The Matrix Fans 2007 forums

[dionysus]

Feral Boy wrote:
The only parts that I didn't see as being applicable was the parts about making refusals--either the refusal of the call to adventure or the refusal of the return. I could see that Neo might have been hampered, but it wasn't because he made a refusal to progress.



Right. I didn't see those parts as actual acts of refusal either. But when using the Campbellian model they seemed to be placed conveniently where such refusal would occur. I haven't examined other stories where the model is used to see whether these stages always involve a refusal on the part of the Hero or not, yet. But my guess is: that for The Matrix, the congruent part need not depend on how the act is performed as much as how similar the story's flow is affected at that point.

I always thought that Neo's refusal to accept Trinity's death was seen as his "Refusal of the Call". After the Oracle asks Neo what he sees when he enters the door made of light, Neo says "[Trinity] starts to fall", pretty soon after that, Neo says "I can't, I won't" when the Oracle tells Neo that he must accept her death "because [he's] the One".

The Call to Adventure, in this case, would be the Reload construct for which Trinity's death is an essential part. I guess the plan was to have Trinity fall to her death so that Neo would come to choose the right door which would allow for a temporary dissemination of the code and the Matrix to become reloaded.

In fact, there's even a theme of "Refusal of the Call" that runs throughout the beginning of Matrix Reloaded: Smith refuses to return to the Source, Smith refuses to be 'part of the system' (symbolically portrayed by the delivery of his earpiece), Morpheus refuses to return all ships to Zion, Neo refuses to fight Smith (symbolically portrayed by his flying off), Morpheus refuses to succumb to his fear of the attacking Sentinels, Morpheus refuses to listen to Locke's advice for maintaining a "certain amount of discretion", and, Neo and Trinity refuse to be present at the 'calling' (symbolically portrayed by their love-making).

The Refusal of the Return, I believe, is portrayed by Neo ending up in Mobil Ave. Neo refuses to "return to the source" to allow for a temporary dissemination of the code he carries which ends in Mobil Ave. MObil Ave itself, therefore, becomes a 'symbol' for Neo's refusal.

Yet another portrayal of Neo's Refusal of the Return can be seen in his stopping the attacking Sentinels. In the Courtyard, the Oracle suggested that Neo's death would come after he would reach the source (= the door made of light ~ "where the path of the one ends"). Later in M3, and in reference to Neo stopping the Sentinels, the Oracle comments "you should be dead". In other words, Neo's path should have ended after he left the source and stopped the Sentinels. Later she admits that apparently he wasn't 'ready' to "connect to the power of the source" yet. Neo's refusal to connect to the power of the source can be seen as his refusal of accepting his own 'end'. Later, after Neo passes the return threshold, he seems more willing to accept his "end".

[Feral_Boy]

The only parts that I didn't see as being applicable was the parts about making refusals--either the refusal of the call to adventure or the refusal of the return. I could see that Neo might have been hampered, but it wasn't because he made a refusal to progress.

Right. I didn't see those parts as actual acts of refusal either. But when using the Campbellian model they seemed to be placed conveniently where such refusal would occur. I haven't examined other stories where the model is used to see whether these stages always involve a refusal on the part of the Hero or not, yet. But my guess is: that for The Matrix, the congruent part need not depend on how the act is performed as much as how similar the story's flow is affected at that point.

Good point. Since Campbell's model is not some sort of Scripture that must be followed to the letter, but is more of a general outline, I think I agree with you.

As for Thomas Anderson. It is a name that is as important as any other anyone calls him. Thomas is who he is. Neo is more a what than a who, which is perhaps why he chose that alias in the first place, don't you think? By referring to him as Thomas Anderson rather than Neo, I hope to keep that point in focus.

Ah, but this could be a whole other discussion. I'm of the opinion that the name Thomas Anderson is the hero's identity that is associated with his previous life as a slave to the Matrix. And as Trinity told Neo, "[T]he Matrix cannot tell you who you are." And while this next point isn't any kind of proof in and of itself, I think it speaks to our instictive feelings about the hero's identity: when any of us refers to the hero, we call him Neo--not Thomas Anderson or the One. We only use the other name and title when we want to refer to specific aspects of Neo's life, namely his former life as a bluepill and his role as Zion's messiah.

And even though the name Neo is an alias, and he was first born as Thomas Anderson, there is a distinct quality about him that extends beyond that name and that identity. He is more than Thomas Anderson and only holds onto that name as long as he's plugged into the Matrix. It is as if freeing him from the Matrix started him on the path to realizing his TRUE self--of which Thomas Anderson is but a pale shadow, something to be shed like a snake leaving behind old skin.

Picture the story of Superman. He had inate qualities about him that set him apart from everyone else. Yet he grew up as Clark Kent and walked among us as if he were one of us. But when the time was right and he came of age, the truth of his identity was revealed and it was shown that the REAL persona was that of Kal-El, and that Clark Kent was actually the alias. As discussed by Bill in Kill Bill, Superman's mythology is different than most other superhero mythologies in that Superman's uniform represents the REAL person--they are the clothes from his home planet. Clark Kent is the costume Superman wears to hide his identity, in a reversal of other superheroes who put on tights and a cape to pretend to be someone else.

And just like Superman, Neo has always had the powers of the One residing within him. He only needed to be awakened to that fact when the time was right. And once that happened, Neo forever shed the Thomas Anderson persona, never again even referring to it.

[dionysus]

That was a very nice post, Feral Boy.

I especially liked the way you used the example of Superman to explain something that we see happen to Neo. In fact, you used Superman's sense of personal identity to explain Neo's sense of personal identity. I'm hoping we can draw on many more examples from other hero stories as we delve deeper into the story, and that we can learn more about the Neo's story and his journey of personal transformation by delving into these other stories as we move along.

[iLuvU2]

I always thought that Neo's refusal to accept Trinity's death was seen as his "Refusal of the Call". After the Oracle asks Neo what he sees when he enters the door made of light, Neo says "[Trinity] starts to fall", pretty soon after that, Neo says "I can't, I won't" when the Oracle tells Neo that he must accept her death "because [he's] the One".

The Call to Adventure, in this case, would be the Reload construct for which Trinity's death is an essential part. I guess the plan was to have Trinity fall to her death so that Neo would come to choose the right door which would allow for a temporary dissemination of the code and the Matrix to become reloaded.

I like that. Your ‘refusal of the call’ seems to fit better and I don’t have the problem with it that I have with the one I wrote and it seems to address Feral Boy’s concerns as well. So, I’m modifying it.

The Refusal of the Return, I believe, is portrayed by Neo ending up in Mobil Ave. Neo refuses to "return to the source" to allow for a temporary dissemination of the code he carries which ends in Mobil Ave. MObil Ave itself, therefore, becomes a 'symbol' for Neo's refusal.

I like the way this seems to fit better as well. So I’m modifying that part, too.

So the edited version for reference is thus:

- SEPARATION
- THE HERO IN HIS ORDINARY WORLD
Most stories take place in a special world, a world that is new and alien to its hero. If you’re going to tell a story about a person out of his customary element, you first have to create a contrast by showing him in his mundane, ordinary world.

In this instance, the ordinary world is Thomas Anderson on the Neb engaged in the work or ‘freeing minds’. His neurotic anguish is in wondering if this is all there is to why he’s there. No further guidance is coming from Morpheus and the Oracle can’t be found.

- THE CALL TO ADVENTURE
The quest begins with the hero in a state of neurotic anguish. The call comes when the psychological forces of the mind (id and superego) become unbalanced. The quest is often announced to the hero by another character who acts as ‘herald’.

The nightmare about Trinity represents the call. It is interesting that Trinity was also the ‘herald’ in the first movie.

It has been pointed out that there are quite a few things that add to the anguish of our hero. There is the report from the Osiris about the sentinel army tunneling toward Zion. Thomas wonders if his role is in anyway related to this new development.

- REFUSAL OF THE CALL
In many stories, the hero initially refuses the call to adventure. When this happens, the hero suffers somehow, and eventually chooses the quest.

The refusal is when Thomas tells the Oracle that he won’t take the responsibility for whether Trinity lives or dies.

- SUPERNATURAL AID
Along the way, the hero often encounters a helper (mentor), usually a wise old man, who gives the hero both psychological and physical weapons.

The Oracle is the one who tells about saving Zion by finding the Keymaker, and making it to the Source in a small window of time. The Oracle is supernatural. She knows what Thomas has been dreaming about and tries to help him understand the choice he sees himself making in his dreams.

- THE CROSSING OF THE FIRST THRESHOLD
The hero must eventually cross into a dark underworld, where he will face evil and darkness, and thereby find true enlightenment. Before this can occur, however, the hero must cross the threshold between his home world and the new world of adventure. Often this involves facing off against and quelling a ‘threshold guardian’.

Threshold guardian(s): Smith (again)
He stands in the way of progressing to the quest for “the Source”.

- INITIATION
- THE ROAD OF TRIALS
Once in the other world, the hero is repeatedly challenged with mental and physical obstacles that must be overcome. Often these take the form of a test, by which the hero improves his skills and proves his worth.

The Merovingian presents a mental and physical obstacle. He tells them to go back and that that he will not release the Keymaker.

- THE MEETING WITH THE GODDESS
After overcoming the Road of Trials, the hero often encounters a goddess-like woman: beautiful, queen-like, or motherly. The hero faces the goddess and in doing so, faces his anima (i.e. the feminine side of the male unconscious mind). By uniting with the goddess, he becomes a whole person, reconciling his feminine nature with his masculine nature. This can also be a negative encounter when the goddess is replaced by The Temptress, leading the hero astray.

Persephone is the name of a goddess in Greek mythology. Persephone is beautiful. She proves to be “the Temptress”.

- TEMPTATION FROM THE PATH
On some Hero’s Quests, the hero will encounter the goddess, but before he can unite with her, he must prove his worthiness by overcoming the temptation of the Woman as Temptress.

Persephone will only lead them to the Keymaker if the hero (Thomas) kisses her. But not just any kiss will do. She wants Thomas to kiss her as if he was kissing Trinity.

- ATONEMENT WITH THE FATHER
The hero may encounter a father-like figure of patriarchal authority. ‘Father’ and ‘son’ are often pitted against each other for mastery of the universe. To understand the father, and ultimately himself, the hero must reconcile with this ultimate authority figure.

The Architect is the “Father of the Matrix”. He explains what the prophecy and the quests up to this point really mean from a different perspective.

- THE ULTIMATE BOON
Having reconciled with the father and achieved personal enlightenment, the hero’s psychological forces are again balanced. His newfound knowledge, or boon, also has potential to benefit society.

I had to vary the order slightly for the films here. Usually the ultimate boon is at the end of the initiation stage but I found that it fits better this way. Here, Thomas saves Trinity’s life and stops his nightmare from coming true.

- APOTHEOSIS
The hero’s ego is disintegrated in a breakthrough expansion of consciousness. Quite frequently his idea of reality is changed, he may find himself able to do new things or able to see a larger point of view.

Thomas realizes that “the One wasn’t meant to end…the war…” After perceiving a larger perspective on what is happening, he is able to “feel” the sentinels and “stop” them.

- RETURN
- REFUSAL OF THE RETURN
Having found bliss and enlightenment in the underworld, the hero may not want to return with the boon.

Thomas refuses to return to the source and apply his “boon” to mankind. So he is jacked out and stops the sentinels, instead and (his mind) ends up in Mobil Ave.

- RESCUE FROM WITHOUT
The hero may need to be rescued from without by humanity.

Seraph, Morpheus, and Trinity force the Merovigian to get Thomas out of Mobil Ave.

- THE CROSSING OF THE RETURN THRESHOLD
Before the hero can return to the real world, he must confront another threshold guardian. The first threshold was a symbolic death; this is now a symbolic rebirth.

Threshold guardian: Smith-Bane
Before Thomas can start on his journey to the Machine City, he must get past Smith-Bane. Smith-Bane blinds him. His symbolic rebirth is that now he is able to “see” the machines without physical sight, just as earlier he was able to see the Matrix differently as well. As a clue to this stage of the Hero’s Journey, Smith/Bane even said, “we’ve been here before, you and I.” This is a direct link back to the same stage of the Hero’s Journey in the first film where Agent Smith is waiting for the hero in room 303 at the Heart O’ The City hotel.

- THE MAGIC FLIGHT
A mad dash is made by the hero to return with the prize.

There are two of these happening at the same time. As the Logos hastens to Machine City facing cannons, bombs, and sentinels, the Mjolnir races back to Zion thru the narrow mechanical tunnels to be able to use their EMP to help Zion.

- MASTER OF TWO WORLDS
Once the final threshold is crossed, the hero is now free to move back and forth between the two worlds at will. He has mastered the conflicting psychological forces of the mind.

This doesn’t fully happen until after he allows Smith to “beat” him. Then all the conflicting psychological forces (worlds) are reconciled. This is depicted in the light Thomas gives of in all three settings.

- FREEDOM TO LIVE
With the journey now complete, the hero has found true freedom, and can turn his efforts to helping or teaching humanity.

There is what MXO players are calling “the truce”, where Zion and the machines are no longer at war. And there is the reconciliation between the Architect and the Oracle where those who want out the matrix are allowed to leave.

If we accept the symbolic deficiency with the world being the programming of the matrix as in Dionysus’ model, then this “freedom to live” in the matrix or not provides a seemingly permanent solution for this.

Now that we do see the Hero’s Journey in the first film and then the second and third films, the questions Dionysus posed are important. For now, I’m going to reacquaint myself with Plato’s allegory of the cave and the Hindu concept of Maya.

THE MATRIX:
THE HERO IN HIS ORDINARY WORLD
- What is it about the world of the Matrix that gives Neo a feeling of neurotic anguish and a sense of alienation from everyday reality?
- What is the symbolic deficiency in Neo’s world of everyday reality?
- What is it about the level of reality in the Matrix that sets it apart from other ‘realities’?
- What is it about Neo that sets him apart from other Human Jack-Ins in the Matrix?

MATRIX RELOADED:
THE HERO IN HIS ORDINARY WORLD
- What is it about the world of Zion that gives Neo a feeling of neurotic anguish and a sense of alienation from everyday reality?
- What is the symbolic deficiency in the world of Zion?
- What is it about the level of reality in Zion that sets it apart from the level of reality in the Matrix?
- What is it about Neo that sets him apart from other Human Free-Minds in Zion?

[Feral_Boy]

Feral Boy wrote:
The only parts that I didn't see as being applicable was the parts about making refusals--either the refusal of the call to adventure or the refusal of the return. I could see that Neo might have been hampered, but it wasn't because he made a refusal to progress.



Right. I didn't see those parts as actual acts of refusal either. But when using the Campbellian model they seemed to be placed conveniently where such refusal would occur. I haven't examined other stories where the model is used to see whether these stages always involve a refusal on the part of the Hero or not, yet. But my guess is: that for The Matrix, the congruent part need not depend on how the act is performed as much as how similar the story's flow is affected at that point.

I always thought that Neo's refusal to accept Trinity's death was seen as his "Refusal of the Call". After the Oracle asks Neo what he sees when he enters the door made of light, Neo says "[Trinity] starts to fall", pretty soon after that, Neo says "I can't, I won't" when the Oracle tells Neo that he must accept her death "because [he's] the One".

The Call to Adventure, in this case, would be the Reload construct for which Trinity's death is an essential part. I guess the plan was to have Trinity fall to her death so that Neo would come to choose the right door which would allow for a temporary dissemination of the code and the Matrix to become reloaded.

That's extremely interesting. I had never thought of Trinity's fall as something that was perhaps planned in order to remove all obstacles to Neo performing his necessary messianic responsibilities to the general populace of Zion. While it could be argued that there are too many coincidences involved in creating the scenario whereby Trinity falls (and could therefore not possibly by anyone's intentional plan that it happened), I do like how you're thinking outside the box on that one.

In fact, there's even a theme of "Refusal of the Call" that runs throughout the beginning of Matrix Reloaded: Smith refuses to return to the Source, Smith refuses to be 'part of the system' (symbolically portrayed by the delivery of his earpiece), Morpheus refuses to return all ships to Zion, Neo refuses to fight Smith (symbolically portrayed by his flying off), Morpheus refuses to succumb to his fear of the attacking Sentinels, Morpheus refuses to listen to Locke's advice for maintaining a "certain amount of discretion", and, Neo and Trinity refuse to be present at the 'calling' (symbolically portrayed by their love-making).

Sounds like many of the characters have "an affinity for disobedience".

The Refusal of the Return, I believe, is portrayed by Neo ending up in Mobil Ave. Neo refuses to "return to the source" to allow for a temporary dissemination of the code he carries which ends in Mobil Ave. MObil Ave itself, therefore, becomes a 'symbol' for Neo's refusal.

Yet another portrayal of Neo's Refusal of the Return can be seen in his stopping the attacking Sentinels. In the Courtyard, the Oracle suggested that Neo's death would come after he would reach the source (= the door made of light ~ "where the path of the one ends"). Later in M3, and in reference to Neo stopping the Sentinels, the Oracle comments "you should be dead". In other words, Neo's path should have ended after he left the source and stopped the Sentinels. Later she admits that apparently he wasn't 'ready' to "connect to the power of the source" yet. Neo's refusal to connect to the power of the source can be seen as his refusal of accepting his own 'end'. Later, after Neo passes the return threshold, he seems more willing to accept his "end".

I thought I should clarify at this point that the Source--the place where the Path of the One ends--does not mean the death of the One. It can't possibly be, because the very next thing that the One is supposed to do is select 23 individuals to rebuild and repopulate Zion. He can't perform that step if he's dead. Instead, what takes place is that all of the "wrong" choices made by everyone who ever subconsciously rejected the Matrix since the previous reload (and these choices are in the form of code that the One carries), are disseminated, or dumped into the Source to be deleted.

Think of it this way: the Matrix is not designed to be able to handle rejections. Every single rejection works to create instability in the programming (symbolic of illusory definitions of reality only holding together as long as people believe in them). Picture a decision tree, with a yes/no branch appearing at the point where people are subconsciously given the choice to accept or reject the Matrix. If they accept the Matrix (and nearly 99% will), then that decision follows the "yes" branch and things go along as planned. The "yes" branch leads to the continued stability of the Matrix. However, the "no" branch does not lead anywhere. There is no contingency plan for people rejecting the Matrix.

That's why the Oracle created the Path of the One. Think of the Path of the One as a sort of bucket that catches all of these rejections. It doesn't take care of them, it only collects them. The beginning point of the Path of the One is right when Zion is first being rebuilt. These are the first rejections, and the bucket is put in place to begin to catch these rejections. Time goes by--apparently many decades--and all the rejections continue to be dumped into the bucket of the Path of the One.

Finally it comes time to unload the contents of this bucket. The size of the bucket is pre-determined so that only a certain amount of rejections are allowed to exist before the Machines take care of the problem. But here is the Machines' main problem: they can't just decide to dump the bucket themselves. They have to have a human do it. All those rejections--made by humans--must be undone by a fellow human. But it requires a superhuman to be able to carry all the code of those hundreds of thousands of rejections. They choose a human, connect him to the Source and set him on the Path of the One, which has already been in motion for many decades before he was even born.

After going through all the steps of the Path of the One that are designed to make this superhuman feel like a messianic figure whose destiny is to save Zion, this One is supposed to follow the Path all the way back to the Source where his powers come from. Once there, he will "accept" the Matrix, thus undoing all the rejections he carries, and effectively (albeit temporarily) bringing the Matrix to 100% acceptance. This is the end of the Path of the One--which the Architect refers to as the prime program. The prime program/Path of the One is centered around taking care of the problem of the rejections of 1% of the population. It is put in place before the very first rejection is made and it ends so that the cycle can be continued. Once the Matrix is brought temporarily (temporarily because in short order 1% of the population will begin rejecting it all over again) to 100% acceptance, the Architect quickly reloads the Matrix. Directly after reloading the Matrix, he will also reinsert the prime program/Path of the One. The prime program/Path of the One is like a subprogram within the larger programming of the Matrix. The Matrix is reloaded and the Path of the One is reinserted.

In the online video game The Matrix Online, it was revealed that even though the Matrix was reloaded at the end of M3, the prime program was NOT reinserted. That means that what Neo accomplished was that the "no" branch is no longer intolerable by the system. Rejecting the Matrix is now a valid choice that does not lead to creating problems for the programming. As the Architect verified to the Oracle in regard to those who want out of the Matrix, "Obviously they will be freed." The Matrix will not crash, and people who want out will get their wish. Neo brought peace and stability to the Matrix.

All the previous One's however, by following the prescribed Path of the One, temporarily disseminated the code they carried, which led to the Matrix being reloaded and the Path of the One being reinserted--at which point they then selected 23 individuals to rebuild and repopulate Zion. The Path of the One continued until the next One appeared to complete the Path of the One.

[iLuvU2]

I thought I should clarify at this point that the Source--the place where the Path of the One ends--does not mean the death of the One. It can't possibly be, because the very next thing that the One is supposed to do is select 23 individuals to rebuild and repopulate Zion. He can't perform that step if he's dead. Instead, what takes place is that all of the "wrong" choices made by everyone who ever subconsciously rejected the Matrix since the previous reload (and these choices are in the form of code that the One carries), are disseminated, or dumped into the Source to be deleted.

All the previous One's however, by following the prescribed Path of the One, temporarily disseminated the code they carried, which led to the Matrix being reloaded and the Path of the One being reinserted--at which point they then selected 23 individuals to rebuild and repopulate Zion. The Path of the One continued until the next One appeared to complete the Path of the One.

I'm pretty sure that the process ends with the One's (and every other Zionite's) death. And if I follow the flow of Reloaded well enough, this time around wasn't going to be any different. But what you say about what the Path of the One was supposed to accomplish is related to the "symbolic deficiency of the world" of the Matrix and Zion, so it goes back to the questions Dionysus posted.

[Feral_Boy]

I thought I should clarify at this point that the Source--the place where the Path of the One ends--does not mean the death of the One. It can't possibly be, because the very next thing that the One is supposed to do is select 23 individuals to rebuild and repopulate Zion. He can't perform that step if he's dead. Instead, what takes place is that all of the "wrong" choices made by everyone who ever subconsciously rejected the Matrix since the previous reload (and these choices are in the form of code that the One carries), are disseminated, or dumped into the Source to be deleted.

All the previous One's however, by following the prescribed Path of the One, temporarily disseminated the code they carried, which led to the Matrix being reloaded and the Path of the One being reinserted--at which point they then selected 23 individuals to rebuild and repopulate Zion. The Path of the One continued until the next One appeared to complete the Path of the One.

I'm pretty sure that the process ends with the One's (and every other Zionite's) death. And if I follow the flow of Reloaded well enough, this time around wasn't going to be any different. But what you say about what the Path of the One was supposed to accomplish is related to the "symbolic deficiency of the world" of the Matrix and Zion, so it goes back to the questions Dionysus posted.

Here's how the Architect puts it:

The function of the One is now to return to the Source, allowing a temporary dissemination of the code you carry, reinserting the prime program. After which you will be required to select from the Matrix 23 individuals--16 female, 7 male--to rebuild Zion.

To be fair, the Architect doesn't even mention the death of the One. All we can technically say is that the One does not die IMMEDIATELY after temporarily disseminating the code he carries. He must stay alive long enough after that to select 23 individuals from the Matrix to rebuild Zion. Actually, we had an interesting discussion on the MeX forum about what possibly happens to the One after he completes his assigned tasks for the Architect. Does the Architect let him live out the rest of his life and die of natural causes? Does he let him live long enough to demonstrate his powers to the 23 individuals--thus confirming the reality of the One to the first generation, and to whom the Oracle will later show up and "prophesy" that the One will return? Does the selection process of the 23 individuals happen from a distance, like in the Architect's chamber (Neo points to 23 random people on a computer screen) and then the Architect kills him without the 23 individuals even seeing the One?

I lean toward the idea that the Architect lets the One live long enough to demonstrate to that first generation that there is in fact a One with awesome powers. At some point after that, the Architect engineers the One's death--either through an "accident" or perhaps by trapping him in some sort of Mobil Ave-ish construct in which Neo's powers are negated and then easily killing him. Shortly after that the Oracle shows up and "prophesies" his return. Here's how Morpheus describes how it happens:

When the Matrix was first built, there was a man born inside who had the ability to change whatever he wanted, to remake the Matrix as he saw fit. It was he who freed the first of us, taught us the truth. As long as the Matrix exists the human race will never be free. After he died the Oracle prophesied his return and that his coming would hail the destruction of the Matrix and the war, bring freedom to our people.

Morpheus thinks he is describing the first One, but in reality he's describing the fifth One. The fifth One followed through with his assigned tasks--went to the Source, temporarily disseminated the code he carried, selected 23 individuals from the Matrix to rebuild Zion, and then freed them. He then lied to them and told them that he freed himself, then demonstrated his power to them. I'm not sure about the part about "remaking the Matrix as he saw fit", though. I don't think even Neo could do that, or at least I don't remember him doing anything like that. Although maybe that part of the One's power that Neo WOULD have had went to Smith instead, which would explain how Smith remade the Matrix as he saw fit at the end of M3. Anyway, in regard to the fifth One, he apparently continued the charade and pretended to be a messianic hero, thus setting up Zion to look up to the One. Then when he dies and the Oracle prophesies his return, Zion is prepared to treat the next One like a messiah, which is the entire reason the Architect allows them to exist. What I'd like to know, however, is how it went down with the FIRST One.

The reason I don't think that the Architect would allow the One to live out his life is because he knows about the reality of what's going on. The longer he stays alive, the higher the chance that he'll disclose the reality of the cycles. The One is a control measure for the systemic anomaly, and Zion is a control measure for the One. If the One told Zion the truth, the whole system of control measures and the Path of the One would collapse. It just makes more sense that the Architect would only keep the One alive as long as he's necessary.

On a side note, Zion believes that the Oracle is human. Therefore, when she makes her prophecy after the One dies, she most likely appears as a little girl. Her shell would then be programmed to appear to age as time went on in order to continue to deceive Zion.

[iLuvU2]

You've apparently given that much thought and one way to address it is at: http://matrixfans2007.informe.com/viewt ... =1136#1136

I think the focus here is on the actual content of the movies rather than how we might want to fill in the blanks. Because if you actually see what is going on as a conceptual metaphor, there really are no blanks that need filling. Thus the story as it progresses follows the structure we're calling the monomyth. What has gone before (e.g. the cycles and such) form a context for the structure. Thus, the history we are confronted with in the REFUSAL OF THE CALL stage in the second movie, has alot to do with why THE HERO, Neo, finds himself feeling displaced and alienated IN HIS ORDINARY WORLD. To be more specific, the flaw in the programming of the matrix as expressed by the Architect is related to the "something wrong with the world" that Morpheus talks about in the first movie. This seems to play a larger role in my mind, as to why he refuses the call than even Trinity does.

[Feral_Boy]

I both agree and disagree with you. You can appreciate the symbolism without getting too far into the technicalities of the whole thing. But at the same time, if the underlying superficial sci-fi storyline being presented is not coherent and logical, then the symbolism breaks down and becomes nonsense. After the first movie, you don't really know HOW Neo came to be, you just accept it and you cheer for him to succeed. But by the second movie, his engineered nature is presented, and you must begin to deal with the fact that his powers were not unexpected but planned. This is not just a side aspect to Neo's character but is essential to understanding the story as a whole. You must first understand the EXPECTATIONS placed on Neo by his Machine masters in order to appreciate what he breaks through at the end of the third movie by creating his own path--independent of the Machine's plans for him and yet at the same time incorporating them--the merging of fate and free will.

[iLuvU2]

After the first movie, you don't really know HOW Neo came to be, you just accept it and you cheer for him to succeed. But by the second movie, his engineered nature is presented, and you must begin to deal with the fact that his powers were not unexpected but planned.

Yes. In the first movie we find Thomas in that state of neurotic anguish. He feels there's something wrong with the world which causes him internal turmoil; and you cheer him regardless of whether you agree or understand his course because you empathize with him and that is in part due to the monomyth.

In the second movie, you find him feeling the same way. There's something wrong with the Zion scenario as well. Using the monomyth model, you find that Thomas' problems in the "real world" actually began way before we get to that point where the Architect is waiting for him. It actually begins when he started dreaming, which happens before the movie begins, just as his problems with the matrix actually started before we (the audience) catch up with him.

[Feral_Boy]

After the first movie, you don't really know HOW Neo came to be, you just accept it and you cheer for him to succeed. But by the second movie, his engineered nature is presented, and you must begin to deal with the fact that his powers were not unexpected but planned.

Yes. In the first movie we find Thomas in that state of neurotic anguish. He feels there's something wrong with the world which causes him internal turmoil; and you cheer him regardless of whether you agree or understand his course because you empathize with him and that is in part due to the monomyth.

In the second movie, you find him feeling the same way. There's something wrong with the Zion scenario as well. Using the monomyth model, you find that Thomas' problems in the "real world" actually began way before we get to that point where the Architect is waiting for him. It actually begins when he started dreaming, which happens before the movie begins, just as his problems with the matrix actually started before we (the audience) catch up with him.

That's a perfect way to sum up why the first movie can be viewed as both self-contained and yet at the same time part of a larger whole. If you just stopped at the first movie, you would have a pretty cool experience and a nice representation of the monomyth. But if you choose to continue on to the two sequels, your horizons will definitely be expanded, even though it's just the monomyth all over again.

It's kind of an interesting approach when you think about it. It's like the first movie's monomyth is akin to the Path of the One--a set path with a fairly predictable outcome (because the "script" of the monomyth is being more or less followed, in other words). And even though the monomyth is once again being followed in the two sequels, it's showing that the self-contained monomyth from the first movie is no longer a solution, but the problem. So all the things that we thought were so awesome in the first movie are now problems that Neo must face. So in that regard, the larger monomyth of the whole trilogy is akin to the Path of Neo--where even though the "script" of the monomyth is still more or less being followed, by turning the smaller monomyth from the first movie upside down and making us question everything we thought we knew, a new path must be forged if the larger problems are to be solved.

The solutions that worked for the smaller monomyth (i.e. the Path of the One) will not work in the bigger picture if the cycles are to be broken. A new solution for the larger monomyth (i.e. the Path of Neo) must be made. It's still a monomyth "script" that's being followed in the two sequels, but in an ingenius way in which you first turn the hero's world upside down and have him go through it all again, but from a different angle. As the Architect says to Neo, "...the process has altered your consciousness..." Indeed!

[iLuvU2]

Dam* you nailed it right there!

Okay, for those who read this, I know we're a little off topic right now and maybe this conversation kinda belongs at the beginning but that's how threads go, I suppose.

I just want to say that I think that if the W. Bros. were sure that thay would have had the budget available to do all three movies, M1 would probably not have been a hero's journey in itself. Whether that is true or not the first film is a hero's journey and this is why you have some of the hate for the sequels and those who say "I love M1 and they messed it up, just to make more money." I don't think so but I see where they're coming from. It feels a bit awkward to add anything after the hero's journey is complete. And that's whether the person knows anything about the hero's journey or not. Because they've (we've) been through the journey so many times in the books we read, the movies we watched, the stories we were told, etc. that we know how a story is supposed to "feel".

[Feral_Boy]

I just want to say that I think that if the W. Bros. were sure that thay would have had the budget available to do all three movies, M1 would probably not have been a hero's journey in itself. Whether that is true or not the first film is a hero's journey and this is why you have some of the hate for the sequels and those who say "I love M1 and they messed it up, just to make more money." I don't think so but I see where they're coming from. It feels a bit awkward to add anything after the hero's journey is complete. And that's whether the person knows anything about the hero's journey or not. Because they've (we've) been through the journey so many times in the books we read, the movies we watched, the stories we were told, etc. that we know how a story is supposed to "feel".

That's a very interesting idea. If M1 did not need to be self-contained due to the need to first impress the studios and get the green light for sequels, how would it have been different? Would more things have been left unresolved by the end of M1 if it was designed to be more of a first act in a trilogy? If I'm not mistaken, this is what happened with the first Star Wars movie, in which George Lucas' idea was to end the trilogy with the destruction of the Death Star. But because the studio wanted just one movie first that was more self-contained, he had to compress some of the elements he wanted to spread over the course of the trilogy and put them in the first movie. So that's why you see the destruction of the Death Star in the first movie, then have it destroyed again in the third.

It's difficult to imagine what they would have done differently in M1 if they could have written the entire trilogy as a more cohesive whole, where M1 is just the first step on the hero's journey. One way we could theorize how it might have been done is to start at the end product and then work our way backwards. We know how the trilogy ends, so we know what steps were needed to get there. Then, after trimming some of the "fat" so to speak and concentrating only on those elements that get us to the end of the trilogy, we could apply the revised big picture to the monomyth, look at the first third of the hero's journey "script" and then guess as to what the new first movie would have looked like.

Although I have to admit, I have a hard time imagining how it could be much different, especially since the two sequels seemed to be based so much on what happened in the first movie. I mean, how do you glaze over Thomas Anderson coming to believe that he is the One?

[iLuvU2]

I'm guessing having Smith "return" would "glaze" as you say and then set up the suspense for the sequel by having a 'how is the hero gonna deal with that' kind of feeling after seeing the first movie, like you feel after watching Reloaded.

I'm thinking some of, if not all the plot points you see in Enter the Matrix would have been in the first film.

[Feral_Boy]

I'm guessing having Smith "return" would "glaze" as you say and then set up the suspense for the sequel by having a 'how is the hero gonna deal with that' kind of feeling after seeing the first movie, like you feel after watching Reloaded.

I'm thinking some of, if not all the plot points you see in Enter the Matrix would have been in the first film.

Yeah, the way that Smith came back after his apparent demise sorta has the feeling of an afterthought because the writers wanted the same foe for the hero. I wonder what Tozy would say about the necessity of having the subplot of Smith gaining the ability to copy himself and its place in the larger symbolic themes of the trilogy. If each individual character truly represents various aspects of a person's psyche, wouldn't just one Smith be sufficient to carry the themes he represents--rather than having multiple Smiths? Although I imagine it would be difficult to have as effective of an ending without Smith having the ability to overwrite both the Oracle and Neo. I thought that part was very nicely done. Perhaps Smith's ability to copy himself and his connection to Neo could have been established some other way besides the way it was done at the end of M1.

I liked your point about Enter the Matrix being potential grist for the M1 mill. Although if you've ever played through (or read through transcripts on the Internet), a lot of it is just fluff in regard to expanding the Matrix mythology. The biggest addition IMO was the part where the Oracle said that Sati was very important and that she would change the Matrix and the Real. I heard a rumor that the fulfillment of that "prophecy" was fulfilled in a recent storyline in MxO (she was kidnapped by the General, I believe), but it sounded like such a lame copout that I didn't want to believe it. The Animatrix short Final Flight of the Osiris could definitely have been a clifflhanger for the first movie and pointed to events in the second movie.

ILuvU2, do you think that the trilogy would have been strengthened or weakened if the trilogy encompassed only one large monomyth (with the first movie simply being a part of the whole rather than being self-contained) instead of the way they ended up doing it?