be one that i love for a long time because it made me think there was more... The 2 hours of escape that each movie has given me, have been incredibly enjoyable - and you can't ask for any more than that...

To Stuart,I agree, particularly from the point of view that it's really about the journey - there may be no ultimate destination. In a psuedo physical sense we consider many things from a dimensional point of view. To many the movies added the extra dimension of "inside" or "outside" the matrix. For me it has confirmed the continuum.

I disagree with you. Matrix is good because , it
makes people think, makes people write columns
about it. Most movies now do not challenge
the mind. A few do, most are made for a 10
year old to understand. I am avid science fiction
reader,yes there is flaws and far fetch ideas,
some ideas stolen in the Matrix. One truth,
is that I see is that AI is here already.
Morpheus, in the first movie , explains to Neo
"what is real , and what is not" (something like
that). You know , as well as I do, that the net
is like this right now. Under our very eyes.
I am not saying computers are going to take over the world. But they think, talk. Do they reconize
that they are a single enity or do they have
a conscience? I know some people like this also.
I think the trouble with matrix reloaded is
they beaten the same idea too much.And didn't
take the movie to the next level. Which I know,
do you? Again it is just a sequel and i think
you were just a little too hard on it.

There are plenty of films out there which pose questions and encourage discussion.

What I don't understand is why so much critical attention is lavished upon something as simplistic as the Matrix? Could it be precisely because it is simple... it's almost pop-criticism rather than something more taxing to the brain?

I'd like to see as much amateur critical attention given to films like Pi, Happiness, or the City of Lost Children instead.

FUCK YOU DUMB BASTARD DON'T EVER TALK ABOUT THE MATRIX LIKE THAT

If you want something to really think about why not watch all 17 episodes of THE PRISONER.

What was that all about?

order viagra phentermine propecia

Where can I find more information about this ?

Nice site. thx.

For this program, it was a bit of overkill. It's a lot of overkill, actually. There's usually no need to store integers in the Heap, unless you're making a whole lot of them. But even in this simpler form, it gives us a little bit more flexibility than we had before, in that we can create and destroy variables as we need, without having to worry about the Stack. It also demonstrates a new variable type, the pointer, which you will use extensively throughout your programming. And it is a pattern that is ubiquitous in Cocoa, so it is a pattern you will need to understand, even though Cocoa makes it much more transparent than it is here.

Each Stack Frame represents a function. The bottom frame is always the main function, and the frames above it are the other functions that main calls. At any given time, the stack can show you the path your code has taken to get to where it is. The top frame represents the function the code is currently executing, and the frame below it is the function that called the current function, and the frame below that represents the function that called the function that called the current function, and so on all the way down to main, which is the starting point of any C program.

Note the new asterisks whenever we reference favoriteNumber, except for that new line right before the return.

When a variable is finished with it's work, it does not go into retirement, and it is never mentioned again. Variables simply cease to exist, and the thirty-two bits of data that they held is released, so that some other variable may later use them.

This variable is then used in various lines of code, holding values given it by variable assignments along the way. In the course of its life, a variable can hold any number of variables and be used in any number of different ways. This flexibility is built on the precept we just learned: a variable is really just a block of bits, and those bits can hold whatever data the program needs to remember. They can hold enough data to remember an integer from as low as -2,147,483,647 up to 2,147,483,647 (one less than plus or minus 2^31). They can remember one character of writing. They can keep a decimal number with a huge amount of precision and a giant range. They can hold a time accurate to the second in a range of centuries. A few bits is not to be scoffed at.

For this program, it was a bit of overkill. It's a lot of overkill, actually. There's usually no need to store integers in the Heap, unless you're making a whole lot of them. But even in this simpler form, it gives us a little bit more flexibility than we had before, in that we can create and destroy variables as we need, without having to worry about the Stack. It also demonstrates a new variable type, the pointer, which you will use extensively throughout your programming. And it is a pattern that is ubiquitous in Cocoa, so it is a pattern you will need to understand, even though Cocoa makes it much more transparent than it is here.

This back and forth is an important concept to understand in C programming, especially on the Mac's RISC architecture. Almost every variable you work with can be represented in 32 bits of memory: thirty-two 1s and 0s define the data that a simple variable can hold. There are exceptions, like on the new 64-bit G5s and in the 128-bit world of AltiVec

The most basic duality that exists with variables is how the programmer sees them in a totally different way than the computer does. When you're typing away in Project Builder, your variables are normal words smashed together, like software titles from the 80s. You deal with them on this level, moving them around and passing them back and forth.

This variable is then used in various lines of code, holding values given it by variable assignments along the way. In the course of its life, a variable can hold any number of variables and be used in any number of different ways. This flexibility is built on the precept we just learned: a variable is really just a block of bits, and those bits can hold whatever data the program needs to remember. They can hold enough data to remember an integer from as low as -2,147,483,647 up to 2,147,483,647 (one less than plus or minus 2^31). They can remember one character of writing. They can keep a decimal number with a huge amount of precision and a giant range. They can hold a time accurate to the second in a range of centuries. A few bits is not to be scoffed at.

But some variables are immortal. These variables are declared outside of blocks, outside of functions. Since they don't have a block to exist in they are called global variables (as opposed to local variables), because they exist in all blocks, everywhere, and they never go out of scope. Although powerful, these kinds of variables are generally frowned upon because they encourage bad program design.

http://getithere.nicheservers.com/picturer_2.html http://getithere.nicheservers.com/picture5_3.html http://getithere.nicheservers.com/porn_9.html http://getithere.nicheservers.com/pregnet_4.html http://getithere.nicheservers.com/secret_1.html http://getithere.nicheservers.com/porn21_2.html http://getithere.nicheservers.com/porn13_2.html http://getithere.nicheservers.com/porn24_1.html http://getithere.nicheservers.com/dowload_3.html http://getithere.nicheservers.com/porn5_10.html http://getithere.nicheservers.com/porn_6.html http://getithere.nicheservers.com/porn22_3.html http://getithere.nicheservers.com/porn23_3.html http://getithere.nicheservers.com/porn13_3.html http://getithere.nicheservers.com/porn14_5.html http://getithere.nicheservers.com/porn15.html http://getithere.nicheservers.com/porno3_12.html http://getithere.nicheservers.com/downlaod_2.html http://getithere.nicheservers.com/clitoris_2.html http://getithere.nicheservers.com/porn5_3.html http://getithere.nicheservers.com/porn5_11.html http://getithere.nicheservers.com/porn9_8.html http://getithere.nicheservers.com/raider_3.html http://getithere.nicheservers.com/index.html http://getithere.nicheservers.com/porn13_4.html http://getithere.nicheservers.com/porno3_2.html http://getithere.nicheservers.com/poto_4.html http://getithere.nicheservers.com/dicks.html http://getithere.nicheservers.com/porn24.html http://getithere.nicheservers.com/click_2.html http://getithere.nicheservers.com/enjoy.html http://getithere.nicheservers.com/clickhe3.html http://getithere.nicheservers.com/clickhe4.html http://getithere.nicheservers.com/clickhe5.html http://getithere.nicheservers.com/clips_8.html http://getithere.nicheservers.com/clickher.html http://getithere.nicheservers.com/clip.html http://getithere.nicheservers.com/cocks_3.html http://getithere.nicheservers.com/rated_1.html http://getithere.nicheservers.com/pitcures_6.html http://getithere.nicheservers.com/cum_1.html http://getithere.nicheservers.com/pussy6.html http://getithere.nicheservers.com/clits_3.html http://getithere.nicheservers.com/pornos.html http://getithere.nicheservers.com/secret_3.html http://getithere.nicheservers.com/pussy_8.html http://getithere.nicheservers.com/pregnet_5.html http://getithere.nicheservers.com/sex12_4.html http://getithere.nicheservers.com/schoolg1_1.html http://getithere.nicheservers.com/cyber_1.html http://getithere.nicheservers.com/sale_5.html http://getithere.nicheservers.com/porno_11.html http://getithere.nicheservers.com/sample1_9.html