ok a lot of people have said that if neo was brought back and introduced to the game, the game would end. Yet some say it wont, anyone want give me an outline on both sides? cuz there is a lot of argument about it.
Neo
51 posts · 2007-03-30 10:43:03 to 2007-04-12 03:41:27
On the possible return of Neo and its impact on the game:
http://forums.station.sony.com/mxo/..._id=36300011004
I am in the "it would be a bad thing" camp myself 
Neo will be back and will work for the machines! He will delete the merovingian, persephone, all the agents, the oracle, the architect, niobe, locke, ghost,...
Oh! And will marry Trinity's twin!
GirlyGurl84 wrote:
Before he died, he was aiming to get Neo's body from the Machines, and collecting "fragments" of Neo, although they seemed to be a weapon he left in the Matrix, rather then pieces of himself. Although I'm not sure.
A code "RSI" of Neo was placed by the Machines hovering in an underground fight club. You can hear his heart beating there.
An old mission document and a few older hints in live events *imply* that there is some form of reincarnation of Neo, in the form of a woman with his name's anagram, Sarah Edmontons. Very vague, and not current.
Other than that, nothing tangible.
ok a lot of people have said that if neo was brought back and introduced to the game, the game would end. Yet some say it wont, anyone want give me an outline on both sides? cuz there is a lot of argument about it.Morpheus, who might not be Morpheus but a fake, has been making (broadcasted) appearences for a long time and was rambling something about Neo being alived or held prisoner in the Machine City.
Before he died, he was aiming to get Neo's body from the Machines, and collecting "fragments" of Neo, although they seemed to be a weapon he left in the Matrix, rather then pieces of himself. Although I'm not sure.
A code "RSI" of Neo was placed by the Machines hovering in an underground fight club. You can hear his heart beating there.
An old mission document and a few older hints in live events *imply* that there is some form of reincarnation of Neo, in the form of a woman with his name's anagram, Sarah Edmontons. Very vague, and not current.
Other than that, nothing tangible.
The_Big_V wrote:
I am in the "it would be a bad thing" camp myselfI second that Emoticon
Papergh0st wrote:
It would be a very bad thing. It'd mean that something is so big was coming our way, and the only way to confront it is to have The One return.
The_Big_V wrote:I am in the "it would be a bad thing" camp myselfI second that Emoticon
It would be a very bad thing. It'd mean that something is so big was coming our way, and the only way to confront it is to have The One return.
Some people appear to have come here with the premise that Neo is dead and gone for good, despite the, well, fact that his death in the movies was rather ambiguous. Thus, they think it's bad if he's not.
I've just come here to see what the writers are offering as a continuation of the plot, and have no particular wishes or requirements for how it should be (doesn't mean I accept and like everything, though).
Then, there are people who have more particular reasons to think it would damage the game or the storyline, but I think it's wrong to judge and speculate about it in this way before anything definite has even surfaced.
Wait until they fk up, and then let's complain and cancel, mkay? Currently, I don't see anything fked up concerning Morpheus or Neo.
zeroone506 wrote:
"The mind cannot live without the body." ~Morpheus
Let's look at what happened to Neo. First he is copied over by Smith. Which is done in Bane, so when Bane has his mind copied over by Smith, Bane was no longer Bane, but Smith. One would have to assume that the same thing happened to Neo. Now once Smith has copied over Neo, the machines enacted Norton Anti Virus into the system, thus destroying Smith. We also saw Neo's Smith being erased too, so if Neo's mind is gone, and if Smith overwritten copy of his mind is gone, then what is left?
Some people appear to have come here with the premise that Neo is dead and gone for good, despite the, well, fact that his death in the movies was rather ambiguous. Thus, they think it's bad if he's not.
I've just come here to see what the writers are offering as a continuation of the plot, and have no particular wishes or requirements for how it should be (doesn't mean I accept and like everything, though).
Then, there are people who have more particular reasons to think it would damage the game or the storyline, but I think it's wrong to judge and speculate about it in this way before anything definite has even surfaced.
Wait until they fk up, and then let's complain and cancel, mkay? Currently, I don't see anything fked up concerning Morpheus or Neo.
"The mind cannot live without the body." ~Morpheus
Let's look at what happened to Neo. First he is copied over by Smith. Which is done in Bane, so when Bane has his mind copied over by Smith, Bane was no longer Bane, but Smith. One would have to assume that the same thing happened to Neo. Now once Smith has copied over Neo, the machines enacted Norton Anti Virus into the system, thus destroying Smith. We also saw Neo's Smith being erased too, so if Neo's mind is gone, and if Smith overwritten copy of his mind is gone, then what is left?
The best of all possible worlds would to be to have Neo remain in that ambiguous state between life and death. Thusly you can still provide hope to the fanbois that Neo is still alive and may return at some point. Keep him ambiguously dead for now. If SOE finally pulls the plug on MxO, heck bring him back on the last week of play.....who cares at that point. The Neo Card is the ultimate trump card.......the one card that you do not want to pull out lightly.
The_Big_V wrote:
QFT.
The best of all possible worlds would to be to have Neo remain in that ambiguous state between life and death. Thusly you can still provide hope to the fanbois that Neo is still alive and may return at some point. Keep him ambiguously dead for now. If SOE finally pulls the plug on MxO, heck bring him back on the last week of play.....who cares at that point. The Neo Card is the ultimate trump card.......the one card that you do not want to pull out lightly.
QFT.
MetaLogic wrote:
The way it looks, Smith did not overwrite or replace anyone, but merely added his code to his hosts, taking control of them and probably deactivating their consciousness.
Who said Bane's personality was gone? Or Neo's? Maybe that Symantec thingie the Machines pumped into Neo only removed Smith from Neo, and used him to track down and destroy all the other entities?
I mean, surely, they might aswell have had to destroy his mind to achieve this. But is this a fact? Why do you think it couldn't be otherwise?
As I said, ambiguous.
zeroone506 wrote:All the people Smith took over in the Matrix (or most of them?) were restored back to normal after he was gone. The Oracle, Sati, Seraph, and all the bluepills who had strange dreams about that event.Some people appear to have come here with the premise that Neo is dead and gone for good, despite the, well, fact that his death in the movies was rather ambiguous. Thus, they think it's bad if he's not.
I've just come here to see what the writers are offering as a continuation of the plot, and have no particular wishes or requirements for how it should be (doesn't mean I accept and like everything, though).
Then, there are people who have more particular reasons to think it would damage the game or the storyline, but I think it's wrong to judge and speculate about it in this way before anything definite has even surfaced.
Wait until they fk up, and then let's complain and cancel, mkay? Currently, I don't see anything fked up concerning Morpheus or Neo.
"The mind cannot live without the body." ~Morpheus
Let's look at what happened to Neo. First he is copied over by Smith. Which is done in Bane, so when Bane has his mind copied over by Smith, Bane was no longer Bane, but Smith. One would have to assume that the same thing happened to Neo. Now once Smith has copied over Neo, the machines enacted Norton Anti Virus into the system, thus destroying Smith. We also saw Neo's Smith being erased too, so if Neo's mind is gone, and if Smith overwritten copy of his mind is gone, then what is left?
The way it looks, Smith did not overwrite or replace anyone, but merely added his code to his hosts, taking control of them and probably deactivating their consciousness.
Who said Bane's personality was gone? Or Neo's? Maybe that Symantec thingie the Machines pumped into Neo only removed Smith from Neo, and used him to track down and destroy all the other entities?
I mean, surely, they might aswell have had to destroy his mind to achieve this. But is this a fact? Why do you think it couldn't be otherwise?
As I said, ambiguous.
The_Big_V wrote:
You know what, how about you stop thinking about fanbois and marketing ploys when talking about the *storyline*?
QFT my... ahem.
The best of all possible worlds would to be to have Neo remain in that ambiguous state between life and death. Thusly you can still provide hope to the fanbois that Neo is still alive and may return at some point. Keep him ambiguously dead for now. If SOE finally pulls the plug on MxO, heck bring him back on the last week of play.....who cares at that point. The Neo Card is the ultimate trump card.......the one card that you do not want to pull out lightly.Or maybe they should have kept the Unlimit thingy until the end, because who'd care then, at least we'd have some cool superhero powers. Or anything that you don't like.
You know what, how about you stop thinking about fanbois and marketing ploys when talking about the *storyline*?
QFT my... ahem.
zeroone506 wrote:
You know what, how about you stop thinking about fanbois and marketing ploys when talking about the *storyline*?i think neos fate remaining ambiguous is more beneficial to the storyline than revealing it, if that reveal should happen to be "he's alive" as opposed "he's dead", in which case I wouldn't have a problem with it.
Okay, then why don't you approve of Neo destroying the Sentinels remaining ambiguous, if you prefer ambiguousity over clarity?
So, what, if they initially concepted "Neo hasn't died at that point and is alive", according or not according to my above post, they should by all means keep it unanswered forever? I mean, not necessarily in the first chapter probably, but I doubt they'd keep anything ambiguous forever.
So, what, if they initially concepted "Neo hasn't died at that point and is alive", according or not according to my above post, they should by all means keep it unanswered forever? I mean, not necessarily in the first chapter probably, but I doubt they'd keep anything ambiguous forever.
zeroone506 wrote:
a) explains nothing that you can listen to and go, okay, they set up a mystery in the second film and now resolved it in a way thats logical and satifying and
b) is totally lame and probably took ten minutes or less to come up with.
why not? the whole setup of the final film smacks of the ambiguity of jesus coming back or not, of king arthur coming back or not, of any other of a number of famous "verily, I shall return and kick some behind....maybe. so be good, puny mortals" individuals throughout history and myth. even the oracles "i suspect we will, someday" is reminiscent of the whole "we'll see king arthur return in englands darkest hour" thing.
thats such a potent thing. why ruin that potency and what it stands for, just so we can say we bring him back and then have him do some stuff in this game for whatever period of time this game runs for, then potentially bring his tale to a halt for a second time, presumably with a second "heroic matrix death / sacrifice / whatever" at the end of the life of the game?
Okay, then why don't you approve of Neo destroying the Sentinels remaining ambiguous, if you prefer ambiguousity over clarity?huh? that didn't need to "remain ambiguous", it needed to be explained better in a way that didn't suck and suggest creativity abandoned the scriptwriting office that day. "your connection extends from this world into the machine mainframe"
a) explains nothing that you can listen to and go, okay, they set up a mystery in the second film and now resolved it in a way thats logical and satifying and
b) is totally lame and probably took ten minutes or less to come up with.
So, what, if they initially concepted "Neo hasn't died at that point and is alive", according or not according to my above post, they should by all means keep it unanswered forever? I mean, not necessarily in the first chapter probably, but I doubt they'd keep anything ambiguous forever.
why not? the whole setup of the final film smacks of the ambiguity of jesus coming back or not, of king arthur coming back or not, of any other of a number of famous "verily, I shall return and kick some behind....maybe. so be good, puny mortals" individuals throughout history and myth. even the oracles "i suspect we will, someday" is reminiscent of the whole "we'll see king arthur return in englands darkest hour" thing.
thats such a potent thing. why ruin that potency and what it stands for, just so we can say we bring him back and then have him do some stuff in this game for whatever period of time this game runs for, then potentially bring his tale to a halt for a second time, presumably with a second "heroic matrix death / sacrifice / whatever" at the end of the life of the game?
Papergh0st wrote:
That "explanation" wasn't lame or sucked, it was vague and lacked detail or elaboration. Which means certain aspects or details aren't covered, and basically the understanding of the thing isn't complete.
Maybe "ambiguous" is the wrong word, but anyway, it was *not* explained in the movies how Neo destroyed the Machines, could see them in this special way, or be transported to the simulation just like that.
There is nothing worse about this explanation than about "a Matrix in the Matrix", or anything else (if you'd care to elaborate what great ideas you've seen on forums =p) - it's the way and detail you present it with. The way it was presented in the movies was, by all means, not sufficient, and didn't seem final.
So you criticize it for being not entirely explained. I suppose you'd be more pleased if MxO would explain it some day, and even more pleased if you knew it were the Wachowskis who had this in mind while writing the screenplay, or something.
Why should the fact if Neo is dead or not remain ambiguous then? Otherwise, they'd make this mystery at the end of the movie, but would never care to answer it. Huh? Not good.
If it was intended to be an empty belief, then it's one way.
If it was intended to hint towards a real story development, it's the other way.
I don't know anything about the future, and don't automatically dismiss one of these possibilities as bad because I don't know how they might or will turn out. That's all.
huh? that didn't need to "remain ambiguous", it needed to be explained better in a way that didn't suck and suggest creativity abandoned the scriptwriting office that day. "your connection extends from this world into the machine mainframe"
a) explains nothing that you can listen to and go, okay, they set up a mystery in the second film and now resolved it in a way thats logical and satifying and
b) is totally lame and probably took ten minutes or less to come up with.
That "explanation" wasn't lame or sucked, it was vague and lacked detail or elaboration. Which means certain aspects or details aren't covered, and basically the understanding of the thing isn't complete.
Maybe "ambiguous" is the wrong word, but anyway, it was *not* explained in the movies how Neo destroyed the Machines, could see them in this special way, or be transported to the simulation just like that.
There is nothing worse about this explanation than about "a Matrix in the Matrix", or anything else (if you'd care to elaborate what great ideas you've seen on forums =p) - it's the way and detail you present it with. The way it was presented in the movies was, by all means, not sufficient, and didn't seem final.
So you criticize it for being not entirely explained. I suppose you'd be more pleased if MxO would explain it some day, and even more pleased if you knew it were the Wachowskis who had this in mind while writing the screenplay, or something.
Why should the fact if Neo is dead or not remain ambiguous then? Otherwise, they'd make this mystery at the end of the movie, but would never care to answer it. Huh? Not good.
First of all, let's not compare mythological and religious truths to *fiction* in this way.
why not? the whole setup of the final film smacks of the ambiguity of jesus coming back or not, of king arthur coming back or not, of any other of a number of famous "verily, I shall return and kick some behind....maybe. so be good, puny mortals" individuals throughout history and myth. even the oracles "i suspect we will, someday" is reminiscent of the whole "we'll see king arthur return in englands darkest hour" thing.
thats such a potent thing. why ruin that potency and what it stands for, just so we can say we bring him back and then have him do some stuff in this game for whatever period of time this game runs for, then potentially bring his tale to a halt for a second time, presumably with a second "heroic matrix death / sacrifice / whatever" at the end of the life of the game?
If it was intended to be an empty belief, then it's one way.
If it was intended to hint towards a real story development, it's the other way.
I don't know anything about the future, and don't automatically dismiss one of these possibilities as bad because I don't know how they might or will turn out. That's all.
Papergh0st wrote:
why not? the whole setup of the final film smacks of the ambiguity of jesus coming back or not, of king arthur coming back or not, of any other of a number of famous "verily, I shall return and kick some behind....maybe. so be good, puny mortals" individuals throughout history and myth. even the oracles "i suspect we will, someday" is reminiscent of the whole "we'll see king arthur return in englands darkest hour" thing.
thats such a potent thing. why ruin that potency and what it stands for, just so we can say we bring him back and then have him do some stuff in this game for whatever period of time this game runs for, then potentially bring his tale to a halt for a second time, presumably with a second "heroic matrix death / sacrifice / whatever" at the end of the life of the game?
Wow that's totally true....haven't thought of that before. Must be why the ambiguous death has so much potency and eloquence. I think it's time for me to re-read some Joseph Campbell. Actually IIRC he did speak about the Arthurian mythos in one of his many lectures, talked about how conquered peoples of various cultures around the world have a similar mythic figure that has left but may return one day.
Let Neo rest in Avalon.
zeroone506 wrote:
they clearly intended to "resolve" the mystery of the sentinels, because neo asked the oracle about it "tell me how I..." and she gave her final answer, which was indeed "your connection goes from this world back to the source"...and that was that. no further elaboration required, she didn't present her information as "vague" or with a hint of "this is sort of the full story, but not quite and I'm holding something back" - he turned up at the oracles place, demanded answers, and she filled him in.
there is no hint from the writers that we are supposed to accept this as anything other than "the explanation bit" of the film, or that she was holding something back, or that we weren't supposed to be satisfied with this explanation. maybe they didn't intend for these things to become as big an issue for the sequels as they did, but given that these are clear double yew tee eff moments in the film - heck, stopping the sentinels is one of the main cliffhangers of the second film - I can't believe its anything other than bad writing and poor judgment.
uh, why not?
how about if I view the tale of christ as fiction? isn't the popularisation of the arthur myth itself due to Geoffry of Monmouth writing historia regum britanniae, a work of fiction, without which we might not even have come to be aware of such tales?
so why are we not allowed to compare the tale of neo with the tales I mentioned? that seems faintly ludicrous when the matrix movies themselves are cadging everything from christ to arthur to buddhism and everything inbetween.
that's fine, and I'm choosing to take the opposite stance. one isn't automatically more valid than the other, but it doesn't mean I can't lay out my thoughts on what I happen to think might (or could) go wrong if they go with the "lets bring Neo back" idea.
That "explanation" wasn't lame or sucked, it was vague and lacked detail or elaboration. Which means certain aspects or details aren't covered, and basically the understanding of the thing isn't complete.they presented you with some big mysteries in the second film with the promise of resolution in the third.
Maybe "ambiguous" is the wrong word, but anyway, it was *not* explained in the movies how Neo destroyed the Machines, could see them in this special way, or be transported to the simulation just like that.
they clearly intended to "resolve" the mystery of the sentinels, because neo asked the oracle about it "tell me how I..." and she gave her final answer, which was indeed "your connection goes from this world back to the source"...and that was that. no further elaboration required, she didn't present her information as "vague" or with a hint of "this is sort of the full story, but not quite and I'm holding something back" - he turned up at the oracles place, demanded answers, and she filled him in.
there is no hint from the writers that we are supposed to accept this as anything other than "the explanation bit" of the film, or that she was holding something back, or that we weren't supposed to be satisfied with this explanation. maybe they didn't intend for these things to become as big an issue for the sequels as they did, but given that these are clear double yew tee eff moments in the film - heck, stopping the sentinels is one of the main cliffhangers of the second film - I can't believe its anything other than bad writing and poor judgment.
First of all, let's not compare mythological and religious truths to *fiction* in this way.
uh, why not?
how about if I view the tale of christ as fiction? isn't the popularisation of the arthur myth itself due to Geoffry of Monmouth writing historia regum britanniae, a work of fiction, without which we might not even have come to be aware of such tales?
so why are we not allowed to compare the tale of neo with the tales I mentioned? that seems faintly ludicrous when the matrix movies themselves are cadging everything from christ to arthur to buddhism and everything inbetween.
I don't know anything about the future, and don't automatically dismiss one of these possibilities as bad because I don't know how they might or will turn out. That's all.
that's fine, and I'm choosing to take the opposite stance. one isn't automatically more valid than the other, but it doesn't mean I can't lay out my thoughts on what I happen to think might (or could) go wrong if they go with the "lets bring Neo back" idea.
Papergh0st wrote:
First of all, let's not compare mythological and religious truths to *fiction* in this way.
uh, why not?
Why not indeed. Good (stuff that lasts) fiction is a form of mythology (creative mythology). A myth is not a lie, but, like art, a rendering or reflection of truth. Subsequently, religion is the extension of myth through ritual.
Sorry to get all metaphysical here but its very late and I have Joseph Campbell on the brain.
Papergh0st wrote:
If the Wachowskis really said the final movie would answer all questions to full extent and in full detail, they either lied or failed. Or they were "razzing"
If it was Joel Silver, the guy has a rather big, fat mouth - not that I hated him, but he praised the movies so hard, I wouldn't use him or poster announcements as valid arguments. Also
I don't know what hints from the writers you want. The Oracle has been talking cryptically, "in riddles", all the time. Even now when you ask her a definite question, you won't get a clear answer.
It was the same in the movies, almost everywhere.
She has been "holding back" information or details all the time. From movie one until right here and now.
Maybe Neo had got used to it, or had understood her answer unlike the audience. Anyway, that answer was vague and insufficient. But it does explain the vage and general concept.
Either the Wachowskis wanted to leave it to interpretations, or to answer it at a later point. Or it was poor writing, if you insist.
Whether real historical events, imparted legends, fiction or simply belief, the point is that people more or less apply it to their real life, and the real world.
The notion of Arthur or Jesus returning is not that someone might write a sequel where this happens, but that is happens in the real.
Neo's return is all pure fiction and doesn't claim to be anything else. Everyone who expects Neo to return to their world is a fictional character.
So what's your point? That it's more exciting to wait for King Arthur than seeing him return? But seeing him return is a scenario beyond our reach, in the Matrix, it's not, it's a possible story twist.
they presented you with some big mysteries in the second film with the promise of resolution in the third.
they clearly intended to "resolve" the mystery of the sentinels, because neo asked the oracle about it "tell me how I..." and she gave her final answer, which was indeed "your connection goes from this world back to the source"...and that was that. no further elaboration required, she didn't present her information as "vague" or with a hint of "this is sort of the full story, but not quite and I'm holding something back" - he turned up at the oracles place, demanded answers, and she filled him in.
there is no hint from the writers that we are supposed to accept this as anything other than "the explanation bit" of the film, or that she was holding something back, or that we weren't supposed to be satisfied with this explanation. maybe they didn't intend for these things to become as big an issue for the sequels as they did, but given that these are clear double yew tee eff moments in the film - heck, stopping the sentinels is one of the main cliffhangers of the second film - I can't believe its anything other than bad writing and poor judgment.
If the Wachowskis really said the final movie would answer all questions to full extent and in full detail, they either lied or failed. Or they were "razzing"
If it was Joel Silver, the guy has a rather big, fat mouth - not that I hated him, but he praised the movies so hard, I wouldn't use him or poster announcements as valid arguments. Also
I don't know what hints from the writers you want. The Oracle has been talking cryptically, "in riddles", all the time. Even now when you ask her a definite question, you won't get a clear answer.
It was the same in the movies, almost everywhere.
She has been "holding back" information or details all the time. From movie one until right here and now.
Maybe Neo had got used to it, or had understood her answer unlike the audience. Anyway, that answer was vague and insufficient. But it does explain the vage and general concept.
Either the Wachowskis wanted to leave it to interpretations, or to answer it at a later point. Or it was poor writing, if you insist.
uh, why not?
how about if I view the tale of christ as fiction? isn't the popularisation of the arthur myth itself due to Geoffry of Monmouth writing historia regum britanniae, a work of fiction, without which we might not even have come to be aware of such tales?
so why are we not allowed to compare the tale of neo with the tales I mentioned? that seems faintly ludicrous when the matrix movies themselves are cadging everything from christ to arthur to buddhism and everything inbetween.
Whether real historical events, imparted legends, fiction or simply belief, the point is that people more or less apply it to their real life, and the real world.
The notion of Arthur or Jesus returning is not that someone might write a sequel where this happens, but that is happens in the real.
Neo's return is all pure fiction and doesn't claim to be anything else. Everyone who expects Neo to return to their world is a fictional character.
So what's your point? That it's more exciting to wait for King Arthur than seeing him return? But seeing him return is a scenario beyond our reach, in the Matrix, it's not, it's a possible story twist.
zeroone506 wrote:
They did exactly the same thing with the architect in Reloaded, but in that case it works because it sets up a new plot thread (prophecy is false) and does a great (if initially head wrecking) job of explaining the ins and outs of what has happened so far, and what it might mean for the future.
If you're gonna leave your plot exposition with regards the meat of your movie to one extended stretch of dialogue, man, you better nail it and nail it good or your film will potentially fall to pieces. they did with that scene. they nailed it real good.
however, they made the mistake of going to the same well twice, and giving you a watered down version second time round.
the oracle scene in revolutions? ouch. you simply can't raise the audiences expectations in that way in the second film, then expect not to feel the heat by palming them off with a sucktacular "explanation". it will hurt the film. worse, it will potentially hurt the audience.
...and the fictional Neo differs from the entirely fictional version of Arthur how?
The version of Arthur I'm referring to is the fictional version of Arthur, which is the version of Arthur that is referred to when talking about his "return". His supposed "return in England's darkest hour" is mentioned in the Arthurian Romances written in the middle ages - a work of fiction, referred to above.
the only people who will try and convince you he might some day return in the real world are people selling king arthur t-shirts and mugs to tourists at one of his supposed graves scattered around the country.
So I still don't see how I can't reference Neo in relation to non, partly (or wholly) fictional versions of fictional characters from a fictitious history - especially when the whole premise of the Neo character is arguably based on elements from all of those characters in the first place.
I don't know what hints from the writers you want. The Oracle has been talking cryptically, "in riddles", all the time. Even now when you ask her a definite question, you won't get a clear answer.that scene is not really the oracle addressing Neo, its the writers addressing the audience, filling us in after waiting 2 hours or more for answers to questions that were set up as major plot points in the second film.
It was the same in the movies, almost everywhere.
She has been "holding back" information or details all the time. From movie one until right here and now.
Maybe Neo had got used to it, or had understood her answer unlike the audience. Anyway, that answer was vague and insufficient. But it does explain the vage and general concept.
Either the Wachowskis wanted to leave it to interpretations, or to answer it at a later point. Or it was poor writing, if you insist.
They did exactly the same thing with the architect in Reloaded, but in that case it works because it sets up a new plot thread (prophecy is false) and does a great (if initially head wrecking) job of explaining the ins and outs of what has happened so far, and what it might mean for the future.
If you're gonna leave your plot exposition with regards the meat of your movie to one extended stretch of dialogue, man, you better nail it and nail it good or your film will potentially fall to pieces. they did with that scene. they nailed it real good.
however, they made the mistake of going to the same well twice, and giving you a watered down version second time round.
the oracle scene in revolutions? ouch. you simply can't raise the audiences expectations in that way in the second film, then expect not to feel the heat by palming them off with a sucktacular "explanation". it will hurt the film. worse, it will potentially hurt the audience.
The notion of Arthur or Jesus returning is not that someone might write a sequel where this happens, but that is happens in the real.
Neo's return is all pure fiction and doesn't claim to be anything else. Everyone who expects Neo to return to their world is a fictional character.
...and the fictional Neo differs from the entirely fictional version of Arthur how?
The version of Arthur I'm referring to is the fictional version of Arthur, which is the version of Arthur that is referred to when talking about his "return". His supposed "return in England's darkest hour" is mentioned in the Arthurian Romances written in the middle ages - a work of fiction, referred to above.
the only people who will try and convince you he might some day return in the real world are people selling king arthur t-shirts and mugs to tourists at one of his supposed graves scattered around the country.
So I still don't see how I can't reference Neo in relation to non, partly (or wholly) fictional versions of fictional characters from a fictitious history - especially when the whole premise of the Neo character is arguably based on elements from all of those characters in the first place.
Don't mean to stray too off topic here, but I found Joseph Campbell's Arthurian Tradition lecture and have upoaded it here:
http://www.divshare.com/download/326729-494
(mainly for Papergh0st but others might enjoy it too. It is an absolute delight to listen to. Where was this guy when I went to college?)
ok u guys still dont get it, u are all arguing whether or not neo is dead.
ASSUME the following:
1. that is the real morpheus, not a fake anot a sim the real flesh and blood morpheus
2. Neo is in a "Coma" of sorts and the machines are holding him captive
3. Smith is still around somewhere some how
4. Stay away from the films and focus on the game it self
5. Consider that in 08 neo is placed inside the game as himself the way he was in the film and is a lvl 255 character / dev player like rarebit or someone like that.
ASSUME the following:
1. that is the real morpheus, not a fake anot a sim the real flesh and blood morpheus
2. Neo is in a "Coma" of sorts and the machines are holding him captive
3. Smith is still around somewhere some how
4. Stay away from the films and focus on the game it self
5. Consider that in 08 neo is placed inside the game as himself the way he was in the film and is a lvl 255 character / dev player like rarebit or someone like that.
GirlyGurl84 wrote:
ok u guys still dont get it, u are all arguing whether or not neo is dead.
ASSUME the following:
1. that is the real morpheus, not a fake anot a sim the real flesh and blood morpheusWe just don't know this quite yet. Only time will tell.
2. Neo is in a "Coma" of sorts and the machines are holding him captiveThe likelihood of this is probably high.
3. Smith is still around somewhere some howNo way. the devs imply this is not at all the case.
4. Stay away from the films and focus on the game it selfWell, there are some limitations. Any major story arc like the return of Neo would definitely have to get approval from the W Bros. first.
5. Consider that in 08 neo is placed inside the game as himself the way he was in the film and is a lvl 255 character / dev player like rarebit or someone like that.
It's not that this can't be done, we are just questioning the wisdom of bringing in a "deus ex machina" like this. Plus, I don't even know if SOE would have the legal right to use Keanu's image. And again, final veto power would be held by the W Bros.
GirlyGurl84 wrote:
you might as well change the title of the thread to "neo is returning, isn't he"? and have us all post:
"yes".
Also, Big_V - thanks for the link
ok u guys still dont get it, u are all arguing whether or not neo is dead....wait, you post a thread asking for people to discuss the possibility of Neo returning (with the obvious requirement that people will actually discuss whether they think he's alive or not, what it means to both the resolution of the films and the continuation of the story and lots of other things besides), then command everyone to assume x, y and z to fit your particular criteria for how you expect the discussion to go?
ASSUME the following:
1. that is the real morpheus, not a fake anot a sim the real flesh and blood morpheus
2. Neo is in a "Coma" of sorts and the machines are holding him captive
3. Smith is still around somewhere some how
4. Stay away from the films and focus on the game it self
5. Consider that in 08 neo is placed inside the game as himself the way he was in the film and is a lvl 255 character / dev player like rarebit or someone like that.
you might as well change the title of the thread to "neo is returning, isn't he"? and have us all post:
"yes".
Also, Big_V - thanks for the link
Papergh0st wrote:
Also, Big_V - thanks for the link
My pleasure PM me sometime and tell me what you think
-Villemar
GirlyGurl84 wrote:
ok u guys still dont get it, u are all arguing whether or not neo is dead.Lol, what a funny post.
What do I not get, I presented you the facts as they are in my first post here.
ASSUME the following:
as opposed to assuming other possibilities?
1. that is the real morpheus, not a fake anot a sim the real flesh and blood morpheus
ok
2. Neo is in a "Coma" of sorts and the machines are holding him captive
plausible; at least he was at the end of "Revolutions", according to this
3. Smith is still around somewhere some how
His code infection is still around, even without the Anniversary... other than that, speculation
4. Stay away from the films and focus on the game it self
WT... what? Why should I disregard the movies?
5. Consider that in 08 neo is placed inside the game as himself the way he was in the film and is a lvl 255 character / dev player like rarebit or someone like that.
your point?
Papergh0st wrote:
Like with every explanation scene in every piece of fiction, it's both the writers addressing the audience and the explaining character addressing the noob character.
It's two sides of the same coin, jeez.
But as you've seen in the Matrix, and in lots of other stories with twists, such explanations can be misleading, or insufficient. So, assuming the writers happen not to be failing at what they're doing, they're addressing the audience to mislead them, or make them speculate or interpret. That's what I'm seeing in that Oracle scene.
From inside the fictional world, it has to make sense why this character offers an incomplete or false explanation. I'd say it makes "sorta" sense with the Oracle, since she's always so cryptical anyway, and her true intentions are somewhat concealed.
So once again, the explanation in Revolutions was insufficient and incomplete, nothing else.
It's not really about people *believing* that Arthur will really return, it's that the mythology somewhat claims it to be real, and thus his return to be really imminent, and people perceive it on an accordig level.
But meh, I don't know much about that. You also brought up Jesus. That's definitely not fiction as it claims to state real events in the past and future. If Arthur's a standard novel, then let's forget about Arthur. Or the other way round, actually
that scene is not really the oracle addressing Neo, its the writers addressing the audience, filling us in after waiting 2 hours or more for answers to questions that were set up as major plot points in the second film.
They did exactly the same thing with the architect in Reloaded, but in that case it works because it sets up a new plot thread (prophecy is false) and does a great (if initially head wrecking) job of explaining the ins and outs of what has happened so far, and what it might mean for the future.
If you're gonna leave your plot exposition with regards the meat of your movie to one extended stretch of dialogue, man, you better nail it and nail it good or your film will potentially fall to pieces. they did with that scene. they nailed it real good.
however, they made the mistake of going to the same well twice, and giving you a watered down version second time round.
the oracle scene in revolutions? ouch. you simply can't raise the audiences expectations in that way in the second film, then expect not to feel the heat by palming them off with a sucktacular "explanation". it will hurt the film. worse, it will potentially hurt the audience.
Like with every explanation scene in every piece of fiction, it's both the writers addressing the audience and the explaining character addressing the noob character.
It's two sides of the same coin, jeez.
But as you've seen in the Matrix, and in lots of other stories with twists, such explanations can be misleading, or insufficient. So, assuming the writers happen not to be failing at what they're doing, they're addressing the audience to mislead them, or make them speculate or interpret. That's what I'm seeing in that Oracle scene.
From inside the fictional world, it has to make sense why this character offers an incomplete or false explanation. I'd say it makes "sorta" sense with the Oracle, since she's always so cryptical anyway, and her true intentions are somewhat concealed.
So once again, the explanation in Revolutions was insufficient and incomplete, nothing else.
...and the fictional Neo differs from the entirely fictional version of Arthur how?
The version of Arthur I'm referring to is the fictional version of Arthur, which is the version of Arthur that is referred to when talking about his "return". His supposed "return in England's darkest hour" is mentioned in the Arthurian Romances written in the middle ages - a work of fiction, referred to above.
the only people who will try and convince you he might some day return in the real world are people selling king arthur t-shirts and mugs to tourists at one of his supposed graves scattered around the country.
So I still don't see how I can't reference Neo in relation to non, partly (or wholly) fictional versions of fictional characters from a fictitious history - especially when the whole premise of the Neo character is arguably based on elements from all of those characters in the first place.
It's not really about people *believing* that Arthur will really return, it's that the mythology somewhat claims it to be real, and thus his return to be really imminent, and people perceive it on an accordig level.
But meh, I don't know much about that. You also brought up Jesus. That's definitely not fiction as it claims to state real events in the past and future. If Arthur's a standard novel, then let's forget about Arthur. Or the other way round, actually
zeroone506 wrote:
OR...you go with the approach often favoured by action / adventure films, where it seems like the makers wanted to hurl lots of action at you then hurriedly "justify" it near the end, with a part where everything stops and some talking heads appear and spout huge chunks of dialogue at you. this is less about meaningful, organically generated discussion between believable characters than it is a signal for you to go outside for a smoke while the scriptwriters practically shatter the fourth wall in order to ram page after page of jibberish at you.
The only real difference between the second method listed above and the oracle scene in revolutions is that, rather than bombard you with talk, they seemingly stripped it all out and left only the bare bones in the form of the oracles dreadful "explanation".
yeah, but its still mythology that was popularised and elaborated upon (and by elaborated, I do of course mean "completely made up" ) by a work of fiction, and the notion of Arthur "returning" - (the arthur that you or I would recognise from the books, defending camelot and hunting down holy grails and smacking around Mordred with Merlin in tow) - is also down to that fiction.
how is the story of jesus "definitely not fiction"? the bible can claim whatever it wants, you can't simply say the "mythical" (ie super magic Jesus with feedings for forty thousand and freaking people out with his ghostly appearances after his resurrection) version of Jesus is "definitely not fiction". if i write a book right now and "claim to state real events in the future", is that classed as "definitely not fiction" as well?
at any rate, you still haven't explained why I can't compare Neo to anyone previously mentioned.
Like with every explanation scene in every piece of fiction, it's both the writers addressing the audience and the explaining character addressing the noob character.yeah, but theres two very different ways of doing this kind of thing in a film script. you can either tease it out in bits and pieces, threaded gently throughout the film - a less jarring approach, and seems less like the film makers literally stepping out of the confines of the screen to waffle at you for twenty minutes.
It's two sides of the same coin, jeez.
OR...you go with the approach often favoured by action / adventure films, where it seems like the makers wanted to hurl lots of action at you then hurriedly "justify" it near the end, with a part where everything stops and some talking heads appear and spout huge chunks of dialogue at you. this is less about meaningful, organically generated discussion between believable characters than it is a signal for you to go outside for a smoke while the scriptwriters practically shatter the fourth wall in order to ram page after page of jibberish at you.
The only real difference between the second method listed above and the oracle scene in revolutions is that, rather than bombard you with talk, they seemingly stripped it all out and left only the bare bones in the form of the oracles dreadful "explanation".
It's not really about people *believing* that Arthur will really return, it's that the mythology somewhat claims it to be real, and thus his return to be really imminent, and people perceive it on an accordig level.
yeah, but its still mythology that was popularised and elaborated upon (and by elaborated, I do of course mean "completely made up" ) by a work of fiction, and the notion of Arthur "returning" - (the arthur that you or I would recognise from the books, defending camelot and hunting down holy grails and smacking around Mordred with Merlin in tow) - is also down to that fiction.
But meh, I don't know much about that. You also brought up Jesus. That's definitely not fiction as it claims to state real events in the past and future.
how is the story of jesus "definitely not fiction"? the bible can claim whatever it wants, you can't simply say the "mythical" (ie super magic Jesus with feedings for forty thousand and freaking people out with his ghostly appearances after his resurrection) version of Jesus is "definitely not fiction". if i write a book right now and "claim to state real events in the future", is that classed as "definitely not fiction" as well?
at any rate, you still haven't explained why I can't compare Neo to anyone previously mentioned.
First part:
Maybe, but I find all these schemes you're talking about kind of far-fetched, and not necessary here.
Why don't I go out and smoke? First, I'm to l33t for smoking. Second, because when I watch an action movie, I am usually interested in the plot, especially if it's a movie like the Matrix where the plot is more than an excuse for an action sequence filled piece of popcorn cinema.
Why carry away from the point? The Architect scene was a long dialogue. The Oracle scene was a short dialogue. The explanation by the Oracle was incomplete, simple as that. Why complicate it?
Second part:
Again, the question is not on what basis it has been written, but where it is applied.
Christians believe that the events and prophecies in the Gospel are real and happened/will happen in the real world, not for someone to write a book about the second coming;
Matrix fans don't think Neo will come to them, but they wait for someone to write about it, how it happens in a world that isn't even supposed to be ours.
EDIT: I brought this up because you compared the incertainty about Neo to the incertainty about Arthur and Jesus. As long as there is any sort of tension about them really returning to our world, even if the people don't take it so seriously, it'll be broken by anyone who writes a sequel about them returning, because then it'll be gone and there won't be any reason to assume these events will occur in the real, because it was supposed to happen in a book (so to speak).
There is no real world element about the Matrix or Neo. Anything that's gonna happen there happens in a fictional world, and the question of Neo returning or not is simply another question of twist/revelation/direction change.
Maybe, but I find all these schemes you're talking about kind of far-fetched, and not necessary here.
Why don't I go out and smoke? First, I'm to l33t for smoking. Second, because when I watch an action movie, I am usually interested in the plot, especially if it's a movie like the Matrix where the plot is more than an excuse for an action sequence filled piece of popcorn cinema.
Why carry away from the point? The Architect scene was a long dialogue. The Oracle scene was a short dialogue. The explanation by the Oracle was incomplete, simple as that. Why complicate it?
Second part:
Again, the question is not on what basis it has been written, but where it is applied.
Christians believe that the events and prophecies in the Gospel are real and happened/will happen in the real world, not for someone to write a book about the second coming;
Matrix fans don't think Neo will come to them, but they wait for someone to write about it, how it happens in a world that isn't even supposed to be ours.
EDIT: I brought this up because you compared the incertainty about Neo to the incertainty about Arthur and Jesus. As long as there is any sort of tension about them really returning to our world, even if the people don't take it so seriously, it'll be broken by anyone who writes a sequel about them returning, because then it'll be gone and there won't be any reason to assume these events will occur in the real, because it was supposed to happen in a book (so to speak).
There is no real world element about the Matrix or Neo. Anything that's gonna happen there happens in a fictional world, and the question of Neo returning or not is simply another question of twist/revelation/direction change.
zeroone506 wrote:
"why complicate it"? well, maybe people reading this might actually be interested in these two differing methods of passing on information to the audience and how they relate to the matrix movies? depends if you think a small insight into the scriptwriting process is a "complication", I guess.
First part:hey, I didn't write the rulebook for putting together a script, but I can certainly offer my opinions on the implementation of portions of the two matrix sequels in relation to those commonly accepted practices in scriptwriting. and if I want to address the lame way in which the oracle scene is put forth, other than simply repeating "its lame" with nothing to back that up, how else can I do it but go into the mechanics of the scriptwriting process in relation to the scenes previously talked about?
Maybe, but I find all these schemes you're talking about kind of far-fetched, and not necessary here.
Why don't I go out and smoke? First, I'm to l33t for smoking. Second, because when I watch an action movie, I am usually interested in the plot, especially if it's a movie like the Matrix where the plot is more than an excuse for an action sequence filled piece of popcorn cinema.
Why carry away from the point? The Architect scene was a long dialogue. The Oracle scene was a short dialogue. The explanation by the Oracle was incomplete, simple as that. Why complicate it?
"why complicate it"? well, maybe people reading this might actually be interested in these two differing methods of passing on information to the audience and how they relate to the matrix movies? depends if you think a small insight into the scriptwriting process is a "complication", I guess.
That's all fair and interesting (no sarcasm here). Actually, I was probably wrong with this "why complicated it".
But you forget that the explanation is not complete and hardly claims to be. The point is, this scene doesn't answer all questions but rather hints towards the explanation, instead of just answering them "sucktacularly".
If I remember correct, I started this part of the argument because you approved of keeping Neo's fate unanswered (in case he's alive, of course), but disapproved of these questions not being answered.
I didn't understand that.
So what I've been trying to prove since then is that these questions really have been hardly answered, instead of being answered in a "lacklustre" way, or something. Along with the questions that arised after this scene.
Thus putting it in the same category as Neo's fate, also an ambiguous mystery.
Marginally:
Even though I don't understand anything about scriptwriting, I understand that dialogues are partially written after the characters' personalities and patterns.
If a guy in a TV series who explains technical details in a plain way every week suddenly starts speaking in lofty riddles, it's gonna be weird.
But the Oracle?
She did give out definite information, aswell, no doubt. Like pointing Neo to the Keymaker, the Merovingian and the exact time.
But did she tell him how this is all part of Machine control, and Zion's gonna be destroyed anyway? Did she tell operatives about the General's true identity, before chapter 5 where it was just "be careful, he's a man or war, not peace"? Did she tell the Cypherites "your leader's a fake and you're going to find that out in a few weeks"?
Either because she's holding back information, or because she doesn't know more specifically, she usually doesn't explain stuff in a detailed way. It has been suggested in the movies, I think, that she rather points people to a direction by telling them what they need, or "choose" to hear, at that moment, rather than being an open encyclopedia.
So considering all this stuff, and I mean all of it, is that scene not at least a little bit less inappropriate, or understandable? Maybe it was never supposed to be a detailed explanation of all events in the first place, whether because the writers wanted to hold back information or because they thought it made sense inside the story?
EDIT: Actually, I can't understand how you can think this Oracle scene somehow failed to become what it should be, if you really look at the Oracle scene in Reloaded, or the Architect scene you brought up.
The first one was longer and contained more concrete information, the latter one was an overload of talk. This one is short and only vaguely touches this question. How can anyone think it was supposed to be a full-valued answer? I just don't get it, it's not logical.
Also, edited my previous post.
But you forget that the explanation is not complete and hardly claims to be. The point is, this scene doesn't answer all questions but rather hints towards the explanation, instead of just answering them "sucktacularly".
If I remember correct, I started this part of the argument because you approved of keeping Neo's fate unanswered (in case he's alive, of course), but disapproved of these questions not being answered.
I didn't understand that.
So what I've been trying to prove since then is that these questions really have been hardly answered, instead of being answered in a "lacklustre" way, or something. Along with the questions that arised after this scene.
Thus putting it in the same category as Neo's fate, also an ambiguous mystery.
Marginally:
Even though I don't understand anything about scriptwriting, I understand that dialogues are partially written after the characters' personalities and patterns.
If a guy in a TV series who explains technical details in a plain way every week suddenly starts speaking in lofty riddles, it's gonna be weird.
But the Oracle?
She did give out definite information, aswell, no doubt. Like pointing Neo to the Keymaker, the Merovingian and the exact time.
But did she tell him how this is all part of Machine control, and Zion's gonna be destroyed anyway? Did she tell operatives about the General's true identity, before chapter 5 where it was just "be careful, he's a man or war, not peace"? Did she tell the Cypherites "your leader's a fake and you're going to find that out in a few weeks"?
Either because she's holding back information, or because she doesn't know more specifically, she usually doesn't explain stuff in a detailed way. It has been suggested in the movies, I think, that she rather points people to a direction by telling them what they need, or "choose" to hear, at that moment, rather than being an open encyclopedia.
So considering all this stuff, and I mean all of it, is that scene not at least a little bit less inappropriate, or understandable? Maybe it was never supposed to be a detailed explanation of all events in the first place, whether because the writers wanted to hold back information or because they thought it made sense inside the story?
EDIT: Actually, I can't understand how you can think this Oracle scene somehow failed to become what it should be, if you really look at the Oracle scene in Reloaded, or the Architect scene you brought up.
The first one was longer and contained more concrete information, the latter one was an overload of talk. This one is short and only vaguely touches this question. How can anyone think it was supposed to be a full-valued answer? I just don't get it, it's not logical.
Also, edited my previous post.
By the way, a question. What were those ideas, that were better than the actual resolutio, like?
zeroone506 wrote:
I've said repeatedly that they set up some big mysteries in the second film in such a way to suggest they were indeed not only going to solve those mysteries, but use them as springboards for greater developments in the plot.
the first film told you the world around you was a lie. the second film expanded upon that with the idea that the whole "one" thing was just another system of control. the third? it took what could have been springboards for some really interesting ideas already built upon in the second movies mysteries (neo and sentinels, what smith was all about etc etc), basically waved a big flag over these moments and promised you as much, then handed you "positive and negative" and "connection goes back to the source".
whatever their intention, cinematically they promised you awesome goodies. then took those goodies away and replaced them with, well, not a lot. its not that we're under the illusion these were "full answers" given by the oracle. the issue is that the answers were terrible, uninventive, cliched, unfulfilling and to put it bluntly, probably not as creative or interesting as some piece of fanfic rewrite of those "oracle moments".
its not so much that the specifics of those ideas raised as possibilities were potentially "better" than what was in the film, its the fact that they were somehow more interesting than what was given to us - the film promised so much more with regards these mysteries and simply did not deliver - and at that point, when looking back at the interest, the intrigue, the theories and ideas laid out across forums and physical discussions before we'd seen the film, even the most turgid "matrix within a matrix" idea became more appealing than the slap in the face that is supposedly the films "big reveal". we expected a huge revelation along the lines of the "one" being another form of control. we did indeed expect hints of matrix within a matrix. we expected something that took a lot of the eastern mythos presented in the first two films and expanded upon it, possibly with a really cosmic, 2001-style ending. we expected a gigantic, vaguely ironic "shock" twist. we expected something more to be made of the previous Ones. we expected the fabric of the reality of the matrix itself to shatter into a thousand and one pieces as neo did something truly astounding to save the day. we expected the reason for neo stopping the sentinels in the real to have some real meat to it, something to get your mind racing. we expected the reason for smiths growing power to tie in with a lot of the biblical style references to his character throughout the three movies. we expected any and all of these things and more besides. there were a million and one ideas, suggestions and debates posted on forums and exchanged in face to face discussion at the time the film was going to come out, and ultimately, we expected something that delivered with regards neo stopping the sentinels and how smith had become so powerful.
in short, we expected something a little less saturday morning kids show than "positive and minus". and we expected something with a bit more meat on the bones than "reaches back to the source, OKAY! Super burly brawl!"
when your supposed "big reveal" is nothing of the sort after having set it up like that in the second film, you then start looking at the other problems with the movie and none of this helps the overall product.
we expected a stunning ending to the trilogy, instead of...oh god....cheesy smiles looking at a cheesy looking CGI sunrise with a child bursting forth from foliage with another stupid grin on her face - i'm surprised Sati and Seraph weren't skipping, arm in arm, to the tune of "sunshine, lollipops and ranbows". we expected better acting than the "rocky balboa" school of acting employed by the actors in the battle suits whose idea of acting was to grimace and make unintelligible yells and grunts at the camera. we expected more than what felt like an age of that red shirted security guard...i mean, the bald chick....who hogged precious screentime with that pointless scene of her going back and forth to blow up a bunch of sentinels in 3 or 4 successive scenes just so they could kill her. we expected more at trinity's death scene than those hilarious quacks and grunts from keanu reeves that I'm assuming were supposed to convey "grief". we expected more than watching the same character die twice in less than 72 hours. we were expecting more than the best use of flying fight scene CGI almost ruined by putting them both in black then having them fight against an almost totally black sky so you couldn't see what was going on. we expected something more than the kids horrendous "check out how ugly i can make my face" acting while screaming "the war is over" six thousand times while Link and the rest of the humans seemingly morphed into Ewoks and did the "yub nub" dance. we expected more than merv taking neo, then watching trinity and co storm club hel, stick a gun in his face and demand neo back, only for him to apparently say "oh... okay then" and hand him over without simply waiting for trinity to put her gun down then have his six thousand goons shoot her in the head. we expected more than odd, throwaway pieces of dialogue that were presumably supposed to be important such as "wingless" or "prodigal son", without giving it its proper context and once again making you simply "guess" potentially important parts of the script. is it important? was it supposed to be important? who knows, because they simply throw it at you and never return to it like so much else in the film. we'll simply hint at some random elements from seraphs tissue-paper "past" and leave the rest to you. we expected a stuntman that actually looked like keanu reeves when being punched into the wall at mobil avenue. we wondered why seraph had seemingly lost his "go anywhere" keys when smith turned up at the oracles apartment block. we expected not to have to see an actor in the Rhama Khandra role that didn't ham up his accent to such a degree that you were immediately reminded of Apu from the simpsons. we expected something that didn't seem like it had been edited by a five year old. we wondered why neo could see with his code vision in the real world (oh right, the "connection to the source". doh). we wondered why the final talk between neo and smith before they start fighting (complete with painfully obvious "gaps" before hugo weaving speaks) makes it seem like they were in different studios talking at a wall when filming it, with the scenes spliced together afterwards. we wondered why smith could fly. we wondered why sati was supposed to be "escaping" even though her parents get on the same train as her yet inexplicably are never seen again. we wondered why they didn't lace the tunnels and everywhere else with timed EMPs instead of using completely useless, armourless mechsuits with guns strapped to them.
in short, we wondered why they fumbled the brilliant setup that was reloaded.
EDIT: Actually, I can't understand how you can think this Oracle scene somehow failed to become what it should be, if you really look at the Oracle scene in Reloaded, or the Architect scene you brought up.you're right, you don't get it. That's the whole point - when we were presented with it, we didn't think it was a full valued answer. in fact, we thought it was the exact opposite - it sucked. the people that objected to this didn't come out of the cinema thinking, "wow, I'm really misguided and I'm going to go around berating the oracles explanation even though I think its supposed to be a full valued answer". they came out thinking "wow, they set up some big stuff in that second film and the supposed answers they handed us were a total joke". its the disappointing and letting down of an expectation that was set up by the second film. believe me, we're all too aware that its not a "full" answer. the problem is, its possible to do "vague" and "non complete" and have it work, or at least be satisfying. this was cliched, pulled out of the "obvious answer" bag stuff. the kind of thing a scriptwriter would pull out of his head on the first or second go, before they got to the really interesting ideas. its like they just gave up or couldn't be bothered anymore.
The first one was longer and contained more concrete information, the latter one was an overload of talk. This one is short and only vaguely touches this question. How can anyone think it was supposed to be a full-valued answer? I just don't get it, it's not logical.
I've said repeatedly that they set up some big mysteries in the second film in such a way to suggest they were indeed not only going to solve those mysteries, but use them as springboards for greater developments in the plot.
the first film told you the world around you was a lie. the second film expanded upon that with the idea that the whole "one" thing was just another system of control. the third? it took what could have been springboards for some really interesting ideas already built upon in the second movies mysteries (neo and sentinels, what smith was all about etc etc), basically waved a big flag over these moments and promised you as much, then handed you "positive and negative" and "connection goes back to the source".
whatever their intention, cinematically they promised you awesome goodies. then took those goodies away and replaced them with, well, not a lot. its not that we're under the illusion these were "full answers" given by the oracle. the issue is that the answers were terrible, uninventive, cliched, unfulfilling and to put it bluntly, probably not as creative or interesting as some piece of fanfic rewrite of those "oracle moments".
By the way, a question. What were those ideas, that were better than the actual resolutio, like?
its not so much that the specifics of those ideas raised as possibilities were potentially "better" than what was in the film, its the fact that they were somehow more interesting than what was given to us - the film promised so much more with regards these mysteries and simply did not deliver - and at that point, when looking back at the interest, the intrigue, the theories and ideas laid out across forums and physical discussions before we'd seen the film, even the most turgid "matrix within a matrix" idea became more appealing than the slap in the face that is supposedly the films "big reveal". we expected a huge revelation along the lines of the "one" being another form of control. we did indeed expect hints of matrix within a matrix. we expected something that took a lot of the eastern mythos presented in the first two films and expanded upon it, possibly with a really cosmic, 2001-style ending. we expected a gigantic, vaguely ironic "shock" twist. we expected something more to be made of the previous Ones. we expected the fabric of the reality of the matrix itself to shatter into a thousand and one pieces as neo did something truly astounding to save the day. we expected the reason for neo stopping the sentinels in the real to have some real meat to it, something to get your mind racing. we expected the reason for smiths growing power to tie in with a lot of the biblical style references to his character throughout the three movies. we expected any and all of these things and more besides. there were a million and one ideas, suggestions and debates posted on forums and exchanged in face to face discussion at the time the film was going to come out, and ultimately, we expected something that delivered with regards neo stopping the sentinels and how smith had become so powerful.
in short, we expected something a little less saturday morning kids show than "positive and minus". and we expected something with a bit more meat on the bones than "reaches back to the source, OKAY! Super burly brawl!"
when your supposed "big reveal" is nothing of the sort after having set it up like that in the second film, you then start looking at the other problems with the movie and none of this helps the overall product.
we expected a stunning ending to the trilogy, instead of...oh god....cheesy smiles looking at a cheesy looking CGI sunrise with a child bursting forth from foliage with another stupid grin on her face - i'm surprised Sati and Seraph weren't skipping, arm in arm, to the tune of "sunshine, lollipops and ranbows". we expected better acting than the "rocky balboa" school of acting employed by the actors in the battle suits whose idea of acting was to grimace and make unintelligible yells and grunts at the camera. we expected more than what felt like an age of that red shirted security guard...i mean, the bald chick....who hogged precious screentime with that pointless scene of her going back and forth to blow up a bunch of sentinels in 3 or 4 successive scenes just so they could kill her. we expected more at trinity's death scene than those hilarious quacks and grunts from keanu reeves that I'm assuming were supposed to convey "grief". we expected more than watching the same character die twice in less than 72 hours. we were expecting more than the best use of flying fight scene CGI almost ruined by putting them both in black then having them fight against an almost totally black sky so you couldn't see what was going on. we expected something more than the kids horrendous "check out how ugly i can make my face" acting while screaming "the war is over" six thousand times while Link and the rest of the humans seemingly morphed into Ewoks and did the "yub nub" dance. we expected more than merv taking neo, then watching trinity and co storm club hel, stick a gun in his face and demand neo back, only for him to apparently say "oh... okay then" and hand him over without simply waiting for trinity to put her gun down then have his six thousand goons shoot her in the head. we expected more than odd, throwaway pieces of dialogue that were presumably supposed to be important such as "wingless" or "prodigal son", without giving it its proper context and once again making you simply "guess" potentially important parts of the script. is it important? was it supposed to be important? who knows, because they simply throw it at you and never return to it like so much else in the film. we'll simply hint at some random elements from seraphs tissue-paper "past" and leave the rest to you. we expected a stuntman that actually looked like keanu reeves when being punched into the wall at mobil avenue. we wondered why seraph had seemingly lost his "go anywhere" keys when smith turned up at the oracles apartment block. we expected not to have to see an actor in the Rhama Khandra role that didn't ham up his accent to such a degree that you were immediately reminded of Apu from the simpsons. we expected something that didn't seem like it had been edited by a five year old. we wondered why neo could see with his code vision in the real world (oh right, the "connection to the source". doh). we wondered why the final talk between neo and smith before they start fighting (complete with painfully obvious "gaps" before hugo weaving speaks) makes it seem like they were in different studios talking at a wall when filming it, with the scenes spliced together afterwards. we wondered why smith could fly. we wondered why sati was supposed to be "escaping" even though her parents get on the same train as her yet inexplicably are never seen again. we wondered why they didn't lace the tunnels and everywhere else with timed EMPs instead of using completely useless, armourless mechsuits with guns strapped to them.
in short, we wondered why they fumbled the brilliant setup that was reloaded.
I completely understand where you are coming from, and why you think this way. I even agree with some of your points.
The thing is, this is a debate and all, so I'm trying to look at things more objectively, or so I think.
My main points:
-These expectations "Revolutions" disappointed hadn't only originated from "Reloaded", but also from your own mind, and the hype the movie created. It makes sense to go back and wonder "did the movie justify these expectations"?
-With such an overload of ambiguosity and unanswered questions the Matrix movies present, it becomes nonsensical (in my opinion) to criticize it for succeeding in its intentions, at least on an objective level (subjectively, you can always be disappointed; pfft, like I wasn't).
-The questions that were left open or unelaborated were most probably aimed at further media, *rather* than interpretations. Because even if TMO is written by other writers, it was initiated and is still being influenced by the Wachowskis. They invented the Assassin and told to "kill off" Morpheus, why shouldn't they intend to elaborate those questions aswell?
After all, think about Enter the Matrix. Reloaded and the first part of Revolutions look rather incomplete without it. I even think it doesn't make sense to disregard the other media, *especially* if the movies were written with them in mind.
After coming up with the arguments to the Oracle scene above, which I hope weren't disregarded or something, I'll comment on some more conrete statements in your post.
...not.
That was at the end of "Reloaded", I thought. The concept is the breaking out of the control grid. Or is it just part of a bigger control...
... which apparently didn't turn out to be the intention, if you ignore the hint called "yellow Neo vision". Vague hints by Rarebit and in the storyline make it plausible to suggest that there will be some major twist, regarding the nature of the universe, or the Oracle's intentions and role.
This is all very vague, and I'm not even sure if I can bring this up as a protection for the movies since I'm not even sure if it's just Rarebit's ideas "approved" by the brothers, but it makes me think twice before judging about the movies as standalone products.
Okay, moot point but I thought I'd say it. The movies themselves obviously do not offer anything along the lines.
These two were expectations that I consider having originated in your mind. Where does Reloaded promise anything like that? Nowhere.
You wanted to know something about previous Ones, or maybe previous Matrix version. There are many other equal questions about the Matrix universe. This is just another example of "things to be expanded upon". MxO does this.
Actually, this fabric was kind of shattered for me because of this yellow vision, but seeing as it wasn't explained... yea.
Seeing as how that question wasn't answered, it still gets the mind racing.
This isn't answered, but something I've been considering common sense until today. I've always wondered why critics didn't understand that. He assimilates more and more programs, eventually the Oracle, and thus gains their knowledge and abilities.
Like the Borg.
Or is it less obvious?
Although I see the sarcasm here - there was actually more (and more meaning) to both. Through the amount of vagueness, the little more elaborate explanations are at least a premise for thinking.
Actually, the latter one means:
Neo's powers in the Matrix originate in his connection to the mainframe which controls the Matrix, and therefore his powers are also superior to standard powerful programs because his source of power is superior (not just a tool in the Matrix, but control from above). Therefore also the "your power goes beyond the Matrix" (paraphrased), it actually sums this up pretty well.
Makes sense.
Considering the mainframe also controls the Real world Machines, his connection to the Source also enables him to contact it and control (or at least destroy) Sentinels from there. The glaring question that remains officially unanswered is how he is connected to the Source when not plugged in, which is also the key to the question how he was booted into the Matrix, or could see the yellow "code".
Considering the latter one actually is a glaring mystery started *after* the Oracle scene... what more is there to say? It's so obvious that it was *intended* to leave all these glaring questions *open*.
Negative, or the System trying to balance itself out. A part of Neo copied or transferred to Smith. Thus, a source of power that goes beyond the Matrix only. Okay, that's all I can say here at the moment.
You certainly mean this?
Yea, I am one of those people who often prefer shocking and depressing ends to happy-ends. Fair, fair.
But I can't look at such things without trying to imagine the writers' intentions, and it's almost obvious that it was supposed to "symbolize" a better condition in the Matrix, after the Smith crisis and this war cycle. Which makes sense. Then, isn't the rainbow some kind of a biblical reference, too?
"War pathos" was one of the stylistical demerits I found in the sequels, not just "Revolutions". And I emphasize the last part.
I've always found that scene annoying. The whole love thing going on between Neo and Trin, with the exception of the slight erotical tension in the first movie (and maybe the resurrection scene in Reloaded), was uninspired and bothersome in my opinion.
You know where it began? With the kiss in movie one. Seriously, I didn't like that. So much about disappointing sequels, altough this death scene was the climax.
I could see everything. The sequence rocked. How about you pull off your sunglasses, Matrix fanboi?
You expected this *after* the "brilliant setup that was Reloaded"? The rave scene and all the related jazz was much "worse" in this regard. I don't understand you, man.
The idea was obviously to show the Merovingian's personal weakness, and throw in a philosophical aphorism about patterns or love and insanity.
Apparently he was convinced of her conviction. That was some good psychological pressure if you ask me, I don't know why you criticize it.
Considering they wanted to make a Seraph game, and MxO doesn't seem to have stopped throwing more and more hints at it, especially with the *current* storyline... dude.
Along with the hint towards Sati's contingent importance in the future, this is most obviously a thing that was intended to be expanded upon. What a moot point, sorry.
Haven't noticed that. And I expected more from the first movie's final than Neo "accidentally" staggering into an already present blood stain on the wall after being shot.
Called "movie mistakes".
Okay. Might even be a logical inconsistence. But you can nitpick similar stuff from all three movies I guess.
And I didn't expect a French gangster that reminded of the "Spongebob Squarepants" narrator. Wait, I also didn't expect a happy hippie grannie baking cookies at her kitchen and called "Oracle" in the cool, modern cyberpunk movie that was supposed to be the goddamn MATRIX!
Oh wait, those were the first two. My bad.
PS: The edit work roxxored.
Is it so difficult to accept that the movie intended to and did leave questions open? Especially since it was gonna be continued anyway?
Geez.
That's because of the water bubbles coming out of the actor's mouths under the artificial rain. It was generally a problematic scene to shoot, and consisted of short takes.
I moron didn't notice that when watching the movies, though.
I've been thinking and speculating about this ever since I had seen the movie years ago, but couldn't think of any semi-plausible explanation.
Hmm... constantly growing inventory of abilities, apparent connection to the Source to override rules... this just all doesn't fit together. *wonder*
She was escaping from the Machines, because she had no purpose for them (then) and was going to be deleted. She wasn't escaping from her parents.
They weren't escaping from the Machines, but the deal with the Merovingian only affected Sati, so they had to return to the Machine city with Sati remaining in the Matrix.
They got to the same train as her probably to bid a proper farewell to her, in order to drive back with the Trainman. Common sense.
Fair.
The thing is, this is a debate and all, so I'm trying to look at things more objectively, or so I think.
My main points:
-These expectations "Revolutions" disappointed hadn't only originated from "Reloaded", but also from your own mind, and the hype the movie created. It makes sense to go back and wonder "did the movie justify these expectations"?
-With such an overload of ambiguosity and unanswered questions the Matrix movies present, it becomes nonsensical (in my opinion) to criticize it for succeeding in its intentions, at least on an objective level (subjectively, you can always be disappointed; pfft, like I wasn't).
-The questions that were left open or unelaborated were most probably aimed at further media, *rather* than interpretations. Because even if TMO is written by other writers, it was initiated and is still being influenced by the Wachowskis. They invented the Assassin and told to "kill off" Morpheus, why shouldn't they intend to elaborate those questions aswell?
After all, think about Enter the Matrix. Reloaded and the first part of Revolutions look rather incomplete without it. I even think it doesn't make sense to disregard the other media, *especially* if the movies were written with them in mind.
After coming up with the arguments to the Oracle scene above, which I hope weren't disregarded or something, I'll comment on some more conrete statements in your post.
became more appealing than the slap in the face that is supposedly the films "big reveal"
...not.
we expected a huge revelation along the lines of the "one" being another form of control.
That was at the end of "Reloaded", I thought. The concept is the breaking out of the control grid. Or is it just part of a bigger control...
we did indeed expect hints of matrix within a matrix.
... which apparently didn't turn out to be the intention, if you ignore the hint called "yellow Neo vision". Vague hints by Rarebit and in the storyline make it plausible to suggest that there will be some major twist, regarding the nature of the universe, or the Oracle's intentions and role.
This is all very vague, and I'm not even sure if I can bring this up as a protection for the movies since I'm not even sure if it's just Rarebit's ideas "approved" by the brothers, but it makes me think twice before judging about the movies as standalone products.
Okay, moot point but I thought I'd say it. The movies themselves obviously do not offer anything along the lines.
we expected something more to be made of the previous Ones.
we expected the fabric of the reality of the matrix itself to shatter into a thousand and one pieces as neo did something truly astounding to save the day.
These two were expectations that I consider having originated in your mind. Where does Reloaded promise anything like that? Nowhere.
You wanted to know something about previous Ones, or maybe previous Matrix version. There are many other equal questions about the Matrix universe. This is just another example of "things to be expanded upon". MxO does this.
Actually, this fabric was kind of shattered for me because of this yellow vision, but seeing as it wasn't explained... yea.
we expected the reason for neo stopping the sentinels in the real to have some real meat to it, something to get your mind racing.
Seeing as how that question wasn't answered, it still gets the mind racing.
how smith had become so powerful.
This isn't answered, but something I've been considering common sense until today. I've always wondered why critics didn't understand that. He assimilates more and more programs, eventually the Oracle, and thus gains their knowledge and abilities.
Like the Borg.
Or is it less obvious?
in short, we expected something a little less saturday morning kids show than "positive and minus". and we expected something with a bit more meat on the bones than "reaches back to the source, OKAY! Super burly brawl!"
Although I see the sarcasm here - there was actually more (and more meaning) to both. Through the amount of vagueness, the little more elaborate explanations are at least a premise for thinking.
Actually, the latter one means:
Neo's powers in the Matrix originate in his connection to the mainframe which controls the Matrix, and therefore his powers are also superior to standard powerful programs because his source of power is superior (not just a tool in the Matrix, but control from above). Therefore also the "your power goes beyond the Matrix" (paraphrased), it actually sums this up pretty well.
Makes sense.
Considering the mainframe also controls the Real world Machines, his connection to the Source also enables him to contact it and control (or at least destroy) Sentinels from there. The glaring question that remains officially unanswered is how he is connected to the Source when not plugged in, which is also the key to the question how he was booted into the Matrix, or could see the yellow "code".
Considering the latter one actually is a glaring mystery started *after* the Oracle scene... what more is there to say? It's so obvious that it was *intended* to leave all these glaring questions *open*.
Negative, or the System trying to balance itself out. A part of Neo copied or transferred to Smith. Thus, a source of power that goes beyond the Matrix only. Okay, that's all I can say here at the moment.
we expected a stunning ending to the trilogy, instead of...oh god....cheesy smiles looking at a cheesy looking CGI sunrise with a child bursting forth from foliage with another stupid grin on her face - i'm surprised Sati and Seraph weren't skipping, arm in arm, to the tune of "sunshine, lollipops and ranbows".
You certainly mean this?
Yea, I am one of those people who often prefer shocking and depressing ends to happy-ends. Fair, fair.
But I can't look at such things without trying to imagine the writers' intentions, and it's almost obvious that it was supposed to "symbolize" a better condition in the Matrix, after the Smith crisis and this war cycle. Which makes sense. Then, isn't the rainbow some kind of a biblical reference, too?
we expected better acting than the "rocky balboa" school of acting employed by the actors in the battle suits whose idea of acting was to grimace and make unintelligible yells and grunts at the camera. we expected more than what felt like an age of that red shirted security guard...i mean, the bald chick....who hogged precious screentime with that pointless scene of her going back and forth to blow up a bunch of sentinels in 3 or 4 successive scenes just so they could kill her.
"War pathos" was one of the stylistical demerits I found in the sequels, not just "Revolutions". And I emphasize the last part.
we expected more at trinity's death scene than those hilarious quacks and grunts from keanu reeves that I'm assuming were supposed to convey "grief".
I've always found that scene annoying. The whole love thing going on between Neo and Trin, with the exception of the slight erotical tension in the first movie (and maybe the resurrection scene in Reloaded), was uninspired and bothersome in my opinion.
You know where it began? With the kiss in movie one. Seriously, I didn't like that. So much about disappointing sequels, altough this death scene was the climax.
we were expecting more than the best use of flying fight scene CGI almost ruined by putting them both in black then having them fight against an almost totally black sky so you couldn't see what was going on.
I could see everything. The sequence rocked. How about you pull off your sunglasses, Matrix fanboi?
we expected something more than the kids horrendous "check out how ugly i can make my face" acting while screaming "the war is over" six thousand times while Link and the rest of the humans seemingly morphed into Ewoks and did the "yub nub" dance.
You expected this *after* the "brilliant setup that was Reloaded"? The rave scene and all the related jazz was much "worse" in this regard. I don't understand you, man.
we expected more than merv taking neo, then watching trinity and co storm club hel, stick a gun in his face and demand neo back, only for him to apparently say "oh... okay then" and hand him over without simply waiting for trinity to put her gun down then have his six thousand goons shoot her in the head.
The idea was obviously to show the Merovingian's personal weakness, and throw in a philosophical aphorism about patterns or love and insanity.
Apparently he was convinced of her conviction. That was some good psychological pressure if you ask me, I don't know why you criticize it.
we expected more than odd, throwaway pieces of dialogue that were presumably supposed to be important such as "wingless" or "prodigal son", without giving it its proper context and once again making you simply "guess" potentially important parts of the script. is it important? was it supposed to be important? who knows, because they simply throw it at you and never return to it like so much else in the film.
we'll simply hint at some random elements from seraphs tissue-paper "past" and leave the rest to you.
Considering they wanted to make a Seraph game, and MxO doesn't seem to have stopped throwing more and more hints at it, especially with the *current* storyline... dude.
Along with the hint towards Sati's contingent importance in the future, this is most obviously a thing that was intended to be expanded upon. What a moot point, sorry.
we expected a stuntman that actually looked like keanu reeves when being punched into the wall at mobil avenue.
Haven't noticed that. And I expected more from the first movie's final than Neo "accidentally" staggering into an already present blood stain on the wall after being shot.
Called "movie mistakes".
we wondered why seraph had seemingly lost his "go anywhere" keys when smith turned up at the oracles apartment block.
Okay. Might even be a logical inconsistence. But you can nitpick similar stuff from all three movies I guess.
we expected not to have to see an actor in the Rhama Khandra role that didn't ham up his accent to such a degree that you were immediately reminded of Apu from the simpsons.
And I didn't expect a French gangster that reminded of the "Spongebob Squarepants" narrator. Wait, I also didn't expect a happy hippie grannie baking cookies at her kitchen and called "Oracle" in the cool, modern cyberpunk movie that was supposed to be the goddamn MATRIX!
Oh wait, those were the first two. My bad.
PS: The edit work roxxored.
we wondered why neo could see with his code vision in the real world (oh right, the "connection to the source". doh).
Is it so difficult to accept that the movie intended to and did leave questions open? Especially since it was gonna be continued anyway?
Geez.
we wondered why the final talk between neo and smith before they start fighting (complete with painfully obvious "gaps" before hugo weaving speaks) makes it seem like they were in different studios talking at a wall when filming it, with the scenes spliced together afterwards.
That's because of the water bubbles coming out of the actor's mouths under the artificial rain. It was generally a problematic scene to shoot, and consisted of short takes.
I moron didn't notice that when watching the movies, though.
we wondered why smith could fly.
I've been thinking and speculating about this ever since I had seen the movie years ago, but couldn't think of any semi-plausible explanation.
Hmm... constantly growing inventory of abilities, apparent connection to the Source to override rules... this just all doesn't fit together. *wonder*
we wondered why sati was supposed to be "escaping" even though her parents get on the same train as her yet inexplicably are never seen again.
She was escaping from the Machines, because she had no purpose for them (then) and was going to be deleted. She wasn't escaping from her parents.
They weren't escaping from the Machines, but the deal with the Merovingian only affected Sati, so they had to return to the Machine city with Sati remaining in the Matrix.
They got to the same train as her probably to bid a proper farewell to her, in order to drive back with the Trainman. Common sense.
we wondered why they didn't lace the tunnels and everywhere else with timed EMPs instead of using completely useless, armourless mechsuits with guns strapped to them.
Fair.
zeroone506 wrote:
they pretty much delivered on the hype (not all of it of course) for the first sequel - revolutions had a strangely muted media build up, and even then it consisted of about five (very) short, fragmented trailers. any "expectations" set were set by how good reloaded was. if you're gonna get everyone all worked up about your latest films - especially when they keep saying they're supposed to be viewed "as one big film", then man, you better deliver when it comes to the payoff, especially if the first part of that double whammy rocked. its not the fault of the people who invested in the prospect of seeing something amazing, THEN seeing it and having their faith rewarded, THEN being promised more awesomeness and (on the basis that the first chunk rocked) fully expecting more awesomeness, that a sizeable chunk of them came out of the cinema thinking wow, that kind of sucked, didn't it?
yes, but we've been here before. if you take the risk of telling your full story *away* from the primary media its being told in, then you take the necessary risk that you weaken the primary medias overall structure. enter the matrix is a good game, and also does a very nice job of filling in blanks and telling a secondary tale. however...videogames are forever locked into the hardware that they were created on (unless someone comes along and revamps them on a newer system). ten years time from now, even five - will anyone be playing enter the matrix and thus understand all the "blanks" from the sequels? will we even have backwards compatibility on the newest gaming machines? heck, the UK PS3 is almost crippled as far as that's concerned.
so eventually you're left with a bunch of incomplete films, with vital chunks of that "further media" missing in action because we can no longer obtain and / or use them.
2001: space odyssey is a great example of dumping crucial parts of your tale in "other" media, but doing it right. they didn't make the mistake of "locking in" a vital part of the tale in a medium that would be outdated in x amount of years time....they went for film and book, created both at the same time and designed it so that you couldn't make sense of parts of the film without the corresponding part of the book and vice versa. they also decided that neither medium was going to take precedence over the other - they're both equal.
well, if you like cliched stuff that's been done a million times before presented as important elements of the final film, then hey, fine.
note "along the lines of", as in, something as thought provoking as the revelation in reloaded. i wasn't saying to reveal the "one being a form of control" as a plot reveal in revolutions.
first, i'm giving you fast and loose examples of what other people were pondering might happen in the final film, and phrasing it as "we" to save time so I don't have to type out "and then these guys thought....and then this other guy on this forum said..." - these are not necessarily things i personally was expecting.
but hey, where does reloaded promise anything like that? well, how about when they mention....the previous Ones? its not unreasonable to expect they might actually go back to this after introducing such an interesting concept...but once again, after the architect does his speech and reveals the one is a system of control, yet another amazing idea is summarily discarded, never to be seen again. i'd have traded all the endless shots of sentinels being fired at and men yelling in close up for five minutes expanding upon this idea that was raised then thrown away.
again, see above with regards weakening the primary media. sure, mxo does this to a degree. but at the time? watching the film? listening to the oracle tell us over and over again that all beginnings have ends? watching neo go kaboom and carted off on his funeral barge? would we have thought at that point, its okay, some game to be released in the future called MXO will come along and explain it all in a continuation of the story?
or would you have sat there an thought, wait - what about all this other stuff?
and then theres the oft-repeated question about how "seriously" we're supposed to take - dare I say it - canon and all that other stuff anyway. weren't you yourself wondering about the validity of snowmen running around in the ask a dev thread?
does it? just makes me shrug and wonder why they didn't bother tying up their final film - their conclusion to the trilogy - in a satisfying manner instead of leaving tons of loose ends all over the place. i mean, i don't know if the W Bros actually ever considered that if you make a trilogy, generally the final film is supposed to give the audience payoff in the form of resolving and answering (most, not necessarily all) of the important things brought about by the second or first film. sure, leave a few things dangling. but in revolutions, they just left tons of stuff dangling all over the place. its sloppy, even accounting for the leap into other media. they could just as easily have resolved these things AND still had enough left over for the upcoming games / books / whatever.
will rarebit ever "explain" how neo did that stuff with the sentinels, for example? its probably doubtful, or not high up on his plot / script thing, at the very least. or expand upon a lot of the other stuff, aside from maybe whether neo is going to return or not, of course. again, doubtful and doesn't have much relevance to the storyline point that the game is up to, unless they suddenly have a "killing sentinels in the real world with your mind" chapter in six months time.
again, as it seems vaguely doubtful, just seems like a wasted opportunity to resolve the film with things that were possibly never going to make it in the game in any case. but all speculation at this point.
...again, its whether it was ever intended to be answered somewhere else. as i said above, do you think this might ever be addressed in MXO? or is it not likely? and why dump a crucially important "explanation" that would be better suited in the film into a secondary (niche) media, which a sizeable chunk of people who saw the film won't ever play anyway?
and in the same way that in ten years time you might not even be able to play enter the matrix anymore thus weakening portions of the sequels, what happens if / when MXO shuts down? how do we go back to watch / assess / whatever the trilogy when key elements are hidden away in
a) games we can't play due to outdated technology and
b) a MMOPRG that shut down?
if the explanation was ever given ingame, would someone keep that explanation on a page on some archived version of DN1 somewhere and point anyone that intended to watch the films to that page, so they could actually make sense of those pieces of vagueness scattered throughout the films?
don't get me wrong - I wasn't after one particular "style" of ending. I just would have preferred pretty much anything over what they gave us as the closing scenes.
yes, their intention would be to symbolise a better condition - but were they so lacking in creative firepower by this point that the best they could do in terms of execution was symbolising these things with rainbows and pink fluffy clouds and seraph and sati all but skipping gaily across the fields? its just.....horrific.
the love story never bothered me to be honest, aside from the fact that they went and killed her off which just seemed to be for the sake of it, more than anything else - arbitrarily disposing of her in the "matrix movie" equivalent of a car crash.
though it did provide one moment of humour when my work colleagues (who had studiously avoided all spoilers) were horrified to find a friend of mine wandered over the day after the premiere with a look of shock on her face and yelled, TRINITY DIES!!!
...lol.
the sequence is well done, for the most part - however, i viewed this film in many cinemas and more often than not, the overall effect was one of "uh, who just hit who there?" i actually find it clearer on a 32 inch HDTV, but then i guess i would do. but in terms of actually going to watch it in the cinema, many people came out disappointed that they couldn't really work out what was going on in a lot of those flying fight sequences. thats not necessarily the fault of the w bros, but meh - you'd think they'd check the thing on a bunch of different cinema screens given that its two guys fighting in black clothes, against a mostly black backdrop.
the rave scene is a rave scene with people raving and neo and trinity bumping uglies for a few minutes. there are no expectations or sense of anticipation connected to this scene.
the kid screaming the war is over is the key moment of the entire zion sequence (and indeed, a key moment for the entire trilogy relating to the war thats raged for 3 movies) and so you're expecting something a bit more impressive than his face contorted in a grotesque parody of "joy" while addressing humans that even manage to do the customary "everyone stands still for about 3 seconds, before one guy leads the rest with a ric flair WHOOOOOO!" cliche.
it kills the moment. it totally kills it.
anything impressive that came before is immediately flushed down the toilet by this moment. its horrendous.
...because its stupid? some crazy idiot comes into your club waving guns around, demanding this and demanding that. you're the all powerful frenchman. do you
a) wait for her to stop rambling, put her gun down then have your massed ranks of guards shoot her in the head or
b) let her have what she wants, even though she has nothing to trade for neos life and nothing preventing you from shooting her in the head?
something i forgot to mention was merv simply dropping out of the film at this point, like so many other things. was he caught by smith? who knows? but as its not important, meh - its okay, W bros. just don't mention him again and we'll just assume the majority of the film for you.
key word: "wanted". that game will likely never appear now, and as for the "reveals" coming up in matrix online - already addressed this with regards putting vital chunks of your tale into secondary media which will one day potentially be inaccessible due to outdated technology (no backwards compatibility for your games) or the game / media itself not actually functioning anymore (ie a MMOPRG shutting down). as these were elements first suggested in the films, its natural and logical to assume those things should have been resolved in the films too. deposit important parts of your story into secondary media at your own risk, but don't complain if it weakens your primary media for the reasons cited above.
/ edit - removed one section above, because i wasn't entirely sure if I'd understood your point correctly or not.
-These expectations "Revolutions" disappointed hadn't only originated from "Reloaded", but also from your own mind, and the hype the movie created. It makes sense to go back and wonder "did the movie justify these expectations"?in terms of "hype", that was predominantly for reloaded - the phones, the gatorade, the near biblical predictions of awesomeness and how it would rock our socks, etc etc, complete with elaborate, artistic and stunningly pieced together trailers that in some cases ran for 2 minutes or more.
they pretty much delivered on the hype (not all of it of course) for the first sequel - revolutions had a strangely muted media build up, and even then it consisted of about five (very) short, fragmented trailers. any "expectations" set were set by how good reloaded was. if you're gonna get everyone all worked up about your latest films - especially when they keep saying they're supposed to be viewed "as one big film", then man, you better deliver when it comes to the payoff, especially if the first part of that double whammy rocked. its not the fault of the people who invested in the prospect of seeing something amazing, THEN seeing it and having their faith rewarded, THEN being promised more awesomeness and (on the basis that the first chunk rocked) fully expecting more awesomeness, that a sizeable chunk of them came out of the cinema thinking wow, that kind of sucked, didn't it?
-The questions that were left open or unelaborated were most probably aimed at further media, *rather* than interpretations. Because even if TMO is written by other writers, it was initiated and is still being influenced by the Wachowskis. They invented the Assassin and told to "kill off" Morpheus, why shouldn't they intend to elaborate those questions aswell?
After all, think about Enter the Matrix. Reloaded and the first part of Revolutions look rather incomplete without it. I even think it doesn't make sense to disregard the other media, *especially* if the movies were written with them in mind.
yes, but we've been here before. if you take the risk of telling your full story *away* from the primary media its being told in, then you take the necessary risk that you weaken the primary medias overall structure. enter the matrix is a good game, and also does a very nice job of filling in blanks and telling a secondary tale. however...videogames are forever locked into the hardware that they were created on (unless someone comes along and revamps them on a newer system). ten years time from now, even five - will anyone be playing enter the matrix and thus understand all the "blanks" from the sequels? will we even have backwards compatibility on the newest gaming machines? heck, the UK PS3 is almost crippled as far as that's concerned.
so eventually you're left with a bunch of incomplete films, with vital chunks of that "further media" missing in action because we can no longer obtain and / or use them.
2001: space odyssey is a great example of dumping crucial parts of your tale in "other" media, but doing it right. they didn't make the mistake of "locking in" a vital part of the tale in a medium that would be outdated in x amount of years time....they went for film and book, created both at the same time and designed it so that you couldn't make sense of parts of the film without the corresponding part of the book and vice versa. they also decided that neither medium was going to take precedence over the other - they're both equal.
me: even the most turgid "matrix within a matrix" idea became more appealing than the slap in the face that is supposedly the films "big reveal".
you: not
well, if you like cliched stuff that's been done a million times before presented as important elements of the final film, then hey, fine.
me: we expected a huge revelation along the lines of the "one" being another form of control.
you: That was at the end of "Reloaded", I thought. The concept is the breaking out of the control grid. Or is it just part of a bigger control...
note "along the lines of", as in, something as thought provoking as the revelation in reloaded. i wasn't saying to reveal the "one being a form of control" as a plot reveal in revolutions.
me: we expected something more to be made of the previous Ones.
we expected the fabric of the reality of the matrix itself to shatter into a thousand and one pieces as neo did something truly astounding to save the day.
you: These two were expectations that I consider having originated in your mind. Where does Reloaded promise anything like that? Nowhere.
first, i'm giving you fast and loose examples of what other people were pondering might happen in the final film, and phrasing it as "we" to save time so I don't have to type out "and then these guys thought....and then this other guy on this forum said..." - these are not necessarily things i personally was expecting.
but hey, where does reloaded promise anything like that? well, how about when they mention....the previous Ones? its not unreasonable to expect they might actually go back to this after introducing such an interesting concept...but once again, after the architect does his speech and reveals the one is a system of control, yet another amazing idea is summarily discarded, never to be seen again. i'd have traded all the endless shots of sentinels being fired at and men yelling in close up for five minutes expanding upon this idea that was raised then thrown away.
This is just another example of "things to be expanded upon". MxO does this.
again, see above with regards weakening the primary media. sure, mxo does this to a degree. but at the time? watching the film? listening to the oracle tell us over and over again that all beginnings have ends? watching neo go kaboom and carted off on his funeral barge? would we have thought at that point, its okay, some game to be released in the future called MXO will come along and explain it all in a continuation of the story?
or would you have sat there an thought, wait - what about all this other stuff?
and then theres the oft-repeated question about how "seriously" we're supposed to take - dare I say it - canon and all that other stuff anyway. weren't you yourself wondering about the validity of snowmen running around in the ask a dev thread?
me: we expected the reason for neo stopping the sentinels in the real to have some real meat to it, something to get your mind racing.
you: Seeing as how that question wasn't answered, it still gets the mind racing.
does it? just makes me shrug and wonder why they didn't bother tying up their final film - their conclusion to the trilogy - in a satisfying manner instead of leaving tons of loose ends all over the place. i mean, i don't know if the W Bros actually ever considered that if you make a trilogy, generally the final film is supposed to give the audience payoff in the form of resolving and answering (most, not necessarily all) of the important things brought about by the second or first film. sure, leave a few things dangling. but in revolutions, they just left tons of stuff dangling all over the place. its sloppy, even accounting for the leap into other media. they could just as easily have resolved these things AND still had enough left over for the upcoming games / books / whatever.
will rarebit ever "explain" how neo did that stuff with the sentinels, for example? its probably doubtful, or not high up on his plot / script thing, at the very least. or expand upon a lot of the other stuff, aside from maybe whether neo is going to return or not, of course. again, doubtful and doesn't have much relevance to the storyline point that the game is up to, unless they suddenly have a "killing sentinels in the real world with your mind" chapter in six months time.
again, as it seems vaguely doubtful, just seems like a wasted opportunity to resolve the film with things that were possibly never going to make it in the game in any case. but all speculation at this point.
Considering the mainframe also controls the Real world Machines, his connection to the Source also enables him to contact it and control (or at least destroy) Sentinels from there. The glaring question that remains officially unanswered is how he is connected to the Source when not plugged in, which is also the key to the question how he was booted into the Matrix, or could see the yellow "code".
Considering the latter one actually is a glaring mystery started *after* the Oracle scene... what more is there to say? It's so obvious that it was *intended* to leave all these glaring questions *open*.
...again, its whether it was ever intended to be answered somewhere else. as i said above, do you think this might ever be addressed in MXO? or is it not likely? and why dump a crucially important "explanation" that would be better suited in the film into a secondary (niche) media, which a sizeable chunk of people who saw the film won't ever play anyway?
and in the same way that in ten years time you might not even be able to play enter the matrix anymore thus weakening portions of the sequels, what happens if / when MXO shuts down? how do we go back to watch / assess / whatever the trilogy when key elements are hidden away in
a) games we can't play due to outdated technology and
b) a MMOPRG that shut down?
if the explanation was ever given ingame, would someone keep that explanation on a page on some archived version of DN1 somewhere and point anyone that intended to watch the films to that page, so they could actually make sense of those pieces of vagueness scattered throughout the films?
Yea, I am one of those people who often prefer shocking and depressing ends to happy-ends. Fair, fair.
But I can't look at such things without trying to imagine the writers' intentions, and it's almost obvious that it was supposed to "symbolize" a better condition in the Matrix, after the Smith crisis and this war cycle. Which makes sense. Then, isn't the rainbow some kind of a biblical reference, too?
don't get me wrong - I wasn't after one particular "style" of ending. I just would have preferred pretty much anything over what they gave us as the closing scenes.
yes, their intention would be to symbolise a better condition - but were they so lacking in creative firepower by this point that the best they could do in terms of execution was symbolising these things with rainbows and pink fluffy clouds and seraph and sati all but skipping gaily across the fields? its just.....horrific.
I've always found that scene annoying. The whole love thing going on between Neo and Trin, with the exception of the slight erotical tension in the first movie (and maybe the resurrection scene in Reloaded), was uninspired and bothersome in my opinion.
You know where it began? With the kiss in movie one. Seriously, I didn't like that. So much about disappointing sequels, altough this death scene was the climax.
the love story never bothered me to be honest, aside from the fact that they went and killed her off which just seemed to be for the sake of it, more than anything else - arbitrarily disposing of her in the "matrix movie" equivalent of a car crash.
though it did provide one moment of humour when my work colleagues (who had studiously avoided all spoilers) were horrified to find a friend of mine wandered over the day after the premiere with a look of shock on her face and yelled, TRINITY DIES!!!
...lol.
I could see everything. The sequence rocked. How about you pull off your sunglasses, Matrix fanboi? SMILEY
the sequence is well done, for the most part - however, i viewed this film in many cinemas and more often than not, the overall effect was one of "uh, who just hit who there?" i actually find it clearer on a 32 inch HDTV, but then i guess i would do. but in terms of actually going to watch it in the cinema, many people came out disappointed that they couldn't really work out what was going on in a lot of those flying fight sequences. thats not necessarily the fault of the w bros, but meh - you'd think they'd check the thing on a bunch of different cinema screens given that its two guys fighting in black clothes, against a mostly black backdrop.
me: we expected something more than the kids horrendous "check out how ugly i can make my face" acting while screaming "the war is over" six thousand times while Link and the rest of the humans seemingly morphed into Ewoks and did the "yub nub" dance.
you: You expected this *after* the "brilliant setup that was Reloaded"? The rave scene and all the related jazz was much "worse" in this regard. I don't understand you, man.
the rave scene is a rave scene with people raving and neo and trinity bumping uglies for a few minutes. there are no expectations or sense of anticipation connected to this scene.
the kid screaming the war is over is the key moment of the entire zion sequence (and indeed, a key moment for the entire trilogy relating to the war thats raged for 3 movies) and so you're expecting something a bit more impressive than his face contorted in a grotesque parody of "joy" while addressing humans that even manage to do the customary "everyone stands still for about 3 seconds, before one guy leads the rest with a ric flair WHOOOOOO!" cliche.
it kills the moment. it totally kills it.
anything impressive that came before is immediately flushed down the toilet by this moment. its horrendous.
me: we expected more than merv taking neo, then watching trinity and co storm club hel, stick a gun in his face and demand neo back, only for him to apparently say "oh... okay then" and hand him over without simply waiting for trinity to put her gun down then have his six thousand goons shoot her in the head.
you: The idea was obviously to show the Merovingian's personal weakness, and throw in a philosophical aphorism about patterns or love and insanity. Apparently he was convinced of her conviction. That was some good psychological pressure if you ask me, I don't know why you criticize it.
...because its stupid? some crazy idiot comes into your club waving guns around, demanding this and demanding that. you're the all powerful frenchman. do you
a) wait for her to stop rambling, put her gun down then have your massed ranks of guards shoot her in the head or
b) let her have what she wants, even though she has nothing to trade for neos life and nothing preventing you from shooting her in the head?
something i forgot to mention was merv simply dropping out of the film at this point, like so many other things. was he caught by smith? who knows? but as its not important, meh - its okay, W bros. just don't mention him again and we'll just assume the majority of the film for you.
me: we expected more than odd, throwaway pieces of dialogue that were presumably supposed to be important such as "wingless" or "prodigal son", without giving it its proper context and once again making you simply "guess" potentially important parts of the script. is it important? was it supposed to be important? who knows, because they simply throw it at you and never return to it like so much else in the film. we'll simply hint at some random elements from seraphs tissue-paper "past" and leave the rest to you.
you: Considering they wanted to make a Seraph game, and MxO doesn't seem to have stopped throwing more and more hints at it, especially with the *current* storyline... dude.
key word: "wanted". that game will likely never appear now, and as for the "reveals" coming up in matrix online - already addressed this with regards putting vital chunks of your tale into secondary media which will one day potentially be inaccessible due to outdated technology (no backwards compatibility for your games) or the game / media itself not actually functioning anymore (ie a MMOPRG shutting down). as these were elements first suggested in the films, its natural and logical to assume those things should have been resolved in the films too. deposit important parts of your story into secondary media at your own risk, but don't complain if it weakens your primary media for the reasons cited above.
/ edit - removed one section above, because i wasn't entirely sure if I'd understood your point correctly or not.
me: we expected not to have to see an actor in the Rhama Khandra role that didn't ham up his accent to such a degree that you were immediately reminded of Apu from the simpsons.
you: And I didn't expect a French gangster that reminded of the "Spongebob Squarepants" narrator. Wait, I also didn't expect a happy hippie grannie baking cookies at her kitchen and called "Oracle" in the cool, modern cyberpunk movie that was supposed to be the goddamn MATRIX!
Oh wait, those were the first two. My bad.
the merovingian has an element of humour and "coolness" about him, along with very obvious dashes of pantomime and campness (in which his way of speaking plays a part) which tends to make people overlook the horrendously exaggerated accent. rama is presented as a straight-down-the-line Indian, and as such, comes across as a terribly stereotyped portrayal of an indian in that respect.
neither of the above points regarding silly accents has any relevance to the fact that the oracle is a black woman baking cookies, especially as her accent is perfectly natural.
Is it so difficult to accept that the movie intended to and did leave questions open? Especially since it was gonna be continued anyway?
well hindsight is an awesome thing, but i can't say at the time of watching revolutions in the cinema I was aware the "story would be continued", much less that there was something called matrix online coming out. again, see above for problems with using secondary media to tie up loose ends in your primary one.
me: we wondered why smith could fly.
I've been thinking and speculating about this ever since I had seen the movie years ago, but couldn't think of any semi-plausible explanation. Hmm... constantly growing inventory of abilities, apparent connection to the Source to override rules... this just all doesn't fit together.
i can't really tell if you're being sarcastic here, but at no point in the films that i am aware of is smith presented as having the ability to "override the rules of the source" through his "apparent connection to it". otherwise, he'd have presumably told the source to get stuffed when neo teamed up with deus ex machinas norton antivirus. the only place it is hinted or suggested that smith gets his "growing powers" from is the other people in the matrix. with that in mind, who did he take over to be able to fly? and why wasn't this person hinted at in the slightest in any of the films?
seriously, one minute they're fighting on the ground - the next, smith just starts flying. and we sit there and go, oh-kayyyyy.....
its just another example of something dropped into the film because hey, it'll make the final fight extremely cool, without actually seemingly bothering to think of presenting anything in the film that might sort of kind of possibly explain it somewhere.
once again, we're just asked to sit there and accept it. or, accept that some explanation might appear somewhere, someday, in some other media somewhere. what's that line bart says in the simpsons?
"krusty is coming......krusty is coming......krusty is coming...."
that about sums it up to me.
me: we wondered why sati was supposed to be "escaping" even though her parents get on the same train as her yet inexplicably are never seen again.
you: She was escaping from the Machines, because she had no purpose for them (then) and was going to be deleted. She wasn't escaping from her parents. They weren't escaping from the Machines, but the deal with the Merovingian only affected Sati, so they had to return to the Machine city with Sati remaining in the Matrix. They got to the same train as her probably to bid a proper farewell to her, in order to drive back with the Trainman. Common sense.
i never said she was escaping from her parents, my point is that you see her getting on the train with them, and the next time you see her, she's magically appeared in the oracles living room, her parents have vanished, and (once again) another element of the film is just discarded somewhere and you're left with one more jarring element from a seriously disjointed whole.
What the HELL does any of that have to do with "What do you think MxO would be like if Neo came back as a Level 255 NPC?"
GirlyGurl84 wrote:
It would kinda change the landscape of MxO if there was an actual war going on.
But I personally would think it would be worth playing more than now.
I wonder if they would do that, though..
Edit: when i see papergh0st and zeroone506's posts I'm reminded of the WALL OF TEXT from my WoW days...
ok a lot of people have said that if neo was brought back and introduced to the game, the game would end. Yet some say it wont, anyone want give me an outline on both sides? cuz there is a lot of argument about it.The idea is that if Neo comes back, it would lead to truce breakage, ending this chapter of the matrix series.
It would kinda change the landscape of MxO if there was an actual war going on.
But I personally would think it would be worth playing more than now.
I wonder if they would do that, though..
Edit: when i see papergh0st and zeroone506's posts I'm reminded of the WALL OF TEXT from my WoW days...
Papergh0st wrote:
I was actually talking about the fan hype on the forums. You perfectly understand that such a hype unnaturally raises the expectations, and lots of the excitement then doesn't originate in the movies anymore, but rather is born in floods of ideas and theories.
Does the sequel have to live up to its predecessor, or this fan hype? It's awesome if it ends up living up to the latter one, but it seems like this wasn't the case with the Matrix, doesn't it?
So my point of view is to disregard this hype in arguments and focus on the movies.
But okay, let's talk about media hype. The writers already have written all the scripts and filmed every scene long ago - it's all set into stone. So *if* Joel Silver really went ahead and promised "awesome answers to everything", he flat out lied.
How is it the movie's fault if the marketing campaign decides to create a hype? Exactly, it's the hype's.
Welcome to the world of advertising, lol. When I buy a snickers and it doesn's taste as incredibly awesome as portrayed in an ad, I am disappointed by the Snickers, but blame my disappointment on the ad and my gullibility.
Well yea, but that's just the media hype that was muted, I'm talking about fan hype. Weren't the forums full of, er, ideas? You were referring to them in comparison to the actual movie resolution.
But okay, Revolutions does not answer all questions by any means, so it is disappointing, in case you disregard continuations. A fact.
I particularly was disappointed by the first Matrix movie after my expectations about it, both plotwise and slightly stylistically.
Lots of people thought Matrix Reloaded sucked. So what if some thought only "Revolutions" sucked? For some reason, I didn't think that. There are too many opinions on that.
Uh... watch Stack's EtM movie?
Seriously man, I've never thought about that. Good point. I guess they were living too much in the present, but obviously it was worth it for them.
The notion of telling important parts of the storyline in an MMORPG and the like is, indeed, inherently flawed. But obviously, video games offer certain qualities other media don't offer, so here we end up.
Let's get it straight. You don't like the movies not having answered all questions, and relying on video games and MMORPGs? This is an absolutely logical point I won't even attempt to argue.
The "not" was referring to the last part of the sentence. I disagree that they're supposedly "big revelations", as the opposite is apparent.
But again, considering the previous paragraphs: they leave the movies incomplete; in order to fill it with video games and MMOs.
Both concepts are inherently flawed.
Ok.
Again, note the "to never be seen again". Remember, while this is an MMO and all, we both are currently playing it and, at least as far as I'm concerned, following the storyline. Or isn't the storyline one of the reasons you play this game?
So this doesn't make sense again.
I can't argue with this, but there were lots of plot questions and gaps in all three movies that could be expanded upon or answered at the expense of action sequences.
Dunno, man.
Funny that you mention this. Actually, I had got to know about MxO or some sort of continuation through comics (Wachowski chat) quite early, so when I was watching the movies, they always were making an incomplete impression on me, partially because I was expecting lots of stuff being answered and expanded upon in The Matrix Online.
It's funny that after two years of playing, much of that important stuff still isn't answered as the recent story has rather focused on new developments rather than the past. But not completely.
You're taking this out of context.
The problem I and CW see here is that the writer(s) don't attempt to categorize these "fun game events" as strictly non-canon.
But seeing as this holiday event doesn't have an impact on anything, it can really be disregarded as such.
When we're talking about story continuation, we should talk about the "real" stuff. The only reason it can be questioned in valitude is that other people write it, mostly. But that doesn't make it invalid, if you look at the "Star Wars Expanded Universe".
Why? Because they chose to. If you ask the Wachowskis why the included certain plots in EtM? They'll tell you "we wanted to make it that way, so EtM tells a complementary part of the story".
So there's no point in asking "so why wasn't it in the movies" any further. Apparently, they did not want it to be a full pay-off.
Conclusion to the trilogy, but not the franchise and story? A sane concept.
Hm, I'm rather optimistic about this. He did say there was some idea that would throw the universe upside down, and hinted that something didn't happen, with a weird picture of the Deus Ex Machina scene.
The past of Seraph and future of Sati were also such questions left open. MxO has already picked on them, much earlier than 6.3 was released.
And this can be a depiction of the past, or an insight into the universe mechanics. No need for such a silly chapter title =PP
That's their mfking problem if they don't play this brilliant and insightful game, alright!
Ookay, they do have their reasons not to play MxO, but their absence won't change anything if MxO really starts giving answers.
Wow, pocus on the present my yound Padawan?
What can I say, currently it's like this that I haven't watched the movies since I started playing MxO, and am currently actually more interested in this storyline than the movies. Again, just currently.
I'll just have to see what MxO comes up with until DC is released. j/k
If officials won't, fans certainly will. I have a pretty nice and large archive of mission screenshots that I work on, and someone can always host important DN1 site, or write summaries.
Actually, there's lots of MxO material everywhere in Matrix related Wiki articles.
It would be horrific if they sung that heavy song. It wasn't horrific, in my opinion. They really were just staying/sitting in this pleasant environment, after Sati and Seraph had joined them by *walking*.
And the Architect's the man.
So no, it wasn't half as bad.
Yea, they improved the visual quality for the DVDs so you could see some things better.
Yea, as far as you're concerned about story and content only. For people concerned about the style, it can be a justified problem.
I particularly was shocked to see this kind of raving in the cool cyberpunk blockbuster. Again, just a question of style, as with Jar Jar Binks.
Although I've started appreciating, or at least tolerating that sequence in the curse of time. But again, there's all this "war pathos" and apocalyptic struggles with choir in the background that one may consider a disturbance of style.
From a story point of view, that rave scene was the first time Zion got to hear about the Machine threat. "Well, obviously we're the last remaining humans on earth and robots are coming to kill us, isn't this just a reason to make party?" (paraphrased)
This and other scenes also portrayed the Zion population in a certain light. Heck, Morpheus' speech opened a new aspect of his character some did not like at all. Subjectively, that also ruined something, if not the "moment" then just the movie.
In the end, you just have the Kid announcing to the same crowd that the war is over, I don't see how that is much worse.
No look, it isn't stupid, it all makes sense.
The three fight their way to the Merovingian by killing his guards, and aim with their guns in the club. The Merv isn't some calculating, efficient military officer who'd order to kill the disturbers at once.
He's a king certain of his own safety and power, and expects amusement or even profit of this. So he promises the intruders that he won't hurt them and they can talk. So there we are.
No one is waving guns around after that, they talk. The Merv makes an offer that all three can't but reject, and instead of leaving with empty hands, Trinity and the rest suddenly initiate a struggle, at which end Trinity catches a weapon and aims it at the Merv's head, before the others can aim theirs at her.
What doesn't make sense about this scene? Nothing. They surprise and confuse their enemies enough so Trinity can get this advantage - at the end, they're all overpowered and outnumbered.
Why don't the goons kill her? Simple reason, the Merv is the boss, and they do what he tells them. They might aswell have shot her, but either they thought she wouldn't kill him, or they were initially confused and then saw she was talking to him. If anything, this is the only loose link, but hey it's not that bad.
After this, everything makes sense again. Trinity will shoot the Merovingian in the face and kill him before he can finish pronouncing "Kill her!". He is convinced by her determination, and also that she'll accept death upon shooting him.
So the only way out is giving in to her demands, and letting them leave safely. Anything else will cause his deletion. He couldn't have waited any longer when Trinity said "time's up". She doesn't have anything to trade for Neo apart from letting him live, indeed.
Other than that, he doesn't remain cool and wait until she fails to shoot him... because he's vulnerable and nervous. A weakling with influence, that's the Merovingian for you.
So, anything else that isn't clear?
Yea, that Smith question's a good one.
Apart from that, this is only a problem as long as you disregard MxO. I've got used to the fact that he's an important figure in the universe already before I joined this game, and having this in mind, his short and episodic appearences just introduce his character in the light of certain events.
They key is that they had an expansion in mind when they wrote those "meaningless junks of script". There's a school of thought that they decided to do it in MxO instead.
It has begun long ago. So this rebuttles this "meaningless hints at nothing to eve be seen again", pwnt.
Yea, technology will get outdate and an MMO shuts down. That's just one aspect, and not a reason to disregard it especially when it hasn't even come so far.
You're here right now and follow the storyline, what else matters?
in terms of "hype", that was predominantly for reloaded - the phones, the gatorade, the near biblical predictions of awesomeness and how it would rock our socks, etc etc, complete with elaborate, artistic and stunningly pieced together trailers that in some cases ran for 2 minutes or more.
I was actually talking about the fan hype on the forums. You perfectly understand that such a hype unnaturally raises the expectations, and lots of the excitement then doesn't originate in the movies anymore, but rather is born in floods of ideas and theories.
Does the sequel have to live up to its predecessor, or this fan hype? It's awesome if it ends up living up to the latter one, but it seems like this wasn't the case with the Matrix, doesn't it?
So my point of view is to disregard this hype in arguments and focus on the movies.
But okay, let's talk about media hype. The writers already have written all the scripts and filmed every scene long ago - it's all set into stone. So *if* Joel Silver really went ahead and promised "awesome answers to everything", he flat out lied.
How is it the movie's fault if the marketing campaign decides to create a hype? Exactly, it's the hype's.
Welcome to the world of advertising, lol. When I buy a snickers and it doesn's taste as incredibly awesome as portrayed in an ad, I am disappointed by the Snickers, but blame my disappointment on the ad and my gullibility.
they pretty much delivered on the hype (not all of it of course) for the first sequel - revolutions had a strangely muted media build up, and even then it consisted of about five (very) short, fragmented trailers. any "expectations" set were set by how good reloaded was.
Well yea, but that's just the media hype that was muted, I'm talking about fan hype. Weren't the forums full of, er, ideas? You were referring to them in comparison to the actual movie resolution.
But okay, Revolutions does not answer all questions by any means, so it is disappointing, in case you disregard continuations. A fact.
[...] especially if the first part of that double whammy rocked. its not the fault of the people who invested in the prospect of seeing something amazing, THEN seeing it and having their faith rewarded, THEN being promised more awesomeness and (on the basis that the first chunk rocked) fully expecting more awesomeness, that a sizeable chunk of them came out of the cinema thinking wow, that kind of sucked, didn't it?
I particularly was disappointed by the first Matrix movie after my expectations about it, both plotwise and slightly stylistically.
Lots of people thought Matrix Reloaded sucked. So what if some thought only "Revolutions" sucked? For some reason, I didn't think that. There are too many opinions on that.
yes, but we've been here before. if you take the risk of telling your full story *away* from the primary media its being told in, then you take the necessary risk that you weaken the primary medias overall structure. enter the matrix is a good game, and also does a very nice job of filling in blanks and telling a secondary tale. however...videogames are forever locked into the hardware that they were created on (unless someone comes along and revamps them on a newer system). ten years time from now, even five - will anyone be playing enter the matrix and thus understand all the "blanks" from the sequels? will we even have backwards compatibility on the newest gaming machines? heck, the UK PS3 is almost crippled as far as that's concerned.
Uh... watch Stack's EtM movie?
Seriously man, I've never thought about that. Good point. I guess they were living too much in the present, but obviously it was worth it for them.
The notion of telling important parts of the storyline in an MMORPG and the like is, indeed, inherently flawed. But obviously, video games offer certain qualities other media don't offer, so here we end up.
Let's get it straight. You don't like the movies not having answered all questions, and relying on video games and MMORPGs? This is an absolutely logical point I won't even attempt to argue.
Me: even the most turgid "matrix within a matrix" idea became more appealing than the slap in the face that is supposedly the films "big reveal".
you: not
well, if you like cliched stuff that's been done a million times before presented as important elements of the final film, then hey, fine.
The "not" was referring to the last part of the sentence. I disagree that they're supposedly "big revelations", as the opposite is apparent.
But again, considering the previous paragraphs: they leave the movies incomplete; in order to fill it with video games and MMOs.
Both concepts are inherently flawed.
first, i'm giving you fast and loose examples of what other people were pondering might happen in the final film, and phrasing it as "we" to save time so I don't have to type out "and then these guys thought....and then this other guy on this forum said..." - these are not necessarily things i personally was expecting.
Ok.
but hey, where does reloaded promise anything like that? well, how about when they mention....the previous Ones? its not unreasonable to expect they might actually go back to this after introducing such an interesting concept...but once again, after the architect does his speech and reveals the one is a system of control, yet another amazing idea is summarily discarded, never to be seen again. i'd have traded all the endless shots of sentinels being fired at and men yelling in close up for five minutes expanding upon this idea that was raised then thrown away.
Again, note the "to never be seen again". Remember, while this is an MMO and all, we both are currently playing it and, at least as far as I'm concerned, following the storyline. Or isn't the storyline one of the reasons you play this game?
So this doesn't make sense again.
I can't argue with this, but there were lots of plot questions and gaps in all three movies that could be expanded upon or answered at the expense of action sequences.
Dunno, man.
again, see above with regards weakening the primary media. sure, mxo does this to a degree. but at the time? watching the film? listening to the oracle tell us over and over again that all beginnings have ends? watching neo go kaboom and carted off on his funeral barge? would we have thought at that point, its okay, some game to be released in the future called MXO will come along and explain it all in a continuation of the story?
or would you have sat there an thought, wait - what about all this other stuff?
Funny that you mention this. Actually, I had got to know about MxO or some sort of continuation through comics (Wachowski chat) quite early, so when I was watching the movies, they always were making an incomplete impression on me, partially because I was expecting lots of stuff being answered and expanded upon in The Matrix Online.
It's funny that after two years of playing, much of that important stuff still isn't answered as the recent story has rather focused on new developments rather than the past. But not completely.
and then theres the oft-repeated question about how "seriously" we're supposed to take - dare I say it - canon and all that other stuff anyway. weren't you yourself wondering about the validity of snowmen running around in the ask a dev thread?
You're taking this out of context.
The problem I and CW see here is that the writer(s) don't attempt to categorize these "fun game events" as strictly non-canon.
But seeing as this holiday event doesn't have an impact on anything, it can really be disregarded as such.
When we're talking about story continuation, we should talk about the "real" stuff. The only reason it can be questioned in valitude is that other people write it, mostly. But that doesn't make it invalid, if you look at the "Star Wars Expanded Universe".
does it? just makes me shrug and wonder why they didn't bother tying up their final film - their conclusion to the trilogy - in a satisfying manner instead of leaving tons of loose ends all over the place.
Why? Because they chose to. If you ask the Wachowskis why the included certain plots in EtM? They'll tell you "we wanted to make it that way, so EtM tells a complementary part of the story".
So there's no point in asking "so why wasn't it in the movies" any further. Apparently, they did not want it to be a full pay-off.
Conclusion to the trilogy, but not the franchise and story? A sane concept.
will rarebit ever "explain" how neo did that stuff with the sentinels, for example? its probably doubtful, or not high up on his plot / script thing, at the very least. or expand upon a lot of the other stuff, aside from maybe whether neo is going to return or not, of course. again, doubtful and doesn't have much relevance to the storyline point that the game is up to, unless they suddenly have a "killing sentinels in the real world with your mind" chapter in six months time.
Hm, I'm rather optimistic about this. He did say there was some idea that would throw the universe upside down, and hinted that something didn't happen, with a weird picture of the Deus Ex Machina scene.
The past of Seraph and future of Sati were also such questions left open. MxO has already picked on them, much earlier than 6.3 was released.
And this can be a depiction of the past, or an insight into the universe mechanics. No need for such a silly chapter title =PP
which a sizeable chunk of people who saw the film won't ever play anyway?
That's their mfking problem if they don't play this brilliant and insightful game, alright!
Ookay, they do have their reasons not to play MxO, but their absence won't change anything if MxO really starts giving answers.
and in the same way that in ten years time you might not even be able to play enter the matrix anymore thus weakening portions of the sequels, what happens if / when MXO shuts down? how do we go back to watch / assess / whatever the trilogy when key elements are hidden away in
a) games we can't play due to outdated technology and
b) a MMOPRG that shut down?
Wow, pocus on the present my yound Padawan?
What can I say, currently it's like this that I haven't watched the movies since I started playing MxO, and am currently actually more interested in this storyline than the movies. Again, just currently.
I'll just have to see what MxO comes up with until DC is released. j/k
if the explanation was ever given ingame, would someone keep that explanation on a page on some archived version of DN1 somewhere and point anyone that intended to watch the films to that page, so they could actually make sense of those pieces of vagueness scattered throughout the films?
If officials won't, fans certainly will. I have a pretty nice and large archive of mission screenshots that I work on, and someone can always host important DN1 site, or write summaries.
Actually, there's lots of MxO material everywhere in Matrix related Wiki articles.
don't get me wrong - I wasn't after one particular "style" of ending. I just would have preferred pretty much anything over what they gave us as the closing scenes.
yes, their intention would be to symbolise a better condition - but were they so lacking in creative firepower by this point that the best they could do in terms of execution was symbolising these things with rainbows and pink fluffy clouds and seraph and sati all but skipping gaily across the fields? its just.....horrific.
It would be horrific if they sung that heavy song. It wasn't horrific, in my opinion. They really were just staying/sitting in this pleasant environment, after Sati and Seraph had joined them by *walking*.
And the Architect's the man.
So no, it wasn't half as bad.
the sequence is well done, for the most part [...]
Yea, they improved the visual quality for the DVDs so you could see some things better.
the rave scene is a rave scene with people raving and neo and trinity bumping uglies for a few minutes. there are no expectations or sense of anticipation connected to this scene.
Yea, as far as you're concerned about story and content only. For people concerned about the style, it can be a justified problem.
I particularly was shocked to see this kind of raving in the cool cyberpunk blockbuster. Again, just a question of style, as with Jar Jar Binks.
Although I've started appreciating, or at least tolerating that sequence in the curse of time. But again, there's all this "war pathos" and apocalyptic struggles with choir in the background that one may consider a disturbance of style.
From a story point of view, that rave scene was the first time Zion got to hear about the Machine threat. "Well, obviously we're the last remaining humans on earth and robots are coming to kill us, isn't this just a reason to make party?" (paraphrased)
This and other scenes also portrayed the Zion population in a certain light. Heck, Morpheus' speech opened a new aspect of his character some did not like at all. Subjectively, that also ruined something, if not the "moment" then just the movie.
In the end, you just have the Kid announcing to the same crowd that the war is over, I don't see how that is much worse.
...because its stupid? some crazy idiot comes into your club waving guns around, demanding this and demanding that. you're the all powerful frenchman. do you
a) wait for her to stop rambling, put her gun down then have your massed ranks of guards shoot her in the head or
b) let her have what she wants, even though she has nothing to trade for neos life and nothing preventing you from shooting her in the head?
No look, it isn't stupid, it all makes sense.
The three fight their way to the Merovingian by killing his guards, and aim with their guns in the club. The Merv isn't some calculating, efficient military officer who'd order to kill the disturbers at once.
He's a king certain of his own safety and power, and expects amusement or even profit of this. So he promises the intruders that he won't hurt them and they can talk. So there we are.
No one is waving guns around after that, they talk. The Merv makes an offer that all three can't but reject, and instead of leaving with empty hands, Trinity and the rest suddenly initiate a struggle, at which end Trinity catches a weapon and aims it at the Merv's head, before the others can aim theirs at her.
What doesn't make sense about this scene? Nothing. They surprise and confuse their enemies enough so Trinity can get this advantage - at the end, they're all overpowered and outnumbered.
Why don't the goons kill her? Simple reason, the Merv is the boss, and they do what he tells them. They might aswell have shot her, but either they thought she wouldn't kill him, or they were initially confused and then saw she was talking to him. If anything, this is the only loose link, but hey it's not that bad.
After this, everything makes sense again. Trinity will shoot the Merovingian in the face and kill him before he can finish pronouncing "Kill her!". He is convinced by her determination, and also that she'll accept death upon shooting him.
So the only way out is giving in to her demands, and letting them leave safely. Anything else will cause his deletion. He couldn't have waited any longer when Trinity said "time's up". She doesn't have anything to trade for Neo apart from letting him live, indeed.
Other than that, he doesn't remain cool and wait until she fails to shoot him... because he's vulnerable and nervous. A weakling with influence, that's the Merovingian for you.
So, anything else that isn't clear?
something i forgot to mention was merv simply dropping out of the film at this point, like so many other things. was he caught by smith? who knows? but as its not important, meh - its okay, W bros. just don't mention him again and we'll just assume the majority of the film for you.
Yea, that Smith question's a good one.
Apart from that, this is only a problem as long as you disregard MxO. I've got used to the fact that he's an important figure in the universe already before I joined this game, and having this in mind, his short and episodic appearences just introduce his character in the light of certain events.
key word: "wanted". that game will likely never appear now, and as for the "reveals" coming up in matrix online - already addressed this with regards putting vital chunks of your tale into secondary media which will one day potentially be inaccessible due to outdated technology (no backwards compatibility for your games) or the game / media itself not actually functioning anymore (ie a MMOPRG shutting down). as these were elements first suggested in the films, its natural and logical to assume those things should have been resolved in the films too. deposit important parts of your story into secondary media at your own risk, but don't complain if it weakens your primary media for the reasons cited above.
They key is that they had an expansion in mind when they wrote those "meaningless junks of script". There's a school of thought that they decided to do it in MxO instead.
It has begun long ago. So this rebuttles this "meaningless hints at nothing to eve be seen again", pwnt.
Yea, technology will get outdate and an MMO shuts down. That's just one aspect, and not a reason to disregard it especially when it hasn't even come so far.
You're here right now and follow the storyline, what else matters?
Come on, let's try.
/ edit - removed one section above, because i wasn't entirely sure if I'd understood your point correctly or not.
Papergh0st wrote:
Does that make it feel kind of incomplete? Not particularly, but the indeed, Revolutions kind of leaves the normal Matrix and dense plot after the first 30 minutes and goes into multiple action-filled climaxes. Which does make it incomplete.
Seriously, this is all well explained in the dialogue, it's just something the movie doesn't actually show. All you'd see is the parents meeting the Oracle at a subway station, or delivering Sati to her, and then returning to the Trainman and drive back. And maybe another whiny bye-bye scene.
the merovingian has an element of humour and "coolness" about him, along with very obvious dashes of pantomime and campness (in which his way of speaking plays a part) which tends to make people overlook the horrendously exaggerated accent. rama is presented as a straight-down-the-line Indian, and as such, comes across as a terribly stereotyped portrayal of an indian in that respect.
Okay, there again goes the stuff about cliches and originals. Maybe they wanted to show religious programs, or apply religion to the Matrix? They chose to live after these religions for some reason, as did the Merovingian prefer to apply to French style and call himself "Merovingian". But meh what do I care, point for you.
neither of the above points regarding silly accents has any relevance to the fact that the oracle is a black woman baking cookies, especially as her accent is perfectly natural.
Hmm, let's not limit this to skin colors and accents. You found a cliched Hindu silly; I found a merry Oracle granny in a cool cyberpunk thriller weird; what's the difference?
And wait, what's the point again? Ah yes, that I personally already had problems with similar elements of the predecessors, thus doesn't find these to be particularly bad for the finale.
i can't really tell if you're being sarcastic here, but at no point in the films that i am aware of is smith presented as having the ability to "override the rules of the source" through his "apparent connection to it". otherwise, he'd have presumably told the source to get stuffed when neo teamed up with deus ex machinas norton antivirus. the only place it is hinted or suggested that smith gets his "growing powers" from is the other people in the matrix. with that in mind, who did he take over to be able to fly? and why wasn't this person hinted at in the slightest in any of the films?
It was sarcasm because I didn't consider this question overly important but rather a technical details (like, what makes hovercrafts hover? why can Neo fly?), and possible explanations were kind of suggesting.
But looking at it strictly, I doubt there is any technical explanation to all his abilities and where he got them. Jst some common sense - he's the negative of the One (lol), gains more and more knowledge by assimilating programs. Maybe he just reprogrammed the Matrix so he could fly, heck. Or he found those ancient cheat codes in the system, heck dunno.
Probably point for you in the end.
i never said she was escaping from her parents, my point is that you see her getting on the train with them, and the next time you see her, she's magically appeared in the oracles living room, her parents have vanished, and (once again) another element of the film is just discarded somewhere and you're left with one more jarring element from a seriously disjointed whole.
Does that make it feel kind of incomplete? Not particularly, but the indeed, Revolutions kind of leaves the normal Matrix and dense plot after the first 30 minutes and goes into multiple action-filled climaxes. Which does make it incomplete.
Skill wrote:
GirlyGurl84 wrote:Neo's death is not a condition of the Truce on any of the sides, not as far as we know. All it could do is strain the Truce, like the recent "twist" did. Where the hell did you make this up?ok a lot of people have said that if neo was brought back and introduced to the game, the game would end. Yet some say it wont, anyone want give me an outline on both sides? cuz there is a lot of argument about it.The idea is that if Neo comes back, it would lead to truce breakage, ending this chapter of the matrix series.
It would kinda change the landscape of MxO if there was an actual war going on.
But I personally would think it would be worth playing more than now.
I wonder if they would do that, though..
Edit: when i see papergh0st and zeroone506's posts I'm reminded of the WALL OF TEXT from my WoW days...
I wonder if Keanu Reeves is playing wondering if he is dead or alive.....
He certainly does, I believe it. In case he gives a *CENSORED*
By the way, when Neo is carried away at the end and we see the yellow vision, Neo seems to shine as opposed to being a dark figure in this bright world before (the shine is so heavy that you don't seem him, but still).
This change happens when he's filled with light during the Smith purge.
So if this yellow shining is spirit, he's probably dead for good.
If it's Machine energy, or Machine consciousness, he might be a Machine now, or a part of the Machine consciousness - anything along the lines.
Actually, Revolutions actually does offer this "shock revelation" by opening a new layer of reality in the Real. If it's the first interpretation, the twist is even much more important since it breaks the genre of SF. If not, it depends on what it was.
And I wonder what the white light in the normal perception was supposed to be.
By the way, when Neo is carried away at the end and we see the yellow vision, Neo seems to shine as opposed to being a dark figure in this bright world before (the shine is so heavy that you don't seem him, but still).
This change happens when he's filled with light during the Smith purge.
So if this yellow shining is spirit, he's probably dead for good.
If it's Machine energy, or Machine consciousness, he might be a Machine now, or a part of the Machine consciousness - anything along the lines.
Actually, Revolutions actually does offer this "shock revelation" by opening a new layer of reality in the Real. If it's the first interpretation, the twist is even much more important since it breaks the genre of SF. If not, it depends on what it was.
And I wonder what the white light in the normal perception was supposed to be.
zeroone506 wrote: They key is that they had an expansion in
mind when they wrote those "meaningless junks of script". There's a
school of thought that they decided to do it in MxO instead.
It has begun long ago. So this rebuttles this "meaningless hints at nothing to eve be seen again", pwnt.
You possibly should have held on to your pwnt for a while longer.
zeroone506 wrote:Suddenly, the case for saying all those endless, endless piles of plot holes and crucial / not so crucial plot elements completely MIA in Revolutions look so much more like bad writing and throwing lots of poorly thought out ideas at the wall to see what sticks, as opposed a lot of plot elements left out of the primary media with the express intention to "fill in the blanks" or "continue those aspects of the story" by placing them in secondary media, is a whole lot stronger.Question regarding MxO story writing:Rarebit wrote: Left it open as far as I know. There are
Do you know if the Wachowskis have set certain aspects and questions,
like character backgrounds or fates, or elaborations of the universe,
to be answered in MxO in a special way?
For example (I'm not
asking about these particular things): Seraph's history, or Neo's
connection to the Source in the Real or the nature of the yellow
vision. Just the stuff I'm talking about.
Or did they just leave it open for Chadwick and the "team" to answer on their own?
evidently a few things established in the movies that they'd rather we
didn't mess with too much, but I haven't heard that they had any
particular goals in mind for the continuing story when they handed it
off to Paul, other than the first year's "peace and what people do etc"
theme that they gave him.
I asked this question exactly for this reason, to get more insight into this topic.
However, this answer doesn't prove your point at all.
"There are evidently a few things established in the movies that they'd rather we didn't mess with too much".
That could very well mean that they had certain answers in mind, and didn't want anyone to mess with these areas and probably giving "wrong" answers. They also rejected a few of Rarebit's ideas, for this reason I suppose.
"Established" can mean "ascertained", but also "introduced".
It's obvious that they did leave Chadwick and the rest lots of freedom to do stuff with their characters and universe, but apparently not full freedom.
Also, Rarebit doesn't talk to the Wachowskis all day. A few months ago, he didn't even know that they had anything to do with the game at all. He said he met Chadwick just a few times and wasn't asking him questions about the brothers - so this statement merely states that they haven't given him instructions to answer stuff.
However, another interpretation is that they really left out blanks to be filled by others. In this case, I'll of course loose my "admiration" of the movies' storyline and the Matrix at all.
Already way back in the day, my Dad was wondering if they "weren't just messing with us" with all this confusing talk and mysteries. I didn't really know, but I was assuming that they certainly had something in mind. If this turns out not to be the case, I'll of course change my opinion.
However, this answer doesn't prove your point at all.
"There are evidently a few things established in the movies that they'd rather we didn't mess with too much".
That could very well mean that they had certain answers in mind, and didn't want anyone to mess with these areas and probably giving "wrong" answers. They also rejected a few of Rarebit's ideas, for this reason I suppose.
"Established" can mean "ascertained", but also "introduced".
It's obvious that they did leave Chadwick and the rest lots of freedom to do stuff with their characters and universe, but apparently not full freedom.
Also, Rarebit doesn't talk to the Wachowskis all day. A few months ago, he didn't even know that they had anything to do with the game at all. He said he met Chadwick just a few times and wasn't asking him questions about the brothers - so this statement merely states that they haven't given him instructions to answer stuff.
However, another interpretation is that they really left out blanks to be filled by others. In this case, I'll of course loose my "admiration" of the movies' storyline and the Matrix at all.
Already way back in the day, my Dad was wondering if they "weren't just messing with us" with all this confusing talk and mysteries. I didn't really know, but I was assuming that they certainly had something in mind. If this turns out not to be the case, I'll of course change my opinion.
zeroone506 wrote:
if they "haven't given him instructions to answer stuff", don't you think that they would have actually done so by now considering these are pretty big "reveals" with regards to the numerous holes and issues already raised?
either the w bros physically wrote this stuff down and handed it to the matrix online dev team and said, "THIS is how its gonna go down in the first year with regards the big questions regarding neo and all the other stuff Paperghost and other random people are going to complain about furiously for years to come on forums the world over" - but they keep forgetting to actually phone up the guy driving the plot of the game and tell him he might want to make space for these big reveals
OR
.....they didn't, and left the development / resolving of those issues for people other than themselves, a group of game developers and a comicbook writer (who as far as I am aware, had no involvement in any of the films whatsoever) to fill in all of the blanks from their third and final movie in the matrix trilogy - which would be a weird thing to do in terms of making a specific set of allusions to things specific to their own inner creative vision then giving it to a total stranger to "fix".
OR
(worst case scenario), they never even intended for any of that stuff to be "resolved" because they thought the film stood on its own two feet "as is".
does it seem realistic that they would do A, or B, or C?
well, let me ask you - debating aside, which do you personally see as being more likely and credible given the above? that somewhere, somehow, the w bros do indeed have this stuff written down and sometime in the near future will remember to phone up rarebit and fill him in? or that they just made the film and thought, "okay, job done, this all makes perfect sense, cya" and never had any intention of fleshing out these problems and issues with the film, even if only because their internal creative process went horribly wrong somehow and they didn't actually ever see any problems with Revolutions when making it?
I asked this question exactly for this reason, to get more insight into this topic.yeah, but come on - you're really reaching with regards ways to explain away these issues with the final film at this point. how far do we want to go in wondering if the w bros actually came up with stuff to fill these blanks? can you work them out from the film? well, no. okay then, we'll wonder if they made the final film in that way because they expressly intended to resolve those issues in some piece of secondary media after the event, like a seraph game...no wait, they won't do that now....okay then, we'll pump for matrix online. that seems reasonable. oh wait, the guy responsible for driving the story along in conjunction with some other guy isn't even aware of any of that stuff being addressed in the future. okay then, we'll imagine that maybe the w bros did write all these things down but they're sitting in a vault in wackowski towers somewhere, come to save us all in a matrix fans darkest hour.
However, this answer doesn't prove your point at all.
"There are evidently a few things established in the movies that they'd rather we didn't mess with too much".
That could very well mean that they had certain answers in mind, and didn't want anyone to mess with these areas and probably giving "wrong" answers. They also rejected a few of Rarebit's ideas, for this reason I suppose.
"Established" can mean "ascertained", but also "introduced".
It's obvious that they did leave Chadwick and the rest lots of freedom to do stuff with their characters and universe, but apparently not full freedom.
Also, Rarebit doesn't talk to the Wachowskis all day. A few months ago, he didn't even know that they had anything to do with the game at all. He said he met Chadwick just a few times and wasn't asking him questions about the brothers - so this statement merely states that they haven't given him instructions to answer stuff.
if they "haven't given him instructions to answer stuff", don't you think that they would have actually done so by now considering these are pretty big "reveals" with regards to the numerous holes and issues already raised?
either the w bros physically wrote this stuff down and handed it to the matrix online dev team and said, "THIS is how its gonna go down in the first year with regards the big questions regarding neo and all the other stuff Paperghost and other random people are going to complain about furiously for years to come on forums the world over" - but they keep forgetting to actually phone up the guy driving the plot of the game and tell him he might want to make space for these big reveals
OR
.....they didn't, and left the development / resolving of those issues for people other than themselves, a group of game developers and a comicbook writer (who as far as I am aware, had no involvement in any of the films whatsoever) to fill in all of the blanks from their third and final movie in the matrix trilogy - which would be a weird thing to do in terms of making a specific set of allusions to things specific to their own inner creative vision then giving it to a total stranger to "fix".
OR
(worst case scenario), they never even intended for any of that stuff to be "resolved" because they thought the film stood on its own two feet "as is".
does it seem realistic that they would do A, or B, or C?
However, another interpretation is that they really left out blanks to be filled by others. In this case, I'll of course loose my "admiration" of the movies' storyline and the Matrix at all.
Already way back in the day, my Dad was wondering if they "weren't just messing with us" with all this confusing talk and mysteries. I didn't really know, but I was assuming that they certainly had something in mind. If this turns out not to be the case, I'll of course change my opinion.
well, let me ask you - debating aside, which do you personally see as being more likely and credible given the above? that somewhere, somehow, the w bros do indeed have this stuff written down and sometime in the near future will remember to phone up rarebit and fill him in? or that they just made the film and thought, "okay, job done, this all makes perfect sense, cya" and never had any intention of fleshing out these problems and issues with the film, even if only because their internal creative process went horribly wrong somehow and they didn't actually ever see any problems with Revolutions when making it?
yeah, but come on - you're really reaching with regards ways to explain away these issues with the final film at this point. how far do we want to go in wondering if the w bros actually came up with stuff to fill these blanks?
No, I'm not. I'm just staying reasonable and don't make one-sided conclusions. Wait, have I said "no, this means they have in a vault"? No.
Before Rarebit suggested some kind of idea and got an email from the Wachowskis, some asked him and he said "I haven't heard anything about them". By your logic, I'd have to conclude that "okay, they've forsaken us". But not quite, apparently, as it turned out later.
We know that the communication between Rarebit and Chadwick isn't very frequent, let alone the Ws. At least before Rarebit gained more control, he also just new the outline for the "first six chapters".
So, is it really that far-fetched not to interpret Rarebit's "I haven't heard about it" as "it doesn't exist"? No, it isn't.
oh wait, the guy responsible for driving the story along in conjunction with some other guy isn't even aware of any of that stuff being addressed in the future. okay then, we'll imagine that maybe the w bros did write all these things down but they're sitting in a vault in wackowski towers somewhere, come to save us all in a matrix fans darkest hour.
I don't think it's so implausible that they wouldn't give all intended plot evolvements right away, even to Chadwick. That would be obvious if they had stopped influencing the game, but they still do, apparently.
And he gave Rarebit and co. only the first 6-7 chapters at the beginning.
So we don't have a triumvirate of equal storytellers, but rather something like a chain where one gives the other one ideas and outlines to work out.
if they "haven't given him instructions to answer stuff", don't you think that they would have actually done so by now considering these are pretty big "reveals" with regards to the numerous holes and issues already raised?
The storyline so far has not revolved around those issues, and has been doing pretty well without them. It might even take a year or more until we find out about Neo's status, or other important questions.
So why do you think is it impossible that that Wachowskis haven't yet revealed this? Just asking.
But all in all, I do see the lack of communication a big problem in MxO in any case. That was problematic with the LET, and is still problematic in this case.
well, let me ask you - debating aside, which do you personally see as being more likely and credible given the above? that somewhere, somehow, the w bros do indeed have this stuff written down and sometime in the near future will remember to phone up rarebit and fill him in? or that they just made the film and thought, "okay, job done, this all makes perfect sense, cya" and never had any intention of fleshing out these problems and issues with the film, even if only because their internal creative process went horribly wrong somehow and they didn't actually ever see any problems with Revolutions when making it?
Wishful thinking. I was already believing the same before MxO launched and people were bitching about the sequels - they said it was BS, I thought there was a meaning, but there wasn't much to prove either my or their point of view.
The reason why I still proceed from "A" or the like, is wishful thinking plus lack of information, and the existance of reasonable arguments to consider "A" possible with the current information.
Apart from that, it is a bit difficult for me to accept that such incredibly glaring questions without any explanation whatsoever were implemented without any thought. If there's an evidence that it's the case, I'll accept it.
EDIT: Oops, I managed to misread the point of this paragraph as "let me ask you, why are you so sure it's this way?" Stupid idiot. But I'm gonna let this stand now.
Actually, if I throw away all the "convictions" I've been having about the Matrix franchise for years, I sure don't know what's more plausible.
What speaks against the second one is that the questions in the movies were all too glaring to be overlooked like this. On the other side, if they didn't take it so seriously with the storyline and rather wanted to confuse the audience with symbolism and question marks, it'd make sense.
What speaks for the first one is that it's entirely possible that they haven't revealed everything to their "sub-writers", since they're apparently still involved. Actually, some interview with Chadwick made this impression on me.
Other than that, look above. At the end of the day, I simply have no idea. But the Mexican standoff in Hel Club still makes sense.
FYI, the reason I asked this question was because after writing another post in this thread, I started wondering: "Hold on dude, how do you know?"
So I start doubting and come up with this in "ask a dev".
If he had replied with "No, they encouraged us to invent our own answers and interpretations", I'd have come here and said: "I was wrong and deeply apologize for my misguided arguments, I hope you understand this".
If he had replied with "Yea, they gave us developments and answers to write into the game, but I won't tell you =p", I'd have come here and said: "Lol pwnt n00b I was r1ght 4ll the t1m3!11!".
But that answer leaves me pretty much in the dark about the Wachowski's intentions or the movies, apart from maybe lowering my conviction and boosting your "sceptism".
If it does anything, then reminding me to *CENSORED* stop taking my assumptions for granted facts
All my points about the Ws intending to answer the questions in MxO, although not being unlogical, lacked any serious substance and were assumptions / wishful thinking.
I should have realized it and made it clear.
However, my opinion waits for something more substantial to change it.
PS: Oh, I forgot.
"but they keep forgetting to actually phone up the guy driving the plot of the game and tell him he might want to make space for these big reveals"
There are evidently a few things established in the movies that they'd rather we didn't mess with too much.
You know how this sounds to me? Like they wanted to make "space" for the reveals.
So I start doubting and come up with this in "ask a dev".
If he had replied with "No, they encouraged us to invent our own answers and interpretations", I'd have come here and said: "I was wrong and deeply apologize for my misguided arguments, I hope you understand this".
If he had replied with "Yea, they gave us developments and answers to write into the game, but I won't tell you =p", I'd have come here and said: "Lol pwnt n00b I was r1ght 4ll the t1m3!11!".
But that answer leaves me pretty much in the dark about the Wachowski's intentions or the movies, apart from maybe lowering my conviction and boosting your "sceptism".
If it does anything, then reminding me to *CENSORED* stop taking my assumptions for granted facts
All my points about the Ws intending to answer the questions in MxO, although not being unlogical, lacked any serious substance and were assumptions / wishful thinking.
I should have realized it and made it clear.
However, my opinion waits for something more substantial to change it.
PS: Oh, I forgot.
"but they keep forgetting to actually phone up the guy driving the plot of the game and tell him he might want to make space for these big reveals"
There are evidently a few things established in the movies that they'd rather we didn't mess with too much.
You know how this sounds to me? Like they wanted to make "space" for the reveals.
