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 Fri May 23 01:23:07 2003