A highly flawed motion picture--the devil is in the details.

Rating: Null/10 (26 June 2003)

The original Matrix owed its freshness and originality, in large measure, to a basic retelling of themes of recalcitrant heroism, spiritual struggle, and ancient-academy butt-whomping, retold within a new-school rubric of cyber-fiction, anime, and groundbreaking visual effects. It was a simple picture, despite its stylistic trappings, with a very simple theme (which resounds in the western cinema from "Shane" to "Star Wars" to "L.O.T.R.") about the Orphean/Christian journey of the hero, who voluntarily journeys into hell to give a boon to the world. "The Matrix" was a remarkably straightforward tale, complete in itself; even though the Wachowski Bros. left plenty of room at the end for a sequel, and left the audience tantalized and wanting to know more, we really didn't need to, because we knew Neo had won the battle for us.
But we still want to know more, right? We want details about not only the future of the story--how close do the machines get to conquering humanity, and our heroes on the "Nebuchadnezzar"-- but about the present--life in Zion, and so forth. There's the rub: The Matrix's creators need to trump their original creation in the details is what makes "Matrix Reloaded" an inferior film compared to the sequel. Did we really need a 10 minute MTV Spring Break in the cave to celebrate Morpheus' upcoming Armageddon with the machines, in order to paint a picture of life in Zion? Even the machines have their own dramas amongst each other that we biologicals just don't need to know a great deal about. This is us vs. them, right?
The details though, aren't entirely without merit. Morpheus' switch from simple prophet to zealot was enlightening, and we did need to understand more about the Oracle's role (sadly punctuated by a interminably laughable fight scene with 1001 otherwise flawless Hugo Weavings) with the Matrix Creator (God?? Satan?? your PHI 325 prof??), if this film were to have any meaning at all. It's not so much what details were thrown at us that makes this film inferior, as how all of the details were thrown at us at once, without regard for editing. You could have completely edited out Jada-Pinkett Smith, for instance, and still given her a supporting credit without really noticing her character was gone. As usual.
As the film progressed, I found myself sorely wanting the smooth consistency and integration of all of the elements that made the original such an instant classic. What I found was a studio franchise. This was not even a decent transitional sequel, as was SW Empire Strikes Back. The fight scenes, instead of being awe-inspiring, were largely superfluous; the philosophic elements were overwhelming rather than digestable. Where was the editor??
Just like, say, A. C. Clarke's novel follow-up to Kubrick's "2001" should never be read, this movie should never be seen by those devotees of the original "Matrix" for precicely the same reason: this sequel gives away too much, and has no regard for the audience's ability to participate creatively. It's hard to believe this was created by the same people responsible for the original.