»I am SO confused«

I really feel like each Matrix movie is seperate to each other, for example, Matrix 1 was brilliant and had such potential but it's almost as if they got a new scriptwriter for 2 and 3, or as if the W brothers got high and just made up whatever they wanted without any real clear direction or clarification. I really think they just sat down together and said, "ok, what can we do to cause confusion and double (triple) meanings without giving any answers?" It's not as if they had a PLAN from movie 1, I think they just went with the flow which is highly disappointing. All in all, I have read so many different theories and they are all so completely different to each other and there are NO ANSWERS.

I really, really wanted to walk out of Matrix 3 and have a huge and overwhelming enlightenment that no movie has ever been able to give, after all the hype the matrix has amassed, surely some profound ending was called for? We are all just people wanting to enjoy a movie, but people need meaning and understanding ultimately in a story otherwise it is all a pointless and meaningless.

For example the fighting scene at the end with Smith and Neo, I really expected something better, I was disappointed in the feeble end. I still don't get the point of all of this, I originally thought (and still do) that Zion is also a program, and I know alot of people will say no, the W bro's would never make a movie where nothing was reality, but why not? Why wouldn't they? That would be different to any movie that has ever been and I think that was their point, to be different.

I don't know but the whole thing is bugging me and I wish they would publish a full description of what it all meant. But I think even if they were to do that, it would be a disappointment because it was all a big farce for media attentio and BOY, did they get it. I wish I had just watched the first one and kept it at that.

Before the matrix was made they said that they were gonna have a trilogy and they had already written all the scripts the matrix 1 yes id hav to agree had many potential yet so did 2 and 3 2 and 3 were ultimatedly filmed as if it was one movie and maybe they did stuff up 3 buh it was becasue straigth after they finished 2 they still had to finish of 3 becasue they were filmed at the same time....

Melanievr wrote:

after all the hype the matrix has amassed, surely some profound ending was called for?

the ending is truly more profound than i think most people appreciate. if you say you wanted something "different", how different do u want it to be? i am willing to bet you never saw it coming.. if they had ended Revolutions like they had the 1st movie.. with Neo kicking some serious machine butt i bet more people would have been happy. as for the final Neo-Smith fight, i don't know why u say u don't see the point? they couldn't have just done a straight up kung-fu fight like they had with the previous 2 movies.. they had to convey an air of invincibility between Neo and Smith at the peak of their almost god-like powers to show us that in the end.. it could never be resolved through battle and conflict alone. i think you wanted it different, but not TOO different. there are answers to all the questions raised by the movies.. obviously no-one but the Wachowskis will ever know how deep the rabbit hole really goes, but i think that's the best part.

I am so sick and tired of hearing people whinge that nothing was explained. So much was explained, you just havn't watched the movies the way there supposed to be. You must think about each individual sentence, each indivual double phrase & tripple phrase (if there are any, I wouldn't remember if there was one but I'm sure theres a few, tripple phrases that is), then you'll see it was all explained. It was made so that you would have to think about after seeing it, thats the sign of a good movie if you just keep on thinking about for hours on end. If you find nothing was explained for you, I won't be the one to tell you because I have already made posts in this forum that could solve some of your quims of the Matrix Revolutions. Search the forum a bit, you'll find alot of people have explained what others could not see, and you'll also find idiots who think they know what there talking about but are just ignorant and should be ignored.

I don't think the Wachowskis wanted to go with any obvious twists like the Matrix within Matrix theory or Neos just a program theory. They just made it meaningful and fanbloodytastic instead. The movie was not pointless if you are still enjoying so long afterwards, thinking YES I'VE GOT THE ANSWER to something you've finally just figured out.

Good morning Melanievr, how are you today?

Quote:

I really feel like each Matrix movie is seperate to each other, for example, Matrix 1 was brilliant and had such potential but it's almost as if they got a new scriptwriter for 2 and 3, or as if the W brothers got high and just made up whatever they wanted without any real clear direction or clarification. I really think they just sat down together and said, "ok, what can we do to cause confusion and double (triple) meanings without giving any answers?" It's not as if they had a PLAN from movie 1, I think they just went with the flow which is highly disappointing. All in all, I have read so many different theories and they are all so completely different to each other and there are NO ANSWERS.

I disagree about the movies being separate to each other although one can take the first movie on it’s own and appreciate it without seeing anything else.
I too agree that Matrix 1 was brilliant. I disagree about the feeling that a new scriptwriter was got for M2. I thought M2 outdid M1. I absolutely loved it and not just for the FX. But I agree that it felt that way for M3. M3 should have brought all the questions in and answered them. I don’t mind the double or triple meanings but without answers annoys me. They did have a plan for the movies, but I don’t know if the plan for M3 was changed from their original conception or not – it seemed that way to me though. You’ve read so many different theories because the WBros didn’t do their job and answer anything.

But this is just my opinion.

Quote:

I really, really wanted to walk out of Matrix 3 and have a huge and overwhelming enlightenment that no movie has ever been able to give, after all the hype the matrix has amassed, surely some profound ending was called for? We are all just people wanting to enjoy a movie, but people need meaning and understanding ultimately in a story otherwise it is all a pointless and meaningless.

You are not the only one. I actually witnessed a few people in the cinema walking out from the movie, but I stayed hoping for something special to come, but it didn’t and I should have followed them. I was even stupid enough to go back again and again just in case it was just the mood I was in which tainted my view. I went back several times to try and watch it each time with a different viewpoint but still I was disappointed. I guess the WBros got their money out of me. Some profound ending was certainly called for. Well, it wasn’t pointless and meaningless for the WBros, they got money. That’s all it seemed to me like they wanted for the end.

Quote:

For example the fighting scene at the end with Smith and Neo, I really expected something better, I was disappointed in the feeble end. I still don't get the point of all of this, I originally thought (and still do) that Zion is also a program, and I know alot of people will say no, the W bro's would never make a movie where nothing was reality, but why not? Why wouldn't they? That would be different to any movie that has ever been and I think that was their point, to be different.

As did I. But we got slow rain drops and two men spinning around in the air growling and punching each other. Whoopy. Certainly better than the Burly Brawl wasn’t it? (NOT). I did too and still believe it should have been. Perhaps they did and Warner Bros wanted them to change it? They certainly did start out different from every other movie.

Quote:

I don't know but the whole thing is bugging me and I wish they would publish a full description of what it all meant. But I think even if they were to do that, it would be a disappointment because it was all a big farce for media attentio and BOY, did they get it. I wish I had just watched the first one and kept it at that.

I don’t think they can. I don’t think they even know what they presented in the third movie. Again, for those reading, this is my OWN viewpoint. Yep, I agree again. I know, it’s kind of shattered the dream hasn’t it?

Thank you for sharing your thoughts.

Kind Regards,
-Md

It's a shame...
Walking out on M3? Then, to my opinion you are truly sad.

I can understand that if you do not have many knowledge on how computers and programs work, that it is much more difficult to understand.

For me M3 turned out differently as I suspected. But But I was still very pleased.
Offcourse I had questions spinning in my head but I solved them all by thinking, thinking, thinking and using this forum.
I think I now know almost anything...so try and ask, I'll give an answer

But still, if you have no knowledge of computers and programs M2 and M3 are quite hard to understand. M3 goes much further than the Matrix by introducing the Source and Mobil Ave station.

Alot of people (also movie-reporters) killed the Matrix hype by saying M2 sucked. This is just because they don't understand any word they heard.
The Architect's speech is VERY difficult to understand. I also had to view it at least 10 times and read the transcript to finally fully understand it.
So you must be some kind of computer-nerd to dig even deeper and understand it all the way.

I haven't even talked about the religious symbols that are in the movies. That's my next area of exploration. That what makes this trilogy so much fun; you have months of extra fun.

Quote:

It's a shame...

I thought so.

Quote:

Walking out on M3? Then, to my opinion you are truly sad.

Each to their own. I disagree.

Quote:

I can understand that if you do not have many knowledge on how computers and programs work, that it is much more difficult to understand.

I have a diploma of information technology (network engineering) and have previous worked for 5 years as a network engineer. I can program in 3 different computer languages and have built systems and repaired systems most of my life. I believe my knowledge on how computers work and programs work is above average so that doesn't sit with me buddy, but you entitled to your opinion, and I respect that. Nice try though.

Quote:

For me M3 turned out differently as I suspected.

As most did.

Quote:

But But I was still very pleased.

Most people I've talked with who do/can think about it weren't.

Quote:

Offcourse I had questions spinning in my head

Most do.

Quote:

but I solved them all by thinking, thinking, thinking and using this forum.

If you think hard enough you could work out a theory for anything.

Quote:

I think I now know almost anything...so try and ask, I'll give an answer

Why should I, apparently I am truly sad so therefore I shouldn't be capabile of asking anything... And if I did, what makes your theory/answer the truth and not just an interpretation of what you saw? - Do you personally know the Wbros? I doubt it. Neither do I so anything I say is just speculation too.

Quote:

But still, if you have no knowledge of computers and programs M2 and M3 are quite hard to understand. M3 goes much further than the Matrix by introducing the Source and Mobil Ave station.

Um, no, I have extreme knowledge of computers and programs and I still think the third movie stinkz. That doesn't pass Mobil Ave Station. You can not just wipe everyone off as not understanding the movie because they don't understand computers or programs. How utterly disgusting of you to even contemplate such a thing. How up-yourself are you? (Not a fact, a question based on your comment supplied here now).

I never said I did not understand the movie, I said it was pathetic. But you and select others are attempting to convince me and others that I did not understand the movie because I do not understand computers or programs... now that, my friend, is TRULY SAD.

Suggestion: Before you speak, take a deep breath. This allows for the brain to think before it speaks.

Quote:

Alot of people (also movie-reporters) killed the Matrix hype by saying M2 sucked.

I found it quite the opposite here for M2.

Quote:

This is just because they don't understand any word they heard.

That's right, keep passing it off as good because they didn't understand a word they heard... how insulting to assume that they didn't.

Quote:

The Architect's speech is VERY difficult to understand.

The Architect's speech is NOT DIFFICULT to understand. It may be for some people without a degree in english, but it is quite easy and flows well.

Perhaps try to use the statement: The Architect's speech for me (Mobil Ave) is VERY difficult to understand. (It would be more accurate would you not agree?)

Quote:

I also had to view it at least 10 times and read the transcript to finally fully understand it.

I see, this is more like it, but what about: 'I (Mobile Ave) had to view it at least 10 times and read the transcript to finally fully undersatnd it because I (Mobile Ave) did not get it the first time.

Drop the 'ALSO' which seems to indicate that you believe everyone had to do this.

Quote:

So you must be some kind of computer-nerd to dig even deeper and understand it all the way.

You do not need to be a computer-nerd to dig deeper and understand it all the way. How rude of you. An understand of computers may aid you, but not all of my friends are computer-nerds, some of them know nothing about computers and seemed to have grasp things that you seem unable to - still.

Quote:

I haven't even talked about the religious symbols that are in the movies. That's my next area of exploration.

Well have fun. Perhaps, to your logic, you have to be a religous-nerd to dig even deeper and understand it all the way...

Quote:

That what makes this trilogy so much fun; you have months of extra fun.

Researching the elements presented in the film for fun does not mean that the movie itself has done it's job. One can very well research other movies which are complete. The mere fact that you have to even go to that trouble shows there is something unfinshed about the movie and that you are trying to seek in some form or another some sort of closure to the movie. But hey, what would I know...

Now, how do I turn this computer thing off...

Hi MarcDaniel. You forgot your "how are you today?"-part which makes me think you still hate me for winning the agent Jackson-debate (which you still haven't admitted and you still did no research of any kind. Please don't ask for a picture-grabber again...you have a degree right? You must know your way then!).

I did not mean to be rude about the computer-nerd-thing. I used it to say that on that part I can understand people. If they don't know much about the computer-world, I can understand their argument that they MIGHT not fully understand the story.

ALL the people around me, with the exception of just one person, did not understand M2. They hated it for it's dialogues and especially the Architect-part. So I might assume that ALOT of people find that part hard to understand. That has nothing to do with rudeness.

What I find rude is that a person re-wrights the whole damn movie just to satisfy his own stubborn ego (which I got to know on the Jackson-debate).
Don't get me wrong...(re)writing and fantasizing can be very cool. But it is for your own personal enjoyment. I fantasize about (extra) Matrix-episodes too. But you do it to proof that the WB-brothers are incompotent and that you know it better!
Yes offcourse you always say that it is your own humble opinion just to seem polite, but at the same time you have the urge to be right about it.

I red a part of your story. My respect goes out to you for the time you put in it. Very well written. But to me personally it means nothing, because I respect the WB's story.

And I am a little shocked that you with all your degrees in computers (and you must know mathematics quite good also, assuming that you at first sight loved the Architect's speech), don't understand M3.

I am not a religious expert yet. But I like to discover all the references. But the main course of the movie is about computer-science. So you need to get a more-or-less clear view on that.

Take care MarcDaniel!

Hi MarcDaniel. You forgot your "how are you today?"-part

- Didn't have time this morning, was late for work - sorry. How are you today though?


which makes me think you still hate me for winning the agent Jackson-debate (which you still haven't admitted and you still did no research of any kind. Please don't ask for a picture-grabber again...you have a degree right? You must know your way then!).

- You presume you have won?
- No one has supplied a picture grabber I asked for
- It is irrelevant what I have and do not have. I know about as much about you as you do of me.
- Sarcasm is the lowest form of wit


I did not mean to be rude about the computer-nerd-thing. I used it to say that on that part I can understand people. If they don't know much about the computer-world, I can understand their argument that they MIGHT not fully understand the story.

- That isn't what you said though.


ALL the people around me, with the exception of just one person, did not understand M2.

- Around you in the real world or online?
- Is it your interpretation that they don't understand because they do not conform to your thoughts?


They hated it for it's dialogues and especially the Architect-part.

- I absolutely loved that part and the dialogue as a whole (besides a couple of stupid things that were said (we spoke about this earlier I believe in another thread))


So I might assume that ALOT of people find that part hard to understand. That has nothing to do with rudeness.

- Never assume. You can make educated guesses or theorise but never generalise or assume.
- It has everything to do with rudeness although, I suppose it depends on your perception of rudeness and/or your own value in morals.


What I find rude is that a person re-wrights the whole damn movie just to satisfy his own stubborn ego (which I got to know on the Jackson-debate).

- That's not rudeness. That's creativity. But each their own. And the Jackson debate isn't over.

Don't get me wrong...(re)writing and fantasizing can be very cool. But it is for your own personal enjoyment. I fantasize about (extra) Matrix-episodes too. But you do it to proof that the WB-brothers are incompotent and that you know it better!

- We all do what we are meant to do. I can't not help what they presented. It is not my fault they presented themselves to me in this manner. Do not blame me for others mistakes.

Yes offcourse you always say that it is your own humble opinion just to seem polite, but at the same time you have the urge to be right about it.

- Absolutely. It is my own humble opinion and no, I am for the most part polite. Some people try my patience though but they still deserve curtesy. Do you not agree?
- In my opinion I am right, this does not mean that in your opinion I am. Is that so difficult a concept to grasp? Is the sharing of ideas in some way something you fear? Do you fear that the WBs may have been wrong? Have you ever questioned it?


I red a part of your story. My respect goes out to you for the time you put in it. Very well written. But to me personally it means nothing, because I respect the WB's story.

- And there it is: 'Part of your story'.
- Thank you.
- It only means nothing if you are unwilling to read it in it's entirety and open your mind to other thoughts.
- And there it is again: 'Respect the WB's Story' without question no doubt...


And I am a little shocked that you with all your degrees in computers (and you must know mathematics quite good also, assuming that you at first sight loved the Architect's speech), don't understand M3.

- Why are you shocked?
- You don't need to be a mathematical genious to work with coding and values.
- Are you trying to say that someone must understand mathematics to understand or like the Architect's speech? - Think about that for a moment... take a breath.

I am not a religious expert yet. But I like to discover all the references. But the main course of the movie is about computer-science. So you need to get a more-or-less clear view on that.

- So you are now dictating to me what I should get clear on within this movie?
- Am I allowed to think for myself?

Take care MarcDaniel!

- You too Mobile Ave, but please try to be a bit more open.
-Md


Gotta get back to work, lunch is over now.

MarcDaniel,

I am open for anything and anybody.
I just want to discuss/debate/explain within the parameters of the WB's story.

Some basic knowledge of mathematics could come in handy at the Architect's speech.

How could the WBs ever be wrong? It's their OWN story. Everything from the movie works out within the rules of computer science and physics. Every detail in the movie can be explained by thinking about it.
It is generally known that the brothers are quite accurate when it comes to detail. It's almost an insult to say that they are wrong.
Even the actors signed the contract without reading the story first. Offcourse it is all different from M1, but still a masterpiece at it's own.

I'll be waiting to hear from you for the so called Jackson-debate...

[quote="Mobil_Ave_Neo"]
What I find rude is that a person re-wrights the whole damn movie just to satisfy his own stubborn ego[/quote

a magnificent statement if ever there was one

i dont mind people rewriting it but they have to realise that the complexity of the matrix trilogy is its beauty...

if some people dont want to use thier time to discover those complexities then that is thier loss

Mobil_Ave_Neo: MarcDaniel,

- What? You didn't answer my 'How are you today?' - OMG, does this mean you hate me?


Mobil_Ave_Neo: I am open for anything and anybody.

- It certainly does not seem that way...


Mobil_Ave_Neo: I just want to discuss/debate/explain within the parameters of the WB's story.

- Then it's best you don't open your mind and jump in on other peoples openess then isn't it?


Mobil_Ave_Neo: Some basic knowledge of mathematics could come in handy at the Architect's speech.

- You don't need basic knowledge of mathematics. Basic knowledge of english perhaps... Then again, perhaps what you mean by basic knowledge is that of 1 plus 1 or something of that simplistic nature. If that's what you mean, then I guess some basic knowledge is helpful: BUT you do not need an understanding of mathematics to understand the speech itself... well then again, you did need to watch it 10 times...


Mobil_Ave_Neo: How could the WBs ever be wrong? It's their OWN story.

- Perhaps they folded to dollar signs...
- But then again, if you ONLY want to discuss/debate/explain within the parameters of the WB's story, then of course you won't be able to think outside the box they've presented now will you?


Mobil_Ave_Neo: Everything from the movie works out within the rules of computer science and physics. Every detail in the movie can be explained by thinking about it.

- I think you're not going to be able to have the ability to contemplate things outside the wB's sphere of creation or try to fit everything else within this sphere, so it is kind of pointless being on a forum with thinkers who can think outside of this isn't it?


Mobil_Ave_Neo: It is generally known that the brothers are quite accurate when it comes to detail.

- I thought so too, until I saw the final installment...


Mobil_Ave_Neo: It's almost an insult to say that they are wrong.

- I must comply to what I have been presented. Almost sounds like some form of religions where you are not allowed to challenge or share thoughts which defy what is written...


Mobil_Ave_Neo: Even the actors signed the contract without reading the story first.

- And so this is your proof?


Mobil_Ave_Neo: Offcourse it is all different from M1, but still a masterpiece at it's own.

- How do you believe it is different?
- M1 is IMHO a great prequel to the events which unfolded within M2. It's a story of how the 'saviour' is found and unplugged. A story of what the saviour went through to believe in his own abilities.


Mobil_Ave_Neo: I'll be waiting to hear from you for the so called Jackson-debate...

- Why should I bother? Really, think about it. I have given you time indexes from the DVD to go through and look at. If you truly wanted to debate this, you would look at these and since you are unable to present me with something to snap shot these timeindexes, then you should snapshot them and post them. I have asked you to present these images on one page so we can all have a look at them.
- I have given you theories on why you don't believe it is the person I do (shadows, lights, etc) but still you don't bother. So if you don't bother, why should I?
- What makes you think you are so important that I have to jump to your beckoning call? If you want to offer more proof, then comply with my requests. I've got more important things in the 'real world' to worry about than whether or not you believe you have presented enough evidence to support your case. And in the end, unlike you, if I am wrong, which I never said I was right, I know I can accept it. But you on the other hand don't seem to be able to accept the possiblity that you could be wrong or think outside of the story you've seen and the way you've interpreted the events within. If it is so difficult to do this, why are you on this forum where these discussions occur? Do you believe that you must advocate for the WB's story? Have you made this your purpose? Isn't the world a little larger than the matrix stories my friend?

Take care and until next we speak Mobil_Ave_Neo.

---

Good morning the anomaly, how are you?

the anomaly: i dont mind people rewriting it but they have to realise that the complexity of the matrix trilogy is its beauty...

- What if the shoe is on the other foot? What if it is those who accept the third movie that have not really realised the true complexity of what was presented in the beginning of the matrix trilogy? Think about it, I didn't say anything but 'What if'.

the anomaly: if some people dont want to use thier time to discover those complexities then that is thier loss

- Again, What if the true loss is those who have not realised the true complexity of the movie or have not realised that the third installment wasn't presented as the WackoB's wanted but what WarnerBros wanted to present instead? Again, I said 'What if'.

- Are you able to think of these statements you made from that angle?

Cheers the anomaly, talk to you later on as well.

how's it going marcdaniel?

i understand what you are saying and you are correct
the matrix trilogy can be appreciated on many different levels
if you want a kick ass all out action movie without the need to delve to deep then the matrix wont dissapoint

but it seems to me that the people who are most dissapointed are the ones who wanted more than that but were unwilling to accept anything but thier own long debated/discussed theories

i myself posted on another forum,large numbers of theories as to what was going to happen in revolutions before it was released

but i was open minded enough to know that i wa probably goint to be way off the mark(and i was with the exeption of who died)

i was also not so naive to think that my endings were more thought out and planned than the watchowski brothers ending.

i think the brothers achieved what they wanted to achieve...

5 months after the film was released there is still huge debate and activity in forums like these...compared to the other big releases which have long since been forgotten(with the exception of yesterday)

and i also am willing,and in fact happy,to accept an ending in which the good guys dont win out in the end

cheers
the anomaly

how's it going marcdaniel?

- It's going really well mate, very tired though, work is getting busier now that the holiday period has really left us. You?

i understand what you are saying and you are correct
the matrix trilogy can be appreciated on many different levels
if you want a kick ass all out action movie without the need to delve to deep then the matrix wont dissapoint

- Oh I concur, for an action movie only, there are many scenes in it that won't disappoint at all.

but it seems to me that the people who are most dissapointed are the ones who wanted more than that but were unwilling to accept anything but thier own long debated/discussed theories

- I know what you are saying but I believe a lot of people who wanted more from it without having long debates discussed beforehand. Yes I personally thought about it alot, but I went in with an open mind expecting anything as it could have gone many ways.

i myself posted on another forum,large numbers of theories as to what was going to happen in revolutions before it was released

- I myself never posted on a matrix forum nor visited them until after the trilogy had finished.

but i was open minded enough to know that i wa probably goint to be way off the mark(and i was with the exeption of who died)

- That's the whole point to it though, whether you are way off the mark or not, you thought about things and were open minded enough to do so. I've read some of your things and whether or not I agree with them, I can put aside what happened in M3 and read your thoughts on a level continuing from m2 or keep M3 in my mind and read them in a different way. Some of them aren't too bad a thoughts either.

i was also not so naive to think that my endings were more thought out and planned than the watchowski brothers ending.

- It's not a matter of being naive or not. Your endings were thought out, they had to have been structured in some way. Whether or not you included as many aspects as you wanted to or as you've seen afterwards it really irrelavent. It's still a thought-process of yours you had that you put down and shared. Some of the ideas you may personally beleive are great ones which should have been used. Just because they weren't, doesn't mean they weren't great ideas does it?

i think the brothers achieved what they wanted to achieve...

- I do too, Money. Absolutely 100% agree with this statement.

5 months after the film was released there is still huge debate and activity in forums like these...compared to the other big releases which have long since been forgotten(with the exception of yesterday)

- Personally, if the movie had been done *in my opinion* correctly, there would not be as much activity in forums like these. Which is why other big releases have long since been forgotten.

and i also am willing,and in fact happy,to accept an ending in which the good guys dont win out in the end

- As am I. I really enjoy twists and turns, and guys that don't normally win winning, so long as it is done well.

cheers
the anomaly

- Thanks for your thoughts. Take Care, will chat to you later.

- PS: If anyone wants to chat to me via IM, they are more than welcome. If you have something you want to chat to me about on the quite the anomaly, please feel free. Not everything has to be aired. Please note, I am not saying that you do have anything on the quite that you want to chat about, but I figured I would extend the invitation to all. You, Mobile Ave, anyone.

Hi MarcDaniel,

I didn't reply to your how-are-you-today, because I think it is all TOO kind. You must be aware of people who are too kind; mostly they have a hidden agenda. But offcourse this is MY VERY OWN HUMBLE OPINION..so who cares?
Get of your lazy ass and make the snapshots yourself please. The only thing you did was copy and paste some transcipt and indexes from the net.
I made my own material. I was willing to make an effort on it. You seek the easy way by saying: I can't really see it. It's just a cheap way of saying that you cannot accept your loss.
And don't talk to me about not having time for it, because of your 'real world'-obligations. You put all your time in a story just to f*ck with a brilliant concept.

You saying that I am only focussed on my own theories is not true. Take some time, take an effort and do a search on me. I can even give you direct links to my quotes if you want. On alot of threads I admit faults or agree with others UNLIKE you. You even disagree with the creators of the Matrix. So what's your problem exactly?

My english is quite good. But in our country the Architect's speech is subtitled. So I listened to it without subtitles a few times.
You saying that I am bad at english...and you accuse me of judging on people's qualities?

I think I now know why you believe in a Matrix-within-a-Matrix theory. Your life itself is simulated by your own Matrix; and I guess you believe that all your wisedom is true.

Take care mate with your 'troubles' in the 'real world'.

Hi Mobile Ave Neo,

You think it’s all TOO kind? Hidden agenda’s?
Interesting, I’d hate to live in your world then. Paranoid?
You’re entitled to your opinion though. Well, I’m beyond caring at this stage when it comes to replying to yourself, please don’t take offence to that.
Get of my lazy ass... I shall reply in the same manner: Stuff you and the horse you came in on. I spent ages going through the DVD getting the scenes and time indexes for you to check. If you’re too flipping lazy to look at them and comment on those scenes, don’t come crawling to the forums to make it sound like my fault and that I am the lazy one. I didn’t just past transcripts. When I posted transcripts you asked for more proof and if I had just search the net for it and to get more evidence. The indexes where NOT from the net, they were from the blooming DVD I watched and noted down on notepad then transferred the document I was typing on the forums for YOU to review – which you obviously haven’t.
You made your own material? Seems like you just posted a couple of pictures and that was it presuming that would explain everything. It doesn’t seem like you made an effort. The facts are, you can not really see it – but hey, why am I bothering if to this date you aren’t going to bother looking into what I posted? I can not accept my loss? Excuse me? I’ll accept my loss if the person debating actually bothers to review my evidence and provide counter evidence and it is found that I am wrong.
Mate, the story I wrote was done during my 3 weeks holidays. The ONLY 3 weeks a year I get off – Do you NEED to know this information? No. Furthermore, did I tell you I couldn’t do it because of ‘real-world’ obligations? And finally, I did not put all my time into a story JUST to f* with a brilliant concept. Such smallmindedness...
No, see you still are not reading my posts. I am saying that it seems from your conversations with me that you appear to be focussed on your own theories. I usually do take some time and put some effort in in searching on people but ONLY if they appear to bother to read my posts/concepts in their entirety.
Direct links to your quotes about what?
What will you quoting something do for me?
I am willing to take a look at these quote, but tell me in what context am I supposed to be viewing them?
You admit faults? That’s good to know, I do too. You seem to think I don’t – again, read my posts more carefully and perhaps you should take your own advise (if it’s advise worth taking that is) and do a search on me and read or re-read some of my posts again.
“You even disagree with the creators of the Matrix”
What kind of adolescent statement is this? I thought I was talking with someone in their mid-twenties. I guess you do not understand what I am saying or talking about then. For that, I am truly sorry.
“So what's your problem exactly?”
Did I say that I had a problem?
“My english is quite good. But in our country the Architect's speech is subtitled. So I listened to it without subtitles a few times.”
So you got the speech delivered to you in two languages. This should have aided you in your interpretation of the speech no?
“You saying that I am bad at english...and you accuse me of judging on people's qualities?”
See, here’s where you are wrong. I used your own statements and turned them around, presenting them in a different manner to you. How does it feel to read something like that? No very good does it mate? Perhaps you should put more thought in some of your statements?
“I think I now know why you believe in a Matrix-within-a-Matrix theory. Your life itself is simulated by your own Matrix; and I guess you believe that all your wisedom is true.”
You do not know anything about my life Mobile Ave. This thought of yours again makes me think, ‘Am I talking to someone in their mid-twenties or not?’ The statement is a cheap attack with not much thought involved at all. I suppose if I were to reply at the same level I could say, “I know you are but what are you?” – However, I am sure that I am speaking with someone that if they wanted to, could put a bit more thought into their statements/comments/questions. Am I wrong?
I do not believe that all my wisdom is true. But why do I have to even write that down for you? If you had/have read my posts you would already know this statement to be true.
“Take care mate with your 'troubles' in the 'real world'.”
After all that you have said before this statement, you actually want me to believe that you care that I have troubles in the real world?
I don’t believe that I said that I was having ‘troubles’ in the ‘real world’.
Interesting…. Let’s review this a bit further.
I say: “It's going really well mate, very tired though, work is getting busier now that the holiday period has really left us.”
And you say: “Take care mate with your 'troubles' in the 'real world'.”
With this in mind, it is interesting to ponder how exactly you interpret the speeches within the movies themselves.
In any case, I will talk to you later. I must get back to my ‘troubles’ at work in the ‘real world’.
-Md

Hi MarcDaniel,

Quote:

“You even disagree with the creators of the Matrix” What kind of adolescent statement is this? I thought I was talking with someone in their mid-twenties. I guess you do not understand what I am saying or talking about then. For that, I am truly sorry.

Well you can say whatever you want. It is a FACT that you do not agree with them. Why else would you not take Revolutions into consideration when you debate (which is quite ridiculous) and re-write the movie as you saw fit?

About the indexing of the DVD. If you did it yourself then I must indeed apolagize.
But you just gave the agents names by yourself. Their names aren't mentioned in the movie.
The transcript on the net has a flaw in it. That's because nobody really cared who was who. So that's why we did an investigation in that thread.

Quote:

01.28.07 - We see Agent Johnson now in another cop car again ready to point a gun at Trinity on the motorcyle with the keymaker. 01.28.54 - We see Agent Johnson in the cop car again. 01.28.54 - We also see a quick shot of Agent Thompson in the same cop car now next to him. Their roles as Driver and Passanger have switched compared with time index 01.23.26 01.28.59 - We see Agent Johnson look back as Trinity now without the Keymaker turns off of the freeway.

That's not in any way Johnson.
You should check out the extra DVD at the feature "Get me an exit". Then you will see 100% proof that the agent fighting Morpheus on the truck is agent Johnson. He is not sitting in the car when they chase Trinity; take a better look.
In the other thread I also pointed out other scenes where you can compare the Jackson-agent from the burly brawl. You never answered upon that request.
The problem is you see the front-side of Jackson only very short at the burly brawl. But when I have time I would gladly make shots of the sides of his face (both on burly brawl and the highway). I will let you know on the forum when I have them ready.

I am indeed someone in his mid-twenties. But in my mind I sometimes feel 16 and sometimes 50. I explore everything my mind has to offer me I have freed it

Hi M,

Well you can say whatever you want. It is a FACT that you do not agree with them. Why else would you not take Revolutions into consideration when you debate (which is quite ridiculous) and re-write the movie as you saw fit?

As can you. And?

About the indexing of the DVD. If you did it yourself then I must indeed apolagize.

I did, and that's fine.

But you just gave the agents names by yourself. Their names aren't mentioned in the movie.
The transcript on the net has a flaw in it. That's because nobody really cared who was who. So that's why we did an investigation in that thread.

No shit. I gave you my account of what I saw in those scenes. I wasn't watching it with your eyes was I?

No shit, of course their names aren't mentioned in the movie. ...shakes head... why o why lord...

The Transcript is flawed? Why? because it doesn't conform with your theory or belief?

OIC, you investigated... Doesn't seem like it to me and really is quite irrelevant.

I've said it before (if you read my post): Whether or not it is Jackson doesn't really matter. It was a simple question about whether agents can come back after Smith clones them or not. What I see and what you see seem to be two different answers and either one doesn't change the plot of the movie one bit.

That's not in any way Johnson.

I disagree.

You should check out the extra DVD at the feature "Get me an exit". Then you will see 100% proof that the agent fighting Morpheus on the truck is agent Johnson. He is not sitting in the car when they chase Trinity; take a better look.

EVEN MORE PROOF THAT YOU DON'T BLOOMING READ MY FKN POSTS!

Quote:

Originally Posted by Marcdaniel Emilee: That's agent Johnson, the same guy fighting Morpheus on the Truck. Extra Features DVD - Chapter: "GET ME AN EXIT" 06.52 - Agent Johnson answering a phone from the Samsung TV commercial. He has the freckle under his left eye. 07.18 - Guy saying, "We took Daniel Bernhardt, who'd played Agent Johnson, and put them in a chase scenario through, like, a cityscape somewhere." - 07.21 - Scene of Agent Johnson jumping on to the car bonnet. 07.33 - Agent Johnson falling on to the road scene, commentator: "The great thing about Daniel is he was amped about that character..." 07.38 - Agent Johnson fighting Morpheus on truck scene (Bluescreen background) 09.15 - Agent Johnson close up - bluescreen 09.29 - Agent Johnson putting his sunglasses back on.

Why oh why are we having this conversation.

The problem is you see the front-side of Jackson only very short at the burly brawl. But when I have time I would gladly make shots of the sides of his face (both on burly brawl and the highway). I will let you know on the forum when I have them ready.

If you bothered to check my indexes you can actually pause the DVD and see both front and side views.

I am indeed someone in his mid-twenties. But in my mind I sometimes feel 16 and sometimes 50. I explore everything my mind has to offer me I have freed it

Fair enough... if that is indeed how you view it.

For the record: I never said and will never say that you HAVE to agree with me nor have I ever said that I was right. I said what I saw and you obviously haven't read my posts which is evident in your previous post.

FINAL NOTE M: Until you do read my posts in their entirety, I am exiting this circular arguement with you. You can view it as a 15 year old and say you've won (which we know is not the case until you have at least reviewed other peoples posts), or you can view it as a 50 year old and read what I have posted previously. I believe the former is probably truer because I have read you saying to others that you will not read their information. So if that is the case, this conversation is over until such time as you do.

-Md

MarcDaniel,

You are right about that additional post of you indexing the extra-feature.
My apolagies for that.

I said that two times yes...not reading someone's information. I also said WHY I wasn't going to do that

The transcript is the spoken text from the film. It is written by someone unofficial; and they do a great job making this effort. The names of the agents was just a little flaw which I can understand. Not many people do care who is who and it is not important to the plot either. But I am a detail-freak, so that explains it.

If I have the time, I will make the new snapshots. To inform the people about the facts (for other detail-freaks like me, if there ever are any) and to bug you a little bit (that's the 16 year old guy in me )

Cheers mate!

it's good very few peaple understood,
the less peaple understand,
the less peaple must be "removed" by the agents

lol, you've read the Matrix comics too.

Nana wrote -

Quote:

it's good very few peaple understood, the less peaple understand, the less peaple must be "removed" by the agents

Yes, and I just hate having to resort to that, don't you

Melanevier, I empathize with you. It is all too obvious that Matrix 2 and 3 were driven to completion simply by the market. Since the story was built up so much, they didn't have to rely on good movie making to achieve success in the last movies. Instead, in order to allow a blind belief in the movies to take over, they made the last two more religious. Therefore, everyone who was not sure that they liked it, could come to like it by attempting to find meaning in it. Everyone knows they liked the first one. However, many people like to believe they enjoyed the 2nd and 3rd movies simply because they apply their own meanings to it. Now, they can claim that those who didn't like it were "misunderstanding." However, I have not heard one coherant theory which doesn't contain innumerable holes. There is only one theory with no holes: The movie was designed to make people "read" into it.

Naaah I don't think so. I could make up a theory without any real holes if I tried hard enough.

It's not at all a marketing trick. If it were, they would have just put in alot of kung fu and Neo would be freeing the entire world.

Everything is very well thought out by the Brothers.
And I love them for making it so complicated and so open for many theories.
If it would all be 100% clear we would not have these months of after-fun discussing the movies.

It could also be that the Brothers built in the very concept of the movie: you have to CHOOSE for yourself which theory you believe.

Mobil Ave Neo wrote -

Quote:

Everything is very well thought out by the Brothers. And I love them for making it so complicated and so open for many theories. If it would all be 100% clear we would not have these months of after-fun discussing the movies.

Yes I absolutely agree with you! The movies have set a standard, never has so much discussion and theorising gone on - long may it continue.

Quote:

It could also be that the Brothers built in the very concept of the movie: you have to CHOOSE for yourself which theory you believe.

I've been saying this for months, in the end you believe what YOU want to believe, no one can tell you what to believe as our perceptions differ so dramatically.
So we really could be debating this trilogy for many years to come!