The Matrix

The Matrix is one of those movies that it's really hard to write a review about. I have a hard time writing reviews on huge ground breaking block busters because so much has been said. It goes the same with Star Wars, Harry Potter, Lord of the Rings, and other films. Even after this rewatch where I think I have things to say, especially considering the movie is 20 years old this year, it still feels weird reviewing a film that has had such an impact on cinema, for better or for worse. I think my approach with this review is more on the basis of areas where the movie holds up and where it doesn't. I also hope that it can serve as an introduction to people who maybe haven't gotten around to seeing this film in the 20 years it's been out and what that might be like as opposed to people like me who have grown up with its influence manifesting in front of me.

Who knows, this review might not even be published, but I'll at least make an attempt.

For a little bit of background, The Matrix came out at an interesting time in cinematic history. The 90's for better or worse was an interesting transition point from the cinematic world of the 70's and 80's with blockbuster hits like Star Wars, Jaws, Terminator, Die Hard, the list goes on, to the cinematic world of today with Lord of the Rings, Harry Potter, the advent of Superhero films, and most notably, the emergence of CGI.

That is not to say there weren't great films to come out of the 90's. The picture above does a pretty good job at illustrating at least some of the big blockbuster hits to come out of the decade to include the Matrix.

But something I took note of in this viewing of The Matrix was the influences of both the emergence of CGI and big budget epics, but also the fight the system attitudes that were starting to form in response to commercialism, the rising age of technology, and a rising feeling of rebellion against "the man".

I have never claimed to make this blog about philosophy, social trends, or really all that political (when I can avoid it), but I do think it is interesting seeing The Matrix from that lens. Take the leather for example. In the late 90's, it made sense. It was edgy and trendy, symbolizing a break from the mainstream, but today it just looks silly. While there are for sure parts of this film that do not feel dated at all and have held up incredibly well, there are a lot of moments in the film that feel very reminiscent of a time with transitioning attitudes and ideas coming to life in film.

And if there's one thing that we can point to the Matrix and say thank you, it was launching Keanu Reeves into the star he is today.

Keanu Reeves plays the main character, Thomas Anderson (not enough people talk about how that's his real name), who goes by the hacker name, Neo. Neo is a computer hacker who has begun hearing the inklings of something called, the Matrix and he's on a journey to find out what that is when the movie begins.

Now when the movie first came out, there was a lot of mystery behind what the Matrix was. It was such a vague term that most people didn't know the definition of that the discovery of it was just as intriguing to the audience as it was to Neo.

Today however, the truth about the Matrix is pretty well known, and Neo discovers, after meeting some mysterious individuals named Trinity (played by Carrie Anne-Moss), and the illusive Morpheus (played by Lawrence Fishburne), that the Matrix is a simulation that all humanity is plugged into. The 1990's surrounding they live in is an illusion that a futuristic, post apocalyptic machine run world has pulled over humanities eyes in order to fuel their AI driven world.

Morpheus brings Neo out of the simulated world and into the real world because he believes that Neo is a prophetic savior who will lead the revolution of humanity against the machines who keep everyone slaves within The Matrix.

The rest is discovering if Neo is The One, the fight against the machines, and a lot of, at the time, state of the art kung fu, gun play, and really interesting effects that I will admit, still remain impressive today (for the most part).

Cards up front, I still really enjoy this film. I've read a lot in the years since I saw it last kind of pointing out its flaws and there are people out there who say that this movie doesn't hold up as much as people say it does. There are elements of those arguments that I agree with and some of them I don't, but overall, I'd say this movie does still hold up by itself. It's actually pretty intriguing to me to watch this by itself and try and think about it without the context of the 2nd and 3rd film which are more unanimously criticized.

I think what I'll try and do is point out the movie's flaws or things that either I didn't like or don't hold up as much as they used to. At the end of the day, the good really does outweigh the bad in with this movie, but that's not to say that there are not some points of this movie that don't work as well today.

The first really noticeable thing I'd say is that the acting in this film is, in reality, not that great. I say that with a huge caveat because the truth is, I like a lot of the actors in this film and I do think they are talented. Furthermore, the exception to that thought is Lawrence Fishburne and Hugo Weaving, those two are fantastic.

But the truth is, as much as I love Keanu Reeves and Carrie Ann Moss, their performances in this are pretty bland, especially in the areas where I'm supposed to believe there is this love connection between the two of them. Other actors in the film, especially the ones that didn't get the same launching of careers that the main stars did really give performances that, while not horrendous, don't really hold up.

I think the main reason for this is because the main star of the Matrix isn't Keanu, it's more the philosophical ideas and themes within the film. I do think the Wachowskis were tapping into not only their own philosophical passions that seem to drive a lot of their work, but also the counter culture that this movie represented. The characters in The Matrix are less characters than they are symbols, religious, philosophical, social, or otherwise.

I do think it works and the truth is, they're not the worst thing in the world, but I think a lot of elements of traditional story telling was overlooked for an interesting counter culture story.

I do think the caveats to this rule are Hugo Weaving and Laurence Fishburne because these two were just doing something totally different. I think these two color in the blank spots left by the other characters and give the movie some flavor.

While Morpheus's character is pretty much the epitome of the philosophical nature of this film, he's not just an unemotional monk, he's got a lot of character to him where you understand why people follow him.

Smith on the other hand is just so iconic that it's hard to see it work with anybody other than Hugo Weaving. In fact you can see it in the other agents. While the other two agents in the film are super bland and emotionless, Hugo Weaving's computer-like villany is just really entertaining. You would think that wouldn't work against a "Woah" blank slate that Keanu plays, but it actually really works because he adds character to someone who probably shouldn't have had any.

The other big thing that doesn't exactly hold up is the CGI, especially when you see the machines in the real world.

Luckily, everything in the real world is a pretty muted color and very dark so it allows for the bad CGI to be masked a little, but that doesn't totally negate the fact that the CGI definitely looks pretty dated.

There are a couple of effects like that in other places in the movie and I remember it being quite a bit worse in the sequels, but I will pair this criticism with the fact that while the CGI does look a little dated, a lot of this movie was produced with practical effects, even in moments that had some CGI in it. Because of that, even the parts where the CGI might look a little dated, it still works because the practical effects do a lot for the way the movie holds up. I remember watching some documentaries on the making of this film and it is a good reminder that while those practical effects and stunts can be expensive, if it works towards a good story, it can be well worth it.

The other "flaws" in the film are small little plot holes or funny issues that years and years of examining this film have created. I won't go into many of them because I don't really think that's the most constructive use of my time, but I will note some of my favorites.

The Oracle (played by the late Gloria Foster) is a good character and the scene in her apartment is a really nice splash of color in a green shaded dark 90's film. If I'm looking at the film by itself, there are no issues here and Gloria Foster did a great job. That being said, this character doesn't make sense if you know (from the later movies) that she is a program. I know they explain it a little, but I don't think that was how she was originally written and I think it's really funny somethings that they had to kind of retcon in order to work it into a sequel.

Neo's real name is Tom... I still think that's funny.

Who were these guys? Did Trinity send them or did she just know that one of them had a white rabbit tattoo? Why are they dressed like that? Is that what people dressed like in the 90's? Was that what people in the 90's thought were going to be the trends? What's up with the nose piercing girl in the back? The introduction of Neo is kind of rushed and dated, partly because Neo is a blank canvas for the audience to latch onto. See awesome old Cracked After Hours video for explanation.

Now that I'm done nitpicking and trying to pull flaws out of this movie, I want to talk about the awesome things.

So while he's a blank slate of a character, I am so happy that Wild Wild West was so appealing to Will Smith that he turned down this role because while I would have loved to watch that movie, in that scenario Keanu would have only been known as Ted from Bill and Ted and the Point Break dude. Keanu Reeves is a gem and I don't care how meh this performance is, its brought so much joy since.

The action in this movie is spectacular and it still holds up. Yes, the CGI is not always great and sometimes it kind of looks like Spy Kids 3D, but like I said, a lot of it is practical effects and it looks awesome to this day.

The choreography, the sets, the ideas, and the science fiction nature of this movie really sets it apart from anything we had ever seen and it feels like its own thing. A good example of this is the movie Dune. I'm trying (emphasis on trying) to watch that 1984 film and I just can't help that it's was trying to replicate and fill the void left by the conclusion of Star Wars in 1983. The Matrix feels so original and fresh (even today) that it just feels like they created their own form of science fiction and it deserves to be praised.

And yes, I have seen Dark City, I do know that some of the ideas in The Matrix are not totally new or unique, but I do have to give credit where its due. As much as I find Dark City intriguing, it never was going to reach that innovative level the Matrix got to. Whether its the sets, the story, the concepts, or the mind blowing action and stunts, The Matrix stands out as the superior idea of simulated reality science fiction because of its unique take on it. So much that when people draw inspiration in that type of Science fiction, they're pulling from The Matrix, not Dark City or the other material that delves into the same ideas.

There are so many influences that The Matrix has had on society as a whole. I can list all the problems with the sequels (and believe me, I probably will when I get around to watching those films), but the first one (regardless of parts that are outdated or flawed) still really holds up and has huge influence on the world of cinema we live in today.

Unfortunately... this is also cinema today and that means that somebody is floating around the idea of doing some kind of continuation, whether its a reboot, sequel, whatever, of The Matrix... and while it's an inevitability because everything gets remade one way or another, because this is the reality we live in... do we have to?

Regardless, the Matrix is a film that does stand the test of time (for the most part). If you haven't seen the film, please do yourself a favor and jump down a nostalgic road back to the 90's where Rage Against the Machine was in their prime raging environment and the idea of the internet was still pretty new and maleable. I didn't even talk about the elements of this film was really prophetic on when it came to technology but I do want to give some of it still for you to discover in case you haven't seen it yet.

But have you watched The Matrix recently? Does it hold up? What are your thoughts today as opposed to twenty or so years ago? Comment and Discuss below! You can also send me your thoughts on Twitter @MovieSymposium as well as send me your requests for films I should review in the future. If you follow me on Twitter, you can get updates on future movie news and reviews coming out of this blog.

Thanks for reading!