Saturday, March 11, 2006

Reloaded Reconsidered

But not by me...By my friend Cbabbitt over at Ain't It Cool News.

In an article as fascinating as it is verbose, Babbitt attempts to reclaim the legacy of The Matrix II from naysayers like myself, who would argue that the Wachowski's simply fumbled in following-up one of the most popular films of our time. I remain unconvinced that The Matrix Reloaded even approaches greatness as a film, but the guy makes as convincing a case as I've ever read.

Just to give you my own take, briefly...I was never really a fan of the first Matrix. It has some great moments, and the last 20 minutes or so in particular kick ass. I love that shootout in the lobby of the building most of all.

But I always preferred the Wachowski's previous film, Bound. That movie not only has their trademark flourishes (like a shot that enters a toilet bowl and comes out through the plumbing in the apartment next door), but it's also loose and sexy and features some killer supporting work from Joe Pantoliano.

Matrix opens well, and has a very clever premise. And I like the cinematography and effects. But the movie's kind of boring and repetitive. Too much lecturing by Larry Fishburne (particularly in long scenes set against a plain white backdrop...Now that's cinematic!) Too many pointless, though cool, fisticuffs that don't lead anywhere and have no import to the story. And I don't really dig the design of the "real world" in this universe...Robotic squid, menacing though they might be, just aren't really compelling as villains. And they are the only representation of the Machine enemy that we have.

So, anyway, I didn't exactly go into Reloaded with massive expectations. Yet, still, the movie fell short for me. I don't need to get into all the ins and outs, but it's combination of slack pacing, silly asides, subplots that don't lead anywhere, overlong/cartoonish set pieces and nonsensical metaphysical jabberings were not exactly my cup of tea. Even the big crowd-pleasing moments - the fight against the 1000 Agent Smiths known as the Burly Brawl, or the large-scale freeway chase - lack the zip and fun of the original film (and other, better, sci-fi/action movies like anything in James Cameron's catalog).

Mr. Babbitt, however, sees things a bit differently. He chalks up the lack of favor among the fan community towards the Matrix sequels mainly to an excess of expectations, coupled with disappointment at the new direction the Wachowski's took with the new films.

Ambition and integrity were lost amidst a colossal backlash of an audience incapable of looking past faults and missteps to see something greater, but just a shocked, disapproving community that wallowed in the easily agreeable nature of collective disappointment. The supposed “Year of the Matrix” became quickly blasted and dismissed, the films unfairly forgotten, and the Wachowskis second guessed for their seemingly uninspired, uncreative contributions. The sequels had been officially deemed unsuccessful by the standards of most critics and fans, an undoubtedly dark moment in the careers of a tremendously exciting duo of cinematic storytellers.

I kind of feel like I embody the counter-argument to this position. I did not have outsized expectations going into the second Matrix film. There were elements of the first film I liked, and this coupled with the extensive marketing campaign that kicked in months in advance of the release, were enough to get me in the theater for the second movie. But I hardly feel like I had a standard already set in my mind for a new Matrix movie, and then took my frustration out on the second film when it failed to pursue this line of storytelling.

In other words, I don't feel like my lack of appreciation for Matrix Reloaded is due to what Babbitt would call "a moment of epic misunderstanding."

Anyway, the article continues as Babbitt goes through the film with a good deal of coherence and admirable depth. It's clear he's really given this some thought, and has compiled a fairly comprehensive guide to the pro's and con's of the film. I will grant that he makes some persuasive arguments, and overall that he's very fair (particularly in terms of the extremely disappointing opening act, which dithers endlessly around Zion).

And, to be perfectly honest, I never really followed the entire Mr. Smith storyline until reading this article.

The Wachowski Brothers create a mind-bending concept of bringing Smith into the real world by copying himself on a rebel and then using a hard-line to jack-out of the Matrix. The idea, like many in the film, is conceptually intriguing, but surprisingly unfulfilling.

So that's how he gets into the real world. This was never totally clear to me in the movie. It just seemed like, one minute he's this rogue program, and the next minute he's running around in the spaceship inside another guy's body. I didn't realize he could port himself inside a real person but still retain the ability to leap back and forth into the real world. It's almost like he's a virus that changes location from a computer system into a human brain, which is a pretty trippy, neat idea.

Interestingly (to me, anyway), Babbitt doesn't bring up the facet of Matrix Reloaded I found most impressive. He seems genuinely taken with the scenes featuring the Merovingian (who I thought resembled a bad European soap opera actor) and the Architect (whose extended, dry monologue typifies the problems in the entire trilogy, to my mind). I, on the other hand, admired the way the Wachowski's laid out a story that made logical sense in terms of computer programs and software.

All the elements of the story - from accessing the increasingly-complex infrastructure of The Matrix, to remnants of deleted programs lingering in a computer system, to reboot and reload mechanisms built into the basic programming code - hold true to the way computers and machines are ordered and operated. That level of complexity in a major, mainstream American film is something to be admired and commended. We're talking about an industry that thought The 40 Year Old Virgin was one of last year's best written movies, okay? And Matrix Reloaded actually includes thematic material relating to the inner workings of complex computer networks. Full respect.

So, I'm a little surprised Babbitt didn't make this case, because it's kind of persuasive. He tends to favor the film for its aesthetic, design component. Here he is describing the much-debated Zion rave sequence:

The dance is beautifully intercut with another criterion of human passion, a love sequence between Neo and Trinity. The imagery is exquisitely interwoven, resulting in a fairly potent piece of human symbolism and metaphor. Cinematographer Bill Pope does magnificent work in the entire trilogy, and this particular sequence represents the best of his abilities. He and uber production designer Owen Paterson bring a sufficiently earthy, dark, almost claustrophobic atmosphere to Zion, and this section demonstrates just how vital their contributions are in envisioning this world.

I, um, respectfully disagree.

Anyway, if you are even a casual fan of the Matrix films, you owe it to yourself to check out this whole article. He's got a second edition coming out soon, about (you guessed it), The Matrix Revolutions. It's all in preparation for the Wachowski's latest venture, V for Vendetta, which they only officially produced but apparently shadow-directed as well. That opens next week, and I personally can't wait to check it out.

1 comment:

Lons said...

Well, Babbitt doesn't need to REconsider the prequels, as he's mainly in agreement with you about their quality.

And as for me, I did that already, before Ep. 3 hit...And my reconsideration wasn't really all that much more kind than my initial consideration.