"Well, you still think London is a COUNTRY , so go figure."
I guess you're going to try and tell me it's a city now.:)
By the way, what does my statement have to do with London being a city or country anyway? Hell, even if it *was* a country it'd still be outside the U.S.
"But even if you just look at the US, Canada, Japan, Hong Kong, South Korea, Singapore, Australia, New Zealand, and the EU, you've still got easily enough people to make the lack of US success attributable to chance."
True. I guess I am adding this to a larger body of observations on my part. I just don't think our system is keeping up. The number of people I meet from other much smaller countries that have really strong computer skills seems disproportionate. This could just be a perspective issue though. My comments aren't based on anything scientific - it just seems like it's the case to me.
"You know, a lot of people figured this out after seeing the first movie."
Yeah, I know - I was one of them. But I was hoping that they would do something cool with it. There *was*, after the first movie, a possibility for much more than was made of the Trilogy. My point was that they took whatever potential they had, and completely ruined it.
Ah yes, I should have been more clear. When I say that people are reluctant to buy things online, what I mean is that they are reluctant to do so when they can get the same thing for free, or, at least they think the should be able to - eg. my shareware story.
This brings me to my main point, which is that until this mentality is eliminated, services like BitPass will face major resistance.
There is a culture of ignorance among regular users that dictates that anything that costs money on the Internet is some sort of scam, so they avoid most of them. Not only that, but many are still very nervous about moving money online.
Among the geeks, however, many still think that actually *buying* things online makes you some sort of sellout. I have been made fun of before for buying shareware - since the person making fun of me had the same software but didn't have to pay $29.99 for it.
Until both groups (standard users and geeks) come to accept that it is quite ok to spend money for something online, we are going to continue to see resistance to these sorts of services.
-danielrm26
Re:They destroyed a potentially awesomeTrilogy...
on
The Matrix: Resolutions
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
I forgot about the mechs not having protection for the pilot; that was lame. Throw a rock at their head and it's game over.
And the fact that they didn't have any EMPs inside the city was questionable. It's true that you lose your computers if you pop one, but that at least buys you some time. To put a finer point on it, if it was such a bad idea to have an EMP then they wouldn't have been waiting anxiously for the ship to show up with one.
-danielrm26
They destroyed a potentially awesomeTrilogy...
on
The Matrix: Resolutions
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
Ok, first of all, let me just feed my ego and post this link. This is the post that I made on the subject right after Reloaded, and in it I pointed out that they *would* do the god, Christ, and reunification of man and machine plot. There, now I feel better.:)
That being said, let me just point out the main reasons this Trilogy has been ruined as a major piece of sci-fi. Note that I didn't say it made the thing sucked completely and horribly; there is a difference. The series is still awesome for what it offers, but there were many (including myself) who had expectations of sci-fi (logical) purity. Those expectations simply weren't met.
Some will argue that the Trilogy put forth the ultimate in depth and philosophy, and that the reason so many complain is because they aren't smart enough to get it. This is utter crap. People who believe this have missed the boat, and I encourage them to read something like "The Metamorphosis of Prime Intellect" in order to see what true sci-fi is.
In my view the difference is this: while true sci-fi asks you to believe something extraordinary, it takes great care not to break the rules that it lays down for itself. And once you accept the principle thing they are asking you to believe, you can then pursue the rest of the story as if it is more or less true science. *THAT* is, in my opinion, *true* sci-fi.
My contention, and the contention of many others, is that this Trilogy is nothing more than a collection of very cool concepts drawn from mythology and philosophy, wrapped up in an attractive action/marital arts/special effects shell. Again, this is a winning combination if you accept it for what it is, but it should *not* be mistaken for true sci-fi genius. Here's why:
1. The energy source issue is lame at best. It just doesn't work. You can keep a human vegetable alive for years with very little going on in their brain. THEY DON'T NEED THE MATRIX to keep bodies alive. If you grow humans and make them into idiots with a minimal amount of brain activity, you can just feed them for decades and they will produce all the power that they would in the Matrix. The fact that they are living out a 9-5 job in the Matrix isn't going to generate the machines any more juice than just keeping them alive. Hell, even if it DID generate more energy, would it be so much that it offset the expenditure of maintaining the Matrix? I think not. Either way, this power source issue is the ENTIRE reason for the movie. Without the use of humans as batteries there is no Matrix, no Neo, no Zion (read on to see why there would be no Zion). The entire Trilogy rests on the energy issue, and it doesn't hold water.
2. The second major problem lies in the fact that you can't build a f*cking city that deep inside the earth. Ask any scientist who's versed in the matter; it's not possible. Again, they are asking quite a bit of the viewer in this regard.
3. They never covered how Neo, a flesh and blood human, is able to exert control over machines in the real world. You see, what they did was switch everything up on us. This started as a sci-fi movie - the scorching of the sky, the underground city, and the war vs. the machines. This was the plot originally, and I think it was a good one. The fact that there was a false reality where the computers kept humans was very cool, and the fact that you could do cool shit while in the Matrix was cool. But the whole thing was laid out as science. Morpheus asks if Neo thinks he's breathing air in the simulation. Logic guided that. The fact that you have to "believe" about the jump program, again, guided by logic. At that point, they hadn't broken their own rules (even though the initial things they were asking you to believe were massive). The problem, however, is that they ended up, in the third movie, with Neo as a Christ figure who could blow up machines with a mere thought. Huh? How so?
"When is it alright to 'poke a hole in the firewall' to allow this? Personally, I think the answer is 'Never!' but perhaps I'm out of touch with current network security models."
Those who don't need to pass traffic inside are afforded that luxury due to the fact that they don't have a job. Anyone can decently secure a network that doesn't interact with anything; the real trick is allowing business to flow as usual and *still* have an acceptable level of Security.
I just hope the GPG support stays solid and consistent. I am about to try and upgrade here both on a Linux and XP system and I am praying that we won't be burdened with enigmail problems.
If this client stays as solid as it seems to be, and is able to maintain good GPG support, I think I am going to be *very* pleased.
> when i said educated i meant "GNU or UNIX-wise" likewise "savages" == MCSEs:) > Im no chauvunist who thinks that "all the Wezt are India-baiters" or something...just trying to convince you that therese enough and more of us UNIX/GNU worshippers out here!
Well in that case, point taken - I stand corrected.:/
> Excuse me. I thought that atleast the "Educated" part of the trest of the world have long since stopped beleiving that India is a land full of savages and wild animals and tribals worshipping false gods (like M$):)..... you disappoint me!
Dude, calm down. I grew up in the San Francisco Bay Area and have had (and still have) *many* Indians among those I call friends. My statement about MCSEs in India comes from my understanding of how Microsoft has penetrated the country, not some sort of idea about Indian inferiority. And even if I did say something negative about some particular aspect of India or Indians, it doesn't mean I don't like them. I can, for example, point out that Americans are generally uneducated compared to the educated in other advanced countries, and I say this while still loving my country.
I hope the people making these sorts of decisions in developing countries realize that there are hidden costs involved in going to Linux. In India, for example, I am sure there are oodles of MCSEs that can click their way to a semi-functional network, but are there enough people familar with *nix to handle a major shift to Linux? I think not.
Not that this is a permanent roadblock, but it's something they need to be aware of. They have to realize that if something goes bad and they aren't with someone like IBM/Redhat, they might be screwed if they don't have geeks on hand to tackle the problem.
The problem with this sort of technology is that you must give it a decent amount of personal information before it can do its thing. Many are reluctant to give such information, and that fact alone could sink the whole thing.
> Back to my point, the reason that the agents are not able to just conjure out a thermonuclear weapon to blast the entire city that the irritating zionists are is because they do not have r00t!
I agree. The problem is that SOMEONE does have root, and that entity has the power to give the agents anything they need. That someone obviously condones what the agents are doing or else they wouldn't be doing it at all.
> This is not a "science fiction movie" a la The Twilight Zone or Star Trek or any other shit story writing that you are used to.
I wasn't trying to compare it to Star Trek or Twilight Zone. I was simply making the point that many think that all the holes in the movie are part of a supreme plan, while it is my opinion that they are there simply because the movie is full of holes.:) I could be wrong (I actually hope I am), but I doubt it.
If you find flaw with this viewpoint, feel free to retort.
I agree with your take of what was going on with the multiple monitors. It was as if it was attempting to map the different options that Neo could have chosen for his response. And then, using his acutal response, they can improve the model for later use.
The issues to me, however, are those that are very specific - like when Neo knocked over the vase in the first movie. Are we to belive that ABSOLUTELY EVERYTHING up until that point had happened exactly as before? Or does she have a Jedi-like preview of the very soon-to-happen future? If it's the first case, then there are some serious problems. Most geeks are familiar with the fact that extrordinarily small events can change the course of history dramatically. Take for instance being at a resturaunt and deciding to wait to shit until you get home vs. using the public restroom. So you almost spent 10 minutes longer there, but you chose not to. If you get in a car wreck and your sister who was eating with you is severly injured, how does that event trickle down throughout your life? What if that wreck didn't happen? What if you were going to meet your wife at the hospital where you went to visit your sister, but you never got in the wreck? What if you postponed going out of state to college because you wanted to stay and see her through her time in the hospital and you ended up not being offered that big job because of it? All because you waited to piss? Given that concept, and the fact that everyone in the group in the first movie was bringing SOMETHING new to the table, I find it hard to believe that things could play out precicely as the Oracle saw from previous iterations (if in fact that was her way of making predictions).
She even goes into it more later in the second movie. She talks again about knowing about things that are going to happen, yet Neo has already broken the mold at that point from previous versions of The One - so how is she able to still know what lies ahead?
An interesting question, and if you read my main thread above you'll see that the answer isn't something complex and cool - the answer is that there is no reason. I don't expect them to be able to explain her oracle powers in a credible way - even allowing for fiction.
...something comes along and makes me want to install another Gentoo box.
I see MS take positive steps with their approaches, and I am encouraged. I see them pull PR stunts like this, though, and they make me want to run X on my desktop.
Rather than a high-level and deep Science Fiction story, this series is going to be proven in the end to be a collection of cool concepts all rolled into a great package. That should *not*, however, be confused with deep Science Fiction.
Let me tell you what would be cool. We find out at the end that the entire movie was nothing but a simulation run by humans (or computers perhaps) designed to find/create/improve AI. That would be cool. But what this ending would do is alienate the large majority of viewers, and frankly, I think it's too high-level for the brothers to do. It would fill all the holes and make it rock (to me and other geeks), but it would make the whole thing suck for those who aren't into Sci-Fi heavily.
What they *are* going to do is go along the line of Smith being the Devil (makes a choice, falls from above, tries to take over), and Neo being the Christ and God figures to varying degrees, and they will battle it out. They are *not* in a second Matrix. Neo stopped the sentinels because he is part machine now - he simply gave them commands somehow. He is going to become one with the machine I think, and he is going to be working to unite man and machine again, while Smith tries to tear it all down.
So, what we are left with (if it goes the way I have described) is a series of major plot holes - problems that serious Science Fiction people cannot ignore:
-The human/battery/enerty thing (humans can live for years with a mostly dead brain in real life and support a body just fine - why the elaborate Matrix just to keep the mind going when it is unecessary?) Answer: You can't have the movie otherwise.
-Their take on future prediction (what are they asking us to believe - that there are supernatural powers as well? Is this Fantasy or Sci-Fi?)
-Notice that only the proper amount of force is ever applied in a situation. In the freeway scene, were they trying to kill anyone? How can an agent be stationary relative to Trinity and empty a clip and not hit her once? Why not make everyone in the vicinity into agents and ram the shit out of them? Why not take over an F-14 and rock them with some Hellfire missiles? Answer: Either the whole conflict was fake on purpose, or the whole thing was fake on accident. Either way though, there wasn't really any effort to kill anyone on the freeway otherwise they would have been dead. So the question is just whether that is a planned part of the movie or a stellar fuckup. I think b. You can't generally have good action without these perfect balances of good-guys vs. bad-guys, but in Science Fiction, *SCIENCE* should dictate some things. If a computer was trying to kill them folks on the freeway, and they had the resources that they have demonstrated all through the first and second movies (or *should* have given the situation), they would dead mofos. There wouldn't be these little applications of force here and there when it is convenient - it would be an overwhelming and deadly ammount of "fuck you up" applied with extreme predjudice. That is what a comptuer would do. (ever played SC on the high level AI? Computers know how to add and combine force to kill stuff - the fact that they don't do so in the Matrix requires some explanation)
-Another thing, the speech by the Architech - they have GOT to be kidding. The entire conversation could have taken place in around a fourth of the time. Why use all the big words and draw it out? Answer: To make it seem very deep - hiding from the average viewer the fact that the whole story is full of contradictions. The duped walk away saying, "That was deep." The geeks walk away saying, "What a load of shit."
So, all that being said, the Matrix is still awesome no matter how it turns out. Ideally I'd be completely wrong and the brothers would suprise me and bust out with something totally cool that makes sense. Unfortunately, that isn't likely, but either way, I'll be in Atlanta at an IMAX theater at the first showing.
In short, make no mistake, the Matrix is an AWESOME movie series - just don't make it into something it isn't.
Slashdot Mirror
"Of course there are. There are ~300 million Americans. There are over 5.7 billion other non-Americans."
That argument doesn't hold water when you account for the penetration of computers into the lives of those 5.7 billion vs. our 300 million.
"Well, you still think London is a COUNTRY , so go figure."
:)
I guess you're going to try and tell me it's a city now.
By the way, what does my statement have to do with London being a city or country anyway? Hell, even if it *was* a country it'd still be outside the U.S.
What's your point exactly?
"But even if you just look at the US, Canada, Japan, Hong Kong, South Korea, Singapore, Australia, New Zealand, and the EU, you've still got easily enough people to make the lack of US success attributable to chance."
True. I guess I am adding this to a larger body of observations on my part. I just don't think our system is keeping up. The number of people I meet from other much smaller countries that have really strong computer skills seems disproportionate. This could just be a perspective issue though. My comments aren't based on anything scientific - it just seems like it's the case to me.
"Stop being so narrow-minded, there are bright people from all over the world--America and abroad."
You missed my point. I think there are *more* abroad.
...all from outside the U.S.?
Our education system is in serious trouble.
"You know, a lot of people figured this out after seeing the first movie."
Yeah, I know - I was one of them. But I was hoping that they would do something cool with it. There *was*, after the first movie, a possibility for much more than was made of the Trilogy. My point was that they took whatever potential they had, and completely ruined it.
-danielrm26
Ah yes, I should have been more clear. When I say that people are reluctant to buy things online, what I mean is that they are reluctant to do so when they can get the same thing for free, or, at least they think the should be able to - eg. my shareware story.
This brings me to my main point, which is that until this mentality is eliminated, services like BitPass will face major resistance.
-danielrm26
There is a culture of ignorance among regular users that dictates that anything that costs money on the Internet is some sort of scam, so they avoid most of them. Not only that, but many are still very nervous about moving money online.
Among the geeks, however, many still think that actually *buying* things online makes you some sort of sellout. I have been made fun of before for buying shareware - since the person making fun of me had the same software but didn't have to pay $29.99 for it.
Until both groups (standard users and geeks) come to accept that it is quite ok to spend money for something online, we are going to continue to see resistance to these sorts of services.
-danielrm26
I forgot about the mechs not having protection for the pilot; that was lame. Throw a rock at their head and it's game over.
And the fact that they didn't have any EMPs inside the city was questionable. It's true that you lose your computers if you pop one, but that at least buys you some time. To put a finer point on it, if it was such a bad idea to have an EMP then they wouldn't have been waiting anxiously for the ship to show up with one.
-danielrm26
Ok, first of all, let me just feed my ego and post this link. This is the post that I made on the subject right after Reloaded, and in it I pointed out that they *would* do the god, Christ, and reunification of man and machine plot. There, now I feel better. :)
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=65437&cid=60 36 019
That being said, let me just point out the main reasons this Trilogy has been ruined as a major piece of sci-fi. Note that I didn't say it made the thing sucked completely and horribly; there is a difference. The series is still awesome for what it offers, but there were many (including myself) who had expectations of sci-fi (logical) purity. Those expectations simply weren't met.
Some will argue that the Trilogy put forth the ultimate in depth and philosophy, and that the reason so many complain is because they aren't smart enough to get it. This is utter crap. People who believe this have missed the boat, and I encourage them to read something like "The Metamorphosis of Prime Intellect" in order to see what true sci-fi is.
In my view the difference is this: while true sci-fi asks you to believe something extraordinary, it takes great care not to break the rules that it lays down for itself. And once you accept the principle thing they are asking you to believe, you can then pursue the rest of the story as if it is more or less true science. *THAT* is, in my opinion, *true* sci-fi.
My contention, and the contention of many others, is that this Trilogy is nothing more than a collection of very cool concepts drawn from mythology and philosophy, wrapped up in an attractive action/marital arts/special effects shell. Again, this is a winning combination if you accept it for what it is, but it should *not* be mistaken for true sci-fi genius. Here's why:
1. The energy source issue is lame at best. It just doesn't work. You can keep a human vegetable alive for years with very little going on in their brain. THEY DON'T NEED THE MATRIX to keep bodies alive. If you grow humans and make them into idiots with a minimal amount of brain activity, you can just feed them for decades and they will produce all the power that they would in the Matrix. The fact that they are living out a 9-5 job in the Matrix isn't going to generate the machines any more juice than just keeping them alive. Hell, even if it DID generate more energy, would it be so much that it offset the expenditure of maintaining the Matrix? I think not. Either way, this power source issue is the ENTIRE reason for the movie. Without the use of humans as batteries there is no Matrix, no Neo, no Zion (read on to see why there would be no Zion). The entire Trilogy rests on the energy issue, and it doesn't hold water.
2. The second major problem lies in the fact that you can't build a f*cking city that deep inside the earth. Ask any scientist who's versed in the matter; it's not possible. Again, they are asking quite a bit of the viewer in this regard.
3. They never covered how Neo, a flesh and blood human, is able to exert control over machines in the real world. You see, what they did was switch everything up on us. This started as a sci-fi movie - the scorching of the sky, the underground city, and the war vs. the machines. This was the plot originally, and I think it was a good one. The fact that there was a false reality where the computers kept humans was very cool, and the fact that you could do cool shit while in the Matrix was cool. But the whole thing was laid out as science. Morpheus asks if Neo thinks he's breathing air in the simulation. Logic guided that. The fact that you have to "believe" about the jump program, again, guided by logic. At that point, they hadn't broken their own rules (even though the initial things they were asking you to believe were massive). The problem, however, is that they ended up, in the third movie, with Neo as a Christ figure who could blow up machines with a mere thought. Huh? How so?
I seem to have misread the original piece. He was talking about passing into the *internal* network, not passing at all.
:)
(I hate jackoffs that don't read the original post correctly)
"When is it alright to 'poke a hole in the firewall' to allow this? Personally, I think the answer is 'Never!' but perhaps I'm out of touch with current network security models."
Those who don't need to pass traffic inside are afforded that luxury due to the fact that they don't have a job. Anyone can decently secure a network that doesn't interact with anything; the real trick is allowing business to flow as usual and *still* have an acceptable level of Security.
"Maybe we should think about jumping ship?"
How about, "No."
You don't leave a battlefield just because the enemy takes some ground.
I just hope the GPG support stays solid and consistent. I am about to try and upgrade here both on a Linux and XP system and I am praying that we won't be burdened with enigmail problems.
If this client stays as solid as it seems to be, and is able to maintain good GPG support, I think I am going to be *very* pleased.
> when i said educated i meant "GNU or UNIX-wise" :) ...just trying to convince you that therese enough and more of us UNIX/GNU worshippers out here!
:/
likewise "savages" == MCSEs
> Im no chauvunist who thinks that "all the Wezt are India-baiters" or something
Well in that case, point taken - I stand corrected.
> Excuse me. I thought that atleast the "Educated" part of the trest of the world have long since stopped beleiving that India is a land full of savages and wild animals and tribals worshipping false gods (like M$) :) ..... you disappoint me!
Dude, calm down. I grew up in the San Francisco Bay Area and have had (and still have) *many* Indians among those I call friends. My statement about MCSEs in India comes from my understanding of how Microsoft has penetrated the country, not some sort of idea about Indian inferiority. And even if I did say something negative about some particular aspect of India or Indians, it doesn't mean I don't like them. I can, for example, point out that Americans are generally uneducated compared to the educated in other advanced countries, and I say this while still loving my country.
In short, relax.
> I'd be willing to bet there are more competent *nix admins per capita in India than in most of the rest of the world.
Interesting. I know there are plenty, but I didn't think there were enough to support an infrastructure based on it. Perhaps I was mistaken.
I hope the people making these sorts of decisions in developing countries realize that there are hidden costs involved in going to Linux. In India, for example, I am sure there are oodles of MCSEs that can click their way to a semi-functional network, but are there enough people familar with *nix to handle a major shift to Linux? I think not.
Not that this is a permanent roadblock, but it's something they need to be aware of. They have to realize that if something goes bad and they aren't with someone like IBM/Redhat, they might be screwed if they don't have geeks on hand to tackle the problem.
The problem with this sort of technology is that you must give it a decent amount of personal information before it can do its thing. Many are reluctant to give such information, and that fact alone could sink the whole thing.
-danielrm26
> Back to my point, the reason that the agents are not able to just conjure out a thermonuclear weapon to blast the entire city that the irritating zionists are is because they do not have r00t!
I agree. The problem is that SOMEONE does have root, and that entity has the power to give the agents anything they need. That someone obviously condones what the agents are doing or else they wouldn't be doing it at all.
> This is not a "science fiction movie" a la The Twilight Zone or Star Trek or any other shit story writing that you are used to.
:) I could be wrong (I actually hope I am), but I doubt it.
I wasn't trying to compare it to Star Trek or Twilight Zone. I was simply making the point that many think that all the holes in the movie are part of a supreme plan, while it is my opinion that they are there simply because the movie is full of holes.
If you find flaw with this viewpoint, feel free to retort.
I agree with your take of what was going on with the multiple monitors. It was as if it was attempting to map the different options that Neo could have chosen for his response. And then, using his acutal response, they can improve the model for later use.
The issues to me, however, are those that are very specific - like when Neo knocked over the vase in the first movie. Are we to belive that ABSOLUTELY EVERYTHING up until that point had happened exactly as before? Or does she have a Jedi-like preview of the very soon-to-happen future? If it's the first case, then there are some serious problems. Most geeks are familiar with the fact that extrordinarily small events can change the course of history dramatically. Take for instance being at a resturaunt and deciding to wait to shit until you get home vs. using the public restroom. So you almost spent 10 minutes longer there, but you chose not to. If you get in a car wreck and your sister who was eating with you is severly injured, how does that event trickle down throughout your life? What if that wreck didn't happen? What if you were going to meet your wife at the hospital where you went to visit your sister, but you never got in the wreck? What if you postponed going out of state to college because you wanted to stay and see her through her time in the hospital and you ended up not being offered that big job because of it? All because you waited to piss? Given that concept, and the fact that everyone in the group in the first movie was bringing SOMETHING new to the table, I find it hard to believe that things could play out precicely as the Oracle saw from previous iterations (if in fact that was her way of making predictions).
She even goes into it more later in the second movie. She talks again about knowing about things that are going to happen, yet Neo has already broken the mold at that point from previous versions of The One - so how is she able to still know what lies ahead?
An interesting question, and if you read my main thread above you'll see that the answer isn't something complex and cool - the answer is that there is no reason. I don't expect them to be able to explain her oracle powers in a credible way - even allowing for fiction.
...something comes along and makes me want to install another Gentoo box.
I see MS take positive steps with their approaches, and I am encouraged. I see them pull PR stunts like this, though, and they make me want to run X on my desktop.
When will they learn?
...will be disappointed.
Rather than a high-level and deep Science Fiction story, this series is going to be proven in the end to be a collection of cool concepts all rolled into a great package. That should *not*, however, be confused with deep Science Fiction.
Let me tell you what would be cool. We find out at the end that the entire movie was nothing but a simulation run by humans (or computers perhaps) designed to find/create/improve AI. That would be cool. But what this ending would do is alienate the large majority of viewers, and frankly, I think it's too high-level for the brothers to do. It would fill all the holes and make it rock (to me and other geeks), but it would make the whole thing suck for those who aren't into Sci-Fi heavily.
What they *are* going to do is go along the line of Smith being the Devil (makes a choice, falls from above, tries to take over), and Neo being the Christ and God figures to varying degrees, and they will battle it out. They are *not* in a second Matrix. Neo stopped the sentinels because he is part machine now - he simply gave them commands somehow. He is going to become one with the machine I think, and he is going to be working to unite man and machine again, while Smith tries to tear it all down.
So, what we are left with (if it goes the way I have described) is a series of major plot holes - problems that serious Science Fiction people cannot ignore:
-The human/battery/enerty thing (humans can live for years with a mostly dead brain in real life and support a body just fine - why the elaborate Matrix just to keep the mind going when it is unecessary?) Answer: You can't have the movie otherwise.
-Their take on future prediction (what are they asking us to believe - that there are supernatural powers as well? Is this Fantasy or Sci-Fi?)
-Notice that only the proper amount of force is ever applied in a situation. In the freeway scene, were they trying to kill anyone? How can an agent be stationary relative to Trinity and empty a clip and not hit her once? Why not make everyone in the vicinity into agents and ram the shit out of them? Why not take over an F-14 and rock them with some Hellfire missiles? Answer: Either the whole conflict was fake on purpose, or the whole thing was fake on accident. Either way though, there wasn't really any effort to kill anyone on the freeway otherwise they would have been dead. So the question is just whether that is a planned part of the movie or a stellar fuckup. I think b. You can't generally have good action without these perfect balances of good-guys vs. bad-guys, but in Science Fiction, *SCIENCE* should dictate some things. If a computer was trying to kill them folks on the freeway, and they had the resources that they have demonstrated all through the first and second movies (or *should* have given the situation), they would dead mofos. There wouldn't be these little applications of force here and there when it is convenient - it would be an overwhelming and deadly ammount of "fuck you up" applied with extreme predjudice. That is what a comptuer would do. (ever played SC on the high level AI? Computers know how to add and combine force to kill stuff - the fact that they don't do so in the Matrix requires some explanation)
-Another thing, the speech by the Architech - they have GOT to be kidding. The entire conversation could have taken place in around a fourth of the time. Why use all the big words and draw it out? Answer: To make it seem very deep - hiding from the average viewer the fact that the whole story is full of contradictions. The duped walk away saying, "That was deep." The geeks walk away saying, "What a load of shit."
So, all that being said, the Matrix is still awesome no matter how it turns out. Ideally I'd be completely wrong and the brothers would suprise me and bust out with something totally cool that makes sense. Unfortunately, that isn't likely, but either way, I'll be in Atlanta at an IMAX theater at the first showing.
In short, make no mistake, the Matrix is an AWESOME movie series - just don't make it into something it isn't.
Indeed. :)