The Matrix is a Trans Allegory now

[BridgeConsoleMasher]

It's a shit movie and the sequels are more shitty.

It got a 99% on Rotten Tomatoes.

Anyways you'd have to not watch the movie to not see a significant reflection there.

[CharlesPhipps]

Eh, better than the bullshit about it being a misogynist parable.

The W. Sisters are probably just trying to reclaim their creation.

[BridgeConsoleMasher]

I don't understand what it is that's different now?

Allegory is already a pretty loose or broad term. They don't have to be precise metaphors necessarily, just consistent in its organicism.

[McAvoy]

I can see it. They did that have that minor character who was supposed to be two different genders in the movie but that got nixed. I wonder if the original idea for Switch was kept if they were going to still kill the character.

I think the question really is for people is whether this Allegory was planned/though of from the beginning or is this something that was thought up later on when the W Brothers became the W Sisters.

That we don't know.

Me, personally I don't care. I am not one of those types of people who analyze the shit out of movies to find deeper meaning. The Matrix is a fun movie.

[TGLS]

I dunno. Reading through the twitter thread linked in the CNN article, some things felt like reaches (i.e. Zooming in on "SYSTEM FAIL" at the end), while others seem clever and subtle (i.e. Mr. Anderson as deadname). Either way, the critical struggle continues...

[BridgeConsoleMasher]

I think the question really is for people is whether this Allegory was planned/though of from the beginning or is this something that was thought up later on when the W Brothers became the W Sisters.

But considering the story was conceived and directed by two trans women, why would there really be any skepticism that the story wasn't about that on some innate level?

[GreyICE]

I think the question really is for people is whether this Allegory was planned/though of from the beginning or is this something that was thought up later on when the W Brothers became the W Sisters.

But considering the story was conceived and directed by two trans women, why would there really be any skepticism that the story wasn't about that on some innate level?

Honestly? I think it's a combination of three things.

1) "I'm way too smart to have missed that!" The school of nerdism that insists they know absolutely everything about absolutely everything. If they missed it... it must not actually be there! The only possible explanation! We all know these people, and we all typically learn to minimize contact with them. Sadly the internet being what it is, we can't socially behavior correct or just stop inviting them the way we do in real life. They're not really bigoted except in all the ways they usually are, which is to say that they're generally fuckwits to everyone, but most especially to women.

2) "Trans people are brand new." These people just ignorantly thing trans people came into existence about 10 years ago. Ignoring that trans people have been documented by medical science for 80 years, and in less scientific term for millennia, they only heard about trans people recently, and the only possible explanation is that it's brand new and anything that says otherwise is revisionist history! This is a variant of the above - they'll generally admit they might not know everything, but they'll certainly argue that they know something about everything important. These are also the sorts that have the most incredibly stupid "cures" for transgender people, like "lets give trans women more testosterone!" or "antidepressants!" As if doctors have never ever thought to try these incredibly obvious ideas (but then again, I guess they think that gender nonconformity is new, so doctors have never tried the obvious stuff to "cure" it...)

3) "This is white genocide from Social Justice Warriors!". These people don't actually give a flying fuck if it's a metaphor for a transgender experience. They're not interested in evidence or narrative. They're just interested in othering transgender people as much as possible and destroying any conversations that might cause non-trans people to have empathy with trans people. These people are just looking to make the discussion as disgusting and uncomfortable for non-shitheads as they can possibly make it. They're obvious bigots, and they don't really care about facts. So they're not even interested in discussing the movie, and you can expect a bunch of random bullshit in their posts.


You can take your pick which is which. Personally I think we have great examples of all three here, certainly 1 and 3.

[BridgeConsoleMasher]

I think the question really is for people is whether this Allegory was planned/though of from the beginning or is this something that was thought up later on when the W Brothers became the W Sisters.

But considering the story was conceived and directed by two trans women, why would there really be any skepticism that the story wasn't about that on some innate level?

Honestly? I think it's a combination of three things.

1) "I'm way too smart to have missed that!" The school of nerdism that insists they know absolutely everything about absolutely everything. If they missed it... it must not actually be there! The only possible explanation! We all know these people, and we all typically learn to minimize contact with them. Sadly the internet being what it is, we can't socially behavior correct or just stop inviting them the way we do in real life. They're not really bigoted except in all the ways they usually are, which is to say that they're generally fuckwits to everyone, but most especially to women.

2) "Trans people are brand new." These people just ignorantly thing trans people came into existence about 10 years ago. Ignoring that trans people have been documented by medical science for 80 years, and in less scientific term for millennia, they only heard about trans people recently, and the only possible explanation is that it's brand new and anything that says otherwise is revisionist history! This is a variant of the above - they'll generally admit they might not know everything, but they'll certainly argue that they know something about everything important. These are also the sorts that have the most incredibly stupid "cures" for transgender people, like "lets give trans women more testosterone!" or "antidepressants!" As if doctors have never ever thought to try these incredibly obvious ideas (but then again, I guess they think that gender nonconformity is new, so doctors have never tried the obvious stuff to "cure" it...)

3) "This is white genocide from Social Justice Warriors!". These people don't actually give a flying fuck if it's a metaphor for a transgender experience. They're not interested in evidence or narrative. They're just interested in othering transgender people as much as possible and destroying any conversations that might cause non-trans people to have empathy with trans people. These people are just looking to make the discussion as disgusting and uncomfortable for non-shitheads as they can possibly make it. They're obvious bigots, and they don't really care about facts. So they're not even interested in discussing the movie, and you can expect a bunch of random bullshit in their posts.


You can take your pick which is which. Personally I think we have great examples of all three here, certainly 1 and 3.

Oh. Well is the movie shitty like Fuzzy said it is?

I thought it was pretty good.

[GreyICE]

Oh. Well is the movie shitty like Fuzzy said it is?

I thought it was pretty good.

Personally I think it's a fantastic movie that managed to create many movie-making techniques, has amazing action scenes, and an incredibly economy of scenes that just works. Even today I can only point to one scene I really dislike, and that one was added due to studio meddling. Everything else is fantastic. Trinity's chase scene across the rooftops was a masterclass, and that scene has been copied many, many times (remember James Bond's day of the dead parade chase? Yeah, it traces its DNA back to that one scene). The Lobby scene is rightfully raved about, but you could probably pick out five or six action sequences that are masterclasses in camerawork, communication to the audience, and tracking motion. Just think of how much actually happens in their action sequences, how much of it is "sci fi", and look at how little of it is confusing. Marvel movies could learn a hell of a lot from that, they've got a lot of action scenes that just devolve into "shit is happening, boom".

Outside of the sheer art of making a movie, I think it's an interesting plot. I think the philosophy is a bit shallow, but it's a 2 hour sci-fi action movie, so... yeah? It tends to be. Kant it's not.

Just overall a great film. I think it holds up 20 years later, and in another 20 years will still hold up. I'd compare it to Terminator 2 - some parts of it have aged, but it's just so damn good.

[BridgeConsoleMasher]

Oh. Well is the movie shitty like Fuzzy said it is?

I thought it was pretty good.

Personally I think it's a fantastic movie that managed to create many movie-making techniques, has amazing action scenes, and an incredibly economy of scenes that just works. Even today I can only point to one scene I really dislike, and that one was added due to studio meddling. Everything else is fantastic. Trinity's chase scene across the rooftops was a masterclass, and that scene has been copied many, many times (remember James Bond's day of the dead parade chase? Yeah, it traces its DNA back to that one scene). The Lobby scene is rightfully raved about, but you could probably pick out five or six action sequences that are masterclasses in camerawork, communication to the audience, and tracking motion. Just think of how much actually happens in their action sequences, how much of it is "sci fi", and look at how little of it is confusing. Marvel movies could learn a hell of a lot from that, they've got a lot of action scenes that just devolve into "shit is happening, boom".

Outside of the sheer art of making a movie, I think it's an interesting plot. I think the philosophy is a bit shallow, but it's a 2 hour sci-fi action movie, so... yeah? It tends to be. Kant it's not.

Just overall a great film. I think it holds up 20 years later, and in another 20 years will still hold up. I'd compare it to Terminator 2 - some parts of it have aged, but it's just so damn good.

It's funny, Wisecrack's team spent about an hour discussing the movie in terms of anything nerdy that they usually do in their videos and each person took to either the filming, the story, or the philosophy. I personally understood each appeal to pretty good detail as far as any disputes came up.

They could have gone in the direction of Star Trek with it I think.