Change Your Image
fuzzy_nolan
Reviews
The Matrix Reloaded (2003)
The Matrix Reloaded - The Pinnacle of Misplaced Effort
And I thought the first one failed. I was wrong.oh so wrong.
To quote a line from Bulworth, 'It's amazing how so many people can put so much money and so much time and make something that.just isn't very good.'
To tell the truth, I really don't know where to start. After being disappointed by The Matrix, I was hoping that the Wachowski Brothers would overcome their inadequacies and produce a work of the quality only previously hinted at. Not only did they repeat the same mistakes, which in itself is hardly surprising, they managed to create totally new ones.
Firstly, it appears that the Wachowskis, inflated with their earlier success, upped the special effects ante but forgot to pay someone to look over the script. Admittedly, the directors had a vision, something that was present even before The Matrix was filmed, of an epic cycle - birth, life, death etc. The Matrix Reloaded however, was so bloated with cryptic, convoluted dialogue that while sitting in the darkened theatre, I could literally hear the majority of the audience scratching their respective heads. What is, at heart, a fairly simple story, is complicated by the whims of the Wachowskis. The Matrix Reloaded is incoherent for much of its running time, and this sort of ridiculousness doesn't wash with an audience. Many of the events are barely strung together in any sort of fashion, in perhaps a vain attempt to excuse the narrative faults by espousing the visual feats. What I'm assuming is that the Wachowskis were given a carte blanche to bring their entire vision directly to the screen, without anyone willing (or able?) to refine their concepts. I don't think this is too outlandish a suggestion, after the Wachowskis brought Warner Bros. their biggest hit in the history of the studio in the form of The Matrix. What we see in the final cut of The Matrix Reloaded is the 'Directors' Cut' which never should have made it to the screen.
Also, the blatant symbolism of The Matrix, which I was initially quite scathing of, seems infinitely preferable to the philosophical and religious detritus that litters The Matrix Reloaded. The former was basically a Christ analogy contained within the philosophical confines of 'the real' and 'the created'. Its sequel, on the other hand, just seems confused, unsure of where to turn for inspiration. Some of the major moments - Trinity's (Carrie Anne-Moss) death/salvation, Neo's (Keanu Reeves) stopping the sentinels - seem to be merely lifted from The Matrix and recontextualised. I'd laugh, but then again I paid for my ticket.
Another thing that provides both the strongest and weakest moments - also something that's bound to make The Matrix Reloaded a squillion dollar hit - are the special effects. While 'bullet time' was heralded as a special effects breakthrough several years ago, it's no longer so potent. When every second shot within any action sequence within the film prominently features the standards - bullet time, shattered glass, the wire work of Yuen Wo-Ping - the effects begin to wear thin. Case in point: Trinity shooting and falling.and falling and shooting.and shooting and falling.etc. If the previous sentence makes no sense at the moment, it will when you see the movie. It's this sort of intensely overwrought, self-conscious special effects that detract from, rather than add to, the film. The supposedly 'seamless' transitions from the real to virtual actors, while laudable, are still quite noticeable. I believe the usual practice is to shoot around the shortcomings, rather than put the spotlight on them like The Matrix Reloaded does. John Gaeta, the visual effects supervisor, publicly stated that it's 'realism, not special effects, that will trick the brain into believing the impossible' and in this respect he's perhaps set his sights a little high. On a bit of a tangent, one special effects moment in the movie - a tracking shot between the Matrixified legs of a beautiful woman - seems more like an expression of the inner Wachowski geek than a legitimate use of special effects to further the narrative. While writing this though, I've begun to suspect that attacking the special effects is something of a fool's mission and there certainly is something to be said for the technical, if not creative or conceptual, achievements of The Matrix Reloaded. For the moment though, I'll leave that for someone else to say.
Just on the acting side of things - for those brief moments when the character belongs to the actor rather than the animator - much of the cast seems to confuse being cool with brain death. Morpheus (Laurence Fishburne) is the main culprit here, with his Mr. Miyagi act fraying around the edges, although Niobe (Jada Pinkett-Smith) is a strong up and coming contender in this category. Thankfully, it's not all doom and gloom - the potential for Neo (Keanu Reeves) to become fairly anodyne after the first instalment never eventuates. Indeed, some of the film's quieter moments rest quite comfortably upon his shoulders. Some of the bit players also admirably acquit themselves, particularly Merovingian (Lambert Wilson) as a Machiavellian playboy, The Kid (Clayton Watson) as Neo's # 1 fan and Agent Smith v.2.0 (Hugo Weaving) who returns with double the menace. Personally, the charismatic Seraph (Sing Ngai) also made quite an impression in a small role while Persephone (Monica Bellucci) was sadly wasted.
On the whole, the failings of The Matrix Reloaded far outnumber the few shining moments. It appears that $300 million does not a good movie maketh. It's a pity, and a relevant comment on the 'blockbuster' industry that, in spite of these inherent failings, The Matrix Reloaded will still inevitably make a fortune.
I'm tempted to voice a hope for The Matrix Revolutions - that the final instalment will be the salvation for blockbusterdom. Unfortunately, I'm increasingly given to thinking that this is beyond the ability of the Wachowskis.
- end rant -
The Matrix (1999)
The Matrix - Spoon-fed Symbolism
One of the features that, according to many reviewers, makes The Matrix such an epic', are the religious overtones that lie parallel with much of the action. The story of Neo (or the New' in Latin; an anagram of one') is, quite obviously, synonymous with that of Christ (whose name, in Hebrew, means Anointed One'). Neo dies, is resurrected and saves the world. Morpheus is a John the Baptist figure, clearing the way for the coming of Christ, just as Cypher reflects Judas' betrayal. One source within The Matrix camp hinted recently that the third instalment should, instead of The Matrix Revolutions, be named The Matrix Resurrection.
The point is, all this blatant symbolism seems aimed at an audience unwilling to think about the implications of the film. Subsequently, while the film claims there is no spoon', it simultaneously uses one to spoon-feed the implications to the audience. Spoon-fed, in this case, by Morpheus, whose main role in the first film seems to be merely explaining the narrative and its complicated rules' (Leonard Maltin criticised the film for its high mumbo jumbo quotient' and I'm inclined to agree) and the Wachowskis who even name their characters with such brazen aplomb that their origin, function and ultimate fate can be guessed without even seeing the film e.g. Trinity, Niobe, Seraph and Persephone. In contrast, a film like Blade Runner explores recurrent philosophical themes, of what it means to be human, and yet doesn't force them on the audience. In fact, it remains ambiguous whether the protagonist Deckard is, himself a Replicant'. Thus the film allows multiple interpretations, something that The Matrix does not deign to do.
In a sense, The Matrix (and, presumably, its sequels) can be watched on two levels, both, unfortunately, intrinsically flawed. From a philosophical angle, The Matrix brings nothing new to the table, merely a bibliographic catalogue of references to superior works. Interestingly, these same themes, of false perceptions of the world and redemption from a Christ figure, have even been explored recently (and, for mine, much more satisfactorily) in Alex Proyas' Dark City, which comes without any of the pretension of The Matrix. On another level, as an action movie, The Matrix succeeds admirably at times. Although it is, as a whole, compromised by its philosophical pretensions in a way that something like the Star Wars series (in spite of its mythological references, specifically Joseph Campbell) is not. It's a lose-lose situation. The Wachowskis bit off more than they (and the audience) could chew. Hopefully with the further instalments of The Matrix trilogy, the Wachowskis offer a more palatable meal.
Triumph des Willens (1935)
Not a documentary...
In spite of what you might read, Triumph Of The Will is by no means a documentary. The word documentary infers a degree of objectiveness, where the director stands back from the action, delivering an image more or less as it was.
The Nuremberg rallies, which are depicted in Triumph Of The Will, were staged (note the deliberate use) as a display of Nazi strength. Riefenstahl was given complete power over the actions that proceeded, resulting in a document of history (not documentary) so subjective that it can be classed only as propaganda, pure and simple. This subjectiveness is evidenced in the fact that this film was banned in most countries for over thirty years following its production.
On a less inflammatory note, it serves as testament to an important aspect of recent world history.
Mulholland Dr. (2001)
Think...
I don't care whether anyone understood this film, I don't even really care that I understood this film. Nor that it was, to quote, `a waste of three hours' or a postmodernist, existentialist comment by David Lynch (as so many aspiring cinematic philosophers have pointed out on this very website).
The fact remains, in a cinematic world where so many films (some critically acclaimed) require you to check your brains at the door'; Mulholland Drive is a breath of fresh air.
Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone (2001)
Potter's a prissy
Why queue up to watch a little public-school boy prat like Harry Potter? As well as being a mediocre film, Harry himself is but a shade of a character.
For a start, Harry never earns anything, or accomplishes on his own. Everything he achieves is gifted to him by someone's assistance. Think of his so called 'feats'. [a] the defeat (albeit temporary) of Voldemort. He only achieves this through somely vaguely referred to 'gift of love' his mother sacrificed herself for. His parents also left him a hell-load of money, an invisibility cloak and everything else he'd ever need to be a hero. Even getting to the final confrontation required more action on his friends' behalf than he himself was involved in. Ron, Hermione, McGonagall, Dumbledore, the Centaur and Hagrid constantly watch his back. Plus, remember that Harry ends up getting the girl, Hermione, instead of Ron, who obviously deserves her. What a rip off! quidditch heroism. Think about it... he's naturally gifted at Quidditch through some genetic talent, and given a Nimbus 2000 broomstick. How can the little b****** fail? This scenario sounds like some bad American gridiron film.
And think of the pathetic enemies he has to face. First Quirrell... a man who can be defeated by someone touching his face! Not exactly a formidable foe. Voldemort, who only exists as a face on the back of Quirrel's head. Last, and certinly least, is Draco Malfoy. What a misnomer. The name itself conjures up all sorts of epic fantasy hero connotations where the character himself is a pathetic nemesis of Harry, vastly inferior in every possible way. His polished aristocratic appearance belies his lack of courage, negligible skills and integral personality flaws.
The road to heroism is supposed to be one of hardship, of sacrifice and redemption... it's not supposed to be a friggin' gravy train.
As a side note, the film also makes great assumptions on the audience's behalf. When we're told that "Nothing will happen while Dumpledore is [at Hogwarts]", we're never told why, and these faults run constantly through the film. Some respect for the audience wouldn't have gone astray. Although it's essentially a children's movie, such condescension doesn't wash.
L'appartement (1996)
Ultimately satisfying.
I saw this only recently, after having seen Amelie and it has to be said that the two definitely share characteristics. As I've only seen about twenty French films, I can't say whether they are prominent characteristics in French films in general or just this genre.
The film's comments on the whimsical nature of love and the constant, almost vaudevillian near-misses where the characters come within echo the shenanigans that go on in Amelie when she's trying to chase down Nino.
I don't know why I'm babbling on about this anyway, it's pretty irrelevant. The point is, that The Apartment fulfilled everything that I want in a film. Great directing (although the time-jumping might bother some people), acting and an overall tone very similar top Amelie, which I thought was fantastic.
I also liked the obvious 'play within a play' scenario. While on the stage, Alice was playing out Helena's role in A Midsummer Night's Dream, almost exactly the same situation was finding it's own course around her.
See it if you can. (Even if it's just for Monica Bellucci... Phwoooar.)
Star Wars: Episode II - Attack of the Clones (2002)
Fantastic... but overdone.
This new Star Wars installment sees Lucas move into an upper echelon of special effects. But is this necessarily a good thing?
I am of the firm belief should only augment the story and not dominate it, as happens in Attack Of The Clones. The saga that began (or ended) with such a fantastically involving story, complete with such intense mythical underpinnings that Joseph Campbell (the renowned mythologist) himself looked upon it favourably. Its a pity now that it has degenerated into an orgasmic explosion for the senses.
If you have no problem with what's mentioned above, the sensory overload will no doubt appeal to you and, by all means, get out and see the film for yourself. But for any discerning film buffs who look deeper than the superficial images, for any concepts or, God forbid, even a theme, I wouldn't bother.
I seriously doubt whether Attack Of The Clones will garner the same enthusiasm in a few decades as the original trilogy currently does. The emotional depth just isn't there, as it was in A New Hope, Empire and Jedi.
The Big Lebowski (1998)
Absolutely nailed by the Coens (and Bridges).
Similar to the measured brilliance of Fargo, the Coen Brothers, Joel and Ethan, again delivered a perfectly structured and aimed tribute to the slacker in all of us.
The slacker in question is Jeff Lebowski, self-proclaiming himself 'The Dude'. Jeff Bridges gives a startling performance far from his usual troubled, semi-action roles like Blown Away and Arlington Road and proves himself to be one of the most consistently underrated actors in Hollywood. The Dude reigns supreme in his own personal sphere of Creedence, White Russians and, above all, bowling. The performance, I think, can be favourably compared to his last great role in Fearless and Jeff Bridges can be proud of his work.
As can John Goodman, Steve Buscemi, (even) Julianne Moore and, most hilariously John Turturro's cameo as Jesus the uptight, paedophilic rival who represents everything The Dude dismisses. It seems a brilliant quality in a director (I'm talking about Joel Coen here) to consistently extract good performances from any actors, regardless of their standing in Hollywood.
I could keep on about the relaxed directing or the inspired music selection, both perfectly complementing the ideals vaunted by the film... but I won't. Every aspect of this (and every other Coen Bros.) film is succintly placed within the whole.
It is this film particularly that makes the Coens directors/writers ones to watch. And remember to take the advice proffered to the heart... The Dude (in all of us) abides.
Jian hua yan yu jiang nan (1977)
Absolute barry.
Jackie Chan actually said in an interview that he felt sorry for anyone that had to see this movie. I'm going to have to agree with him, I was feeling pretty sorry for myself after I saw this slapped-together sham of a kung-fu movie.