It's comments like these that just make me /facepalm.
That's exactly it. And no, I'm not being sarcastic.
Some of you apparently need your hand held, so why don't you give this video a try:
The first movie deals with a Christian type mythos. Most here recognize that because it's something they are familiar with, so they understand what is going on. 2&3 deal with Buddhism and Hinduism, which is foreign to most people here, so it leaves them thinking like the above posters.
What is it with people like you and Mist? Do you think you're the only ones who caught the ham fisted, obtuse and ultimately nauseating deluge of eastern references in 2 and 3? It wasn't like it was "subtle", the constant references to how Karma is a product of choice, and how said system makes perfect constructs like (Nirvana, Paradise, Matrix 1) impossible for humanity to hold onto was pounded home with all the grace of a drunk jock on prom night. The symbolism behind the "Architect" lacked subtly to the point that even people with a modest understanding of philosophy felt like they were raped by a giant cliche of Shiva.
The problem was the fact that they took a coherent, focused set of symbolism and muddied it with incoherent babble as they attempted to show how much they paid attention in Philosophy 102/103. This may make for a great masturbatory experience for them, as they splooge their philosophical ramblings onto film between huge, pointless, action sequences (Which really hurt the introspective nature they were going for) but it made for a BAD FILM overall. Their inability to deliver that coherent message, because of their ADHD driven tangents, ruined the pacing, story, plot and even a lot of the dialogue.
Hence the problem. Now, when watching number 2, it felt like, while there were nods to other philosophies, that they were still ultimately building toward a few specific questions...You know, coherency. But three they just decided to keep branching, farther and farther out--and instead of achieving enlightenment, they only ended up making Neo look like a comic book character that was being written by a second rate author who couldn't quite decide on the plot, so he just decided to have him do a ton of cool shit and drop in some symbolic elements into each scene so they could say their movie wasn't just an action movie. (Wakakwoski Script Meeting: Hey tranny bro, we just had ANOTHER long, pointless fight scene. How do we make the movie seem smart again? Oh, I know, lets add another long dialogue about choice--this time we'll add multiple iterations of lives, give it a real Hindu vibe...Oooo, we'll have Neo wear an Asian style overcoat to really slam home how smart we're being about the symbolism here! High Five!)
They'd have done more, by doing less. They should have nodded to the other philosophies in 2 and 3, but kept the story moving along with the coherent symbolism/allegory they developed in 1. Which is why I said, the machines, who were omniscience/potent, would have represented God. Their love of mankind stemming from their creation by mankind would have explained the paradox of an all powerful God limiting himself with creatures that have free will (Which automatically limits both Omniscience/Potence.) Neo, would have represented a bridge between God and Man, so that God could better understand man, and man God--hence "the one's" purpose of collecting all that free will code, and allowing the machines to decipher it to fix the Matrix (IE Jesus, son of God, fixing Heaven by being
halfmortal--and I can make a pretty good argument for Neo being half machine, lots of symbolism there)....Much simpler, more focused--and that would allow the action sequences without feeling like a roller coaster of philosophical ramblings. (Note: The reality is, my last little paragraph here was the story, lots of the symbolism in the end points to it--I just think it's meaning could have been conveyed in a cleaner fashion, less doused by the philosophical bullshit of 2/3 and said clearer fashion would have made for a FAR better movie.)
Which is why I made the post--not because I didn't understand it, I just don't think it's good movie making to take a coherent allegory in one film, and then skull fuck it in the series, only to heavily intimate that it did, indeed continue by the end. But hey, to each their own, whatever helps you guys feel like special snow flakes.
