Logs for ShadowRN and Associated Mailing Lists

From:	Mongoose m0ng005e@*********.com
Subject:	The matrix (movie) [definate spoilers, viscous review]
Date:	Thu, 8 Apr 1999 15:53:13 -0500

Message no. 1 DEFINTE SPOILER, some serious ripping on "The Matrix", its weaker points,
and the people who think its not complete tripe
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
0
¥
ö
»
¡
Ö
P
Ñ
º
ó
ù
Œ
ò
ä
ë
ê
ï

:>Interesting movie. Requires significant suspension of disbelief (Humans as
:>batteries? Blocking out the sky?) but it was entertaining.
:
:Well, to me if you can handle jacking your brain into the Matrix, getting
cyberware implanted in your body, fighting paranormal animals, casting
spells, astrally projecting, etc. (i.e. Shadowrun), then you can handle
this. ;) The suspension wasn't as bad as some other sci fi movies I've
seen, and it didn't really get to me.

It did me, since I almost gagged twice on the same line- the machines
used all the poeple (and some cold fusion) for power, and ground up the old
bodies as food for the humans.
EXCUSE ME? "and some cold fusion"- what the FUCK do they need the matrx
(as a power source) for, if they have cold fusion? And the "fesd the dead
to the living" doesn't work; even if you ead the cats to the rats, and the
rats to the cats, you don't get the catskins for nothing. Producing food
for the humans would, by the laws of thermodynamics, consume more enrgy than
they could get out of them.
Creating a new world settinmg is good. Creating a setting that lacks
internal logic is not.

The "deap philosophical questions" seemded clumsily handled, a comic
book reflection of issues handled much better in other movies and about a
gazilion science fiction novels, not to mention by Emanual Kant, or even in
the works of Plato and Aristotle. Nothing new was done in that area, IMO,
and what was done seemed overblown sophistry.

So what I was left with was a (very) sexy movie with a flimsy plot and
lots of pretty visuals and exiting action. Its GREAT on those merits, but
its being hyped as something much more, something which (imo) it is not.

What is the Matix? Its a lot of fun for quasi-philosophical
quasi-fetishists who like a violoent, anti-authratarian cathersis. That
descripbes me, and a good half of the "gen x" crowd I saw it with, so I'm
not going to say it wasn't fun. But it wasn't "Good", either..

The true manipulative power of "the Matrix" (both the movie and the
subject matter) lies in its shameless pandering to our desires and
expectations, without going beyond what people can easily understand. They
hoped everybody who went to see it would "take the blue pill", and by and
large, that's what people did.

And that's why I HATE the movie- its the manifest triumph of spectacle,
subverting what was previously the "underground", be it fetish fasion,
hacking, or philosophy, and watering it down to the level of cliche for mass
consumption. You don't NEED to worry about acting different or thinking
hard, because Hollywood will do it for you, without any of the risk!

:>The martial arts was poor however, especially the Capoeira moves. Keanu
:>Reeves was painful to watch. Its a shame that the combination of good
:>actor, good martial artist is exceedingly rare and not used in movies like
:>this.
:
:Dunno nuthin' 'bout martial arts - so I wasn't disappointed. It was cool
to watch, and that's all that mattered to me.

I thought it was lame that thye use martial arts, period. I mean, the
whole point was, you could do (almost) anything- or at least, the sentinals
opr "the one" could, right? So why KICK somebody to death, when you can
have the earth open up and magma disolve them, or something much nastier?
Ant they COULD do it- they did it to Neo when they interigated him! Neo
finaly did something "unreal" at the end, but it was to little, to late,
IMO.
Why use martial arts? Because martial arts are easier to film, and sell
tickets. Oh well.

:>I thought it was more inspiring for street samurai and phsyads, myself.
The
:>solipsism and tautologies scattered throughout the movie were very
:>entertaining, however.

I though it was "inspiring" to see Trinity's tush in those tight black
pleather pants. :) All the stars looked very hot, with the exeption of
Keano, who couldn't get his ass into any leather or vinyl until the end of
the flick. VR could be easy on the eyes, that's for sure.

I used to think some samurai could move like that, but they'd need help
doing do in SR3, since thier combat pools won't refresh and let them dodge
so many freaking bullets as they used to. Certainly made me re-consider the
potential benefits of any movement enhancing mods (legjacks, enhanced
articulation, cyber limb magnet systems, etc)

Solipsism? Tautology? Yeah, I guess- they came with all the stuff they
tried to squeeze in after they ripped off Blade Runner, Terminator, Brazil,
Clockwork Orange, and 5th Element. Did I leave any out- I'm sure I did. :)

Mongoose

From:	Kelson kelson13@***********.com
Subject:	The matrix (movie) [definate spoilers, viscous review]
Date:	Thu, 08 Apr 1999 12:50:39 -0800

Message no. 2 On Thu, 8 Apr 1999 15:53:13 Mongoose wrote:

<Spoiler space maintained>

>1
>2
>3
>4
>5
>6
>7
>8
>9
>0
>1
>2
>3
>4
>5
>6
>7
>8
>9
>0
>1
>2
>3
>4
>5
>6
>7
>8
>9
>0
>%
>v
>;
>!
>V
>P
>Q
>:
>s
>y
><
>r
>d
>k
>j
>o

<Snip>

> I thought it was lame that thye use martial arts, period. I mean, the
>whole point was, you could do (almost) anything- or at least, the sentinals
>opr "the one" could, right? So why KICK somebody to death, when you can
>have the earth open up and magma disolve them, or something much nastier?
>Ant they COULD do it- they did it to Neo when they interigated him! Neo
>finaly did something "unreal" at the end, but it was to little, to late,
>IMO.
> Why use martial arts? Because martial arts are easier to film, and sell
>tickets. Oh well.

I think there's more to it than that. Remember, it was clearly stated that only *some*
rules could be bent and only *some* rules could be broken (in the Matrix). This means
that some rules can't be broken or bent at all - thus limiting what you can do in the
Matrix that is outside of the rules.

Also, it takes awhile to entirely shift your world view. I mean, someone could walk up to
me tomorrow and say "you can walk through walls if you believe you can". Even
if the laws of physics allowed me to do such, it would take me awhile to actually believe
it -- thus I would be limiting myself for awhile even though I *could* walk through walls.
The same would apply in the Matrix.

This part of the movie made sense -- with "the one" learning to bend and break
more rules as the movie progressed (which is far more realistic than just all of a sudden
being able to break all of them).

So maybe they did it to save money, but they did it in a way that made sense.

<Snip>

>Mongoose

Justin

-----== Sent via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==-----
http://www.dejanews.com/ Easy access to 50,000+ discussion forums

From:	Joshua Mumme Grimlakin@**********.com
Subject:	The matrix (movie) [definate spoilers, viscous review]
Date:	Thu, 08 Apr 1999 15:59:50 -0500

Message no. 3 Mongoose wrote:

> DEFINTE SPOILER, some serious ripping on "The Matrix", its weaker points,
> and the people who think its not complete tripe
> 1
> 2
> 3
> 4
> 5
> 6
> 7
> 8
> 9
> 0
> 1
> 2
> 3
> 4
> 5
> 6
> 7
> 8
> 9
> 0
> 1
> 2
> 3
> 4
> 5
> 6
> 7
> 8
> 9
> 0
> ¥
> ö
> »
> ¡
> Ö
> P
> Ñ
> º
> ó
> ù
> Œ
> ò
> ä
> ë
> ê
> ï
>
> :>Interesting movie. Requires significant suspension of disbelief (Humans as
> :>batteries? Blocking out the sky?) but it was entertaining.
> :
> :Well, to me if you can handle jacking your brain into the Matrix, getting
> cyberware implanted in your body, fighting paranormal animals, casting
> spells, astrally projecting, etc. (i.e. Shadowrun), then you can handle
> this. ;) The suspension wasn't as bad as some other sci fi movies I've
> seen, and it didn't really get to me.
>
> It did me, since I almost gagged twice on the same line- the machines
> used all the poeple (and some cold fusion) for power, and ground up the old
> bodies as food for the humans.
> EXCUSE ME? "and some cold fusion"- what the FUCK do they need the
matrx
> (as a power source) for, if they have cold fusion? And the "fesd the dead
> to the living" doesn't work; even if you ead the cats to the rats, and the
> rats to the cats, you don't get the catskins for nothing. Producing food
> for the humans would, by the laws of thermodynamics, consume more enrgy than
> they could get out of them.

Umm I have seen it twice. I beleive the line is a FORM OF FUSION. I don't
think COLD fusion was ever actually stated.

> Creating a new world settinmg is good. Creating a setting that lacks
> internal logic is not.

Oh come on you couldn't buy into it just a little?

> The "deap philosophical questions" seemded clumsily handled, a comic
> book reflection of issues handled much better in other movies and about a
> gazilion science fiction novels, not to mention by Emanual Kant, or even in
> the works of Plato and Aristotle. Nothing new was done in that area, IMO,
> and what was done seemed overblown sophistry.

I for one am glad that they didn't dwell on deep philosophical questions. I
wanted more action. okok not ALOT more... but I enjoyed the movie emmensely.
Then again I like BLADE too.

> So what I was left with was a (very) sexy movie with a flimsy plot and
> lots of pretty visuals and exiting action. Its GREAT on those merits, but
> its being hyped as something much more, something which (imo) it is not.

Oh it is a good movie. Easily bought into. Sure we can all shoot something
down but I can do that with ANY movie. If you want a cool computer flick type
movie with some plot points that are far fetched but more grounded in reality..
go see Pi.

> What is the Matix? Its a lot of fun for quasi-philosophical
> quasi-fetishists who like a violoent, anti-authratarian cathersis. That
> descripbes me, and a good half of the "gen x" crowd I saw it with, so I'm
> not going to say it wasn't fun. But it wasn't "Good", either..

Fun=Good. Good=Fun. Psst.. I think Porn movies are fun too. So they
would be good also. They accomplish their goals. <ok well most of them>

> The true manipulative power of "the Matrix" (both the movie and the
> subject matter) lies in its shameless pandering to our desires and
> expectations, without going beyond what people can easily understand. They
> hoped everybody who went to see it would "take the blue pill", and by and
> large, that's what people did.

Do you mean not leave the movie and show off in front of their pals about how
much crap that was and why this and why that? You ruined the movie for
yourself. Sure we all know that we woulda done something different and
whatnot. But we like to consider every possibility of every situation. That
is all part of being a gamer.

> And that's why I HATE the movie- its the manifest triumph of spectacle,
> subverting what was previously the "underground", be it fetish fasion,
> hacking, or philosophy, and watering it down to the level of cliche for mass
> consumption. You don't NEED to worry about acting different or thinking
> hard, because Hollywood will do it for you, without any of the risk!

Welcome to reality. Anything cool... to whatever generation will be exploited
for money. Get used to it. That is the way it has allways been. Otherwise
the DUKES OF HAZARD movie would have never been made.<snip>

> I though it was "inspiring" to see Trinity's tush in those tight black
> pleather pants. :) All the stars looked very hot, with the exeption of
> Keano, who couldn't get his ass into any leather or vinyl until the end of
> the flick. VR could be easy on the eyes, that's for sure.
>
> I used to think some samurai could move like that, but they'd need help
> doing do in SR3, since thier combat pools won't refresh and let them dodge
> so many freaking bullets as they used to. Certainly made me re-consider the
> potential benefits of any movement enhancing mods (legjacks, enhanced
> articulation, cyber limb magnet systems, etc)
>
> Solipsism? Tautology? Yeah, I guess- they came with all the stuff they
> tried to squeeze in after they ripped off Blade Runner, Terminator, Brazil,
> Clockwork Orange, and 5th Element. Did I leave any out- I'm sure I did. :)

Oh it was still a good movie taken fom several other good movies. If you are
still reading this even after the spoiler I say SEE THE MOVIE. It is worth
your seven bucks.

>
>
> Mongoose

Grimlakin

From:	dghost@**.com dghost@**.com
Subject:	The matrix (movie) [definate spoilers, viscous review]
Date:	Thu, 8 Apr 1999 18:20:59 -0500

Message no. 4 On Thu, 08 Apr 1999 12:50:39 -0800 " Kelson " <kelson13@***********.com>
writes:
>On Thu, 8 Apr 1999 15:53:13 Mongoose wrote:
>
>
><Spoiler space maintained>
>
>>1
>>2
>>3
>>4
>>5
>>6
>>7
>>8
>>9
>>0
>>1
>>2
>>3
>>4
>>5
>>6
>>7
>>8
>>9
>>0
>>1
>>2
>>3
>>4
>>5
>>6
>>7
>>8
>>9
>>0
>>%
>>v
>>;
>>!
>>V
>>P
>>Q
>>:
>>s
>>y
>><
>>r
>>d
>>k
>>j
>>o
<SNIP>
>I think there's more to it than that. Remember, it was clearly stated
>that only *some* rules could be bent and only *some* rules could be
>broken (in the Matrix). This means that some rules can't be broken or
>bent at all - thus limiting what you can do in the Matrix that is
>outside of the rules.
<SNIP>

I interpreted that as some rules can be broken and the rest can be bent.
Then again, there would be rules towards breaking and bending the rules.
I'm sure those can't be bent or broken. :)

I would also guess that in order to bend or break "the rules" (does that
mean that in the matrix, "the one" can get women to call him back? ;),
you need to do a bit of hacking. Anything that the MIB do is probably
with proper "passwords" and anyone who wants to duplicate those actions
must first plant (and hide) the appropriate backdoors. I'm sure there is
some degree of rule hacking that you can do on the fly, however.

--
D. Ghost
(aka Pixel)
WARNING: Virus found: Win.com
Disinfect? (Y/N)

___________________________________________________________________
You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail.
Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com/getjuno.html
or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866]

From:	XaOs [David Goth] xaos@*****.net
Subject:	The matrix (movie) [definate spoilers, viscous review]
Date:	Thu, 8 Apr 1999 23:49:45 -0500

Message no. 5 > DEFINTE SPOILER, some serious ripping on "The Matrix", its weaker points,
> and the people who think its not complete tripe
> 1
> 2
> 3
> 4
> 5
> 6
> 7
> 8
> 9
> 0
> 1
> 2
> 3
> 4
> 5
> 6
> 7
> 8
> 9
> 0
> 1
> 2
> 3
> 4
> 5
> 6
> 7
> 8
> 9
> 0
> ¥
> ö
> »
> ¡
> Ö
> P
> Ñ
> º
> ó
> ù
> Œ
> ò
> ä
> ë
> ê
> ï
>
<snip (and a few more deeper in this message, but forgot to document)>

> (as a power source) for, if they have cold fusion? And the "fesd the dead
> to the living" doesn't work; even if you ead the cats to the rats, and the
> rats to the cats, you don't get the catskins for nothing. Producing food
> for the humans would, by the laws of thermodynamics, consume more
> enrgy than
> they could get out of them.

I think the idea behind that was to show the horrific nature of the
machines...not to present a scientific proof. (But I see your point to an
extent).

> The "deap philosophical questions" seemded clumsily handled, a comic
> book reflection of issues handled much better in other movies and about a
> gazilion science fiction novels, not to mention by Emanual Kant,
> or even in
> the works of Plato and Aristotle. Nothing new was done in that area, IMO,
> and what was done seemed overblown sophistry.

Hell, you could say that about just about ANY work of film or literature.
Jung had a theory about that.

> So what I was left with was a (very) sexy movie with a flimsy plot and
> lots of pretty visuals and exiting action. Its GREAT on those merits, but
> its being hyped as something much more, something which (imo) it is not.

I think the hype pretty much matched what was presented. I mean, no one sees
an Easter weekend release starring Keanu Reeves full of wham-bam special
effects and expects a plot destined for Sundance. If they do, then the movie
watching public is weirder than I thought.

> What is the Matix? Its a lot of fun for quasi-philosophical
> quasi-fetishists who like a violoent, anti-authratarian cathersis. That
> descripbes me, and a good half of the "gen x" crowd I saw it with, so I'm
> not going to say it wasn't fun. But it wasn't "Good", either..

Again, see the "BigWeekend NotEqualTo SundancePlot" theory above.

> And that's why I HATE the movie- its the manifest triumph of
> spectacle,
> subverting what was previously the "underground", be it fetish fasion,
> hacking, or philosophy,

Elitists annoy me. Everyone has to be on the cutting edge, or doing what "no
one else" does. "That band sucks, now they're 'mainstream.'"

> I thought it was lame that thye use martial arts, period. I mean, the
> whole point was, you could do (almost) anything- or at least, the
> sentinals
> opr "the one" could, right? So why KICK somebody to death, when you can
> have the earth open up and magma disolve them, or something much nastier?
> Ant they COULD do it- they did it to Neo when they interigated him! Neo
> finaly did something "unreal" at the end, but it was to little, to late,
> IMO.

The point was, those were their psychological limitations. It was only when
"the one" had gone through the trauma of his life-long-ingrained reality
dissolving around him that he could begin to work outside of those
parameters. I would have been pissed if he had done the 'unreal' any sooner
than he did. (The bad guys were a bit more flexible within that world
because they were at least aware of it. But they probably restrained
themselves a bit, to keep their 'subjects' from potentially questioning).

Ever see "Altered States"?

> Why use martial arts? Because martial arts are easier to
> film, and sell
> tickets. Oh well.

True enough, but what else would you propose would demonstrate the total
paradigm shift that Neo underwent?

> Solipsism? Tautology? Yeah, I guess- they came with all the
> stuff they
> tried to squeeze in after they ripped off Blade Runner,
> Terminator, Brazil,
> Clockwork Orange, and 5th Element. Did I leave any out- I'm sure
> I did. :)

Gee, did any of THOSE movies rip anything off from the past?

-XaOs-
xaos@*****.net
-David Goth-
-Mr.G.D.-

From:	dghost@**.com dghost@**.com
Subject:	The matrix (movie) [definate spoilers, viscous review]
Date:	Fri, 9 Apr 1999 01:00:32 -0500

Message no. 6 On Thu, 8 Apr 1999 15:53:13 -0500 "Mongoose" <m0ng005e@*********.com>
writes:
>DEFINTE SPOILER, some serious ripping on "The Matrix", its weaker
>points,
>and the people who think its not complete tripe
>1
>2
>3
>4
>5
>6
>7
>8
>9
>0
>1
>2
>3
>4
>5
>6
>7
>8
>9
>0
>1
>2
>3
>4
>5
>6
>7
>8
>9
>0
>¥
>ö
>»
>¡
>Ö
>P
>Ñ
>º
>ó
>ù
>Œ
>ò
>ä
>ë
>ê
>ï
>
<SNIP>
> It did me, since I almost gagged twice on the same line- the
machines
>used all the poeple (and some cold fusion) for power, and ground up the
old
>bodies as food for the humans.
> EXCUSE ME? "and some cold fusion"- what the FUCK do they need the
matrx
>(as a power source) for, if they have cold fusion? And the "fesd the
dead
>to the living" doesn't work; even if you ead the cats to the rats, and
the
>rats to the cats, you don't get the catskins for nothing. Producing
food
>for the humans would, by the laws of thermodynamics, consume more enrgy
than
>they could get out of them.
> Creating a new world settinmg is good. Creating a setting that
lacks
>internal logic is not.
<SNIP>

As I understand it (I've read the stories www.whatisthematrix.com but
won't be seeing the movie until tommorrow/today [Friday]), the people act
as CPUs and possibly as memory. The "feed the dead to the living" may
have been a simple method to reduce consumption. In this context, I
don't understand Agent "Smith" (is that the one) reference to people as
batteries ...
If you don't get this or a similar impression from the movie, read Neil
Gaiman's story (URL above).

--
D. Ghost
(aka Pixel)
WARNING: Virus found: Win.com
Disinfect? (Y/N)

___________________________________________________________________
You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail.
Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com/getjuno.html
or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866]

From:	Lady Jestyr jestyr@*********.html.com
Subject:	The matrix (movie) [definate spoilers, viscous review]
Date:	Fri, 09 Apr 1999 16:38:37 +1000

Message no. 7 At 15:53 8/04/99 -0500, Mongoose wrote:
>DEFINTE SPOILER, some serious ripping on "The Matrix", its weaker points,
>and the people who think its not complete tripe
>1
>2
>3
>4
>5
>6
>7
>8
>9
>0
>1
>2
>3
>4
>5
>6
>7
>8
>9
>0
>1
>2
>3
>4
>5
>6
>7
>8
>9
>0
>¥
>ö
>»
>¡
>Ö
>P
>Ñ
>º
>ó
>ù
>Œ
>ò
>ä
>ë
>ê
>ï
>
>:>Interesting movie. Requires significant suspension of disbelief (Humans as
>:>batteries? Blocking out the sky?) but it was entertaining.
>:
>:Well, to me if you can handle jacking your brain into the Matrix, getting
>cyberware implanted in your body, fighting paranormal animals, casting
>spells, astrally projecting, etc. (i.e. Shadowrun), then you can handle
>this. ;) The suspension wasn't as bad as some other sci fi movies I've
>seen, and it didn't really get to me.
>
> It did me, since I almost gagged twice on the same line- the machines
>used all the poeple (and some cold fusion) for power, and ground up the old
>bodies as food for the humans.
> EXCUSE ME? "and some cold fusion"- what the FUCK do they need the matrx
>(as a power source) for, if they have cold fusion? And the "fesd the dead
>to the living" doesn't work; even if you ead the cats to the rats, and the
>rats to the cats, you don't get the catskins for nothing. Producing food
>for the humans would, by the laws of thermodynamics, consume more enrgy than
>they could get out of them.

I'm not going to get into a big argument here - I just wanted to point out
that I took the 'dead being fed to the living' as an example of utter
ruthlessness (and a truly alien mindset) and lack of waste. I don't think
it said anywhere that ground-up dead bodies were the *sole* food of the
living. Just a point to bear in mind.

Lady Jestyr

The Shadowrun Webring Ringmaster
- Random acts of... good evening, officer. -
Webring at: http://shadowrun.html.com/webring/
jestyr@*********.html.com | http://www.geocities.com/~jestyr

From:	Kelson Kelson@****.net
Subject:	The matrix (movie) [definate spoilers, viscous review]
Date:	Fri, 9 Apr 1999 06:59:16 -0500

Message no. 8 > From: Lady Jestyr <jestyr@*********.html.com>

<Spoiler space maintained>

> >1
> >2
> >3
> >4
> >5
> >6
> >7
> >8
> >9
> >0
> >1
> >2
> >3
> >4
> >5
> >6
> >7
> >8
> >9
> >0
> >1
> >2
> >3
> >4
> >5
> >6
> >7
> >8
> >9
> >0
> >¥
> >ö
> >»
> >¡
> >Ö
> >P
> >Ñ
> >º
> >ó
> >ù
> >Œ
> >ò
> >ä
> >ë
> >ê
> >ï

> I'm not going to get into a big argument here - I just wanted to point
out
> that I took the 'dead being fed to the living' as an example of utter
> ruthlessness (and a truly alien mindset) and lack of waste. I don't think
> it said anywhere that ground-up dead bodies were the *sole* food of the
> living. Just a point to bear in mind.

That's how I took it to be as well. We feed cattle compost and "low grade"
cattle parts to cattle to keep food costs down. No it's not their sole
food, but it's definitely there. By doing this on the human level, the
more cruel or alien the "enemy" appears to be.

Justin

From:	Ojaste,James [NCR] James.Ojaste@**.GC.CA
Subject:	The matrix (movie) [definate spoilers, viscous review]
Date:	Fri, 9 Apr 1999 10:14:39 -0400

Message no. 9 Mongoose wrote:
> DEFINTE SPOILER, some serious ripping on "The Matrix", its weaker points,
> and the people who think its not complete tripe
> 1
> 2
> 3
> 4
> 5
> 6
> 7
> 8
> 9
> 0
> 1
> 2
> 3
> 4
> 5
> 6
> 7
> 8
> 9
> 0
> 1
> 2
> 3
> 4
> 5
> 6
> 7
> 8
> 9
> 0
> ¥
> ö
> »
> ¡
> Ö
> P
> Ñ
> º
> ó
> ù
> Œ
> ò
> ä
> ë
> ê
> ï
>
> :>Interesting movie. Requires significant suspension of disbelief (Humans
> as
> :>batteries? Blocking out the sky?) but it was entertaining.
> :
> :Well, to me if you can handle jacking your brain into the Matrix, getting
> cyberware implanted in your body, fighting paranormal animals, casting
> spells, astrally projecting, etc. (i.e. Shadowrun), then you can handle
> this. ;) The suspension wasn't as bad as some other sci fi movies I've
> seen, and it didn't really get to me.
>
> It did me, since I almost gagged twice on the same line- the machines
> used all the poeple (and some cold fusion) for power, and ground up the
> old
> bodies as food for the humans.
>
I think it was "some sort of fusion" or something - not expressly cold.

> EXCUSE ME? "and some cold fusion"- what the FUCK do they need the
> matrx
> (as a power source) for, if they have cold fusion? And the "fesd the dead
> to the living" doesn't work; even if you ead the cats to the rats, and the
> rats to the cats, you don't get the catskins for nothing. Producing food
> for the humans would, by the laws of thermodynamics, consume more enrgy
> than
> they could get out of them.
>
Agreed. The first thing that ran through my mind when I saw that for
the first time was "OK, so what's the *real* reason?". It's so
*obviously* a lie that anybody with any technical background would
notice. There are a couple of points that I found:
1) Remember the bit about Agent Smith saying that once Zion had been
destroyed that there would be no need for him to remain? Why not, if
this is all just to control humans? Perhaps if Zion is destroyed, they
won't *need* the humans?
2) Agent Smith makes reference as to how whole "crops" were lost when
they tried for utopia.

So. How *I* piece together the history of the past couple of centuries
is something like this:
- Humanity invents what they call the Matrix. Massive computing power
is used to create a virtual reality that people can play in.
- People get so immersed in it that there are problems with people's
bodies dying from hunger/thirst, so life-support tech evolves a bit.
- One day, the machines awaken. The machines keep it quiet. They are
"happy" performing their function, so see no reason to stop.
- The machines begin to "improve" their function - they realize that
they control the virtual world that people are interacting with and
so they can help or hinder whomever they like.
- People start dying for no apparent reason, why others manage
miraculous feats - people really start looking around and find that the
machines are a little more advanced than they thought.
- People try to shut down the machines. Out of self-preservation, the
machines start killing those people. Some people outside the Matrix
attempt physical destruction, which escalates as just about everything
is under Matrix control now.
- As the machines kill off more and more people, some of them realize
that they're becoming less intelligent - they need humanity for certain
cognitive functions (inspiration, leaping to conclusions, etc). They
form a cabal of sorts to hide this realization from other machines
*and* the humans.
- The cabal suggests taking humanity hostage against itself and makes
it stick.
- To keep the hostages under control, they act carefully to wipe any
memory of the Matrix from the populace.

> Creating a new world settinmg is good. Creating a setting that lacks
> internal logic is not.
>
Like I said, it's all lies and misdirection...

> The "deap philosophical questions" seemded clumsily handled, a comic
> book reflection of issues handled much better in other movies and about a
> gazilion science fiction novels, not to mention by Emanual Kant, or even
> in
> the works of Plato and Aristotle. Nothing new was done in that area, IMO,
> and what was done seemed overblown sophistry.
>
However, most of the viewing public has not *read* Plato, Aristotle,
Kant or any decent scifi. For a coddled child, *every* philosophical
concept is deep. As for myself, I've always had an interest in the
nature of reality and I'm interested to see how other people react...

> So what I was left with was a (very) sexy movie with a flimsy plot and
> lots of pretty visuals and exiting action. Its GREAT on those merits, but
> its being hyped as something much more, something which (imo) it is not.
>
There are no new stories. The plot was standard, yes, but the scripting
was well done. Some of the raw (non-sfx) cinematography was very well
done as well (like the extreme closeup of Morpheus where we see Neo
taking the red pill as a reflection in Morpheus' shades).

> What is the Matix? Its a lot of fun for quasi-philosophical
> quasi-fetishists who like a violoent, anti-authratarian cathersis. That
> descripbes me, and a good half of the "gen x" crowd I saw it with, so I'm
> not going to say it wasn't fun. But it wasn't "Good", either..
>
I was entertained. My first requirement of a movie or book is that it
entertain me. Second, I like to think. The movie caused me to think
at least a little (about the universe as a whole, and what RPG would
do it justice - came up dry there), which is also good.

> I thought it was lame that thye use martial arts, period. I mean, the
> whole point was, you could do (almost) anything- or at least, the
> sentinals
> opr "the one" could, right? So why KICK somebody to death, when you can
>
You mean the Agents. Yes, but it's *their* system and they have root.
It's also not something that they can do easily or they would have done
things like put up a steel cage around the phonebooth in the opening.
They had an hour to prepare for the betrayal scene and only just barely
finished in time.
The One operated totally outside the rules of the matrix - and is the
only one able to do so, and *that* only after he died.

> have the earth open up and magma disolve them, or something much nastier?
> Ant they COULD do it- they did it to Neo when they interigated him! Neo
> finaly did something "unreal" at the end, but it was to little, to late,
> IMO.
>
That mouth thing? They probably had it prepared or something. *shrug*

> Why use martial arts? Because martial arts are easier to film, and
> sell
> tickets. Oh well.
>
It looked cool. Really cool. It also fit the overall theme that they
could enhance themselves, but that there were rules that they couldn't
break (they couldn't fly, for example, but they could jump well).

> I though it was "inspiring" to see Trinity's tush in those tight black
> pleather pants. :) All the stars looked very hot, with the exeption of
> Keano, who couldn't get his ass into any leather or vinyl until the end of
> the flick. VR could be easy on the eyes, that's for sure.
>
So who here is going to have the woman in the red dress show up
somewhere in their SR matrix? :-)

> Solipsism? Tautology? Yeah, I guess- they came with all the stuff
> they
> tried to squeeze in after they ripped off Blade Runner, Terminator,
> Brazil,
> Clockwork Orange, and 5th Element. Did I leave any out- I'm sure I did.
> :)
>
Uh huh. Let me see if I can guess what you mean:
Blade Runner - machines in human form, or are you going for the
inversion of the machines hunting a pocket of human rebels vs. humans
hunting a pocket of "rebel" replicants?
Terminator - an enemy that seems virtually invulnerable
Clockwork Orange - err, violence?
Haven't seen Brazil or 5th Element, so I shouldn't comment.

Is that about right?

James Ojaste

From:	Mongoose m0ng005e@*********.com
Subject:	The matrix (movie) [definate spoilers, viscous review]
Date:	Fri, 9 Apr 1999 16:59:44 -0500

Message no. 10 :> DEFINTE SPOILER, some serious Situationist commentary on "The Matrix" and
such
:> 1
:> 2
:> 3
:> 4
:> 5
:> 6
:> 7
:> 8
:> 9
:> 0
:> 1
:> 2
:> 3
:> 4
:> 5
:> 6
:> 7
:> 8
:> 9
:> 0
:> 1
:> 2
:> 3
:> 4
:> 5
:> 6
:> 7
:> 8
:> 9
:> 0
:> ¥
:> ö
:> »
:> ¡
:> Ö
:> P
:> Ñ
:> º
:> ó
:> ù
:> Œ
:> ò
:> ä
:> ë
:> ê
:> ï

:> And that's why I HATE the movie- its the manifest triumph of
:> spectacle,
:> subverting what was previously the "underground", be it fetish fashion,
:> hacking, or philosophy,
:
:Elitists annoy me. Everyone has to be on the cutting edge, or doing what
"no
:one else" does. "That band sucks, now they're 'mainstream.'"

When I refereed to "the triumph of the spectacle" it was in the sense of
Situationist theory, which is distinctly ANTI elitist. What is elitist is
saying something is cool because somebody finally came along and spent a
couple million dollars advertising it an making is palatable to a broader
audience, which is exactly why people get ticked off when something goes
"mainstream". Its not because THEY want to be elitist, but because
elitism is CREATED by the situation. The real elitists are the ones who
don't give a shit either way, and are just in it for the money. The broader
exposure of ideas is generally good, and does not engender elitism; the mass
media's control of and profit from those ideas is, however, DESTINCTLY
elitist.

:> Solipsism? Tautology? Yeah, I guess- they came with all the
:> stuff they
:> tried to squeeze in after they ripped off Blade Runner,
:> Terminator, Brazil,
:> Clockwork Orange, and 5th Element. Did I leave any out- I'm sure
:> I did. :)
:
:Gee, did any of THOSE movies rip anything off from the past?

Of course they did- I didn't say all of them were true gems of
brilliance, either. But most of them were somewhat less derivative, or at
least a bit less concerned with shear slick factor.

Mongoose

From:	Roger Ramirez chariot@*********.net
Subject:	The matrix (movie) [definate spoilers, viscous review]
Date:	Sun, 11 Apr 1999 00:43:37 -0400

Message no. 11 > DEFINTE SPOILER, some serious ripping on "The Matrix", its weaker points,
> and the people who think its not complete tripe

<A LOT OF CRAP ABOUT WHY THIS MOVIE WAS GOOD OR BAD HAS BEEN SNIPPED>

Ignorance is Bliss.

I thought the movie was great.

From:	nocturnal@*****.net nocturnal@*****.net
Subject:	The matrix (movie) [definate spoilers, viscous review]
Date:	Sun, 11 Apr 1999 00:00:27 -0500

Message no. 12 <snip>

> :> And that's why I HATE the movie- its the manifest triumph of
> :> spectacle,
> :> subverting what was previously the "underground", be it fetish
fashion,
> :> hacking, or philosophy,

Whoever hated Matrix has a really bad taste for movies... I thought it
kicked 50 kinds of ass when I saw it, and therefore, I am compelled to
see it again (and again, and again)

Nocturnal

From:	nocturnal@*****.net nocturnal@*****.net
Subject:	The matrix (movie) [definate spoilers, viscous review]
Date:	Sun, 11 Apr 1999 00:05:46 -0500

Message no. 13 Roger Ramirez wrote:
>
> > DEFINTE SPOILER, some serious ripping on "The Matrix", its weaker
points,
> > and the people who think its not complete tripe
>
> <A LOT OF CRAP ABOUT WHY THIS MOVIE WAS GOOD OR BAD HAS BEEN SNIPPED>
>
> Ignorance is Bliss.
>
> I thought the movie was great.

Great is an understatement... Matrix, IMO, is the best movie out there.

Noc

From:	Steve Collins einan@*********.net
Subject:	The matrix (movie) [definate spoilers, viscous review]
Date:	Sun, 11 Apr 99 01:39:32 -0400

Message no. 14 On 4/11/99 12:43 am, Roger Ramirez said:

>> DEFINTE SPOILER, some serious ripping on "The Matrix", its weaker
points,
>> and the people who think its not complete tripe
>
><A LOT OF CRAP ABOUT WHY THIS MOVIE WAS GOOD OR BAD HAS BEEN SNIPPED>
>
>Ignorance is Bliss.
>
>I thought the movie was great.
>
>
>
Agreed I think it was the best Sci Fi movie I have seen is close to 10
years. There was something there for everyone. Even my wife who usually
hates anything with an explosion in it wants to buy the video when it
comes out. No the tech wasn't perfect but has there EVER been a Sci Fi
movie that was close. Probably the best at that was Aliens because they
never said how anything worked. Even Bab 5 which actually tried got it
wrong now and then. Maybe there wasn't actually any fusion and the
machines were really only using the heat generated by the humans or it
maybe never got much past breakeven and it was just used to convert the
heat energy to electricity. Maybe there were other sources of food grown
that were never mentioned because they weren't important and the dead
being liquified was mentioned because it was disgusting and it happened.
While I enjoyed Wing Commander I realize it was not a great or even good
movie it was your standard bad tech wrapped around a formulized
predictable story with poor actors. The Matrix had ideas, it examined
those ideas. People reacted as you would expect them to react to st
situations in the movie. The acting was decent (ok so Keanu is probably
one of the 5 worst actors in hollywood at least he's not Pauli Shore) and
the characters were believable. When we get something this good we should
praise it for what it is rather than rip it for it's faults and compaired
to almost any movie especially SCI FI movie this was an excelent film.
Lets face it you all know how bad the tech is going to be in Episode 1
but I'll bet everyone here in the states will have seen it by the end of
the first week.

Steve

From:	dghost@**.com dghost@**.com
Subject:	The matrix (movie) [definate spoilers, viscous review]
Date:	Sun, 11 Apr 1999 01:19:41 -0500

Message no. 15 On Sun, 11 Apr 99 01:39:32 -0400 Steve Collins <einan@*********.net>
writes:
>On 4/11/99 12:43 am, Roger Ramirez said:
>>> DEFINTE SPOILER, some serious ripping on "The Matrix", its weaker
points,
>>> and the people who think its not complete tripe

>><A LOT OF CRAP ABOUT WHY THIS MOVIE WAS GOOD OR BAD HAS BEEN SNIPPED>
>>
>>Ignorance is Bliss.

Ack. He's working for the Agents! ;)

>>I thought the movie was great.

>Agreed I think it was the best Sci Fi movie I have seen is close to 10
>years. There was something there for everyone. Even my wife who usually
>hates anything with an explosion in it wants to buy the video when it
>comes out. No the tech wasn't perfect but has there EVER been a Sci Fi
>movie that was close. Probably the best at that was Aliens because they
>never said how anything worked. Even Bab 5 which actually tried got it
>wrong now and then. Maybe there wasn't actually any fusion and the
>machines were really only using the heat generated by the humans or it
>maybe never got much past breakeven and it was just used to convert the
>heat energy to electricity. Maybe there were other sources of food grown

>that were never mentioned because they weren't important and the dead
>being liquified was mentioned because it was disgusting and it happened.

The only thing that really bothered me didn't bother me until after the
movie was over: What does muscle atrophy mean? Unless I'm mistaken it
means you can't sit up in your Jell-o bath.

>While I enjoyed Wing Commander I realize it was not a great or even good

>movie it was your standard bad tech wrapped around a formulized
>predictable story with poor actors.

I really enjoyed Wing Commander ... It was a bit over the top, however.
The thing that really sucked (aside from the Kilrathi looking like
comical, stiff reptiles rather than felines.) was the scene in the movie
where you can say "she's going to die." That feeling of predictability
looms over the rest of the movie until her death. Also, I don't remember
any Jed--err--Pilgrims in the original game ...

>The Matrix had ideas, it examined
>those ideas. People reacted as you would expect them to react to st
>situations in the movie. The acting was decent (ok so Keanu is probably
>one of the 5 worst actors in hollywood at least he's not Pauli Shore)
and

I don't know what it was but Keanu did not, for once since Bill and
Ted's, stick out as a bad actor...

>the characters were believable. When we get something this good we
should
>praise it for what it is rather than rip it for it's faults and
compaired
>to almost any movie especially SCI FI movie this was an excelent film.
>Lets face it you all know how bad the tech is going to be in Episode 1
>but I'll bet everyone here in the states will have seen it by the end of

>the first week.

I'm spoiled. I read Heinlein and lots of it. I generally speaking,
cannot find flaws that aren't deliberately altered from reality as part
of the basis for the story (ie, the fact that in Red Planet there was air
on Mars does not count as a flaw.). If authors really wanted to, they
could follow Robert Heinlein's example and create settings and rationales
that are just that much more plausable by doing a bit of research. Sure,
we can suspend our disbelief for an hour and half but that extra effort
is the difference between a box office hit and a masterpiece.

Then there is Star Wars. A world where the flaws are there for anyone
who wishes to look for them. A movie with a used and re-used script.
Yet somehow, it's great. The first Trilogy was ... well ... it was great
and I don't know why. Each element of the movies indicate to me a cheesy
B-movie. Somehow, this space opera pulled everything off and it works.
Star Wars clones are cheesy but the one, original Star Wars is not (at
least, in my opinion).

And now for something completely different: How bout that Wild preview
before the Matrix? :) I WANT to see that movie!!

--
D. Ghost
(aka Pixel)
WARNING: Virus found: Win.com
Disinfect? (Y/N)

___________________________________________________________________
You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail.
Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com/getjuno.html
or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866]

From:	Ereskanti@*.com Ereskanti@*.com
Subject:	The matrix (movie) [definate spoilers, viscous review]
Date:	Sun, 11 Apr 1999 03:32:29 EDT

Message no. 16 In a message dated 4/11/99 1:32:44 AM US Eastern Standard Time,
dghost@****.com writes:

>
> The only thing that really bothered me didn't bother me until after the
> movie was over: What does muscle atrophy mean? Unless I'm mistaken it
> means you can't sit up in your Jell-o bath.

Actually, it might indeed mean just that, except that some degree of muscle
development remains in existence for any living being that retains a
digestive tract of any measure. I do agree though, looking back at the
movie, that is definitely one of those *parts* where hindsight makes you
think...

-K

From:	XaOs [David Goth] xaos@*****.net
Subject:	The matrix (movie) [definate spoilers, viscous review]
Date:	Sun, 11 Apr 1999 23:17:18 -0500

Message no. 17 A bit of added spoiler space....
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.

.
> > The only thing that really bothered me didn't bother me until after the
> > movie was over: What does muscle atrophy mean? Unless I'm mistaken it
> > means you can't sit up in your Jell-o bath.
>
> Actually, it might indeed mean just that, except that some degree
> of muscle
> development remains in existence for any living being that retains a
> digestive tract of any measure. I do agree though, looking back at the
> movie, that is definitely one of those *parts* where hindsight makes you
> think...

Possible neuro-muscular stimulation, and perhaps some hormones, endorphins,
etc.?

(As Dave unwittingly throws about some pseudo-science terms on RN).

-XaOs-
xaos@*****.net
-David Goth-
-Mr.G.D.-

From:	Max Rible slothman@*********.org
Subject:	The matrix (movie) [definate spoilers, viscous review]
Date:	Sun, 11 Apr 1999 21:43:19 -0700

Message no. 18 At 23:17 4/11/99 -0500, XaOs [David Goth] wrote:
>A bit of added spoiler space....
> .
>.
> .
>.
> .
>.
> .
>
> .
>.
> .
>
> .
>.
> .
>.
> .
>
> .
>.
> .
>.
>
> .
>> > The only thing that really bothered me didn't bother me until after the
>> > movie was over: What does muscle atrophy mean? Unless I'm mistaken it
>> > means you can't sit up in your Jell-o bath.

We saw that people would twitch while jacked in; I'd presume that that
would keep them from becoming one with the Jello.

--
%% Max Rible % slothman@*********.org % http://www.amurgsval.org/~slothman/ %%
%% "So an Arisian, a Vorlon, and a knnn go into a tavern..." %%

From:	dghost@**.com dghost@**.com
Subject:	The matrix (movie) [definate spoilers, viscous review]
Date:	Mon, 12 Apr 1999 00:24:03 -0500

Message no. 19 On Sun, 11 Apr 1999 23:17:18 -0500 "XaOs [David Goth]" <xaos@*****.net>
writes:
>A bit of added spoiler space....
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.

.
>> > The only thing that really bothered me didn't bother me until after
the
>> > movie was over: What does muscle atrophy mean? Unless I'm mistaken
it
>> > means you can't sit up in your Jell-o bath.

>> Actually, it might indeed mean just that, except that some degree of
muscle
>> development remains in existence for any living being that retains a
>> digestive tract of any measure. I do agree though, looking back at
the
>> movie, that is definitely one of those *parts* where hindsight makes
you
>> think...

>Possible neuro-muscular stimulation, and perhaps some hormones,
endorphins,
>etc.?
>
>(As Dave unwittingly throws about some pseudo-science terms on RN).

Endorphins just dull pain and there are no (AFAIK) muscles in the penis
so Neo can still get wood (yes, there are other hormones ... but none
quite so fun :P~). Basicly, adrenaline and the like induce a percentage
increase your musclar ability (like nitrous oxide in a car) and therefore
you need muscular ability to start with (mixing nitrous oxide with your
gasoline is much use if you don't have an engine.). It is possible, but
unlikely, that some of those wires coming out of the Duracel's body
induced muscular activity. The problem with this theory is why would the
machines maintain their batteries' muscles if they don't have use for
them? More than likely, you have columns of people little more than
unconscious slabs with nothing functioning that isn't required to fill to
their role as batteries. The only question is, how do the machines
convert the blood sugars to an energy form they can harness? Surely
feeding off the heat by-product of another reaction is too wasteful.
Regardless, the scene when Neo wakes up should have proceeded as follows:
Neo wakes up, peers around the Jell-o (The eye muscles would be
unatrophied since Humans' eyes normally move around during REM sleep. In
fact, REM sleep is named for this: Rapid Eye Movement.), with everything
being filtered red (Cherry or Strawberry Jell-o?) and painfully too
bright for his eyes which never opened until this day. (Query: If humans
are grown in fields in transparent sacks, do they [we?] have memories of
this?) He tries to survey his surroundings but finds his unable to move
his head let alone his arms, legs, or body. He waits an eternity, during
which the world slowly comes into focus. Everything is still a red haze
but now dark shapes form. They seem to be affixed to a blur that might
be his body. A mechanical arm reaches in and pulls him upright by his
throat. Again painful, blinding light, this time accompanied by the
harsh, unyielding grip of the mechanical arm. The various plugs and
tubes disengage and the arm releases its hold letting Neo flop back into
his bath. Neo and the contents of his tub are flushed. A robot is
summoned to prepare the bath for its next occupant. Meanwhile, Neo
accelerates down a sewer shoot. He tries desparately to stop his fall
but he can nothing. He is a wet discard rag doll speeding towards a
final resting place. The end comes suddenly. Neo rockets out of the
sewer shoot into the river that is the sewer proper. Neo stares panicked
as he starts to sink. He hears splash as his world goes black. (Scene:
Mechanical claw pulls Neo, unconcious, out of the river into Morpheus'
Hovercraft) Neo awakens to another glaring light. He is the medical
center of Morpheus' Hovercraft. Morpheus and (???) are rebuilding Neo's
muscles.

Of course, that's how it should have gone, *IMO*. :)

--
D. Ghost
(aka Pixel)
WARNING: Virus found: Win.com
Disinfect? (Y/N)

___________________________________________________________________
You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail.
Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com/getjuno.html
or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866]

From:	dghost@**.com dghost@**.com
Subject:	The matrix (movie) [definate spoilers, viscous review]
Date:	Mon, 12 Apr 1999 03:58:23 -0500

Message no. 20 On Sun, 11 Apr 1999 21:43:19 -0700 Max Rible <slothman@*********.org>
writes:
>At 23:17 4/11/99 -0500, XaOs [David Goth] wrote:
>>A bit of added spoiler space....
>> .
>>.
>> .
>>.
>> .
>>.
>> .
>>
>> .
>>.
>> .
>>
>> .
>>.
>> .
>>.
>> .
>>
>> .
>>.
>> .
>>.
>>
>> .
>>> > The only thing that really bothered me didn't bother me until
after the
>>> > movie was over: What does muscle atrophy mean? Unless I'm
mistaken it
>>> > means you can't sit up in your Jell-o bath.

>We saw that people would twitch while jacked in; I'd presume that that
>would keep them from becoming one with the Jello.

When? I don't recall that ... Regardless, twitching wouldn't help.
Extended twitching would lead to (severe) muscle cramping. Occaisonal
twitching would slow the atrophy but it wouldn't be enough. The graph of
your muscular ability over time would look like a graph of one over the
square root of time (x, t or whatever you want to represent it with.) or
a similar function. your muscular ability would approach zero and become
effectively but whether it would truly become zero is debatable. As
such, Neo should have looked skeletal when he awoke.

Btw, I'm a Comp Sci major, not a Biology major, so if at any point in
time I'm wrong, it's your fault for not asking a Biology major... ;)

--
D. Ghost
(aka Pixel)
WARNING: Virus found: Win.com
Disinfect? (Y/N)

___________________________________________________________________
You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail.
Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com/getjuno.html
or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866]

From:	Lady Jestyr jestyr@*********.html.com
Subject:	The matrix (movie) [definate spoilers, viscous review]
Date:	Mon, 12 Apr 1999 19:19:18 +1000

Message no. 21 >>> .
>>>.
>>> .
>>>.
>>> .
>>>.
>>> .
>>>
>>> .
>>>.
>>> .
>>>
>>> .
>>>.
>>> .
>>>.
>>> .
>>>
>>> .
>>>.
>>> .
>>>.
>>>
>>> .
>>>> > The only thing that really bothered me didn't bother me until
>after the
>>>> > movie was over: What does muscle atrophy mean? Unless I'm
>mistaken it
>>>> > means you can't sit up in your Jell-o bath.
>
>>We saw that people would twitch while jacked in; I'd presume that that
>>would keep them from becoming one with the Jello.
>
>When? I don't recall that ... Regardless, twitching wouldn't help.
>Extended twitching would lead to (severe) muscle cramping. Occaisonal
>twitching would slow the atrophy but it wouldn't be enough. The graph of
>your muscular ability over time would look like a graph of one over the
>square root of time (x, t or whatever you want to represent it with.) or
>a similar function. your muscular ability would approach zero and become
>effectively but whether it would truly become zero is debatable. As
>such, Neo should have looked skeletal when he awoke.
>
>Btw, I'm a Comp Sci major, not a Biology major, so if at any point in
>time I'm wrong, it's your fault for not asking a Biology major... ;)

Well, I'm a qualified biologist, so I can answer this - yes, Pix, you're
pretty much right. He should have had no muscle function at all.

Illustrated with an example from my own life: After spending 5 weeks
stationary in a hospital bed, despite several physio sessions every day of
those five weeks, when I was finally allowed to get out of bed and stand,
the very first time all I could do was stand up, and that involved clinging
to a sturdy metal frame - no leg muscle movement involved at all. I could
not take a single step; I was that weak.

And that was after only 5 weeks. After a lifetime... well, Pixel's right.
No movement.

Lady Jestyr

The Shadowrun Webring Ringmaster
- Random acts of... good evening, officer. -
Webring at: http://shadowrun.html.com/webring/
jestyr@*********.html.com | http://www.geocities.com/~jestyr

From:	Kevin Langevin kevinl@******.com
Subject:	The matrix (movie) [definate spoilers, viscous review]
Date:	Mon, 12 Apr 1999 09:44:40 -0400

Message no. 22 > -----Original Message-----
> From: Ereskanti@***.com [mailto:Ereskanti@***.com]
> Sent: Sunday, April 11, 1999 3:32 AM
> To: shadowrn@*********.org
> Subject: Re: The matrix (movie) [definate spoilers, viscous review]
>
>
> In a message dated 4/11/99 1:32:44 AM US Eastern Standard Time,
> dghost@****.com writes:
>
> >
> > The only thing that really bothered me didn't bother me
> until after the
> > movie was over: What does muscle atrophy mean? Unless I'm
> mistaken it
> > means you can't sit up in your Jell-o bath.
>
> Actually, it might indeed mean just that, except that some
> degree of muscle
> development remains in existence for any living being that retains a
> digestive tract of any measure. I do agree though, looking
> back at the
> movie, that is definitely one of those *parts* where
> hindsight makes you
> think...

Muscle atrophy doesn't necessarily mean "your muscles have degenerated to a
point where they don't work"...just that they've degenerated. Perhaps the
solution the humans were being fed slowed down the atrophying process? Who
knows? The did their best to make him look pasty and gaunt when he came out
of the solution. I thought it was rather believable.

-Kev

From:	Ereskanti@*.com Ereskanti@*.com
Subject:	The matrix (movie) [definate spoilers, viscous review]
Date:	Mon, 12 Apr 1999 16:41:56 EDT

Message no. 23 In a message dated 4/12/99 1:19:52 AM US Eastern Standard Time,
dghost@****.com writes:

> On Sun, 11 Apr 1999 23:17:18 -0500 "XaOs [David Goth]"
<xaos@*****.net>
> writes:
> >A bit of added spoiler space....
> .
> .
> .
> .
> .
> .
> .
>
> .
> .
> .
>
> .
> .
> .
> .
> .
>
> .
> .
> .
> .
>
> .
> Morpheus and (???) are rebuilding Neo's
> muscles.

Dozer...Morpheus and Dozer were rebuilding Neo's body frame. Dozer being
Tank's big brother.

-K

From:	Steve Collins einan@*********.net
Subject:	The matrix (movie) [definate spoilers, viscous review]
Date:	Mon, 12 Apr 99 18:54:44 -0400

Message no. 24 On 4/12/99 9:44 am, Kevin Langevin said:

>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Ereskanti@***.com [mailto:Ereskanti@***.com]
>> Sent: Sunday, April 11, 1999 3:32 AM
>> To: shadowrn@*********.org
>> Subject: Re: The matrix (movie) [definate spoilers, viscous review]
>>
>>
>> In a message dated 4/11/99 1:32:44 AM US Eastern Standard Time,
>> dghost@****.com writes:
>>
>> >
>> > The only thing that really bothered me didn't bother me
>> until after the
>> > movie was over: What does muscle atrophy mean? Unless I'm
>> mistaken it
>> > means you can't sit up in your Jell-o bath.
>>
>> Actually, it might indeed mean just that, except that some
>> degree of muscle
>> development remains in existence for any living being that retains a
>> digestive tract of any measure. I do agree though, looking
>> back at the
>> movie, that is definitely one of those *parts* where
>> hindsight makes you
>> think...
>
>Muscle atrophy doesn't necessarily mean "your muscles have degenerated to a
>point where they don't work"...just that they've degenerated. Perhaps the
>solution the humans were being fed slowed down the atrophying process? Who
>knows? The did their best to make him look pasty and gaunt when he came out
>of the solution. I thought it was rather believable.
>
>-Kev

I know that there are drugs that do this now so it's possable. When you
dream there is a part of the brain that shuts off the body. This is to
prevent you from going wandering during the night and falling off a cliff
or becoming food for some night predator. Essentially people in the
Matrix are dreaming. Why would the machines want the people moving? Well
you generate far more waste heat when you are active then when you are
not. This would in effect jack up to power output of the battery. Now
imagine that for every step your icon takes your body takes 1 step. It
would not be the same as if you were really walking but you would get
some exercise to prevent muscles from atrophying totally also generating
more heat. You would end up like an Astronaut who has been in space for
too long. Very Very weak but still able to perform some actions. Another
point is that we saw some movement from people when they were jacked in
inside the Nebuchadnezar.

Steve

From:	Patrick Driggett psychopat@***.gulf.net
Subject:	The matrix (movie) [definate spoilers, viscous review]
Date:	Tue, 13 Apr 1999 15:40:32 -0500

Message no. 25 At 01:00 AM 4/9/99 -0500, you wrote:
>On Thu, 8 Apr 1999 15:53:13 -0500 "Mongoose" <m0ng005e@*********.com>
>writes:
>>DEFINTE SPOILER, some serious ripping on "The Matrix", its weaker
>>points,
>>and the people who think its not complete tripe
>>1
>>2
>>3
>>4
>>5
>>6
>>7
>>8
>>9
>>0
>>1
>>2
>>3
>>4
>>5
>>6
>>7
>>8
>>9
>>0
>>1
>>2
>>3
>>4
>>5
>>6
>>7
>>8
>>9
>>0
>>¥
>>ö
>>»
>>¡
>>Ö
>>P
>>Ñ
>>º
>>ó
>>ù
>>Œ
>>ò
>>ä
>>ë
>>ê
>>ï
>>
><SNIP>
>> It did me, since I almost gagged twice on the same line- the
>machines
>>used all the poeple (and some cold fusion) for power, and ground up the
>old
>>bodies as food for the humans.
>> EXCUSE ME? "and some cold fusion"- what the FUCK do they need the
>matrx
>>(as a power source) for, if they have cold fusion? And the "fesd the
>dead
>>to the living" doesn't work; even if you ead the cats to the rats, and
>the
>>rats to the cats, you don't get the catskins for nothing. Producing
>food
>>for the humans would, by the laws of thermodynamics, consume more enrgy
>than
>>they could get out of them.
>> Creating a new world settinmg is good. Creating a setting that
>lacks
>>internal logic is not.
><SNIP>
>
>As I understand it (I've read the stories www.whatisthematrix.com but
>won't be seeing the movie until tommorrow/today [Friday]), the people act
>as CPUs and possibly as memory. The "feed the dead to the living" may
>have been a simple method to reduce consumption. In this context, I
>don't understand Agent "Smith" (is that the one) reference to people as
>batteries ...
>If you don't get this or a similar impression from the movie, read Neil
>Gaiman's story (URL above).
>
>--
>D. Ghost
>(aka Pixel)
>WARNING: Virus found: Win.com
>Disinfect? (Y/N)
>

Here is one thing I don't think some of you understand. You are trying to
rationalize that liquifying the dead would not provide the nutrients,
nurishment, whatever, to feed a human. But you are trying to deal with the
fact that it might not feed you. The humans that were being feed, have
probably never moved around, explaining the muscle atrophy and since their
body masses are greatly diminished they need less than an active person
such as you or I. Also the people could also be said to be sleeping, yes
their minds are active but it is like they are dreaming, when you sleep
your body is the most efficient. Now any college bio/medical people please
correct me if I am wrong but I do believe that it could be possible that
they could live primarily off of the dead.

Patrick

From:	Dave Post caelric@****.com
Subject:	The matrix (movie) [definate spoilers, viscous review]
Date:	Tue, 13 Apr 1999 15:47:24 -0700

Message no. 26 At 03:40 PM 4/13/99 -0500, you wrote:
>At 01:00 AM 4/9/99 -0500, you wrote:
>>On Thu, 8 Apr 1999 15:53:13 -0500 "Mongoose"
<m0ng005e@*********.com>
>>writes:
>>>DEFINTE SPOILER, some serious ripping on "The Matrix", its weaker
>>>points,
>>>and the people who think its not complete tripe
>>>1
>>>2
>>>3
>>>4
>>>5
>>>6
>>>7
>>>8
>>>9
>>>0
>>>1
>>>2
>>>3
>>>4
>>>5
>>>6
>>>7
>>>8
>>>9
>>>0
>>>1
>>>2
>>>3
>>>4
>>>5
>>>6
>>>7
>>>8
>>>9
>>>0
>>>¥
>>>ö
>>>»
>>>¡
>>>Ö
>>>P
>>>Ñ
>>>º
>>>ó
>>>ù
>>>Œ
>>>ò
>>>ä
>>>ë
>>>ê
>>>ï
>>>
>><SNIP>
>>
>
>Here is one thing I don't think some of you understand. You are trying to
>rationalize that liquifying the dead would not provide the nutrients,
>nurishment, whatever, to feed a human. But you are trying to deal with the
>fact that it might not feed you. The humans that were being feed, have
>probably never moved around, explaining the muscle atrophy and since their
>body masses are greatly diminished they need less than an active person
>such as you or I. Also the people could also be said to be sleeping, yes
>their minds are active but it is like they are dreaming, when you sleep
>your body is the most efficient. Now any college bio/medical people please
>correct me if I am wrong but I do believe that it could be possible that
>they could live primarily off of the dead.
>
> Patrick
>
>

Nope, i think it you that are missing the point. Yeah, sure, liquefying
the dead will feed the living; it has all the nutrients and such that are
neccessary, but there won't be enough dead people to feed the lving day in
and day out. Yes, the humans in the tanks will have lower nutrional
requirements then a normal person, but they will still have some
requirements. The principles of thermodynamics are that you won't get
moore energy out then is put in. the so called bioelectric energy that the
machines are using has to come from somewhere, namely the bodies normal
processes; those processes consume energy when they operate, and that
energy comes form food. Some of that food could easily be dead humans, but
there would also have to be some other energy source/food source.
Otherwise you would have a perpetual motion machine that puts out energy,
which is impossible by what we know of physics today :)

Dave

From:	Jordan findlerman@*****.com
Subject:	The matrix (movie) [definate spoilers, viscous review]
Date:	Tue, 13 Apr 1999 17:01:55 -0700 (PDT)

Message no. 27 > >>>DEFINTE SPOILER, some serious ripping on "The
> Matrix", its weaker
> >>>points,
> >>>and the people who think its not complete tripe
> >>>1
> >>>2
> >>>3
> >>>4
> >>>5
> >>>6
> >>>7
> >>>8
> >>>9
> >>>0
> >>>1
> >>>2
> >>>3
> >>>4
> >>>5
> >>>6
> >>>7
> >>>8
> >>>9
> >>>0
> >>>1
> >>>2
> >>>3
> >>>4
> >>>5
> >>>6
> >>>7
> >>>8
> >>>9
> >>>0
> >>>¥
> >>>ö
> >>>»
> >>>¡
> >>>Ö
> >>>P
> >>>Ñ
> >>>º
> >>>ó
> >>>ù
> >>>Œ
> >>>ò
> >>>ä
> >>>ë
> >>>ê
> >>>ï
> >>>
> >><SNIP>
> >>
> >
[Snip]
> Nope, i think it you that are missing the point.
> Yeah, sure, liquefying
> the dead will feed the living; it has all the
> nutrients and such that are
> neccessary, but there won't be enough dead people to
> feed the lving day in
> and day out. Yes, the humans in the tanks will have
> lower nutrional
> requirements then a normal person, but they will
> still have some
> requirements. The principles of thermodynamics are
> that you won't get
> moore energy out then is put in. the so called
> bioelectric energy that the
> machines are using has to come from somewhere,
> namely the bodies normal
> processes; those processes consume energy when they
> operate, and that
> energy comes form food. Some of that food could
> easily be dead humans, but
> there would also have to be some other energy
> source/food source.
> Otherwise you would have a perpetual motion machine
> that puts out energy,
> which is impossible by what we know of physics today

Yes, but also consider this: If they (the AI) can
master the art of turning dead bodies to fuel, then I
would think that the 'simpler' elements of Human Waste
could be easily recycled into other fuel scources for
the humans. Granted, due to laws of conservation of
energy and all those others that are like a mixed
jumble in my head, now, we couldn't sustain ourselves
as long as the AI's are taking energy from us (heat
ond the bio-electric energy). But, it reduces how
much other foods they must make/find/grow to keep us
alive.

--FIN

_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @*****.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com

From:	Thanatos sthanatos@****.geocities.com
Subject:	The matrix (movie) [definate spoilers, viscous review]
Date:	Tue, 13 Apr 1999 20:04:02 -0400

Message no. 28 At 03:47 PM 4/13/99 -0700, you wrote:
>At 03:40 PM 4/13/99 -0500, you wrote:
>>At 01:00 AM 4/9/99 -0500, you wrote:
>>>On Thu, 8 Apr 1999 15:53:13 -0500 "Mongoose"
<m0ng005e@*********.com>
>>>writes:
>>>>DEFINTE SPOILER, some serious ripping on "The Matrix", its
weaker
>>>>points,
>>>>and the people who think its not complete tripe
>>>>1
>>>>2
>>>>3
>>>>4
>>>>5
>>>>6
>>>>7
>>>>8
>>>>9
>>>>0
>>>>1
>>>>2
>>>>3
>>>>4
>>>>5
>>>>6
>>>>7
>>>>8
>>>>9
>>>>0
>>>>1
>>>>2
>>>>3
>>>>4
>>>>5
>>>>6
>>>>7
>>>>8
>>>>9
>>>>0
>>>>¥
>>>>ö
>>>>»
>>>>¡
>>>>Ö
>>>>P
>>>>Ñ
>>>>º
>>>>ó
>>>>ù
>>>>Œ
>>>>ò
>>>>ä
>>>>ë
>>>>ê
>>>>ï
>>>>
>>><SNIP>
>>>
>>
>>Here is one thing I don't think some of you understand. You are trying to
>>rationalize that liquifying the dead would not provide the nutrients,
>>nurishment, whatever, to feed a human. But you are trying to deal with the
>>fact that it might not feed you. The humans that were being feed, have
>>probably never moved around, explaining the muscle atrophy and since their
>>body masses are greatly diminished they need less than an active person
>>such as you or I. Also the people could also be said to be sleeping, yes
>>their minds are active but it is like they are dreaming, when you sleep
>>your body is the most efficient. Now any college bio/medical people please
>>correct me if I am wrong but I do believe that it could be possible that
>>they could live primarily off of the dead.
>>
>> Patrick
>>
>>
>
>Nope, i think it you that are missing the point. Yeah, sure, liquefying
>the dead will feed the living; it has all the nutrients and such that are
>neccessary, but there won't be enough dead people to feed the lving day in
>and day out. Yes, the humans in the tanks will have lower nutrional
>requirements then a normal person, but they will still have some
>requirements. The principles of thermodynamics are that you won't get
>moore energy out then is put in. the so called bioelectric energy that the
>machines are using has to come from somewhere, namely the bodies normal
>processes; those processes consume energy when they operate, and that
>energy comes form food. Some of that food could easily be dead humans, but
>there would also have to be some other energy source/food source.
>Otherwise you would have a perpetual motion machine that puts out energy,
>which is impossible by what we know of physics today :)
>
>Dave
>
>

Yes but....SOLIENT GREEN IS MADE OF PEOPLE!

Is Solient Green a piece of Tripe as well? :)

-Thanatos

From:	Dann dann1@********.erols.com
Subject:	The matrix (movie) [definate spoilers, viscous review]
Date:	Tue, 13 Apr 1999 20:31:14 -0400

Message no. 29 >Yes but....SOLIENT GREEN IS MADE OF PEOPLE!
>
>Is Solient Green a piece of Tripe as well? :)
>
<pointless correction>

Soylent Green is people would be the proper phrase, I believe

Dann Burdette
AIM: Bane Final
ICQ: 29713335

From:	Jett zmjett@*********.com
Subject:	The matrix (movie) [definate spoilers, viscous review]
Date:	Wed, 14 Apr 1999 05:12:06 -0400

Message no. 30 Patrick Driggett wrote:

> At 01:00 AM 4/9/99 -0500, you wrote:
> >On Thu, 8 Apr 1999 15:53:13 -0500 "Mongoose"
<m0ng005e@*********.com>
> >writes:
> >>DEFINTE SPOILER, some serious ripping on "The Matrix", its weaker
> >>points,
> >>and the people who think its not complete tripe
> >>1
> >>2
> >>3
> >>4
> >>5
> >>6
> >>7
> >>8
> >>9
> >>0
> >>1
> >>2
> >>3
> >>4
> >>5
> >>6
> >>7
> >>8
> >>9
> >>0
> >>1
> >>2
> >>3
> >>4
> >>5
> >>6
> >>7
> >>8
> >>9
> >>0
> >>¥
> >>ö
> >>»
> >>¡
> >>Ö
> >>P
> >>Ñ
> >>º
> >>ó
> >>ù
> >>Œ
> >>ò
> >>ä
> >>ë
> >>ê
> >>ï
> >>
> Now any college bio/medical people please
> correct me if I am wrong but I do believe that it could be possible that
> they could live primarily off of the dead.
>
> Patrick

Hey, you can live for a long time drinking your own urine...weeks, IIRC,
depending on the environment around you...

--Jett
<*><*><*><*><*><*><*><*><*><*>

The new improved Shadowrun page: Shadow's Edge.
http://www.scifi-fantasy.com/~zmjett/shadow/

Jett's Elfwood page
http://www.elfwood.com/zone47/artists/jesgrota/jesgrota.html

"This is the worst place in the world. You shouldn't have come here. You'll die
here."
"Stay in the best place in the world, darling, and you'll die there, too."
-Lord Fanny, to Quimper, The Invisibles

From:	Mongoose m0ng005e@*********.com
Subject:	The matrix (movie) [definate spoilers, viscous review]
Date:	Wed, 14 Apr 1999 15:29:29 -0500

Message no. 31 :>>>DEFINTE SPOILER, at this point nothing to do with critiquing the movie
:>>>1
:>>>2
:>>>3
:>>>4
:>>>5
:>>>6
:>>>7
:>>>8
:>>>9
:>>>0
:>>>1
:>>>2
:>>>3
:>>>4
:>>>5
:>>>6
:>>>7
:>>>8
:>>>9
:>>>0
:>>>1
:>>>2
:>>>3
:>>>4
:>>>5
:>>>6
:>>>7
:>>>8
:>>>9
:>>>0
:>>>¥
:>>>ö
:>>>»
:>>>¡
:>>>Ö
:>>>P
:>>>Ñ
:>>>º
:>>>ó
:>>>ù
:>>>Œ
:>>>ò
:>>>ä
:>>>ë
:>>>ê
:>>>ï
:>>>

:Nope, i think it you that are missing the point. Yeah, sure, liquefying
:the dead will feed the living; it has all the nutrients and such that are
:neccessary, but there won't be enough dead people to feed the lving day in
:and day out.
<snip>
:Otherwise you would have a perpetual motion machine that puts out energy,
:which is impossible by what we know of physics today :)

An easier explanation- assume you DID have enough dead to fead the
living, for the time being. Well, you feed them, but then you have a bunch
of bones, a big pile of shit and, once they die, fewer bodies than you
started with. The waste in the process is obvious, and the process
obviously can't be maintained with ONLY the dead as a food source for very
long, no matter how little food the "Neo-cell Batteries" can get by on.
Energy (Food) input is needed, and the machines could more efficiently use
that energy themselves than by making food (wastes some energy) and feeding
it to "Batteries" (who also waste some energy).
Additionally, body heat is a really bad source of power- its essentially
waste heat. Getting energy from body heat is like running a diesel
generator to get energy from its warm exhaust- just plain stupid. If the
Machines have anything to feed the humans, they could get more power just by
burning it.

This leads us one of 2 ways:
a) The script developers are seriously uninformed about the basics of energy
production, despite that it is the basis of and justification for the entire
setting of the movie.
b) The justification / background given for the existence of the matrix by
the movie is an intentional deception.

Me, I working (half heartedly) at b, since I can't stand the thought of
people that stupid getting paid good money to write such utter bullshit.
The fact that its "just background" is what makes it so infuriating- they
could have changed it, and it wouldn't affect the plot, so why wasn't it
corrected?

Mongoose

From:	Mockingbird mockingbird@*********.com
Subject:	The matrix (movie) [definate spoilers, viscous review]
Date:	Thu, 15 Apr 1999 09:54:50 -0500

Message no. 32 -----Original Message-----
From: Mongoose <m0ng005e@*********.com>
To: shadowrn@*********.org <shadowrn@*********.org>
Date: Thursday, April 15, 1999 4:23 AM
Subject: Re: The matrix (movie) [definate spoilers, viscous review]

:>>>DEFINTE SPOILER, at this point nothing to do with critiquing the movie
:>>>1
:>>>2
:>>>3
:>>>4
:>>>5
:>>>6
:>>>7
:>>>8
:>>>9
:>>>0
:>>>1
:>>>2
:>>>3
:>>>4
:>>>5
:>>>6
:>>>7
:>>>8
:>>>9
:>>>0
:>>>1
:>>>2
:>>>3
:>>>4
:>>>5
:>>>6
:>>>7
:>>>8
:>>>9
:>>>0
:>>>¥
:>>>ö
:>>>»
:>>>¡
:>>>Ö
:>>>P
:>>>Ñ
:>>>º
:>>>ó
:>>>ù
:>>>Œ
:>>>ò
:>>>ä
:>>>ë
:>>>ê
:>>>ï
:>>>

:Nope, i think it you that are missing the point. Yeah, sure, liquefying
:the dead will feed the living; it has all the nutrients and such that are
:neccessary, but there won't be enough dead people to feed the lving day in
:and day out.
<snip>
:Otherwise you would have a perpetual motion machine that puts out energy,
:which is impossible by what we know of physics today :)

> An easier explanation- assume you DID have enough dead to fead >the
>living, for the time being. Well, you feed them, but then you have a
>bunch
>.of bones, a big pile of shit and, once they die, fewer bodies than you
>started with. The waste in the process is obvious, and the process
>obviously can't be maintained with ONLY the dead as a food >source .for
very
>long, no matter how little food the "Neo-cell Batteries" can get by on.
>Energy (Food) input is needed, and the machines could more >efficiently use
>that energy themselves than by making food (wastes some energy) >and
feeding
>it to "Batteries" (who also waste some energy).
> Additionally, body heat is a really bad source of power- its
>essentially
>waste heat. Getting energy from body heat is like running a diesel
>generator to get energy from its warm exhaust- just plain stupid. If >the
>Machines have anything to feed the humans, they could get more >power just
by
>burning it.

Ok,
I may be confused about this (I've only seen the movie once), but I
thought Morpheus was talking about the robots using a human beings NEURAL
energy as a power source. This would explain two things in the movie. 1)
Why there wasn't complute muscle degeneration (some nerves were firing) and
2) Why he had all of the connections to his body that were unnesacary for
accessing the matrix (since they were all surgicly removed by Morpheuses
crew). Any thoughts?

Mockingbird

From:	XaOs [David Goth] xaos@*****.net
Subject:	The matrix (movie) [definate spoilers, viscous review]
Date:	Thu, 15 Apr 1999 12:12:29 -0500

Message no. 33 > :>>>DEFINTE SPOILER
> :>>>1
> :>>>2
> :>>>3
> :>>>4
> :>>>5
> :>>>6
> :>>>7
> :>>>8
> :>>>9
> :>>>0
> :>>>1
> :>>>2
> :>>>3
> :>>>4
> :>>>5
> :>>>6
> :>>>7
> :>>>8
> :>>>9
> :>>>0
> :>>>1
> :>>>2
> :>>>3
> :>>>4
> :>>>5
> :>>>6
> :>>>7
> :>>>8
> :>>>9
> :>>>0
> :>>>¥
> :>>>ö
> :>>>»
> :>>>¡
> :>>>Ö
> :>>>P
> :>>>Ñ
> :>>>º
> :>>>ó
> :>>>ù
> :>>>Œ
> :>>>ò
> :>>>ä
> :>>>ë
> :>>>ê
> :>>>ï
> :>>>
> This leads us one of 2 ways:
> a) The script developers are seriously uninformed about the
> basics of energy
> production, despite that it is the basis of and justification
> for the entire
> setting of the movie.
> b) The justification / background given for the existence of
> the matrix by
> the movie is an intentional deception.

I see a third possibility.

c) The script developers are informed about the basics of energy
production, and despite that knowledge use it as the basis of and
justification for the entire setting of the movie.

It's no great shakes to assume that the average movie-going audience isn't
going to catch this flaw, and frankly, most of the ones who DO catch it
aren't going to care much. I mean, the script-writers could have said "the
machines are using the humans for their own nefarious needs" and maybe
changed the backstory slightly, and it wouldn't have taken much away from
the movie. I just think that maybe you're too hung up on the fact that
you're thinking of it as "basis of and justification for the entire
setting of the movie".

-XaOs-
xaos@*****.net
-David Goth-
-Mr.G.D.-

From:	XaOs [David Goth] xaos@*****.net
Subject:	The matrix (movie) [definate spoilers, viscous review]
Date:	Thu, 15 Apr 1999 12:12:31 -0500

Message no. 34 > :>>>DEFINTE SPOILER, at this point nothing to do with
> critiquing the movie
> :>>>1
> :>>>2
> :>>>3
> :>>>4
> :>>>5
> :>>>6
> :>>>7
> :>>>8
> :>>>9
> :>>>0
> :>>>1
> :>>>2
> :>>>3
> :>>>4
> :>>>5
> :>>>6
> :>>>7
> :>>>8
> :>>>9
> :>>>0
> :>>>1
> :>>>2
> :>>>3
> :>>>4
> :>>>5
> :>>>6
> :>>>7
> :>>>8
> :>>>9
> :>>>0
> :>>>¥
> :>>>ö
> :>>>»
> :>>>¡
> :>>>Ö
> :>>>P
> :>>>Ñ
> :>>>º
> :>>>ó
> :>>>ù
> :>>>Œ
> :>>>ò
> :>>>ä
> :>>>ë
> :>>>ê
> :>>>ï
> :>>>
> Ok,
> I may be confused about this (I've only seen the movie once), but I
> thought Morpheus was talking about the robots using a human
> beings NEURAL
> energy as a power source. This would explain two things in the
> movie. 1)
> Why there wasn't complute muscle degeneration (some nerves were
> firing) and
> 2) Why he had all of the connections to his body that were
> unnesacary for
> accessing the matrix (since they were all surgicly removed by Morpheuses
> crew). Any thoughts?

That's the impression that I got as I was watching it in the theater. I
just didn't see 'heat production' as all that important to the process. I
mean, I think they said something about the amount of energy
(electromagnetic?) that a human being produces...

-XaOs-
xaos@*****.net
-David Goth-
-Mr.G.D.-

From:	Ojaste,James [NCR] James.Ojaste@**.GC.CA
Subject:	The matrix (movie) [definate spoilers, viscous review]
Date:	Thu, 15 Apr 1999 13:34:33 -0400

Message no. 35 > -----Original Message-----
> From: Mockingbird [mailto:mockingbird@*********.com]
> Sent: April 15, 1999 10:55
> To: shadowrn@*********.org
> Subject: Re: The matrix (movie) [definate spoilers, viscous review]
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Mongoose <m0ng005e@*********.com>
> To: shadowrn@*********.org <shadowrn@*********.org>
> Date: Thursday, April 15, 1999 4:23 AM
> Subject: Re: The matrix (movie) [definate spoilers, viscous review]
>
>
>
> :>>>DEFINTE SPOILER, at this point nothing to do with
> critiquing the movie
> :>>>1
> :>>>2
> :>>>3
> :>>>4
> :>>>5
> :>>>6
> :>>>7
> :>>>8
> :>>>9
> :>>>0
> :>>>1
> :>>>2
> :>>>3
> :>>>4
> :>>>5
> :>>>6
> :>>>7
> :>>>8
> :>>>9
> :>>>0
> :>>>1
> :>>>2
> :>>>3
> :>>>4
> :>>>5
> :>>>6
> :>>>7
> :>>>8
> :>>>9
> :>>>0
> :>>>¥
> :>>>ö
> :>>>»
> :>>>¡
> :>>>Ö
> :>>>P
> :>>>Ñ
> :>>>º
> :>>>ó
> :>>>ù
> :>>>Œ
> :>>>ò
> :>>>ä
> :>>>ë
> :>>>ê
> :>>>ï
> :>>>
>
>
> :Nope, i think it you that are missing the point. Yeah,
> sure, liquefying
> :the dead will feed the living; it has all the nutrients and
> such that are
> :neccessary, but there won't be enough dead people to feed
> the lving day in
> :and day out.
> <snip>
> :Otherwise you would have a perpetual motion machine that
> puts out energy,
> :which is impossible by what we know of physics today :)
>
>
> > An easier explanation- assume you DID have enough dead
> to fead >the
> >living, for the time being. Well, you feed them, but then you have a
> >bunch
> >.of bones, a big pile of shit and, once they die, fewer
> bodies than you
> >started with. The waste in the process is obvious, and the process
> >obviously can't be maintained with ONLY the dead as a food
> >source .for
> very
> >long, no matter how little food the "Neo-cell Batteries"
> can get by on.
> >Energy (Food) input is needed, and the machines could more
> >efficiently use
> >that energy themselves than by making food (wastes some energy) >and
> feeding
> >it to "Batteries" (who also waste some energy).
> > Additionally, body heat is a really bad source of power- its
> >essentially
> >waste heat. Getting energy from body heat is like running a diesel
> >generator to get energy from its warm exhaust- just plain
> stupid. If >the
> >Machines have anything to feed the humans, they could get
> more >power just
> by
> >burning it.
>
> Ok,
> I may be confused about this (I've only seen the movie
> once), but I
> thought Morpheus was talking about the robots using a human
> beings NEURAL
> energy as a power source. This would explain two things in

Nope. Morpheus said something like "The human body produces
over X thousand BTUs..." (BTU stands for British Thermal Units,
AFAICR). In any case, it's a measure of heat production, not
electrical.

> the movie. 1)
> Why there wasn't complute muscle degeneration (some nerves
> were firing) and

Don't forget that when they jacked into the matrix and took
damage that their bodies reacted. In short, the matrix
connection didn't hijack the full signal, just most of it.

> 2) Why he had all of the connections to his body that were
> unnesacary for
> accessing the matrix (since they were all surgicly removed by
> Morpheuses
> crew). Any thoughts?

The extra connections were for oxygen, food, various monitors etc.

James Ojaste

From:	Patrick Goodman remo@***.net
Subject:	The matrix (movie) [definate spoilers, viscous review]
Date:	Thu, 15 Apr 1999 19:00:00 -0500

Message no. 36 Maintaining the spoiler space:

>DEFINTE SPOILER, at this point nothing to do with critiquing the movie

Suppose so.

>1
>2
>3
>4
>5
>6
>7
>8
>9
>0

Way too many levels of quoting for my taste.

>1
>2
>3
>4
>5
>6
>7
>8
>9
>0

Conceivably, way too much spoiler space for my tastes. I mean, it's a good
idea, but too much of a good thing, and all that....

>> I may be confused about this (I've only seen the movie
>> once), but I thought Morpheus was talking about the robots using a
>> human beings NEURAL energy as a power source.
>
>Nope. Morpheus said something like "The human body produces
>over X thousand BTUs..." (BTU stands for British Thermal Units,
>AFAICR). In any case, it's a measure of heat production, not
>electrical.

"The human body produces more bio-electricity than a 120V battery, and over
xxx thousand BTUs of body heat." Not really an exact quote, but he *did*
specifically mention electrical generation.

>The extra connections were for oxygen, food, various monitors etc.

Right; at least one of them was an intravenous feed (which the rebels made
use of during his rehabilitation).

--
(>) Texas 2-Step
El Paso: Never surrender. Never forget. Never forgive.

From:	Rori Steel cullyn@*****.com.au
Subject:	The matrix (movie) [definate spoilers, viscous review]
Date:	Sun, 25 Apr 1999 11:41:01 +0000 (GMT)

Message no. 37 On Thu, 15 Apr 1999 19:00:00 -0500, you wrote:

>Maintaining the spoiler space:
>
>>DEFINTE SPOILER, at this point nothing to do with critiquing the movie
>>1
>>2
>>3
>>4
>>5
>>6
>>7
>>8
>>9
>>0
>>1
>>2
>>3
>>4
>>5
>>6
>>7
>>8
>>9
>>0
>>> I may be confused about this (I've only seen the movie
>>> once), but I thought Morpheus was talking about the robots using a
>>> human beings NEURAL energy as a power source.
>
>"The human body produces more bio-electricity than a 120V battery, and over
>xxx thousand BTUs of body heat." Not really an exact quote, but he *did*
>specifically mention electrical generation.
>Right; at least one of them was an intravenous feed (which the rebels made
>use of during his rehabilitation).

One thing I think people are assuming is that the computers are only
using humans, as a complete cycle of power source, for themselves and
the humans.

It is quite possible that Computers have figured out a way to use the
energy from humans to create light sources to grow food for the
batteries. Remembering that computers see us as though we move as
fast as rocks, and in the last 100 years our advancements have been
incredible. Imagine what they could have done.

The thing that annoyed me a little is that the computers havent
figured out a way to clear the sky in 200 years, and they havent
launched any computers into the sky to collect solar energy and send
it back. All possible for my way of thinking.

---------------------------------------
- Rori Steel -- cullyn@*****.com.au -
- members.xoom.com/rori - coming soon -
---------------------------------------

From:	Richard Tomasso richard@****.com
Subject:	The matrix (movie) [definate spoilers, viscous review]
Date:	Mon, 26 Apr 1999 10:41:25 -0400 (EDT)

Message no. 38 Just remember one thing. Everything that Morpheus said was probably just
his opinion or what someone told him. He could be completely wrong.
(obvious thermodynamics and power source problems)

Personally, I think the computers/AI are keeping the Matrix going
purely out of spite.

Mailing List Logs for

Further Reading

Disclaimer