Difference between revisions of "Talk:566: Matrix Revisited"

Explain xkcd: It's 'cause you're dumb.
Jump to: navigation, search
Line 4: Line 4:
 
Panels 12-13 could also suggest that Neo can't comply with the "please remove any metallic items" instruction because he has metal balls. [[User:Saibot84|Saibot84]] ([[User talk:Saibot84|talk]]) 08:35, 5 May 2013 (UTC)
 
Panels 12-13 could also suggest that Neo can't comply with the "please remove any metallic items" instruction because he has metal balls. [[User:Saibot84|Saibot84]] ([[User talk:Saibot84|talk]]) 08:35, 5 May 2013 (UTC)
 
:The opposite of what I replied to Shanek.  [[Special:Contributions/108.162.219.223|108.162.219.223]] 00:41, 11 January 2014 (UTC)
 
:The opposite of what I replied to Shanek.  [[Special:Contributions/108.162.219.223|108.162.219.223]] 00:41, 11 January 2014 (UTC)
 +
 +
I wonder if the sequel bit implies of how the entire movie is supposed to make you just accept things as they are no matter how messed up, and people voluntarily ignore the existence of the sequels, which is the exact opposite of the philosophy that the movie encourages.

Revision as of 17:53, 30 March 2014

In panel #9, the characters are upside-down and the colors are inverted. Films are produced on negatives, which invert the colors, and are threaded through the projector upside-down (the lens turns the image right-side-up again when projected). This could mean that, instead of merely being in a "non-existent dimension," the characters have gone WAY out of the Matrix and now see themselves to be what they truly are: images on film. (If this was Randall's intention, he might have made it more clear by including the sprocket holes.) Shanek (talk) 12:08, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

Regardless of the lack of sprocket holes, I think this is an excellent insight and I will add it to the explanation. 108.162.219.223 00:41, 11 January 2014 (UTC)

Panels 12-13 could also suggest that Neo can't comply with the "please remove any metallic items" instruction because he has metal balls. Saibot84 (talk) 08:35, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

The opposite of what I replied to Shanek. 108.162.219.223 00:41, 11 January 2014 (UTC)

I wonder if the sequel bit implies of how the entire movie is supposed to make you just accept things as they are no matter how messed up, and people voluntarily ignore the existence of the sequels, which is the exact opposite of the philosophy that the movie encourages.