The Matrix

[marc]

Why am I running into Gnosticism everywhere I look this week?  Not just on this board, but on a couple of other websites I've visited also.

Gnosticism making a comeback?  Who knows; could be I guess.  I could see a new agey form taking off using a Matrix-type theme.  But if someone wants to convince me that this is the intent of the producers of the film, I will need more convincing.

[Son of a Preacher Man]

"Neo.  I've been looking for you, Neo."

I'm a huge fan of the Matrix and I also just finished reading the article in question.  I'm thinking the writer of this piece is giving the Wachowski Brothers too much credit.  He acts as if they developed a film to push "gnosctism" down the throats of the American public.  That's plain silly.

Most writers... especially a team of writers begin by saying, "What if?"  The question: "What if we lived in a dream world?" may have been one asked by gnostics, but it is certainly not original or exclusive to them.  

Here's what I think happened. The Wachowski Brothers had this question hanging out there and since they are visual artists they came up with some visuals and story boards outlining certain scenes they wanted to shoot.  They had a general premise--a man wakes up from their Matrix and saves the world.  To tell that story, you need a protagonist and this protagonist would be the savior of all mankind.  Now, where can one go to find such a story?  Anything come to mind?

I think you guys will agree that while the W Bro's are visually creative, they had to get their story from elsewhere.  What has always been obvious to me is that this story was a reflection of the story of Jesus.  Perhaps they derived some of the story from this gnostic view presented in the article.  More likely they built upon various themes of similar nature.  Regardless, they had this unique method of film making they wanted to explore, they had a premise, and all they lacked was story to go with it.  Enter The ONE... Neo.

This I know for sure.  When the script was completed, they took it to Lorenzo di Bonaventura (a former Warner Brothers exec).  He took it to the studio heads and pitched it as a video game... Do the video game first, then make a movie was the essence of this conversation because the script was long on looks, but short on plot. The resulting video games are intended to be a continuation of the story... or at least of The Matrix world.  In other words, these guys weren't out to sell gnosticism, they were out to sell their digital world.

All the metaphors... all the stuff mentioned in that article were probably tweaked into the flick to add a little story-depth along the way. They probably paid researchers to come up with ideas for things like this, which is common practice once a film gets a green light. [I mean think about it--the premise is mind-boggling, but the plot is overly simple and the dialogue is both forced and bland.  As much as I love the film, I must admit that once you get past the "what if I'm living in a dream world?" thoughts, the movie IS strictly eye candy.]

Seeker, I also found the movie very spiritual.  How many times do we ask ourselves, "Am I just living in a dream world?"  Life just feels so unreal at times, not to mention the fact that the movie always reminds me of what Christ has done for me.

Personally I think the article gives WAY too much credit to the brothers as deep thinkers rather than the visual artists they actually are.  If he hates The Matrix, I don't even need to ask what he thought of DOGMA.  :D   Personally, I'm glad we don't get "wonderful" movies like the Bells of St. Mary's anymore.  :doh: That story is just as farfetched and unrealistic (in its own way) as The Matrix. What's next?  Bruce Willis represents Jesus in Armageddon?  The astroid is the Satan's attempt to stop the plan of Salvation?  Ben Afleck's character represents Peter?  Billy Bob is ... well, Billy Bob.  :thumbup:

[admin]

My good friend Josh, who just recently joined this board, went with me to see the Matrix for the first time. We all went home with wide eyes.

I later compared the movie to my dad-in-law's book, "Seeing the Unseen." It's like a whole new world......that you can't see.......only you can choose to ignore it.

Take the blue pill and go back home to Kansas. :cool:

-Lee

[s1n4m1n]

Does anyone have a problem with the ultraviolent nature of the film (it is rated R)? What would Jesus do?

agape,

Ken

[Seeker]

When I mentioned my great admiration for that movie to a Catholic acquaintance, one of those really conservative legalistic ones - kind of like a much better read and cultured CoC conservative, he about freaked out. When I told him I found the movie highly spiritual and Christian, he said that was what he would expect from a Protestant. Then he had me read this article. I'm not sure what to make of it.

http://www.envoymagazine.com/backissues/4.5/coverstory.html

Thoughts anyone?

[marc]

. . . then again, I could be wrong.  I just did a google search with the words "gnostic" and "matrix" and, well, let's just say this article does not stand alone.  I'd like to see what the people who made the movie say about this.

. . . later (I'll just edit so I don't have 3 posts in a row). . . still searching I found this quote from an interview with the producers:

"agunn3 says: Have you ever been told that the Matrix has Gnostic overtones?
WachowskiBros: Do you consider that to be a good thing?"

That was the sum total of that.  Clears it up, don't it? :alien:

[charlie]

I've read sites explaining the Matrix as Buddhist allegory too. It means nothing. The Matrix is my favorite movie because it provides me with a very vivid, popular and understandable witnessing tool. I'll never forget leaving the movie theater after watching it and thinking, "finally, someone did it! Someone portrayed the spiritual world in a movie in a way that makes sense to everyone." You can draw analogies from it for any faith because faith is the major theme. As an American movie, the W brothers were wise to let it have elements of all religions while leaning heavily toward Christianity; something our American society is very fond of doing at the moment.

[marc]

[!--QuoteBegin--][/span][table border=\"0\" align=\"center\" width=\"95%\" cellpadding=\"3\" cellspacing=\"1\"][tr][td]Quote [/td][/tr][tr][td id=\"QUOTE\"][!--QuoteEBegin--]these guys weren't out to sell gnosticism, they were out to sell their digital world.

[/quote]

Well, that would explain the "Do you consider that to be a good thing?" response.

I'm going to have to watch this again.  I took it as being a sort of anti-materialist, anti-consumer mentality film.

[spurly]

Ken,

At one time I would have had a problem with the violent nature of the film.  And even today I probably wouldn't take young children to see it.

However, the spiritual battle raging around us is very real.  I think the movie may have been pointing out the drastic measures it would take to when the battle.

Whenever people mention that, one thing I always think about is how very violent portions of the Bible are.  It wasn't always pretty.  God wiped nations from the face of the earth including women and children to protect his people from idolatry and keep them holy.  

I think a lot of times we miss that because we become too used to it.

One thing I am learning to do is to confront culture where it is.  If we are always shying away from culture, how will we ever take Christ to that culture.

We are to be in the world, but not of it.  It is a fine line.

Just my thoughts.

Kevin

[Son of a Preacher Man]

Ken,

On the violence issue...

Remember that Family Cable channel they had for a while?  (Anybody remember what it was called?)  I can't think of the call letters but I think it was one of Ted Turner's baby's.  Regardless, it was billed as the "Family Channel".  I read a study once that showed more acts of violence were comitted on that station every Saturday morning by noon than all of prime-time programing combined.  The reason was that every Saturday morning they showed nothing but westerns.

Just because the MPA didn't pass out ratings back then, it didn't make the films any less violent than today.  The difference isn't the amount of violence in film... it's that violence is more graphically portrayed in some.  Of course, all the wire-work in Matrix (and the fact that most of the violence ocurrs in the Matrix) makes the violence seem cartoon-like.  Fewer people die in that movie than in most of the old westerns I used to watch with my Grandpa.

No, I don't have a problem with the "ultra-violent".  "Ultra-viloent" is a subjective term and the way the MPA rates its films is even more subjective.  (Don't forget that the first "R" rating was given to a film just because David Niven said the word "virgin" in it.) As Kevin also points out there are many more graphic scenes portrayed in the Bible. In particular I think of Dinah's "situation" in Gen 34 and the subsequent slaughter of every male in the city by her brothers Simeon and Levi. Read that story--that's ultra-violent.  

What would Jesus do?  Well, if He were around today I'd imagine he'd walk into the seedest bar, sit down with the most promiscuous girl and the most crooked lawyer, and start talking about life.

But then again... I'm just a jaded, desensitized Gen-Xer.  What do I know?  I could be wrong.

W/Loving Respect,

SOPM