I bet Neitzche didn't have cool pince-nez shades.

Matrix was not original. It was a popcorn flick. It had good special effects, and the plot was above average for an action movie, but it wasn't a breakthrough movie. The special effects were good, but essentially just improvements on previous movies. The rotating camera work had been done before in a documentary. The martial arts were tropes from Hong Kong cinema. They just integrated these features into one film. The Messianistic aspects of the film had been overused many times before in everything from Arthurian legend to Star Wars. The philosophical aspects of the film had been discussed before, and better, in any number of science fiction novels. Want some interesting ideas on consciousness and reality? Pick up some Philip K. Dick novels.

Or just keep with the Hollywood version. The first movie was entertaining, even if the sequels were an utter hash. There's nothing wrong with enjoying them. But don't pretend they're anything special. Their main influence has been and will be the mixture of special effects and stylized fighting scenes they presented.

Well said, Ba.

Ok, ok, I was wrong, sorry.

serriously, Philip K Dick is worth a read. "Bladerunner" is a film adaptation of his novel, 'Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep', and it goes deeper than most modern claptrap ever will.

There's no money in making the popcorn eaters *think*, see...

Ok, I'll try it.

Have you read "It's a good life". I'm afraid I don't know who it's by, I read it in a sci-fi collection. It's about a boy who kills people if they think bad thoughts. It's really excellent.

Sounds like an old twilight zone episode. Ba can probably recall the name.

Yes, they made a twilight zone episode of it, but the book's still better, methinks.

By Jerome Bixby. Adapted from the story for the Twilight Zone by Rod Serling.

Yes! I knew his name began with J. Thank you, Ba. **bows**

If your liked the matrix, I suggest you read Neal Stephenson's Snow Crash. It has many of the same ideas as the matrix, but they are presented better, plus, it has political undertones.

Ok, thanks - My reading list for the holidays just went up a couple of books.

*marvels at Ba's vast wealth of knowledge*

Edit to say they also made a Simpsions episode of it in one of the "Treehouse of Horror" episodes.

While I agree with what pretty much everyone has said, I also is agree with it!

I think the matrix philosophy could be more closely found in Robert Nozsic's(I've got that name SO wrong) Though Machine- which is basically all about wether if given the choice you could live in a computer dream world or the real world you what would you choose....

Also well as borrowing action from Hong Kong movies it borrowed heavily from Anime. Watch 'Ghost in the Shell' and you'll see many of the themes. The Shoot out in the lobby of the first one is basically an exact scene from 'Ghost in the Shell'.


But, I don't think any of these claims (however true they are) can be used to attack the Matrix. It never said it was new, ask the Wilsinsjdsdnjsfdhjf brothers where they got there Ideas from they'll glady say X hong kong movie, philosophy Y or Animie Z.

And I think it *WAS* breakthrough, becuase it was the first movie to sucessfully blend a wide range of ideas, philosophys, camera techinques and action squenences.

Before, maybe someone would know about Anime, someone else would know about a documentry that had a cool camera effect. But the Matrix (I only really talk about one cuase the rest are wanky) brought all of these together. And thats what made it a breakthrough.

Question for everyone, but especially for CJ, if he hasn't given up on his brainchild yet...

Is the intelligence factor subjective? People here seem to disagree whether or not the Matrix is "ingenious" because some saw it as a revelation of new ideas, while others have read/seen/heard those ideas before.

My original response would have been "an intelligent book is one that presents believable new ideas, while a dumb one will just mull over the same tired old stuff"... but then, what if 2 people read the same book, and one is a total innocent and the other is a heard-it-all cynic - would they be able to accurately judge the intelligence factor of one book?

I'm still at work, and I really ought to be going home! :p