Winner Jan '01

Other Winners & How to Win!

• • •

The Matrix

Response in the "The Last Sci-Fi Movie I Watched Was...." discussion

Posted by: TIABUENA

• • •

Actually, I not only never fell asleep during English Literature, I audited every class I could both in high school and college and later taught the subject for a short time, until I moved to Europe.

Well, I don't know if your scripts are any more plausible than the original. The first time I ran into the idea of turning humans into batteries was in a book by Stephen King, The Tommyknockers, which was not, I think, one of his best efforts, but still an interesting read in terms of the characters. King's strength is not in his stories per se, but in his people and how they react to situations.

I have a suspicion that The Matrix is based loosely on an SF short story I read maybe thirty years ago in which humans were encased in pods and dreaming their reality. That story (and though I remember it, I remember neither the author nor the title) and the King book both came to mind when I saw the film. Literature and films both fall into several categories, in terms of purpose, or at least this is how I see it.

One purpose is plot: the need to tell a really interesting story; everything else is secondary to this purpose. Michael Crichton falls into this category. Another purpose is moral imperative,(or the need to reveal truths, and all that that entails... CS Lewis would fall into this category) and another is character study, (DH Lawrence). Most authors focus and have real strength in one of these categories, while a very few are strong in all of them. And of course there are those rare geniuses who write gorgeous prose about fictional characters who spring to absolute life in beautifully constructed stories which concern deep philosophical problems. Few books can survive on the strength of beautiful writing, but films can survive and prosper on the strength of beautiful imaging because they are a different art form.

Now here's the thing. I can watch a Jim Jarmusch film, say Stranger than Paradise, which is one of the simplest and starkest films ever made, and realise that his purpose in this film was nothing more than to show the concatenation of events resulting from one unusual event in the life of a person. It is a character study, with a very intimate focus on just three people. The plot is almost non-existent, and nobody has ever criticised Jarmusch for lack of plot because his focus is elsewhere.

The Matrix was an attempt, and a rather successful one, to imitate anime. The story is second hand, it's not the important thing. How can a story not matter? A lot of people complain about bad story lines in films. I've heard the same complaint about The Cell, about The Talented Mr. Ripley, about The Sixth Sense, and many other films. Sometimes, the story, the plot, is just not all that important, and is secondary to other factors.

What is important? Well, it depends on the film... or even the book. Funny. I've read all of Kurt Vonnegut's books many times over and can't remember a single one of his plots (except in a couple of short stories)... what I remember is all of his asides, his comments and philosophies. The stories themselves are only a medium, something for Vonnegut to use as a vehicle to support his philosophies.(Which is why nobody can make them into decent films).

Okay, back to el Matrix. What was the purpose of this film? What did it tell us, other than the fact that there are some very talented CGI guys out there ready and willing to give us some great images.

What was the Moral Imperative of The Matrix? Did it have one? What was The Message? More importantly, can a film stand alone as a visual art form in the same way as a painting? Why do we have to have a "plausible" plot? Why do we need any plot at all? Warhol used film as a plotless art form, years before the plotless and meaningless proliferation of music videos which only provide a succession of images. Is a succession of images enough?

Getting into deeeeeep waters here, now. Art is changing; cinema is changing; music is changing. Is Beauty its own excuse for being?

- TIABUENA

Talk Back