I’m a big fan of the original ‘Matrix’ trilogy. I gave the first film in the series a 10 out of 10 grade, which means that I think it’s among the 50 or so best movies I’ve ever seen. For me ‘The Matrix’ is the best possible combination of original and extremely well-made action film and intelligent sci-fi with a superb idea, a metaphor for the relations between our world and the digital world that develops and expands overwhelming us. I do not reject ‘sequel’ films. I appreciate them when they bring in new things, when they expand on the original story, when they keep the consistency and connection to the original film or films, but at the same time add new dimensions to justify repeating the theme. ‘The Matrix Resurrections‘, made during the pandemic and released in 2021, directed and co-written (only) by Lana Wachowski tries to be all these but the success is very partial. I wasn’t completely disappointed, but I was expecting more. To be frank, the level of expectation was very high.
Thomas Anderson, the hero of the series played by Keanu Reeves is the genius programmer of the ‘Matrix’ game. He created Neo, but he no longer knows that the character is merging with his creator. Glimpses of past adventures, sensations and feelings (illustrated with visual flashes from the trilogy) haunt him, and to counteract them he resorts to the services of a psychoanalyst. The shrink recommends some blue (and not red – important detail) pills to keep him within reality and support his physical and intellectual form, because the boss signed a contract for … making a film inspired by the game ‘Matrix’. But is this the reality? When he meets a woman who bears a striking resemblance to Trinity, suspicions grow. And we, the viewers, may remember that the two heroes had died in the third series. What is the reality? Or maybe ‘What is reality?’ is the question.
I confess that from a point on I lost the thread or the clew of the story. The problem seems to me to be that the authors assume familiarity with the trilogy, or this film does not come after a 2-3 year hiatus, but 18 years after the last series. One example. The film begins with a reenactment of one of the scenes from the original films, which from one point on goes in a different direction. It’s a computer program, the software is old and has bugs. I don’t think anyone who hasn’t seen or has forgotten the scene understands much. Plus, new spectators are not emotionally attached to Neo and Trinity to care about their story, let alone to the other characters. I confess that I didn’t like the new incarnation of Morpheus, maybe because Laurence Fishburne was so formidable in the classic ‘Matrix’. What partly balances is the excellent acting performance of Keanu Reeves, who obviously likes to suffer in the ‘Matrix’ movies, and of Carrie-Anne Moss. When I started to not really understand what was going on, who was manipulating who, who were the players and who were the real characters, who was alive and who was reincarnated, I decided that if the universe is a huge computer game, then this is how I also should watch this movie. And I started to like it, because the special effects are formidable, the animal-robots have previously unimagined shapes, and in a digital game you don’t have to invest too much sentiment for the characters. ‘Matrix’ fans will either love this movie or hate ‘The Matrix Resurrections‘. I belong to the first category. Younger viewers may be curious to seek out the original to understand this fourth series. They will discover three masterful films made twenty or so years ago. Which is also a win.