is the matrix reloded worth watching

[Kemaiku]

As for the Architects line about multiple versions, the Matrix Online wiki explains that this refers only to the "proper" or 3.0 series.

But he says "The first Matrix I designed". So that would mean he didn't design 1.0 or 2.0.

"The first matrix I designed was quite naturally perfect, it was a work of art, flawless, sublime. A triumph equaled only by its monumental failure."

1.0, Heaven

"Thus I redesigned it based on your history to more accurately reflect the varying grotesqueries of your nature. However, I was again frustrated by failure."

2.0, Hell

"Thus, the answer was stumbled upon by another, an intuitive program, initially created to investigate certain aspects of the human psyche. If I am the father of the matrix, she would undoubtedly be its mother. As I was saying, she stumbled upon a solution whereby nearly 99.9% of all test subjects accepted the program, as long as they were given a choice, even if they were only aware of the choice at a near unconscious level."

3.0, Reality simulation

 

[Robert Comsol]

The philosophy and ideas in The Matrix movies is not acceptable as a guide to the real world, but most movies are equally irrelevant and much more cliched.

Considering the avatar you have chosen I am somewhat perplexed, now, as I felt Baruch Spinoza's ideas were rather prominently featured in the Matrix Trilogy:

"Spinoza was a thoroughgoing determinist who held that absolutely everything that happens occurs through the operation of necessity. For him, even human behaviour is fully determined, with freedom being our capacity to know we are determined and to understand why we act as we do. So freedom is not the possibility to say "no" to what happens to us but the possibility to say "yes" and fully understand why things should necessarily happen that way. By forming more "adequate" ideas about what we do and our emotions or affections, we become the adequate cause of our effects (internal or external), which entails an increase in activity (versus passivity). This means that we become both more free and more like God, as Spinoza argues in the Scholium to Prop. 49, Part II. However, Spinoza also held that everything must necessarily happen the way that it does. Therefore, humans have no free will. They believe, however, that their will is free. This illusionary perception of freedom stems from our human consciousness, experience and our indifference to prior natural causes. Humans think they are free but they ″dream with their eyes open″. For Spinoza, our actions are guided entirely by natural impulses." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spinoza

That's the lesson the protagonists are being told or taught by the Merovingian (aka the Devil) in RELOADED. He mocks them because they ask for the keymaker but they don't understand "why" they need him.

I'd dare to say that the question "Why" is a red thread throughout the trilogy. Another nice exmple is the Oracle in RELOADED. Neo has made / will make his choices but doesn't yet understand "Why" (IIRC she said "You already made your coice but now you want to understand the why").

And of course in RELOADED (or Act II) the pivotal scene is the confrontation with the Architect, the full understanding of a rather brutal truth and for Neo to make a choice between a rock and a hard place and "why" he chooses the door to the left and not the one to the right.

This scene is rather reminiscent of THE EMPIRE STRIKES BACK and Luke's decision: to save his friends and by doing so risk everything they've fought for.
IMHO, Aristoteles had some very good explanation for this kind of human behaviour and I couldn't say in either case that Neo's or Luke's choice wasn't the right one.

Bob

 

[GalaxyX]

"The one's powers extend beyond the matrix"

 

[stj]

The philosophy and ideas in The Matrix movies is not acceptable as a guide to the real world, but most movies are equally irrelevant and much more cliched.

Considering the avatar you have chosen I am somewhat perplexed, now, as I felt Baruch Spinoza's ideas were rather prominently featured in the Matrix Trilogy...
Bob

My primary objection are 1) humans as batteries, which is mercifully blurred over after the first movie 2) the simultaneous existence of a deterministic Matrix and an antirationalist Oracle and 3) the way the movie offers a self-willed Neo who simply "chooses" to fight Smith to the death, or at least be interpreted as doing something so simple. The existence of gay people only in the Inferno but not the Temple was also remarkably annoying.

But the greater point that determinism is a hugely important theme is correct. I'm not in agreement with Spinoza's epistemology, so he's more like a Greek atomist or Lucretius, admirable, in the end essential to the human journey, but not the destination.

The Matrix ended with a man coming back to life to no reason other than the background music. There's no way to rate that movie very highly. Maybe it sounded as if I was damning with faint praise, but that wasn't the intention.

 

[Set Harth]

It was a bluff, they can't survive alone now, and the Oracle finally called them on it.

But I thought the Architect was above lying and saw it as a human trait. Doesn't that include bluffing?

 

[Asbo Zaprudder]

But as to what it is now, 4.0, 3.6 or 3.5.5 or something, I don't know.

Probably Windows 8.1.

 

[Robert Comsol]

My primary objection are 1) humans as batteries, which is mercifully blurred over after the first movie.

Interesting, I thought that by the second film they clearly showcased Zion's practical application of geothermal energy (so deep underground) and the machines posession of drilling equipment to tap into geothermal energy if these ever wanted.

One could argue that Morpheus' battery analogy was a little piece of propaganda. The "Second Renaissance" animation film ("hand over your flesh") almost suggested to me that mankind was imprisoned as part of a punishment.

I think the "Second Renaissance" made it clear that appearances are deceiving. The whole premise that mankind would willingly darken the sky (to deprive the machines of solar energy) is rather hilarious, considering the suicidal side effects the inevitable "nuclear" winter would / did have on mankind (add to this that the machines never developped technology to clean up the darkened sky in several - ? - centuries).

2) the simultaneous existence of a deterministic Matrix and an antirationalist Oracle.

But wasn't the Oracle equally deterministic? She definitely inspired Morpheus to think in deterministic patterns when he constantly spoke about fate, destiny and that things happen for a reason.

Of course, and the Architect suggested that rather clearly, one of her duties as a control program was to provide the subjects with the illusion of choice. Ironically, Morpheus had been so taken with this concept that the first thing the Merovingian told him that this was wrong (however, the Merovingian was apparently jealous that the Oracle had qualities to influence and manipulate people far beyond his own "determininistic" abilities).

I can't help but to highlight the crucial scene in the Oracle's kitchen when she wants Neo to take notice of the "Know Thyself" plaque above her kitchen door. The man who truly knows himself will also know "why" he makes the decisions he does.

3) the way the movie offers a self-willed Neo who simply "chooses" to fight Smith to the death, or at least be interpreted as doing something so simple.

Well, I'm unable to understand the theories that claim that Neo could defeat Smith because he was connected to the Source in order to delete Smith. IIRC the other agents ("loyal" to the Matrix) were equally connected to the source but were assimilated by Smith with obvious ease.

By the end of REVOLUTIONS I felt we were looking at the ultimate metaphor: Agent Smith is Neo's evil alter ego but since evil is an inseparable part of each of us, we can't really defeat or eliminate it. So finally Neo does the right thing, he accepts it as it is but the re-unification process also kills him.

The existence of gay people only in the Inferno but not the Temple was also remarkably annoying.

IIRC I noticed one couple of female dancers in the Temple session that did not look like they had been looking for or lacking male dancing partners.

The Matrix ended with a man coming back to life to no reason other than the background music. There's no way to rate that movie very highly. Maybe it sounded as if I was damning with faint praise, but that wasn't the intention.

Thomas Anderson had to die before he could truly become "Neo".
IMHO it's a classic of story-telling and in particular the Monomyth.
Just like Yoda told Luke Skywalker "You must unlearn" and shed your previously aquired prejudices and conceptions, the old self has to "die" first before you are truly ready to absorb new and different concepts. Again, IMHO, a metaphor which the Wachowskis illustrated literally and pretty darn good, I should add.

Bob

 

[Set Harth]

I think the "Second Renaissance" made it clear that appearances are deceiving. The whole premise that mankind would willingly darken the sky (to deprive the machines of solar energy) is rather hilarious

Hilarious or not, it seems that's intended to be what happened.

 

[Kemaiku]

It was a bluff, they can't survive alone now, and the Oracle finally called them on it.

But I thought the Architect was above lying and saw it as a human trait. Doesn't that include bluffing?

I think the Architect honestly believed everything the machines told him or programmed him to be. They needed humans once, to power their early efforts to build their city.

After that the only reason they could ever have needed beyond say, V3.2 was to keep us there out of habit or malice. Or maybe somewhere deep down, they just couldn't bring themselves to kill the human race. They had several chances, but always chose to keep them alive.

The Architect never changed in all his time there, who knows how much communication he even has with the machines anymore, if he even knows if anything about their attitudes changed.

But as to what it is now, 4.0, 3.6 or 3.5.5 or something, I don't know.

Probably Windows 8.1.

Ouch

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

I think the "Second Renaissance" made it clear that appearances are deceiving. The whole premise that mankind would willingly darken the sky (to deprive the machines of solar energy) is rather hilarious

Hilarious or not, it seems that's intended to be what happened.

Then again, that entire film is told from the machines' perspective. So it's likely to have rather extreme anti-human bias.

 

[Set Harth]

Then again, that entire film is told from the machines' perspective.

How so? It seems to be told from an omniscient perspective, and the framing device is the Zion mainframe.

 

[Stoo]

1.0 was Heaven with the Architect being "god", as he assumed he should be to them, and was given carte blanche by the machines to do whatever the hell he wanted. They were too busy over 100 miles away building a new home, freezing and depowering to death.

Humans had no control over their motor function, and played out a preset life they couldn't consciously control, like a dream, poorly rendered, bodily paralysed in a sense. Seraph and his angels patrolled and tried to comfort the humans, but the neural connections were poor, their bodies explosed to the elements on the real world surface.

Thousands of them woke up and discovered they were pinned to a metal tree trunk and being dissected, most of them died instantly from the shock. They lost nearly all of them in only a couple of years.

Hmm, so whereas before we were told humans were unable to accept paradise, now it's more like, the machines created a really crappy beta version of paradise.

 

[stj]

The whole premise that mankind would willingly darken the sky (to deprive the machines of solar energy) is rather hilarious, considering the suicidal side effects the inevitable "nuclear" winter would / did have on mankind (add to this that the machines never developped technology to clean up the darkened sky in several - ? - centuries).

Yes, it is possible to dismiss the batteries as a myth, however sincerely believed. But if blue sparks can make machines fly, why can't people power computers? I would like to think that the Zion universe, with it's permanently dark skies, is just as virtual as the Matrix. The dialogue in the train station is ambiguous but provocative in its references to "our" world and "your" world.

But wasn't the Oracle equally deterministic?

Yes, but I wasn't contrasting their determinism, but the Oracle's repudiation of reason.

By the end of REVOLUTIONS I felt we were looking at the ultimate metaphor: Agent Smith is Neo's evil alter ego but since evil is an inseparable part of each of us, we can't really defeat or eliminate it. So finally Neo does the right thing, he accepts it as it is but the re-unification process also kills him.

A very attractive interpretation, though I don't agree that the agents are in contact with the source. Whatever that breaks down to, it is not the same thing as just being plugged into the Matrix.

IMHO it's a classic of story-telling and in particular the Monomyth....
Bob

True, but for me the monomyth the monotonousmyth. Tastes differ, obviously.

I would end by clarifying that not only do I not consider The Matrix a classic, but every claim to any interest and achievement is due almost entirely to the two-part sequel.

 

[Kemaiku]

Then again, that entire film is told from the machines' perspective. So it's likely to have rather extreme anti-human bias.

Second Renaissance is told from the perspective of the Zion Archive avatar, a sentient program that strangely is the only one who is neutral in the entire affair from the beginning, feeling sorry for both and hoping for a peaceful resolution.

"May there be mercy on Man and Machines for their sins."

As she perches on the pod of a human inmate of the Matrix, showing compassion for them and lamenting the violence of it all.

Hmm, so whereas before we were told humans were unable to accept paradise, now it's more like, the machines created a really crappy beta version of paradise.

At this point, the "neural interface" was nothing more than a few dozen wires poked into the exposed brain of a naked human, the Matrix was far smaller, and only just written, it was probably visually perfect in some way, but lacked proper feedback to the body and was too "dreamlike" in it's playing out.

 

[Stoo]

Yeah but I mean, there's some sort of statement about human nature there, a claim that for some reason we're too messed up to accept paradise. Which is rather undermined if it turns out the paradise was badly constructed in the first place.

 

[Mr Light]

The framing device of "The Second Renaissance" takes place long after the trilogy ended and there is peace between man and machine. That's why she's so conciliatory towards both sides. I don't remember the specifics but there's something from the very opening moment of the short that points this out, but in a way that you don't realize it until the trilogy was over.

 

[Robert Comsol]

As she perches on the pod of a human inmate of the Matrix, showing compassion for them and lamenting the violence of it all.

Rewatching the sequence I couldn't help but wonder if that had actually been Neo's pod...

Hmm, so whereas before we were told humans were unable to accept paradise, now it's more like, the machines created a really crappy beta version of paradise.

At this point, the "neural interface" was nothing more than a few dozen wires poked into the exposed brain of a naked human, the Matrix was far smaller, and only just written, it was probably visually perfect in some way, but lacked proper feedback to the body and was too "dreamlike" in it's playing out.

You make it sound as if the essential problem had been one of presentation.

If the Architect had designed "paradise" based on the usual clichés I wouldn't wonder that it failed because such paradise would eventually become boring and unbearable for its occupants.
There is a great analogy in the "Twilight Zone" episode "A Nice Place to Visit"

Bob

 

[Asbo Zaprudder]

I'm now wondering what plumbing is required to produce new humans to be added to vacated pods. I probably shouldn't...

 

[Kemaiku]

Yeah the basic message is that 1.0 was terribly flawed in every way. 2.0 was much better technically, only they went all BDSM on the human race. Someone had to hand hold them in designing 3.0 properly.

And there is no reproductive plumming. Genetic samples seem to be taken from the pods, and the fetus grown out in the fields, the implants are grown by nanites as it develops. Well, the ones that aren't eaten by those 3-4 foot long spiders.

Add irony points if the machines back engineered them from the sky burning nanite cloud.

I'm just wondering if the liquification of the dead takes place by some enzyme in the pod, then suck out the entire liquid content, or if they're taken out to do it somewhere else.