On The Matrix

that's the fundimental flaw is saw. supposedly perpetual motion devices are not possible. if they are not then the machines are not actually dependent on humans. if they are possible (maybe we're in the matrix and what we think are actual natural laws are incorrect) then why depend on super ineffecent humans? either way morpheus (and zion for that matter) should realise the machines do not depend on humans for energy, and so must be holding them for another reason.i was hoping they would introduce a new level of deception where the machines are actually trying their hardest to not violate some basic laws they were programmed with (think something along the lines of asmov's 3 laws).

Quote:
i was hoping they would introduce a new level of deception where the machines are actually trying their hardest to not violate some basic laws they were programmed with (think something along the lines of asmov's 3 laws).Now that would have been an interesting approach for sure! BYW..incase you haven't heard... they're slated to make that movie too. Dont' know if they're just going to start at Caves of steel, or incorporate all the books....it's with that...can't remember his name right now...fresh prince guy...playing the part of Daneel, I believe. (I know I got that name wrong...but it's been a way long time since a read the books.)P.S. Here is another fan thing going out there about Matrix...uh...yes, it may be ridiculous...just mentioning it, lol....That the Matrix is actually the continuation of the Terminator series, much later in the future, after the humans were defeated and the machiones progressed even further. Even aanimatrix espisode about the 'beginning' eluded to the same kind of beginning for Matrix...anyway...not that I agree with this...please don't start 'nailing' me just for mentioning it...lol....j/k

JustinCy writes:

quote:

---

Can someone explain to me why they created zion in the first place?

---

My understanding is that it had to do with the need to keep the equation balanced. The Matrix is rejected without with ability to choose. In order to function, it needs people who choose to deny it and who break other people out. But, they can't be allowed to become too successful as that will unbalance things the other way.Of course, that begs the question of why not simply create a program to take the place of the Zionites, but that requires actually analyzing the inherent logic of the premise too much and this movie really can't survive too much of that.

quote:

---

And why couldn't the machines just drop a nuke in Zion, they had to have nuclear capabilities if they were getting their energy from fusion technologies.

---

Because physics has been suspended. They don't have "fusion." They have "a form of fusion." Don't worry your pretty little head about it.What I want to know is why the Zionistas only have bullets when they've managed to create anti-gravity (or at the very least maglevs that don't need any surface upon which to operate). These ships have EMPs and have killed off sentinels before. It never occurred to them to take one and examine its laser weapon systems and use them against the sentinels? Let's see the sentinels try to drill into Zion when a laser cannon beams a constant ray of death in their only entryway. Oh, but then we wouldn't have those wonderful scenes of the bullets ripping through the ship or have any reason for the Kid to be running around the dock bringing ammo.I do have to give them proper credit for one thing, though: The moon and the sun are in the sky at the same time and the moon is not full. Did you ever read Lord of the Flies? Golding truly did not understand anything about the most basic physics. He describes a lovely scene of the sun setting in the west and as it does, a beautiful crescent moon appears in the east. Excuse me? A crescent moon at sunset? You meant full moon, right? When the moon is opposite the sun, it's full. At worst, gibbous.Too, how on earth do any of those kids start a fire with Piggy's glasses? Piggy is nearsighted meaning his glasses have concave lenses. Concave lenses cause light to diverge, not converge. You couldn't start a fire even with all the lighter fluid and gunpowder in the world with a concave lens. Piggy needs to be farsighted so that he has convex lenses if they're going to use them to start a fire.Now, it's hard to say if the actual sky is quite right in that scene in the Matrix....the sun is still in the sky and the moon is a bare sliver of crescent. It appears that it's about high noon while the moon is somewhere near the horizon. Thus, it really ought to be at quarter. But, they don't actually show the sun and the moon in the same shot, so we can't be sure of their relative positions. However, it is much easier to see the crescent moon when the sun is below the horizon.------------------
Rrhain
WWJD? JWRTFM!

I thought the answer to that was obvious. A choice between one fake reality and another is no choice at all. For the choice to work, it has to be a real choice: fake dreamworld vs. actual reality.As to the ridiculous energy premise, it works a little better if you edit the movie mentally so that the machines aren't using them for power, but rather as a distributed-processing supercomputer. It's much more likely that the limiting resource for the machines would be computation cycles, not electricity. (Also the Matrix itself makes much more sense if you consider it not as a rasterized virtual input stream, but as a distributed, shared dreamstate.) I think it's reasonable to suggest that the Brothers W would actually have written it that way if they had thought of it, or if they had thought that the audience would get it, or something.

quote:

---

Of course, that begs the question of why not simply create a program to take the place of the Zionites, but that requires actually analyzing the inherent logic of the premise too much and this movie really can't survive too much of that.

---

The famous, Matrix within the matrix theory...
I personally favoured that idea too: like a work-around you use in programming, when things just can't be helped in an elegant way.

quote:

---

What I want to know is why the Zionistas only have bullets when they've managed to create anti-gravity..

---

BTW, is there any explanation in the movies of why the ships you have in Revolutions have guns (The Nebukadnezar -sp?- had none)? And are there any explanation as to why you can just shoot down the sentinels now? In the first movie you needed to fire the EMP on the ship.regards

EMP is the only way to prevent them from sending reinforcements.

Crashfrog writes:

quote:

---

EMP is the only way to prevent them from sending reinforcements.

---

Still not quite logical. In the decisive scene in the first movie, they are attacked by one (or more) sentinels and can't fire the emp because that would disconnect/kill Neo. Now, when the sentinel starts cutting up the ship that would be a good point to shoot the sucker down and deal with possible reinforcements later: you could always use the emp then.

Perhaps. But at that point in the movie, who do they have to operate the guns?You're right, though. The absence of guns in the first movie is suspect. It may very well be that they didn't think of it until they did "Final Flight of the Osiris".

quote:

---

Perhaps. But at that point in the movie, who do they have to operate the guns?

---

Three people (if my count is correct), two to operate the guns, one for the emp ..Additionally, now they have those "hand-held" emps which do kill a sentinel but don't screw up all electronics close by. They could have used one of those..Well, this discussion isn't really important anyway. Just one of the things that bugged me. Same thing for Aliens II (where in the first movie they couldn't deal with a single alien and start killing them by the dozen in the second movie).regards[This message has been edited by Alex, 11-13-2003]

concerning the energy crisis:well... were the computers really not intelligent enough to launch satellites into outer space and harness the sun's energy there? or build a tower with a solar panel above the clouds?

First, the transition from Sci-Fi Action to Religous Jihad Triumph story happened too quickly. It was not set up in the second movie whatsoever. This alienated many hardcore fans IMO. Second, making Agent Smith a Yang to Neo's Ying was not set up correctly. The climax was not set up properly to make the final battle between these two 'opposites' seem definitive enough. Had there been a bit more story to pump up the Smith character, it could have been much better. Third, the character focus has been on a downward spiral since Reloaded. Many people complained about this and I agree, we simply don't care much about Ghost, Zee, Link, and the Zion crew. True its integral to the storyline, but honestly, so much more could have been done with the core characters (especially Smith). Finally. The ending. The focus changed from 'overthrowing the machines' (as set up in the first movie), to 'peace.' This could have been done better. How will this 'peace' be established? What about the machines need for electrical power? Are they going to simply unplug every human? I can't see a truce between man and machine without the absence of human battery power.In short, Revolutions was far from bad, but the main flaws are easily attributed to poor plot development, erroneous character development, and (at parts) abysmal voice acting.

I haven't seen the Matrix movies and so deserve to be dumped on for making uninformed comments, but after reading through the posts it feels like more thought went into this thread than into the Matrix plot lines, almost as if they budgeted all the money for special effects and had none left over for screenwriters.--Percy

Well, Tank is running the control board, Morpheus is running the EMP, Neo is still in the Matrix, and Trinity is busy making out with his inert body. Nobody else is alive. In the first movie they're a little group of salvage wreckers. In the second movie they're space marines. In the words of Bill Paxton they're "state of the bad-ass art." Crashfrog, Movie Apologist

The first movie is a brilliant synthesis of Kung-fu/Gun-fu Hong Kong movies and anime, plus an actually authentic cyberpunk plot (not authentic in terms of technology, but in terms of theme). At the time it was the best action movie in 10 years, and the best science-fiction since 2001: A Space Oddessy. By all means is the first movie required viewing.The second two are passable sequels, but neither of them are as good as the first. If anything they make the first movie better, but by themselves they're not great.

TheoMorphic writes:

quote:

---

well... were the computers really not intelligent enough to launch satellites into outer space and harness the sun's energy there? or build a tower with a solar panel above the clouds?

---

I had thought about that, too, but you're talking building a tower above the clouds. That's pushing four miles. I'm not saying it's impossible, but it would require a tremendous amount of engineering and materials science to create a stable structure of that height.------------------
Rrhain
WWJD? JWRTFM!