[Joel J]

[NOTE: Some may consider the information in this post a spoiler. However, I really shouldn't have to add this bit of information, because **SPOILERS** dominates the title of this thread.]

Just saw the Matrix Reloaded. And while I am not going to read the 7 pages of discussion that is this thread, I will say what I think of the movie.

It appears as though the majority of this movie was nothing but a "filler." Filler not in the sense that it is worthless, but background information; information necessary to create a setting for the real movie (chapter one of Hamlet). With that little said, it appears as though the real movie will be The Matrix: Revolutions.

We learn about the prior 5 Zions that has existed. We also learn that the Matrix is version 5. Tying these two pieces of information together and the fact that The Architect says Zion will once again be destroyed, we can conclude that in order for the Matrix to be.. reloaded.. the 1% probability of disaster that is factored out (Zion) has to be destroyed. What does that mean? A little of nothing.

However, I do have a slight problem, as some others do, believing everything the architect had to say. Whenever Neo too quickly believes what he is told, the belief is usually incorrect: the supposed death of Trinity, the fact that he isn't "the one;" etc.. all of which Neo has believed, but has turned out to be partial truth. Therefore, I can only assume the architect is, to some degree, playing with Neo's mind; catalyzing some sort of reaction.

Also, the choice the architect gives Neo parallels the choice he is given in the original Matrix by Morpheus. In addition, a similar path is chosen by Neo. In the original, Neo is told by the Oracle that he is not The One. Neo believes, but later discovers that he is.. that the oracle just said what he wanted to hear. In Reloaded Neo is told by the Oracle that there is nothing he can do to stop Trinity's death. And while she didn't die, we all know that humans do eventually die. Is this what The Architect is referring to, or is he simply saying what Neo expects to hear, thus catalyzing some sort of reaction?

The Architect states that the purpose of The One is to now return to the source to.. refresh the code? huh? I am slightly confused by this directive. However, it does make sense: Neo, all of a sudden, weilds a power over the sentinels, seemingly real machines, not part of a.. fiction. Is he really outside the Matrix, or was the door to his left a gateway to some sort of.. test?

I do have another question. Who is the "mother" of the matrix? Have we met her? The Architect, due to his response to Neo's question, asserts that it is not the Oracle. Therefore, who could it be? A new character, or one we have already come to know.

I have many more questions, but I am beginning to realize how large (relatively, of course) this post is becoming; therefore I will bring it to a close.

Neo's choices litters him with self doubt. And while he seems to be constantly shown that his doubt is.. incorrect, he continues to doubt.. interesting.

I have heard of mixed reviews of The Matrix: Reloaded. I am willing to concede that the story was a bit lacking; however, until I see Revolutions, I will cling to the belief that this movie was nothing more than a setup, a presentation of important information. After all, Reloaded and Revolutions are basically, together, a whole script seperated into two parts: A beginning and an.. end. I could be wrong, I could be right; I am just reflecting what I think.

Sorry for repeating myself in some cases, but in order for me to really have a question to which I can accept an answer to, I must have more than one way of arriving at it.

Oh, btw: The Matrix has you.. [lol]