After watching “Matrix Revolutions,” I was disapointed. The movie lost its confusing yet interesting story line that the first one did very well, and there were so many characters that a lot of them got lost in the story and they wasted many good actors.
When they return to the real world and the battle of the machines starts, it just goes on and on and on while Neo and Trinity disapear for a long time. The fight scenes just never cut away for such a long time that in the end it became anoying to watch. When the human base was under attack by the machines, there was no dialogue for such a long time. The effects were really good but they didn't cut away from this specific scene for what seems to be half the movie. The visual effects were just as good as the first movie but the fight scenes didn't match the originals. It isn't a really bad thing to take out the fight scenes, it's just the fact that the first movie was based solely on those fight scenes and it wasn't smart for them to take so much of them out. There were only a few good fight scenes and the biggest one dealt with flying and it was sort of overkill by the end. I think that one big thing that made “Revolutions” worse than the first movie was that everyone seemed to be in love with eachother. After watching the first one I was expecting more fighting but instead they turned it into romance and it was drawn out way too long. It seemed that in “Matrix Revolutions,” they had too many plot points that I've seen in other movies before.
The whole movie is full of little errors like this. For example, the machines make a deal in the end with Neo to defeat the agent Smith, and after he does, the machines are supposed to not continue attacking humans and growing them in their fields after years of doing so, just because of a promise. It doesn't make much sense. Neo comes in and saves the day at the end, but the movie doesn't really even explain how it works. Neo's about to lose and die and then magically he wins. I didn't think it was a very good ending, they should have finished the series at the end of the second movie.
When the trailer for this film was first introduced to the public, many expected The Matrix to be just another science-fiction film with phenomenal special effects which lacked an intriguing plot. The majority of the reviews definitely put an end to this misconception. Most of the reviews written on this film eloquently complement the Wachowski brothers on their excellent story line. The Biblical references of this film incorporated with the phenomenal cinematography distinguish The Matrix from all other science-fiction films in which the main characters are on a race to save humanity. "The script, written by the Wachowski brothers is intelligent but carefully not geeky."2
When one looks at a reboot of a movie, it is essential to seek a balance of staying true to the old story, while giving it a breath of fresh thoughts. For the story Robocop, the stories being made thirty years apart, it would have a different audience in 2014 than it did in 1984. This audience would require different aspects from cinema, such as flashier effects, more intricate costumes, and a simpler plot. While these changes appeased the younger audiences of the age, the changes left the older crowd as well as the people with different tastes betrayed. Although the new movie had more grandiose and flashy effects and costumes, it lacked charm and had mediocre script writing.
There are many similarities between the motion picture, Matrix, and Orson Scott Card’s Ender’s Game. The most striking of these is the way the movie and the book begin. The first chapter of the book begins with a conversation between two IF agents about how one believes that ender is the one. Similarly, in the movie the first words are from Trinity, also stating her belief that Neo is “the one”. The theme of the “chosen one” who is destined to save the human race is dominant in both the movie and book.
Buying a house largely goes along with getting married and having kids, which tends to be pushed to the wayside, as opposed to with previous generations that focused on getting married young. The primary dream of many millennials is to maintain a steady source of income prior to settling down in their dream home. It is more common for millennials to wait till their late 30s and early 40s to have children, whereas in past generations it was more common for couples to start having children right out of highschool, when they were in their late teens and early 20s. This age difference in starting a family is primarily because of two things; wanting to focus on their career, and not yet finding the ideal soulmate. It is apparent that millennials are more focused on their career because they tend to care more about material items, always wanting the “bigger, better” item. This can only be attained by having a good source of income, which means having a good job, which requires a good education. Their love of material items may also be seen as being selfish which could also explain their lack of a desire to start a family. Additionally, millennials tend not to start a family because of their inability to find the right person to marry. The younger generation tends to be more focused on appearance than
Kant prescribes the Categorical Imperative, which has three maxims: in essence, (1) act so the maxim you are acting off of could be a universal law, (2) do not treat people as a means to an ends, and (3) act in harmony with nature’s laws and act as though you are the universal legislator. Aristotle simply states virtue resides in the mean. However, in practice, ethical actions would be similar regardless of if one follows virtue ethics or the Categorical Imperative. Take Aristotle’s example about temperance (13-14; bk. 3 ch. 10). Acting self-indulgently uses a person, namely the rational agent acting in this scenario, as a means to the ends of pleasure, which violates the second maxim of the Categorical Imperative and is thus immoral under Kant’s ethical framework. On the other hand, excessive deprivation contradicts with the natural will which desires to live healthily and with nature, rather than to deprive oneself of food and/or pleasure. Aristotle’s other example of bravery also holds true using Kantian ethics. Acting too confidently treats the lives of people (rational agents) flippantly, as a means to the ends of appearing brave. But acting cowardly in the face of danger is a direct contradiction if it were to be universalized. If the maxim is, “If I am afraid I will avoid the conflict,” everyone would avoid conflicts that cause fear. If everyone avoided the conflicts they would not exist,
The Matrix series is much more than an action-packed sci-fi thriller. After one view of this film for the second and third time, we start to notice a great deal of symbolism. This symbolism starts to paint a completely different picture than the images of humans battling machines. It is a religious story, with symbols deeply set in the Christian faith. The Matrix contains religious symbolism through its four main characters, Morpheus, Neo, Trinity and Cypher. In that each character personifies the “Father,” the “Son,” “Satan,” and the “Holy Spirit” of the Christian beliefs only shown through the amazing performances of the actors. A critic by the name of Shawn Levy said "The Matrix slams you back in your chair, pops open your eyes and leaves your jaw hanging slack in amazement."(metacritic.com)
This student of Philosophy now sees the movie The Matrix in a whole new way after gaining an understanding of some of the underlying philosophical concepts that the writers of the movie used to develop an intriguing and well thought out plot. Some of the philosophical concepts were clear, while others were only hinted at and most likely overlooked by those unfamiliar with those concepts, as was this student when the movie first came out in theaters all those many years ago. In this part of the essay we will take a look at the obvious and not so obvious concepts of: what exactly is the Matrix and how does it related to both Descartes and Plato, can we trust our own senses once we understand what the Matrix is, and how Neo taking the Red Pill is symbolic of the beginning of the journey out of Pl...
Providing culturally competent care is a vital responsibility of a nurse’s role in healthcare. “Culturally competent care means conveying acceptance of the patient’s health beliefs while sharing information, encouraging self-efficiency, and strengthening the patients coping resources” (Giddens, 2013). Competence is achieved through and ongoing process of understanding another culture and learning to accept and respect the differences.
In his play, A Doll's House, Henrik Ibsen depicts a female protagonist, Nora Helmer, who dares to defy her husband and forsake her "duty" as a wife and mother to seek out her individuality. A Doll's House challenges the patriarchal view held by most people at the time that a woman's place was in the home. Many women could relate to Nora's situation. Like Nora, they felt trapped by their husbands and their fathers; however, they believed that the rules of society prevented them from stepping out of the shadows of men. Through this play, Ibsen stresses the importance of women's individuality. A Doll's House combines realistic characters, fascinating imagery, explicit stage directions, and an influential setting to develop a controversial theme.
If you’ve ever had deja vu or felt that something about the world was just off, then you might just be living in the Matrix, a digital reality. At least, that is the case in the movie The Matrix directed by the Wachowski brothers. This movie, released March 1st 1999, takes place in a very distant future after a war between humanity and machines with artificial intelligence. A young man named Thomas Anderson, who goes by Neo in his nightlife as a hacker, discovers that the world is not all he thought it to be. Neo learns the truth about his world and what he has to do to save it in this action packed science fiction film.
A Doll House was a play written well ahead of its time. This play was written in a time when it was considered an outrage for a woman such as Nora not only to display a mind of her own, but also to leave her husband in order to obtain her freedom. This play relates to the Art Nouveau and Edwardian period because just as the furniture and clothing were considered decorative pieces, so were women. Women were expected only to tend to the husband's and children's needs. Women were not supposed to do anything without first consulting the husband and certainly never do anything without his prior knowledge and approval. Women were expected to be at home and always looking presentable for their husbands.
Ibsen, Henrik. A Doll's House. In Four Major Plays. Trans. James McFarlane and Jens Arup. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1981.
In Henrik Ibsen’s play, A Doll House Ibsen describes the perfect family and the conflicts within. Ibsen examines the normal lives of the Helmer family through the eyes of the wife, Nora Helmer. She goes through a series of trials as she progresses through the play and with each trial she realizes something is missing in her life. Ibsen examines the struggles within the house.
In the beginning of the play, the reader is introduced to the Helmer household on Christmas eve; Nora purchases a Christmas tree to be used as the main ornament in the house and brings it in to be decorated. Shortly after, Torvald, her husband, approaches her by referring to her as his “little lark”(12) and his “little squirrel”(12). Shortly after, Torvald criticizes Nora for eating a macaroon: “Not nibbling sweets?..Not even taken a bite at a macaroon or two?”(14). Torvald “was only joking”(15). Perhaps it was the way the couple communicated at all times, but Torvald’s teasing is also manipulative. Nora seems to believe anything Torvald tells her; as naive as she is, she believes Torvald is only playing with her. However, as the man of the house, he does cause Nora to consistently ask for his approval, or fear his rejection: “I should not think of going against your wishes”(15), Nora says.
A Doll’s House, the title belonging to one of the most well known plays in the world of literature. As the name suggests, this famous play written by Henrik Ibsen in 1879 discusses the dilemmas of a seemingly perfect 19th century family. The title serves as a significant symbol and proposal of the message that Ibsen intended to convey through the play. The title highlights two important aspects of the play, a doll and a house. The doll and house symbolize the main character Nora Helmer, and the house in which she lives in with her husband, Torvald Helmer. It is clear that Ibsen named his play A Doll’s House because of the relationship between Nora and Torvald, the perfection of the house in which they live, and the constant manipulation that