RE: Reloaded with plastic pea pellets; a rant for Jim

Jim, the ancient choice remains; eternal life in the Garden OR the knowledge
of Good and Evil and death. Of course, there is the lie, and we know that
choice rests on good (true) information. Some choose the one intertwine
with the lie and break through the supposed simulacra into nothingness where
Will ceases to exist. You choose life and the rest shall be added unto you.
We will then have the best data too if we choose wisely. Be faithful in the
little things and you will be trusted with the great things. My daughter is
not allowed to play with guns and cars...yet. Like that song says 'who do
you trust?'. Some have said trust yourself and well we know where that
goes, pssst the existentialist are familiar with that earth covered box, in
their breaking through don't they stand with their friend angst and
contemplate the nothingness they will someday succumb to? But He who made
me has a claim, some will Simulacra their way into oblivion to deny that
claim. Like the best Nobility, we must learn to kneel and bow first. Who
is the greatest in the Kingdom? The servant. The Marxist laughs and dies
in revolution. We all serve something, Whom do you serve?

Jim did you notice that when Neo was fighting the Merovingian's henchmen he
was cut (in his hand) and blood dripped to the floor? The Merovingian said
'see, he is only a man.' That is exactly what one would expect said from a
Merovingian of an Anderson. Also, did you notice that in the closing scenes
Neo exhibits Matrix mastering powers outside the Matrix apparently? Your
essay spends some space speaking of councilor Hume's skepticism, those
strolls in engineering, of course Commander Locke was only annoyed by him,
Notice, all this talk of things and makers of things in the movie breaks
down at one point, it is captured in the punch line of a favorite joke,
'Nietzsche, get your own dirt.'

Jim and Diego, there are other movies. Sam Gamgee serves too, and lays the
mighty low; take that Nietzsche.

Diego, sweet James, there is an old story about the colonizing of New
Mexico. When the Men of Arms stormed Acoma the Sky city on a Mesa with no
roads to its top, they climbed an adjacent Mesa and laid a bridge across and
took that High city. It was just a score and a half or so that fought the
whole city. As the Spanish Men of Arms swept across their makeshift log
bridge one at a time, they reportedly shouted !Santiago! and they were
carried through, some fell but they won the day. Legend has it that when
they shouted Santiago! an apparition of a fierce man upon a charger appeared
as a cloud dressed in armor with arms of iron, and swept over the Mesa with
those audacious Spaniards. This is all not that uncommon for a telling of a
battle in those days, but the surprising part of it all was that it was
those Acoma Pueblo Indians who were the witnesses to the apparition and they
tell this story to this day. Maybe they just didn't want to admit defeat to
the Spaniards but, Diego, they had no idea what a Diego was much less a
Santa Diego.

So can you account for your whereabouts at about that time?

Daniel

Hey...if you want to read a discussion of the meaning of "terrorism"
within the film, you should probably read a piece I wrote about the
first flick that's recently been updated to accomodate the sequel:

http://artisanitorium.thehydden.com/nonfiction/film/matrix.htm

Something else to keep in mind is that the W Brothers envisioned the
film as a live action comic book. The "entertainment value" payoff for
their audience is the violence -- for their projected audience of
pre-teen to 20ish males. You're just too grown up for comics books,
Diego :).

There's a chase scene on a freeway that beats any other chase scene on
film, in my opinion -- gah. At times I was even scared for the stunt
drivers. There are quite a few gratuitous scenes, actually. I'd say
less than an hour advances the plot, and the rest is just eye candy. If
you don't like that form of eye candy, though, of course the film will
seem like crap.

You may want to check out Down with Love if for no other reason than the
way it plays with and violates 60's film conventions.

Jim

Diego M. Dell'Era wrote:

> It is released today where I live, but all the talk here is
> discouraging.
>
> I rather enjoyed the first one, but you have to agree that
> its philosophy and ideology were crappy. The freedom
> fighters plant a bomb in a government building, and then
> they crash an aircraft into another one, presumably in the
> bussiness district, judging from the panoramic view. Free
> your mind, my ass.
>
> I think its merits are a good narrative and foreshadowing,
> plus some "ontological shock", but that's about it. They
> tell me the second one doesn't even have that. Most critics
> have Daniel's mixed feelings about it, I gather. And Jim,
> sequels don't necessarily have to be languid and irresolute;
> what about Godfather Part II?
>
> The last sci-fi film I really liked was *Gattaca*. Cheesy at
> times, but nice. Has anyone seen anything more recent on
> that line that you'd care to recommend?
>
> Saludos,
> Diego D.
-
* Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message
* UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH
Received on Thu May 22 19:18:30 2003