Who Thinks Revolutions Was Useless !!!

ragesRemourse

I have to disagree there, and you and I seem to agree on a lot of this!! However, the people who always follow up with "it should have ended this way..." never seem to actually grasp the actual meaning and soul, if you will, of the story. They are used to definates, which is a strong characteristic of Western European and American influanced literature. Very few authors who are in that segment of literature ever leave large portions of the story up for interpretation. However, the matrix, has a very Eastern Oriental influance of literature. A Tao like flow. This is important because this segment of literature embraces questions. They embrace the fact that things do happen and we do not always understand why, we just need to understand that there is a reason for it to happen. These people who say "It should've ended like..." are in need of answers because they have been socially conditioned to expect as much. And no offense to any who feel the story should have ended this way, but it seems that they are quite often those who do not question authority or the system, but rather follow it blindly.

That is how it appears to me, from those whom I've spoken to....

Jedi

There's always another point of view! 😉

DarkV

I don't think any of us will budge, and that's fine, the only problem I had is people trying to discourage others from going to see the movie where they could form their own opinions.

DV> alright, i have gone back and looked at every post, and i have to say, every plot hole that was stated was disputed by either myself, meta, Omega, or one of the others in here...i saw no points that were left open. Yes, i will admit that some of it is open for interpretation, however, that is what makes this series so great, the fact that it can make different people think in different ways, and that it can make people think at all...Even the Wachowski bros have said:

AgentMartin: Do you appreciate people dissecting your movie? Do you find it a bit of an honour, or does it annoy you a little, especially when the person may have it all wrong?
WachowskiBros: There's not necessarily ever an "all wrong". Because it's about what a person gets out of the movie, what an individual gets out of the movie.

I understand that you don't like it, but i have yet to see substantial plot holes or reasons why the movie is not good, aside from the fact that "It makes you think"

Jedi

Bravo. 🙂 Interpretation is key, and to interpret you have to have knowledged, and you have to think...

Okay, first thing's first: This didn't answer all the questions. It brought up new ones as well.

Now, it does complete the tale of the war, which is good. And unlike many people (appearantly), I get the whole Smith thing, the war thing, thing with the kid, and the ending with the peace thing.

Answers for those who didn't get it yet:

First off, you need to understand "programs".

Programs in the Matrix world take the form of people, obviously. But they have constraints. Not the same constraints people do, but constraints imposed upon them nonethess.

Okay. These programs are essentially independant AI's working for the Matrix itself. Think of it like an army. You've got the Architect at the top doing the job of CEO and a bunch of underlings. They don't actually "control" the Matrix. It's too complex to control directly like that. Instead, they supervise and adjust when needed, by heavy change (deja-vu inducing mods) or by direct action (going in as an entity and kicking some ass).

Now, these programs have existence only as bits. It's a computer simulation, after all. But the Matrix is an independant simulation and they don't actually live inside it all the time. They leave, when needed, and go home. Programs at home base do the work of maintaining the whole system and keeping it all running. Programs with nothing to do at home get deleted. This is obviously terrifying if you happen to be an AI program. So they are constrained by the home base to continue to be useful.

These are independant entities, remember. Some of them, like the Mervogian and so forth, have gone rogue. They can exist in the Matrix itself because the Matrix is running independantly and not subject to heavy duty control. That's the only way it can exist and support so many people inside it, sort of thing. The Matrix is controlled by those inside it. These "laws of nature" exist because everyone there thinks they exist. The world is one that everyone agrees on, sort of thing. This isn't really a new philosophical concept about the world, look it up.

The train station and the trainman is a secret passage, sort of thing, between home base and the Matrix proper. He created it as a waypoint between the two areas. The two programs from home base are taking their kid to the Oracle for protection because she has no purpose. If she stayed in the home base, she'd be deleted. She appearantly gets a purpose at the end of the movie by making the sun rise though.

Anyway, Smith was set "free" by Neo destroying him in the first movie. He says as much in the second movie. By "set free", he means that he's gone rogue. Since he was destroyed in the Matrix, he should have returned to home base for deletion. He didn't. He rebelled and gained some power from the merging of him and Neo. He learned how to infect others, for one thing. Neo did just that to him in the first movie, remember?

So he goes around infecting everybody. He infects the Oracle and gets her Oracular powers, in fact. Remember that the Mervogian wanted her eyes? That's a symbol, sort of thing. The Oracle was designed to be an intuitive AI program (Architect lets that slip during the second movie) and her eyes are the symbols of that.

Okay, so he takes control of all this stuff. Neo finds out that Smith has so much power over the Matrix by this relentless self-duplication, that the programs in home base can no longer control him. He's gained vast control over the Matrix itself by simply becoming everyone in it. They can't tolerate him either, but they lack the power to stop him.

Neo, however, has control of the Matrix by the fact that he's "the one". He found that power in the first movie. Smith can't control the Matrix by virtue of his own mind alone, the duplication gives him that power by having many minds thinking the same thing at once. Neo has that power because his mind is free and he knows it's not real. Smith knows it's not real but being a program he is constrained by the rules of the Matrix, which he can now change to some degree. This all puts Neo and Smith on virtually equal footing. The balancing of the equation, as the Oracle put it.

In any case, Smith infects Neo. And that's his downfall, because he's still constrained by the reality of the situation, which is that a death in the real world is a death in the Matrix, and vice versa. So when Neo gets infected and Smith takes over his body, the Architect (via the machine world) kills Neo. Since Smith is inhabiting him, this kills Smith as well and Smith gets deleted from the Matrix, according to the rules of the Matrix. It had to be Neo and not one of the other people Smith has infected because Neo is the only one with natural control over the Matrix itself, and therefore his control forces that death to occur in the Matrix as well. They could have explained this better, but the clues are there anyway.

The deal brokered (off screen) was that Neo would do this in order to buy a peace between free humans and machines. The Architect agreed to free humans who wanted to be freed from the Matrix as well in order to take care of the Smith problem. Neo was really only willing to take this course of action because Trinity died, sort of thing. That's why she had to die plot-wise, so that Neo wouldn't have any ties to prevent him from doing it. He gave beating the hell out of Smith a shot, but when he couldn't win without sacrificing himself, he gave in and did it. Note that he chose the other way in the second movie because of Trinity. So she had to go to finish the story.

Now, like I said, this movie didn't answer some things:
a) Why can Neo control or destroy the machines in the real world?
b) Why can he see this fire type deal when he's blinded?
c) How the hell did he get his conciousness knocked into the Train Station in the beginning without any connection to the Matrix or the machines at all?

If you consider the spiritual side of the movie, then you can come up with answers, but frankly I find that really unsatisfying. They should have either made these answers plain or figured out a better plot without these holes in it.

I have already made my comments on the movie and just reading other peoples threads it just seem to me that the fans of revolutions seem to be implying the we that thought that the movies was crap was because our lack of understanding or have preconceived ideas of how the movie was suppose to end.

Well as far as I am concerned I watched and I was not impressed with the story, I was not expecting all the answers infact I was expecting it to be open but the fact remains that there were to many holes in the storyline things that did notto be concentrated on were, things that should of been concentrated on were not.

Even the soundtrack was poor, allthis after two great movies M1 and M2 were great so many threads so many hidden things which require real attention to notice but revolutions fell so short.

If you want actually points of the movie I have stated some earlier but let us not forget that not everyone has seen the movie so we will be giving the plot away.

The whole machine world is very vast and yes just the matrix part of te machine world is complex I have no problem with that.

Movies should be more about special effects, there are some good parts in the movie I am not saying it was a complete waste of time but it was very disappointing.

I was not expecting NEO to save the day and walk into the sunset with Trinity but I was expecting something to end a really good trilogy but I guess that was just too much to ask for.

If you love the movie I have no problem with that if you hated the movie I have no problem with that either but to think that anyone who disagrees with anyone over this movie is dump or metally challenged is uncalled for.

Ok my opinion on the film was it had the potential to be a good movie , they just dumbed it out , it could have been deep like reloaded but with the genius of matrix 1. I wish these directors would have really thought about the plot of matrix 3 harder , they are going to end a magnificent movie why not finish it with the best possible ending. Take neos powers as the one to the fullest , have Zion be saved , smith destroyed , and the destruction of the matrix. Reloaded made some bold statements here and there almost threats , I thought for sure they would be resolved in the 3rd installment , for example Neo meeting the architect again perhaps fighting or coming up with a deal of some sort. I’m really unsatisfied , they really should have gone all out and done exactly what fans would want and what the story would want. I mean the matrix trilogy is over , there will never be another one , they missed their opportunity and now leave us a film that cannot be enjoyed by both perspectives , positive or negative. I just hope the DVD version of the film offers some extended scenes or some more explanation on characters.

How does anyone in this day and age still listen to and respect Ebert and Roeper???????
Their thumbs are well and trully up their asses.
Come on, Titanic, two thumbs way, way up??

Castaway, JurassicPark 3, Star wars Ep II, Kangaroo Jack, The Hulk, The Fast and The Furious, all up.
Up on what exactly? Royalties?
Im sure these two Hollywood Whores are paid by the buketload for every review they do.
If you listen to E &R for your next film experience, you have to learn two words from me first...
Fellini, Kubrick.......

The newspapers are known to put up false critic ratings

Gmpho: I feel the exact same way, exept for titanic that was a good movie slow for the first hour but the last two made up for it. I was saying to go listen to these guys and check out why they gave it a thumbs up....they more or less gave it a bad review and then to finish it off they said they loved it becuase it was an action epic.

Meta: the first two movies left alot of room for thinking yet you dont see me bashing those two fine works do ya?. This last movie did'nt fail in my eyes b/c i went in there thinking something and came out dissapointed. To me this movie failed becuase it's lack of character use, character explanation, characters built up in reloaded...a complete waste in this film....'cept for seraph he is the only one they focused on and gave away some insight to him. Morpheus my god the most dominat character in the last two films...brought down to nothing. Even after he is re-assured that he must believe what he wants and apparently still believes in the oracle he does not show this.

The jump from cutting edge, make-you think, sci-fi epic to action packed, semi stroy driven action film. Another reason is why should i come out of the movie theatre with questions I had going in....mero's purpose, per. purpose, what happend to the twins, why did persephone require a kiss what purpose did that serve (yes fine to sample love but, why) these are just some.

One thing you guys keep holding is that you have to understand something else like programming or contain certain books in your library to understand these films and that's just not fair. There are many ppl out there who to you, I guess, would seem like common folk and they understood everything they were just let down.

Jedi go check out the major plot holes in revolutions thread there were ppl who posted in there with great points and although you may have come to your own conclusion's on them still does not excuse the fact that they exist. What about the person who asked you to answer his questions without speculation and then after you took a shot at answering it he made a great post about how he knew you and someone else who claim to have understood it would have different answers. I applaud that and not because it's the same way i think but b/c he made a very good point and no-one can answer his question's with anything but speculation.

Saying something like "we want ppl to think about it" sounds like an excuse for plot holes...just think about it for a second. At this point we should all agree to disagree but, if i feel I must say something i will say it because im sure you guys feel the same way.

i agree that some parts of the films, there is no way the bros could have made such clever references to religions, names and computer stuff, however, if it WAS intentional, then they are very clever indeed. ✅

Originally posted by DARKVIRUS
Saying something like "we want ppl to think about it" sounds like an excuse for plot holes...just think about it for a second.

Not everyone wants OR needs things to be cut out in cardboard. Why do you think there are words like allusion, metaphor and allegory? Why do we write brook-reports and answer questions like “What is the meaning of…?” ?”Explain the purpose of…” Ever seen a painting by one of the surrealists like Dali or Freddie?

If you think it’s NOT FAIR, that the Matrix movies require thought and reflection, that is your right. When surrealism was “invented” most people scorned it, and the nazis named it “entartete kunst”, because it did not come with a clear-cut explanation like a painting of a house in the sunset. Some surreal art I like, some I don’t. But I wouldn’t claim to call it a poor art-form, just because I do not LIKE all of it.
You DO have to understand more to get the full picture. Without a basic knowledge of Greek mythology, names like Morpheus and Persephone means nothing. Without an idea of Buddhist ideals, the whole idea of “what is real”, “Karma” and “transcendence” will rush right over your head.
You call it a plot-hole. I call it lack of knowledge. Is it a plot-hole to call Morpheus by that name? Or Persephone? Is it a plot-hole that you don’t get a pamphlet on the Merovingian line of French Kings when entering the movie theatre?

What does exist are open questions, left for you to interpret, depending on who you are. And that people around here keep taking the time to answer your questions, when you will not accept any ANSWER, because not all answers will be the same (is Neo dead or alive? Who knows? Some people will interpret it as “he is”, others will not), is because they want to. They're not obliged to, you know?

It reminds me of the first time I grasped the idea of surrealism. I read an article, where the art-critic elaborated on the fact, that the reason most people despise surrealism, is because the lack of a clear-cut answer makes them uneasy. Paint a small pig in the corner, and they’re safe again. Ah, there’s at least a pig, that I can recognise, there’s no doubt.
But the entire point is to forget the pig. Don’t be scared.

i cant be bothered to read all of that, so i'll just agree

yeah, omega, your 110% right!!

Ohhh, Dave. You have to be careful. Anyone who agrees with me is part of a conspiracy peanut-gallery, while those who agree with DV are courageous people who have the COURAGE to come to this forum, and courageously tell us Revolutions “sucks” because you have to THINK.
Uhhhh… 😉

DarkV

You missed portions of what I said, and understood only what you replied to. Not that you don't have the capability to understand...

If you read many of my posts, I say that it is the format of the third movie that many people do not like. They are not used to it. It has no character developement because it is beyond that point of the story. Most people are used to cookie cutter pressed movies; they have a beginning, they develope upon characters and plot, they give full explinations, and they climax and conclude. Many people knocked Reloaded because it did not climax or conclude, and that they felt it delved to far into pop culture philosopy and the like. Now it's being argued that Revo sucked because it lacked that very element, it lacked character developement/use, and it didn't answer questions!! Now, obviously, not everyone is arguing all three of those -- you being one of them. But your arguement, consisting of character developement and use (setting aside plot holes for another time), you should realize that this was done in the first and second movies as if all three movies were one. What would it have added to the story if you elaborated on who the Mero was, his connection with Seraph and the Trainman? Surely it would have answered a lot of questions about who these people were!! But what would it have done for the story of Neo and the battle against the machines? Saddly, nothing. It is a side story, one that I agree would be interesting, but it did not parrallel with the story that the Wakowski's were trying to tell. The Mero, the Trainman, Peresephone, and the rest did not but intersect with story for but a moment. I am sorry that you feel that it needed that to make it a good story, but it added nothing to this story, and would have created an impossibly long set of movies to encompass it all. This movie was written as climax and conclusion elements of the movie only; alone it would be like picking up a large novel and reading the last one third of the book or less.

Omega

I do agree with you, as you stated things I have been arguing myself! We must be a conspericy! We must be stopped!! Free thinking can bring down the whole system and cause a catostrophic system failure!! LoL

😆

you know what? all you losers in this thread should put your crooked heads together, write a great movie and put the brothers to shame.....

the movie was great....ya I admit that it wasn't as mind blowing as the other but it still kicked ass

movie sucked elephant balls...no way I buy the dvd this time.

Aah.... a thread close to my heart.

Although I despised Revo with a passion, you will not notice ME flagarently badgering the ones who didn't. I believe everyone is entitled to their own opinions, and by creating this thread, someone was very much doing so. BUT this HAS BEEN DONE BEFORE!!!