The Matrix Resurrections (2021)

Director: Lana Wachowski

Cast: Keanu Reeves, Carrie-Anne Moss, Yahya Abudl-Mateen II, Jada Pinkett Smith

Have I Seen it Before: Well, there were a few moments there in the early going where I thought I might have…

Did I Like It: I never really liked the first two Matrix sequels, The Matrix Reloaded (2003) and The Matrix Revolutions (2003). I think the—perhaps over-lauded—philosophical depth of The Matrix (1999) became far too self conscious as the series progressed. The Wachowskis knew what side of their bread ought to be buttered, and so also made sure to stop the navel-gazing at various (occasionally incomprehensible) times to be an action movie again. The whole affair of those sequels only served to be so aggressively uneven that even now, nearly twenty years later, that’s the only real reaction I have to those two films.

So, I can say with some joy that, for the most part, this is the best Matrix film since the original. The first act is an interesting meditation on just what The Matrix has become since the premiere of the original film. It feels different, and even if it attaches itself to that ponderous quality which dragged down previous efforts, it is specifically calibrated to consistently surprise. 

Then it all becomes a very tedious continuation of the plot threads left dangling from Resurrections. A real big drag of one. Am I supposed to have some kind of reaction from a reunion with both General Niobe (Smith) and The Merovingian (Lambert Wilson)? If I am, I don’t think it’s the reaction for which Lana Wachowski likely hoped.

But then the finale, where Trinity (Moss) comes into her own and evolves beyond just being Keanu Reeves’ girlfriend that the film reaches (if not completely accomplishes) something more visceral, and potentially more special.

So, it’s all still suspiciously uneven. Again. That just makes it a very natural part of the larger saga. I’m just glad I can get on board with some of the parts presented, even if they don’t quite fit together as well as they could within the individual film in which they’re presented.

The Matrix Revolutions (2003)

Director: The Wachowskis

Cast: Keanu Reeves, Laurence Fishburne, Carrie-Anne Moss, Hugo Weaving

Have I Seen it Before: After The Matrix Reloaded (2003), I wondered if I even needed to see another Matrix movie, but sometimes you’re a college freshman and people are going to the theater, and it’s not like you have anything better to do.

Did I Like It: And at that time, I kind of liked, or at least I liked it better than I did the second film. It had a rousing finale. The duality between Neo (Reeves) and Agent Smith (Weaving) fills a few intriguing minutes. The realization that the only way the war between the human resistance and the machines will end is by them being forced to work together is worth chewing on for a few moments. I’ve seen far worse trilogy cappers, based on that list.

It’s almost enough to ignore the fact that I don’t think anyone can adequately explain just what happened at the end of the movie. Did Neo die? Did he become a machine? Did he become Smith? Does the end even matter? I suppose I can live with ambiguity in my movie*, or at any rate I’ll have to accept it because that’s all that we have on the menu. But did we have to put up with extended mech battles that seem like they were taken from a rejected version of Alien 3 (1992)? Or, more importantly, a scene that runs through what feels like its own feature length runtime and takes place entirely in a hermetically sealed subway station?

Maybe I don’t like the film at all, as it turns out? Should I even watch the fourth film?

I probably will… Probably. 

*Does the fourth movie resolve any of that? Still remains to be seen here on these reviews, but if I know my Wachowskis (or even half of them), I’m betting the answer is no.

The Matrix Reloaded (2003)

Director: The Wachowskis

Cast: Keanu Reeves, Laurence Fishburne, Carrie-Anne Moss, Hugo Weaving

Have I Seen it Before: Oh, sure. After The Matrix (1999) I was pretty excited about it. When I heard the Wachowskis were producing their sequels back-to-back, a la the same process used for Back to the Future - Part II (1989) and Back to the Future - Part III (1990), I got even more excited. It felt like they were doing things right.

Did I Like It: And that excitement sort of evaporated. Instantly. The balance between mythologyesque/adventurey and the more religiousy/allegoryish elements of the original film moved all the way to the religiousy end of the spectrum. That may not be the right criticism for this movie in particular, but the Matrix sequels as a whole certainly landed there. This one seems more like a relentless chase sequence that expands on the original film’s main feature… And that is making a bunch of story promises that the additional movies can’t or wont’ payoff.

Sure, the freeway segment probably doesn’t get enough credit for being a pretty spectacular action sequence, but the extended rave sequence in the city of Zion is such a protracted exercise in self-indulgence that I honestly wonder if Kevin Smith didn’t direct it. It exists merely to be cool and has so little to do with the scraps of a story filling the remaining two and a half hours, that I’m sort of surprised that J.J. Abrams didn’t take over the production at some point.

I suppose that’s probably enough snark to spread around for one movie, but ultimately this feels like a list of cool things (raves, flying sequences, techno vampires) desperately searching for a story. They didn’t have a story to continue, but they jammed just enough philosophy and pyrotechnics into a package to convince some people.

The Matrix (1999)

Director: The Wachowskis

Cast: Keanu Reeves, Laurence Fishburne, Carrie-Anne Moss, Hugo Weaving

Have I Seen it Before: I mean, how would somebody get through the 2000s, own a DVD player the entire damn time, and not see this movie? I’m legitimately curious.

Did I Like It: As is usually the case, it’s difficult to write about a movie that changed the face of cinema ever since, and sometimes in good ways. One could write about how the mythology in the film influenced genre filmmaking, but then you’d also have to note how the series never quite capitalized on its singularly Campbellian display of the monomyth here, but that almost seems like a better discussion to have during the reviews of those movies, especially the persistently discouraging sequels*.

I could talk about how the narrative has changed slightly in the twenty-plus years since its initial release. It’s become something of a parable for the trans/non-binary experience, especially after the Wachowskis transitioned. But they deny that such a parable was at least consciously the case, and there are any number of other writers who could pontificate on that point far more eloquently than I could. 

I might go back to the critique I had of the movie back in the day, that Cypher (Joe Pantoliano) might have had a point. The real world of the story is so drab and awful and filled with frequent death, and the Matrix seems… okay enough? Who wouldn’t want to go back into The Matrix? Between the gender parable and just growing up a little bit, that criticism rings hollow.

So, where am I left in this review? It’s a very fine film and if you have, indeed, somehow made it to this point in life without seeing the film, you certainly should. The thing that I was struck by in this viewing was that I had always taken the film as a piece filmed in Chicago, with all of the character of that town. The Wachowskis come from there. And yet, the film wasn’t shot there at all, and instead is a product of Australia, utilizing studio facilities whose biggest contributions to the form up until that point was Mighty Morphin’ Power Rangers: The Movie (1995). I thought I had gotten so sophisticated in my viewing that I could always pick out when a film was shot in a real city or not. This film continues to surprise me. That’s more than a little something.

*At press time, I haven’t yet watched The Matrix Resurrections (2021), but I do get the impression that it isn’t exactly going to bring the whole together all of a sudden.

Memento (2000)

Director: Christopher Nolan 

Cast: Guy Pearce, Carrie-Anne Moss, Joe Pantoliano, Stephen Toblowsky

Have I Seen it Before: Yes, but it’s been years. My DVD case has a crack in it, and it’s entirely possible I’ve gone most of fifteen years without noticing it.

Did I Like It: Which was an integral part of the charm. The film’s plot is so carefully constructed, that unless you know the film backwards (and, I suppose, forwards), there are pleasures and surprises aplenty to rediscover. I’m sitting there vaguely remembering that both Natalie (Moss) and Teddy (Pantoliano) are not who they appear, but just how it all comes together remained beyond my memory until the very end. A movie built on surprises that holds up on multiple viewings is truly a thing to behold.

It almost makes me regret the success Nolan has enjoyed since this film. After Batman Begins (2005) he quickly became the world’s greatest purveyor of the now ubiquitous “trailer noise”*. I’ve enjoyed most of his work post-The Dark Knight (2008), but I can’t help but lament the smaller, deceptively simple work he could have produced had Warner Bros. not let him do whatever his wildest dreams would allow. 

It’s sort of a strange miracle that the film hasn’t become more influential, aside from introducing the idea that if Hollywood could halt its search for a filmmaker who could make a Batman movie which would be an actual detective story. A TV show with this idea could have worked, and been ever-green. I’m shocked it hasn’t become a procedural which somehow had been running on CBS for fifteen years without me noticing. A quick glance at the film’s Wikipedia page insists that a remake is in the works, which, why? Can we remake films which were released after Y2K? It’s seems like a crime.

Maybe if my memory takes a hit, it would be a good idea. Otherwise, I’ll pass.