Zen, Christianity, and holes the size of Kansas

Rating: 6/10 (10 April 1999)

I went into the movie with several preconceptions, but I was surprised. I was astonished both by the thought that was put into the plot, and the lack of thought that was put into the theory. The combination of the second coming of Christ and Zen Buddhism was nifty, but one would have to leave their logic in the car outside if they are going to follow the plot without gasping for coherence. I thought that Keanu did a fine job, acting the less like Bill S. Preston Esq. than ever, but it was a bit telling when the entire theater laughed at his attempt to look stylish while fighting; he isn't a martial artist.
The major holes in the plot may pass by some people, which may be a good thing, but I think that in a movie which tries to present a possible future, challenging the mind of the patron, it is sad when there are such problems in the actual presentation. There was a definite lack of continuity in thought that left me feeling insulted, as if the producers thought that I would not notice that nothing fit together. I think that if the movie was written and presented to a publisher, they would get rejected because of the lack of thoroughness.
But wow, there were a lot of scenes that just amazed me. I was captured.
It has a good story line with poor world design, a great presentation, and lots of eye candy.
I kind of hope that people could look past the problems, but I also would be saddened if people didn't see the big logical errors. It would mean that people don't think about and thus can't learn from movies. If they don't get the problems with the movie, they probably don't get the point of it either.