Yes, the joke is on us we understand but....being so meta made it even more meta and ironic.
Do you see now Tom.
Yah I didn't understand the whole gender studies thing going on whatsoever, it seemed like kaleidoscopes of gender roles. Lets make another women who is perfect without a proper backstory as to why she's perfect (this isn't necessarily a female thing but it certainly shows more). Then have her be gay just to add another level - I literally don't know what is trolling and what is not trolling anymore considering the writer changed from a male to a female. The bigger issues with females in modern films isn't that we remake them from nostalgia, it's that they don't have a proper fucking character definition to them. Trinity did, trinity was literally perfect in the first film.
Anyway, I guess this thread has achieved what it should a diverse set of opinions
Yes, the blue haired, blue sunglasses girl. Blue pill. Ironic? Unironic? Still follows there.
Trinity was perfection then, she was made almost "imperfect" when she got married and wasn't kicking ass.
Another point in the "it's so meta, it's meta" Blue pill. The only thing Red pill about the movie is that one ones aware of it's nuances are most likely not the ones who watched the previous movies, but for those who actually
understood (that there are or could be) the underlying meanings.
I'll throw out another example:
Matrix: One = Neo a.k.a Jesus Christ, sacrificed himself to save a world, no one but his followers actually gave a shit.
Matrix: Four (Resurrections) = Neo, I mean Thomas Anderson, I mean Jesus,
ressurects as a game developer in a world
he created,
in his image, queue God Mode and Adam and Eve style romance.
This is probably the easiest visible pattern of the series that people have been debating for the longest time. This part 4 just made is soooo (not to some) obvious. I don't know nearly enough about the bible to catalogue all of the instances but it's the one book that's baked into society's brain for one to
not pick up on it. The movie was more of a sequel to The Matrix than it being a 4th installment with the return of NEARLY no characters from the first, a complete departure from a decent storyline, it was clearly written in this regard. Unless someone can explain why Niaobe was telepathically talking to a robot bird, I don't think that was in part 2. Or 3. If it's implied that they're cool with the sentinels after they kinda destroyed everything, it's a reach.
Like a banana taped to a wall, making art purposely bad doesn't make it good.
Either, this was meta meta humor in reference to what one would say about the Matrix 4, or you don't know that art is subjective. I would agree, however, in the world we live in people thrive in the purposely
bad. Would you pay for something this
bad? I can tell you 3 people would pay more than $100k for it. The same can be said about the movie.
I'm trying to break the 4th wall using real references I don't bullshit when it comes to explanations if I can help it.
In my defense, I'm not defending the movie for it being campy at best, I'm applauding it for what it became. A real life reflection of the current state of the world through the lens of a movie adaptation.
Hell, the only good thing about the movie was the $15 I paid to get the HBO Max subscription, I've just been watching old things that are actually good, and I hate apps, and movies.
It's not all bad is the impression I got from the movie and it's right. Sometimes, it's gotta be bad to be good. Philosophical shit.
