Alfred Urrutia (
Mon, 3 May 1999 15:03:39 -0700 (PDT)

On May 3, 2:08pm, Mark Kuettner wasted bandwidth discussing:
> Subject: Re: [gundam] [OT] The Matrix & Dark City -spoiler-

> >Agent Smith explained that setting. It was the zenith of Man's
> >accomplishments or words to that effect. It was what the humans
> >jacked into the Matrix wanted to accept most (the first, idyllic
> >attempt was a disaster, he said). So, give them what *they* felt was
> >the best. And what was there to add to it? the actual human/AI war?
> >Just keep things as they were, everyone's happy. Except those few
> >who feel that it's a lie.
> >
> Interesting plot device to start the movie in the Matrix simulation
> of 1999, but more settings should have been explored instead of
> turning into a John Woo film. Personal gripe, sorry.

I can understand "should have" because of your personal gripe, but it
works perfectly for the movie itself. I mean, what better setting to
make the moviegoer think that maybe it *is* true or, hey, wouldn't it
be neat if it were true, etc., than in a setting we are well aware of.
As opposed to some future Bladerunner Earth or off-world look or some
other style that we couldn't identify with. And, again, it was more of
a comic book/anime movie, not a John Woo movie. Look at their story
boards. They got lots of comic book artists to draw those up for them.
They *wanted* a comic book look, anime style stunts.

> >
> >Given the premise, they nailed it. There're a series of facts that are
> >not known about that universe. How much info, exactly, was being
> >pumped into the human brains in the Matrix through that head jack?
> >Could more be fed? Could an output line be added to affect changes?
> >Were humans that were "grown" the only change? Might there have been
> >genetic changes as well, maybe to make humans more accepting of the
> >Matrix setup? What was the Matrix, physically? Where were the various
> >AIs during all this, typically? It was implied that they might not
> >find the Matrix so inviting. So, is there a separate virtual world
> >that they inhabit or are they sentient physical beings like the
> >sentinels? Are the sentinels sentient or just the equivalent of
> >dobermans? Without that info and more any "dissatisfaction" based
> >on presumed story shortcomings is pointless.
> The premise was so gray, as was the movie overall (The humans blocked
> out the sun so the solar-powered AI would crash?Huh? We, uh, kinda
> need the sun ourselves, the last time I checked) Everyone pretty
> much acted like each other for the most part, except for the token
> "goofy guy" on the ship. Given it is a dire situation, but it took
> itself a little too seriously. Maybe the sequel will be a musical.

They, uh, could be assumed to have planned a quick defeat of the AI and
then a reversing, if possible, of the darkened skies. But they didn't
beat the AIs and the AIs didn't need the sun to function anymore. Like
I said, too many unknown facts about what happened. On purpose. Morpheus
says that the details are few. So who's to "say" what or why? I'm glad
it took itself so seriously. I don't need another movie where the actors
mug it up for the camera (MiB) or are parodying something else (Scream)
or are doing it just for the effects (Starship Troopers). A story that
is told like it was *true*, that's what we need a little more of.


"Did you know that I shot your father on Melpomene?  Between the eyes,
 so he could see it coming."

- Major Joachim Steuben/Hammer's Slammers

Alfred Urrutia - Disney FA - 818.526.3338 - -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- - Gundam Mailing List Archives are available at

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b3 on Tue May 04 1999 - 07:03:47 JST