»Do you believe in the brothers?«

Having read lots of theories and stuff, I can't get this one question out of my head:

Did the brothers really think over all aspects of what they have created (3 movies, a game, some animations, more to come)? In other words:

Is there any believable and logical theory that explains it all? If yes, did the brothers think of it the same way or is it just coincidence that the theory fits.

My personal opinion at the moment: I'd very much like to believe in the brothers, but I can't help thinking, they might just have scratched on the surface leaving many things open to explanation they did never think to the end themselves...

Simple.

Some things have a concrete explanation.
Some things are interpretive.

Akshat Gupta wrote:

Simple. Some things have a concrete explanation. Some things are interpretive.

That's what you think the brothers meant it to be?

i strongly believe that the Wachowskis thought these things throught VERY thoroughly, the multiple meanings and things left open to interpretation are in my opinion deliberate.

i like to think of the matrix story as something which manages to unite science, mathematics, religion and philosophy into a coherent whole. all these things are different human perspectives that attempt to make sense of existence in manifestly different ways. as a result, a lot of different interpretations can be made depending on your character and the things you are drawn to.. so it makes the matrix a very subjective viewing experience and i think that can only be a good thing

just as a endnote just to tie that in with what Akshat just said.. think of the the scientific and mathematical elements as the concrete aspect.. and the religious and philisophical as the interpretive element.

Precisely. Good one.

OOh, look it's me posting my second post after making a jerk of myself in my first one.

This is a thing I have believed for a long time (the subjective viewing). I find it amusing how you can almost pinpoint what people believe in or see as a truth of life when they watch the Matrix.

What makes it such a great film is that it DOES connect with your psyche, whether you enjoy the films or not.

If you don't like fate, religion, or philosophy, and enjoy hardcore logic, I've found that most people like that were propogating the "there's multiple Matrix's" theories. Of course there are, it's only logical, right?

And when you go into the less "prove it" sections of interpretation, again, people see each scene in a different light, and you can almost tell what they are about when they tell you what the Matrix is about.

It's the most perplexing and interesting thing I've found about the movies. Even if you hate the films, inevitably the second and the third films will strike some kind of chord with you. And I believe it's a very deliberate set up. The first Matrix is liked the most because it is the least.... convicting I suppose. The Wachowskis were presenting their project... and they knew they had no following yet, so you get an introduction to the question of reality, of struggle, of belief, but you never have to be directly confronted by it. "Ooh, go Neo, you stand up for whatever is you like."

Then the 2nd and the 3rd films dropped all the pretenses and started getting grittier, and people hate it when you try to tell a story that does things you don't particularly like.

wAkE_uP_nEo wrote:

i strongly believe that the Wachowskis thought these things throught VERY thoroughly, the multiple meanings and things left open to interpretation are in my opinion deliberate. i like to think of the matrix story as something which manages to unite science, mathematics, religion and philosophy into a coherent whole. all these things are different human perspectives that attempt to make sense of existence in manifestly different ways. as a result, a lot of different interpretations can be made depending on your character and the things you are drawn to.. so it makes the matrix a very subjective viewing experience and i think that can only be a good thing just as a endnote just to tie that in with what Akshat just said.. think of the the scientific and mathematical elements as the concrete aspect.. and the religious and philisophical as the interpretive element.

I would like to believe that, too (that they have thought everything through thoroughly), I'd just hate to be disappointed someday, getting to know, it's just some thrown together ideas, nothing more...of course, the movies etc. as they are can give people a lot of meaning and interpretation, no matter what the brothers intended...but I'd still like to know, what and how far the brothers thought...of course, noone will probably be able to tell me, but let's see if you people trust them or not...

Doctor Shaft wrote:

OOh, look it's me posting my second post after making a jerk of myself in my first one. This is a thing I have believed for a long time (the subjective viewing). I find it amusing how you can almost pinpoint what people believe in or see as a truth of life when they watch the Matrix. What makes it such a great film is that it DOES connect with your psyche, whether you enjoy the films or not. If you don't like fate, religion, or philosophy, and enjoy hardcore logic, I've found that most people like that were propogating the "there's multiple Matrix's" theories. Of course there are, it's only logical, right? And when you go into the less "prove it" sections of interpretation, again, people see each scene in a different light, and you can almost tell what they are about when they tell you what the Matrix is about. It's the most perplexing and interesting thing I've found about the movies. Even if you hate the films, inevitably the second and the third films will strike some kind of chord with you. And I believe it's a very deliberate set up. The first Matrix is liked the most because it is the least.... convicting I suppose. The Wachowskis were presenting their project... and they knew they had no following yet, so you get an introduction to the question of reality, of struggle, of belief, but you never have to be directly confronted by it. "Ooh, go Neo, you stand up for whatever is you like." Then the 2nd and the 3rd films dropped all the pretenses and started getting grittier, and people hate it when you try to tell a story that does things you don't particularly like.

With me, it was kind of:

I enjoyed the first movie very much, more for story that for any fancy action. Then I watched Reloaded and felt let down...more fancy action, less story, bunch of "unbelievable"/unexplained things...never watched it again, just thought "another fucked up sequel" (although I knew, it was meant to be a trilogy from the start)...later on I got to see Revolutions and had the same feeling I had when watching Reloaded again, only stronger: "This is supposed to be it?" I thought, nothing is explained, some strange things happen etc...much of what it says on the mainpage of this forum...

Some time later, I thought "this can't be it", there must be more to it...and got to reading all kinds of "matrix explained" pages...I am impressed by all the ideas and theories people have, I'm just still unsure, if they are not interpreting many things that just weren't thought of, that the brothers just didn't care for...

Well, you got me by now, I want to believe!

BTW: I am more the scientific/logical type (for explanation of things happening in the movies etc), although I like philisopical meanings as well, I am not that much into religion...what I care for most, is the story/characters/events being somehow scientifically/logically explainable/plausible...

Okay, enough for now...let's hear your opinions.

Well I can honestly say 99% and possibly 100% of the things in the Matrix are plausible. I did not feel any of it as unbeilavable and see it as the best saga ever. The brothers put alot of effort into making it and there are answers, everything is explainable. They wrote it to such an extent that there is alot more in there minds then there is in the movies/animes/games.

hungarian kid wrote:

Well I can honestly say 99% and possibly 100% of the things in the Matrix are plausible. I did not feel any of it as unbeilavable and see it as the best saga ever. The brothers put alot of effort into making it and there are answers, everything is explainable. They wrote it to such an extent that there is alot more in there minds then there is in the movies/animes/games.

Then you can probably give us the ultimate explanation/theory?

That it's all not THAT plausible, at least not at first or even second glance, is probably the reason, people are discussing that much, ain't it?

I hope you are right, though, that's for sure...but how do you know?

Minako wrote -

Quote:

or is it just coincidence that the theory fits.

On a personal note; I don't believe in coincidences - everything happens for a reason.

The story was well thought out and much research went into the philosophy and the symbolism. It's all there, some obvious, some not so obvious. Hence the need for us to see how deep the rabbit hole really does go

The brothers did not think some things through well enough. To me, the first Matrix was intended to be a stand alone movie before it became a huge success. Then, at the spur of the moment the brothers got high and came up with two more scripts worth of material. Some things make sense, but they seemed to throw in too many things out of left field that left me scratching my head. A great movie should not require internet research to find out what it means or what it is about. That's why the first one was so great. It was smart, but at the same time made complete sense upon conclusion.

Quote:

To me, the first Matrix was intended to be a stand alone movie before it became a huge success. Then, at the spur of the moment the brothers got high and came up with two more scripts worth of material.

I struggle to believe this. It would be contrary to everything I have read about the trilogy. The reason the first movie could stand alone is that it is rare unknown directors are handed a lisence to make 3 big budget films right from the get go. The matrix storey was meant to be 'multi-part' all along but the first movie 'just in case it flopped' it had to be made in a way that it would make a certain degree of sense in and of itself.

Turning to the greater issue of whether the brothers are genius's..well ...I would love to think that they are. There is so much more depth to this storey as most people reading these forums would appreciate. Everytime I watch the movie(s) I notice a small detail that I didn't notice before.

I don't know if the 'behind the scenes storey' is perfect...? I think in the end the very thing that makes this movie great is that it pushes such big themes: choice; reality; love; fate; purpose; causality; hope...the meaning of life etc. This, I think, is also why the storey cannot be 100% perfect - because I don't think that all of these issues can be presented and resolved together in a way that holds everything together perfectly. I give the brothers credit for making 3 of the best movies of all time and definately the best ever trilogy, but I hestitate to call them demigods.

Don't get me wrong though. The brother's have taken on all of these themes and done justice to most of them where most movie makers (and storey tellers) have massacred them in the past.

Mind you, I'm yet to find an issue in the movies that can't be reasoned away without having to look to far beyond the movies/game/animatrix....so who knows...?

I think what the W brothers have created here is not just a trilogy of films, and it is not intended to be perceived just as a 'great piece of movie-making' They wanted to make a multimedia experience, and they seem to have acheived it: you are sat at your computer right now experiencing it. The games, the anime, the online search for truth and reason all add up to The Matrix experience.

hungarian kid wrote:

Well I can honestly say 99% and possibly 100% of the things in the Matrix are plausible. I did not feel any of it as unbeilavable and see it as the best saga ever. The brothers put alot of effort into making it and there are answers, everything is explainable. They wrote it to such an extent that there is alot more in there minds then there is in the movies/animes/games.

I agree fully.

Minako wrote:

Having read lots of theories and stuff, I can't get this one question out of my head: Did the brothers really think over all aspects of what they have created (3 movies, a game, some animations, more to come)? In other words: Is there any believable and logical theory that explains it all? If yes, did the brothers think of it the same way or is it just coincidence that the theory fits. My personal opinion at the moment: I'd very much like to believe in the brothers, but I can't help thinking, they might just have scratched on the surface leaving many things open to explanation they did never think to the end themselves...

I think that they fully thought out everything before making the films because they are too intricate and complex to have haphazardly concocted. I also think part of the reason they created them was to incite the search for truth that they experience. Obviously it worked.

I've made a film, and I know that sometimes you want to keep things open so that other people can interpret it for themselves. That's why the W. Brothers don't like answering questions on their movies. However, at the same time, there are many things that you WANT to put into the movie to see if the audience could pick it up, and even possibly make a whole new meaning from something. The W. Brothers especially like to do that.

Is there proof that the Matrix was originally concieved as a trilogy? I find that hard to believe.

Quote:

Is there proof that the Matrix was originally concieved as a trilogy? I find that hard to believe

I have read many articles which suggest that it was always intended to be a trilogy. In fact I am yet to read one that indicates the opposite. See the following for instance:

kentucky.com...

I never needed interent discussions to understand the Matrix. But, already, from the replies, you can immediately tell where people stand on a variety of issues (okay, you can't get an absolute, accurate account, but you can come close).

This isn't to say that I want to put people on a chopping block and say "well, you should think this." It's just to say that some of the reactions, from both me and others, whether on one side or the other, are kind of not surprising or unexpected.

If you don't like things about fate, chance versus coincidence, miraculous things, or even just "supernatural" or "beyond the mathematical plausibility", then I've found that many viewers find the Matrix to be lacking. This doesn't mean all, but many of my friends or people I know, if they don't like the movies, there issue with it is when all the "out-there" crap gets into the movie, which I personally relate to and love about the films, whereas others aren't turned on by it much for a variety of reasons.

I think the second and third film had plenty of storyline... anymore would have been useless. The first film sets the premise, the second and third follow through and complete things. More talk would have just added more stuff that would not have added to the story (unless you're looking for more history and background, which I like to... but doens't go to well with the average theater-going movie watcher).

2 and 3 are hystarically fun to mock.

Splinterinyourmind wrote:

I've made a film, and I know that sometimes you want to keep things open so that other people can interpret it for themselves. That's why the W. Brothers don't like answering questions on their movies. However, at the same time, there are many things that you WANT to put into the movie to see if the audience could pick it up, and even possibly make a whole new meaning from something. The W. Brothers especially like to do that.

I agree with you.

I think brothers put a really great effort to put all the stuff they wanted into the movies, that's why the movies are so good for digging things up.

But at some point, I think they couldn't simply, possibly and understandibly relate what they wanted to say to the whole movie so they just put a vague reference by picture, sign, symbol or word to that think. To keep the movie open. It is like to say, they did their best and when they realize they couldn't, they tried at least

At the expense of clarity, sticked to reality.
And have fun

I don't know if they FAILED, per say, but I think that they had some of it unintentional, and a LOT of it intentional.

I really feel like the brothers had no plan to do pts 2 and 3. No matter what they say, I won't change my mind. Matrix was a complete movie, well thought out and truly a classic. Pts. 2 and 3 were not nearly as complete. WB asked for sequels and they jumped on it. I think they got totaly caught up in the special effects and forgot about the story. In the DVD extras on Revolutions, that is all they talk about. Not the story, not te trilogy, all about effects. There were so many holes and things just not adding up in the sequels that it is not funny. I think they are given way too much credit and we all come up with our own theories that they never intended. An example is the Matrix-within the Matrix idea everyone had before Revolutions was released. That would have been brilliant, but instead we got what we got.

I think, hey what did i say about gasping, i think that the brothers thought it through. i think they knew what they were doing. See i think the same way as Another Smith whom is the greatest agent of all time.