| The Matrix Analysis |
January 4, 2009 at 1:xxam
I promised an analysis of the "Matrix". A big mistake. So I will make this quick and as
painless as possible because I really don't want to do it. There are other things I would
rather do.
Remember, that a movie can be enjoyable for many reasons; a movie can receive
excellent ratings such as an Academy Award for many different factors. So don't turn up
your nose when someone says they enjoy a movie. They may enjoy it for reasons you
would never imagine. My favorite feature of movies is expansive cinematography.
I guess when someone indicates they love a movie, they should qualify the statement. I
will not today. One reason is because of the theme of the movie itself.
Of course, to my untrained eye, there seemed to be many themes in the movies and
many of them conflicting ones. I won't list all of them. Some of the statements maybe
inflammatory. But for those who really need to know about the inflammatory ones, maybe
they would be rather obvious to them and no comments are needed.
Basically in the end, you have an old woman (whom some MAY say should KNOW
better) sitting on the bench "according to some" spouting the same old "nonsense".
Faith and belief.
Hadn't "Mr. Smith" told them over and over there it was a figment of her imagination?
Another conflicting statement. Faith and belief IS imagination to a certain degree. (I
would be laughing about the faith/belief statements for WEEKS. Sorry.)
And where was her saviour, the one she had SO much belief in?
Well, according to the visuals, someone off "in the sun or sunlight" where SOME may
say being "burnt alive!" Translation: "in hell, where he SHOULD be! For messing up our
world! Talking about he was fighting and tearing every thing up cuz "he CHOOSE to! I
know he was out of breath but WHAT KIND OF EXPLANATION WAS THAT?
(Gosh! Do I EVER love the Arts!)
Well! What else am I SUPPOSED to think!?
And what does the old woman on the bench says about the ending, (to paraphrase)
"NOW, we will get a little peace! Maybe". And then after his death, everything had
converted back to a world of peace and beauty. I think I missed something though.
Because wasn't that world supposed to be there imagination? The world they were
fighting against?
I'm telling you: in many ways the movie is funny. NOT to say it was intended to be
comical but it is. From a philosophical point of view.
Mr. Smith? Where is he? Or they? Well, if he said he didn't exist and he was just part of
some kind of program, why should it matter what happen to him? Even HE would say so.
They would just create another program, which would be more manageable.
Same world. Different actors. Same game.
I tell you: Funny.
Final Analysis: Nothing's changed. Just something called "time and space" seems to
screw up some of the "special effects" of those who "don't exist".
If you ignore all the religious references of the Three Great Pillars of Faith about why we
SHOULD fight about faith, I guess you may say this would be a perfect movie for atheists
or agnostics because of some of its possibly twisted logic. Sometimes they DO present
some valid points that make you think. But another subject matter for another day and
not a subject that I am really interested in discussing.
But let me give you ("unbelievers") something to think about remembering that I do not
remember MOST of the script from all of the movies. It requires that you get somewhat
into a political frame of mind in order to understand my question better:
If, as Mr. Smith insisted (I think) there is definitely someone bigger than the little old
woman sitting on the bench who MAY control her environment, why can't there be
Someone bigger than they?
Did they kill Him or something? (Just something SATAN would insinuate and LIE about!
YES! We WILL get back to the subject of sacrifices!)
AND
EVERY one seems to make want to qualify whether there is a "GOD" with the
assumption there is life after death. (Such a tiresome subject!)
"There is no God. We are here. Then we die. That is IT!"
Forget ALL the religious doctrine about the afterlife: Why must these two subjects be so
closely connected?
You mean if I can prove there is life after death ...something YOU can't accomplish on
your own........THEN you will be there is a God?
(The Bible said, "No! You will not. If you don't believe Moses and the Prophets who are
alive, you will NOT believe someone even from the dead!")
Answer: The discussion of immorality (and NOT just life after death) it is a NECESSARY
part of the debate for people who are lazy and greedy like SOME in that GREAT movie.
They want something that is ONLY appealing to eye and gratifying to the flesh and
pleasing to the ears. "It had better taste good, look good, SOUND good and make me
LOOK good! (The Bible) We don't care about it being good or not! Gosh! It can be EVIL!
As long as it does the above! We do NOT care! Can you make me live forever? Make
me vampire if you must!"
Why? Because the fallen nature simply does not have the spiritual constitution to
ENDURE anything ELSE! All things that qualifies as good MUST be able to be seen,
held, savoured, used and/or abused and touched. "Our spirits are DEAD to ANY and
EVERY thing else! ARE YOU NUTS?!"
"That is the ONLY way I can "know" ANYTHING!"
I don't think much about this subject and I MAY change my line of reasoning in the future
but my impulse now is to tell you to SIMPLIFY the debate! Take the notion of YOUR
immortality or a afterlife out of the equation. Could you accept the idea that a God exists
even if it meant a limited existence for those who serve Him?
Don't make this a debate about Western or Eastern philosophies religions either
because the Buddhists seem the most able to simplify the debate in that matter.
I would NOT make this a movie about politics such as capitalism vs Communism and etc.,
either. (So don't start a war with the atheists and the Communists. smile) Like I said: SO
many themes one COULD comment on and maybe NONE the collaborations of writers
intended. So don't blame them for nuttin'! And we haven't even gotten to Descartes
theories either. MAYBE another day.
But I DO love those movies!
A great movie for those who want to increase sale of psychotropic drugs, too. Notice how
our hero was hooked up a chair and given the greatest animal tranquilizer of all time
after his beloved sadly said, "Yes" when told by him, "It is SO beautiful!"
(Laughing!) Gosh! Those folks would definitely NOT be artists like Picassos or interior
designers or architects!
OK. Some could say that he was in a electric chair.
I know. Me very, very, very bad. Especially since the ENTIRE movie was about faith,
belief and imagination! Sorry but the fight between faith and so-called reality is an
UGLY, UGLY one. I laugh because people don't really realize that! Those will little faith
may not see some of the twisted underlying themes that creep into their minds and may
affect their thinking later. No need to fear though. A person of real faith can ALWAYS
withstand a little questioning. A little debate and/or maybe a little adjustment of course. It
is NOT called persecution. (I almost left out the word "not"! Whew!) If no one can
question you about anything, it is simple: you do NOT have faith. Faith can STAND!
Bring on some more great movies that encourages introspection! And maybe not the
ones intended. I will be laughing about so much (for days) that folks may think I am nuts:
Me: "The NERVE of some people!"
But THAT is my philosophical analysis WITHOUT mentioning Descartes! Okay? You
probably would like that analysis even less.
Updated: at 1:xxam 1/4/10: OK. I will watch the movies AGAIN! One day. Just remember
though: you only have ONE time to make a FIRST impression and don't blame ANY
impression on MY mind. I DO love the movies, though. LOVE THEM! Just as I have been
impressed!
I promised an analysis of the "Matrix". A big mistake. So I will make this quick and as
painless as possible because I really don't want to do it. There are other things I would
rather do.
Remember, that a movie can be enjoyable for many reasons; a movie can receive
excellent ratings such as an Academy Award for many different factors. So don't turn up
your nose when someone says they enjoy a movie. They may enjoy it for reasons you
would never imagine. My favorite feature of movies is expansive cinematography.
I guess when someone indicates they love a movie, they should qualify the statement. I
will not today. One reason is because of the theme of the movie itself.
Of course, to my untrained eye, there seemed to be many themes in the movies and
many of them conflicting ones. I won't list all of them. Some of the statements maybe
inflammatory. But for those who really need to know about the inflammatory ones, maybe
they would be rather obvious to them and no comments are needed.
Basically in the end, you have an old woman (whom some MAY say should KNOW
better) sitting on the bench "according to some" spouting the same old "nonsense".
Faith and belief.
Hadn't "Mr. Smith" told them over and over there it was a figment of her imagination?
Another conflicting statement. Faith and belief IS imagination to a certain degree. (I
would be laughing about the faith/belief statements for WEEKS. Sorry.)
And where was her saviour, the one she had SO much belief in?
Well, according to the visuals, someone off "in the sun or sunlight" where SOME may
say being "burnt alive!" Translation: "in hell, where he SHOULD be! For messing up our
world! Talking about he was fighting and tearing every thing up cuz "he CHOOSE to! I
know he was out of breath but WHAT KIND OF EXPLANATION WAS THAT?
(Gosh! Do I EVER love the Arts!)
Well! What else am I SUPPOSED to think!?
And what does the old woman on the bench says about the ending, (to paraphrase)
"NOW, we will get a little peace! Maybe". And then after his death, everything had
converted back to a world of peace and beauty. I think I missed something though.
Because wasn't that world supposed to be there imagination? The world they were
fighting against?
I'm telling you: in many ways the movie is funny. NOT to say it was intended to be
comical but it is. From a philosophical point of view.
Mr. Smith? Where is he? Or they? Well, if he said he didn't exist and he was just part of
some kind of program, why should it matter what happen to him? Even HE would say so.
They would just create another program, which would be more manageable.
Same world. Different actors. Same game.
I tell you: Funny.
Final Analysis: Nothing's changed. Just something called "time and space" seems to
screw up some of the "special effects" of those who "don't exist".
If you ignore all the religious references of the Three Great Pillars of Faith about why we
SHOULD fight about faith, I guess you may say this would be a perfect movie for atheists
or agnostics because of some of its possibly twisted logic. Sometimes they DO present
some valid points that make you think. But another subject matter for another day and
not a subject that I am really interested in discussing.
But let me give you ("unbelievers") something to think about remembering that I do not
remember MOST of the script from all of the movies. It requires that you get somewhat
into a political frame of mind in order to understand my question better:
If, as Mr. Smith insisted (I think) there is definitely someone bigger than the little old
woman sitting on the bench who MAY control her environment, why can't there be
Someone bigger than they?
Did they kill Him or something? (Just something SATAN would insinuate and LIE about!
YES! We WILL get back to the subject of sacrifices!)
AND
EVERY one seems to make want to qualify whether there is a "GOD" with the
assumption there is life after death. (Such a tiresome subject!)
"There is no God. We are here. Then we die. That is IT!"
Forget ALL the religious doctrine about the afterlife: Why must these two subjects be so
closely connected?
You mean if I can prove there is life after death ...something YOU can't accomplish on
your own........THEN you will be there is a God?
(The Bible said, "No! You will not. If you don't believe Moses and the Prophets who are
alive, you will NOT believe someone even from the dead!")
Answer: The discussion of immorality (and NOT just life after death) it is a NECESSARY
part of the debate for people who are lazy and greedy like SOME in that GREAT movie.
They want something that is ONLY appealing to eye and gratifying to the flesh and
pleasing to the ears. "It had better taste good, look good, SOUND good and make me
LOOK good! (The Bible) We don't care about it being good or not! Gosh! It can be EVIL!
As long as it does the above! We do NOT care! Can you make me live forever? Make
me vampire if you must!"
Why? Because the fallen nature simply does not have the spiritual constitution to
ENDURE anything ELSE! All things that qualifies as good MUST be able to be seen,
held, savoured, used and/or abused and touched. "Our spirits are DEAD to ANY and
EVERY thing else! ARE YOU NUTS?!"
"That is the ONLY way I can "know" ANYTHING!"
I don't think much about this subject and I MAY change my line of reasoning in the future
but my impulse now is to tell you to SIMPLIFY the debate! Take the notion of YOUR
immortality or a afterlife out of the equation. Could you accept the idea that a God exists
even if it meant a limited existence for those who serve Him?
Don't make this a debate about Western or Eastern philosophies religions either
because the Buddhists seem the most able to simplify the debate in that matter.
I would NOT make this a movie about politics such as capitalism vs Communism and etc.,
either. (So don't start a war with the atheists and the Communists. smile) Like I said: SO
many themes one COULD comment on and maybe NONE the collaborations of writers
intended. So don't blame them for nuttin'! And we haven't even gotten to Descartes
theories either. MAYBE another day.
But I DO love those movies!
A great movie for those who want to increase sale of psychotropic drugs, too. Notice how
our hero was hooked up a chair and given the greatest animal tranquilizer of all time
after his beloved sadly said, "Yes" when told by him, "It is SO beautiful!"
(Laughing!) Gosh! Those folks would definitely NOT be artists like Picassos or interior
designers or architects!
OK. Some could say that he was in a electric chair.
I know. Me very, very, very bad. Especially since the ENTIRE movie was about faith,
belief and imagination! Sorry but the fight between faith and so-called reality is an
UGLY, UGLY one. I laugh because people don't really realize that! Those will little faith
may not see some of the twisted underlying themes that creep into their minds and may
affect their thinking later. No need to fear though. A person of real faith can ALWAYS
withstand a little questioning. A little debate and/or maybe a little adjustment of course. It
is NOT called persecution. (I almost left out the word "not"! Whew!) If no one can
question you about anything, it is simple: you do NOT have faith. Faith can STAND!
Bring on some more great movies that encourages introspection! And maybe not the
ones intended. I will be laughing about so much (for days) that folks may think I am nuts:
Me: "The NERVE of some people!"
But THAT is my philosophical analysis WITHOUT mentioning Descartes! Okay? You
probably would like that analysis even less.
Updated: at 1:xxam 1/4/10: OK. I will watch the movies AGAIN! One day. Just remember
though: you only have ONE time to make a FIRST impression and don't blame ANY
impression on MY mind. I DO love the movies, though. LOVE THEM! Just as I have been
impressed!
 |
 |