'The Matrix' Reboot in the Works at Warner Bros | Hacker News Reader

'The Matrix' Reboot in the Works at Warner Bros

hollywoodreporter.com

12 pointsjonbaer14 comments

This is the only movie I will nerd out about, largely because, despite it's flaws, the first one made a big impact on me.

It's pretty well understood that the trilogy was ad-hoc and poorly executed [1], so I'm extremely skeptical about a "reboot" being any kind of good. They also went nuts with all the sub-stories, plots and characters with the animatrix etc... trying to create backstories and a larger universe a la Star Wars - it all felt very contrived.

Not really sure where they would go with a new version either. The finale of the three movies basically was Neo and Agent Smith "rebooting" the system - for the 6th time with no end in sight [2]. So unless they decide to make it that there is a "God like" system, or that they make the universe conscious and cause the big crunch, there isn't much more territory to explore.

[1] http://scifi.stackexchange.com/questions/36898/how-far-in-ad...

[2]https://www.quora.com/Why-did-the-machines-restart-the-Matri...

It doesn't need to be a reboot. Just continue on with the current storyline.

The machines keep their deal with Neo. Humanity grows outside of the Matrix and starts thriving again. Freeborn humans become disillusioned with society start to break into the Matrix, while machines start sneaking out in human bodies.

The machines and humans in power want to stop both things from happening and attempt to curb it in their own ways, which may or may not cause a new war between humans and machines.

It was stupid to make humans be energy sources (because they're not) rather than being a distributed computer as originally envisioned.

However inefficient put enough people in a room and it clearly heats up. It worked for me in the movie. I'm of the opinion that this shouldn't be a reboot but rather the matrix 4 with Keanu and the Wachowskis. Oh well. Even though the second and third movies weren't as good as the first one I love the trilogy and still rewatch it to this day.

But the "hive mind" aspect of the original concept works on so many layers. Not only does it bind together many aspects of the film (especially the out-of-body experiences Neo and Agent Smith), but connects it to the conceptual genesis in the Simulacra and Simulation treatise, as well as to concepts like Richard Dawkins' Memetics.

The Matrix is infinitely more interesting conceptually and thematically from the network-of-minds angle.

My favorite bit of trivia was about 'residual self image'. Originally the character "Switch" was to be a man in one reality and a woman in the other - it is the digital projection of your mental self, after all.

This idea was discarded (I don't remember why), and it's interesting that the Wachowski brothers became the Wachowski sisters.

It would have been so much more philosophically interesting if that part had been left in.

I expect it is because it would take too much time to make it clear for the audience that it is the same character and as far as the cinematic impact it isn't real different than giving them different hair and clothes in the Matrix.

(I'm not arguing about it being an interesting thing to put in the story, just speculating that they didn't think it added enough to the movie)

However inefficient put enough people in a room and it clearly heats up

The "however inefficient" part hints that you might understand why it makes no sense. But it worked for you?

It's not just inefficient. It's negative efficient. You have to add more energy to a human than you can possibly get out of that human.

It's negative efficient.

I'm going out on a limb but ... I think that perhaps the Wachowskis, even though they attended a high school "known for its performing arts and science curriculum", did a lot of daydreaming during their science courses.

I believe the change was requested by the producers.

That's what I've seen reported, and it's consistent with the fact that back story narration aside, the actual depictions throughout the series are more consistent with the reported original intent, that humans are processing nodes, not power sources.

> However inefficient put enough people in a room and it clearly heats up.

It's a whole lot of unnecessary overhead compared to burning the fuel you are feeding the humans to generate energy.

We should harness keystrokes for energy.

> It was stupid to make humans be energy sources (because they're not) rather than being a distributed computer as originally envisioned.

But, aside from description from an unreliable sources spouting what is explicitly revealed to be misleading-on-key-points religious dogma created as part of a system of control by the machines, there's no indication in the film that humans are sources of power in the film, and every indication that they are networked processing units (and even that agents, while they can be hosted in different humans over time, are hosted at specifically a 1:1 ratio on humans; or 1 instance per human once Smith is able to create multiple instances.)

Now, admittedly, in fact the description given was altered to please execs or test audiences (I forget which), but it actually works quite well in context.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com