The Sociology of The Matrix: Nostalgia, Rationalization, and the Hyperreality of The Wachowskis' Magnum Opus

 

Author’s Note: This paper’s focus, interpretation of theoretical concepts, and their implications to The Matrix franchise, is only one of many ways these texts can be interpreted. It in no way claims to be a definitive or universally valid approach. The author encourages other Sociologists, media scholars, and those in interdisciplinary studies who are interested in the analysis of The Matrix properties; to research, write, and publicly provide their own analysis if they haven’t done so already.  If you need a brief explanation of bolded terms look at the Glossary at the end of the essay.

 

INTRODUCTION

The Matrix franchise is a socio-cultural phenomenon. Upon the release of the first film, The Matrix in 1999, The Wachowski’s both transformed and reflected the cultural zeitgeist of the late 90’s. The film revolutionized filmmaking, ignited fashion, and introduced individuals into a basic understanding of philosophical concepts that had beneficial and detrimental effects on culture. The impact of the first film was so immense, that it set a bar that the subsequent films in the franchise could not clear in the eyes of the public majority. Even with another attempt at clarification, in the form of 2021’s The Matrix Resurrections, most people are not embracing the complete story the way they had the first chapter in the saga.  This essay is an attempt to analyze the cultural and social impact of The Matrix Franchise through The Sociological perspective. By invoking Sociologists and their specific theories, this essay will interrogate the bifurcated obsession and revulsion that seems to be invoked whenever the franchise is brought up in public discourse. Additionally, this essay will present the ways in which the fourth film in the franchise clarifies the socio-political messages of the films as a whole and rebukes their popularized public perception as being both misguided and shallow.

 

PLOT

The Matrix franchise is set in a dystopian future where the last of humanity are grown to be batteries for advanced artificial intelligence. The machines siphon the body’s energy while maintaining human passivity by plugging them into a “virtual simulated dream world” called “The Matrix”.  The First three films in the franchise revolve around the identification of “The One”: a human able to manipulate the matrix itself, his subsequent freedom, and humanity’s fight for peace against the machines. The fourth film, set 60 years after the end of the third film, identifies the impact of the brokered peace “The One” negotiated, offset by the complexities of a co-existent symbiosis between humans and machines.   

 

PRODUCTION

By looking at select parts of the production of each film, and the expanded multi-media franchise, we can better understand and begin to unpack the films’ importance in shaping (and simultaneously being influenced by) the cultural Zeitgeist of the historical period in which it exists.

            Timeline

Coming off their success of Bound (1996), The Wachowski’s used their current cultural capital to pen and helm The Matrix. From the very beginning, the Wachowski’s had a very philosophically dense and ambitious project in mind. Before the actors were allowed to read the script, the Wachowskis required them to read Jean Baudrillard’s Simulacra and Simulations. While not fully on board at the jump, Warner Bros executives were given a 600-page story board of the entire first script, and the opening 10 minutes of the first film during its principal photography. Upon viewing the footage and the storyboards, executives gave full support to the film’s production. After The Matrix’s initial success, the studio quickly greenlit two sequels, released in 2003.

During this time, the Wachowski’s became trailblazers of corporate synergistic media marketing when they released The Animatrix and Enter the Matrix. The former being an animated anthology of short stories which gave more background and context to the world of the Matrix, including character motivations and crucial plot information needed in the sequels. The latter was a video game; taking place during one of the live action films and featuring a playable character that is introduced in live action during the second film. Now, 20 years later, a lot of big budget “tentpole” films have multi-media tie ins: comic books, board games, video games, books etc. to create an all-consuming immersive experience, and has become standard practice.

The Matrix’s cross media immersive experience was designed to increase the anticipation for the sequel films (Reloaded and Revolutions), which the studio allowed the Wachowskis to make simultaneously[1] (a practice pioneered successfully by Lord of the Rings)[2] and release them approx. 6 months apart. At first glance, this may seem foolish as you could have more time to build anticipation if the studio waited 1 to 3 years for “the final installment”. Yet, this decision becomes clearer upon reflection, especially when you watch these two films back-to-back, and you realize they are a single story. Again, it is important to separate them, because on the surface, no one is going to sit through a 5-hr. film in the theater[3]. The problem was not in the splitting of the story into two films, but in where they split them. At their current separation point, it is in the third act of the overall story structure. Neo just needs to be found by Trinity and face Smith, Morpheus needs to get to Zion, and Zion needs to defend itself against the machines; that’s it. Both films become far more compelling (without changing the edit that the Wachowskis already approved) if you just shift the climax of Reloaded to end when Neo goes through the door. This creates the tension of not knowing what Neo is going to find. Meanwhile, Trinity is fighting agents and you don’t know if she will survive, and Smith is a virulent program controlling the Matrix. By having the conversation with the architect at the beginning of the third film, Neo making a different choice than his predecessors, is now part of the titular Revolutions encompassed in the film. This shift does not fix a lot of the problems in the third film, but like “The Machete” watching order of the Star Wars films, it makes the rewatch a better experience.            

Due to the overall lukewarm to frigid reception of these sequels by the public, both the studio and the creators were unwilling to continue the story. Lilly Wachowski, stating in an interview in 2011, that [returning to The Matrix] "[was] a particularly repelling idea in these times" when studios preferred to green-light sequels, reboots, and adaptations over original material (Lang 2015). While in 2015, Lana acknowledged that they were outside the loop in Hollywood, and that there might be a reboot happening, but it was likely they were going to be replaced (Winetraub 2015). Also, The Wachowski’s gave their blessing for other creators to continue the story. This is what allowed The Matrix Online game to be considered cannon for a time. Yet, this was later retconned with the release of the fourth film in 2021, The Matrix Resurrections; an unexpected and beautiful love story; born out of the tragedy of Lana Wachowski losing her parents and one of her friends in a single year.  Wachowski felt that while she couldn't have her parents back, she could at least bring back Neo and Trinity; feeling very comforted to see them alive again (Romano 2021).  Unfortunately, because of the continuing COVID-19 pandemic (now with a more contagious variant, Omicron) and the WB deal with HBOMAX to release the film on their streaming platform same day and date, the box office for The Matrix Resurrections was next to nothing, undercutting the film and evaporating any chances in continuing the story.[4]

Cinematography

            The first three films in the franchise were photographed by Bill Pope, with visual effects by John Gaeta. The visual effects of these films were highly praised for their invention of “Bullet Time”; a filmmaking technique where the position of the camera is able to move within a shot, rotating that image while the action is being played out in slow motion.  Additionally, the cinematography of the first film consciously made a distinction in cinematic language between “the real world” and “The Matrix”. The shots in “the real world” were undersaturated, while the world of the matrix” was enveloped in a computerized green hue, reminiscent of the encrypted “digital rain” that opened the films. This color became so iconic that it was eventually known as “Matrix green”.  Ironically, this green tint wasn’t the initial visual language to connote the difference between the matrix and the real world. This only became apparent in the sequels as the color pallet changed from the blue/grey of the first film, to the greens and blacks of the second and third films. It wasn’t until the Blu-ray release(s), and subsequent streaming, where the uniform green color was added to the original film for continuity. 

            For the return to the Matrix in 2021’s Resurrections, Jon Toll was set to be behind the camera. However, once the production resumed in November 2020 after the COVID-19 lockdown of March 2020, Jon Toll opted not to return. Lana Wachowski then turned to camera operator, and frequent collaborator, Daniele Massaccesi who could shoot the film with a more eclectic spontaneity and a greater emphasis on natural light than the previous films, to convey the warmth and love between Neo and Trinity (Hemphill 2021).

           Fight Choreography

Because the Wachowskis are fans of Hong Kong cinema, particularly Shaw bros films, they wanted to make The Matrix, and its first two sequels, embody the flavor of the Kung Fu films of the 1970’s; particularly those of Bruce Lee and Jackie Chan. To achieve this, they hired legendary fight choreographer, stunt coordinator, and director Yuen Woo Ping. The Matrix became Yuen’s first film outside of China and introduced his signature “wire fu”; a style of martial arts choreography (particularly Kung fu) to western audiences. This “wire fu” style is a combination of the typical Peking Opera approach to Wu Shu (found in a lot of Chinese films) coupled with the use of wires in order to make the characters in the film look like they can defy gravity, even fly.[5] This featured style was important to the filmmakers, as it signifies ways in which the boundaries of the matrix could be broken by someone who has been “freed”.

On The Matrix, Yuen had all the principal actors begin fight training for several months prior to the beginning of filming, to get comfortable with the choreography and wire work. The training eventually paid off, with several fight sequences and wire work being heavily praised as revolutionary: with one of the most famous sequences in the original film, the dojo fight between Morpheus and Neo, becoming culturally iconic in the genre. Yet, sociologically, this feeling of revolutionary transformation is coming from a place of culture shock and ethnocentrism. A lot of the Hong Kong films of the 1970’s used “Wire Fu” (look at Wuxia films of King Hu: Dragon Inn, or A Touch of Zen), yet they did not get a wide release, or universal acclaim until much later. Thus, the culture shock the western filmmaking industry experienced in 1999 with the release of The Matrix, was due to it being the first exposure many filmgoers had to this style of action photography. This ethnocentric ignorance unfortunately led to Yuen and the Wachowski’s being unfairly labeled trailblazers and trend setters for their action choreography, when all they did was bring something to the attention of the American public that had been used for decades internationally. Secondarily, this newfound action focus, resulted in several films using this same action style; whether they be appropriate period pieces like Ang Lee’s Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon; or Zhang Yimou’s House of Flying Daggers and Hero, to many western American productions of the early 2000’s, such as Charlie’s Angels (2000), Kill Bill Vol 1+2 and of course The Matrix sequels. The practice of “wire fu” became fully adopted and incorporated into the American film culture by 2005, allowing a lot of actors and stunt performers to achieve actions and movements beyond their physical capabilities (Shohini 2005). 

While this standardization (and eventual oversaturation) did not negatively impact the reception of The Matrix, it did impact the sequels, especially Resurrections. By their release in the Spring and Fall of 2003, Reloaded and Revolutions were released into an ether that had already oversaturated the public’s appetite for this style of action. Instead, in the interim between the original Matrix and Reloaded, the public attention and hunger had shifted to a more frenetic action style showcased in 2002’s The Bourne Identity, which continued all the way through Daniel Craig’s time as James Bond. Additionally, the 2003 subsequent sequels to The Matrix had less martial arts choreography than the first film; instead relying on a lot of visual and special effects to represent powers both programs and humans possess in the matrix. This is best exemplified by the fight choreography in The Matrix: Resurrections.

Fight choreography, like the rest of film culture, has trends; peaks and valleys of tastes and standard behavior, shaped by the reactionary nature of Hollywood, in major studio’s attempt to grasp at higher profits. So, if an action or sci-fi film is popular, a lot of the style and aesthetic of the fighting will be repeated. Since the release of The Matrix Revolutions in 2003, the action film genre has gone through several different flavors of action filmmaking. Yet, 2021’s The Matrix Resurrections neither presents an action framework that we are currently familiar with, nor uses the same wuxia inspired “wire-fu” we may be nostalgic for these 18 years later.  Instead, it rests on the quick cutting chaotic camera movements popularized in early 2002, coupled with the heavy use of special effect “powers” one can have in the matrix. This lessens the experience of the action and its ability to tell a story, transforming it into muddled garbage.

Subjective Aside: Editing Fight Choreography   

Before I begin this rant, a bit of personal context. I grew up a fan of Japanese and Hong Kong cinema, much like the Wachowskis.  What makes that style action choreography superior, in my opinion, has less to do with the movements being performed, and more about camera placement and editing.   When you look at a lot of Japanese (Kurosawa, Kobayashi, or Suzuki) or Hong Kong films (Lo Wen, Jackie Chan) they often use a lot of wide shots, with fewer camera angles and shifts in focus. These films let the action unfold in front of the camera by showcasing the actors’ and stunt performers’ abilities. The result is action choreography that is clearly visible and easy to track through an environment. This way, the action is allowed to tell a story. Unfortunately, in Western Cinema, action is often created in the editing of the film.

 One of the main reasons for the recent failure of western action cinema to be able to tell a compelling, let alone a coherent story, is through its use of multiple camera shots and quick cut editing. In Hollywood today, for both safety and to make up for a lack of experience among novice actors and performers, a lot of action and martial arts choreography is performed at half, to one third the speed shown; and memorized in very small chunks.  This choreography is then shot using multiple cameras “for coverage”.  Once the scene is shot, the raw footage is given to the editor, and they create the fight scene. This is done first by speeding up the film footage (by removing individual frames) and quickly cutting between shots to make the fight choreography seem more dynamic. 

The use of cuts in the editing process is a tool for cinematic storytelling. You can create emotion, investment and intrigue depending on how, where, and when you cut, and what shot you use. However, in action filmmaking, cuts are usually used for two reasons: to create tension, or to hide a mistake. With the way a lot of action films are currently shot, and the fight being found in the edit rather than in camera, it is often difficult for an audience to understand what is going on, and how the scene unfolds through the fight.  This is the product of the filmmakers trying to perform a slight of hand. By speeding up the film and removing frames, coupled with shaky handheld camera movement, the filmmakers are creating tension and confusion for the audience so they will not realize the poor, unoriginal, or sloppy fight choreography that they are witnessing on screen. 

·         Here is a Fun film exercise for those interested in a comparison of Eastern and western action filmmaking: Compare the fight between Bruce Lee and Chuck Norris in 1973’s The Way of the Dragon with the fight between Neo and Smith in The Matrix Resurrections. Every time you notice a cut mark it by clapping. Guaranteed you will miss some cuts, but the fight in Resurrections will undoubtably illicit thunderous applause.

What this exercise illustrates is that a lot of modern action films do not use action to tell the story. Instead, it is the spectacle between the story; the bridge between the plot points rather than an exploration of the character, thereby helping to develop the story in and of itself.  Therefore, a lot of action sequences in western films today all look the same; its either a lot of CGI characters ramming into each other, or a bunch of quickly edited still frame poses set to music.  Either way, it has become a boring, convoluted mess that has left me annoyed and disheartened. End of rant.      

 

HISTORICAL CONTEXT

            The cultural importance of The Matrix on the American film industry cannot be overstated. So many of the same adjectives have been overused to explain its impact. “The Matrix “changed the game”, it was “revolutionary”, it was “Iconic”, or any other metaphor for “transformation” was applied to describe this late 20^th century Sci-fi Cyberpunk Neo-noir. Yet, as the list of adjectives I’ve just used can attest, it is not something brand new. A lot of the content of the original film is derivative of several influences Lana and Lilly had in the late 80’s early 90’s. 

The Cyberpunk Movement

            When you look at the original film, you can see camera shots of the 40’s noir films, a set design reminiscent of Blade Runner, and a lot of stylizations from Japanese Anime; most notably Akira and Ghost in the Shell (the latter being the inspiration for the text and type face of the matrix’s encryption (aka the “digital rain”)). These films, along with The Matrix became a huge part of the cyberpunk genre which I explain in a previous essay:

            Cyberpunk is a branch of the science fiction genre that is differentiated by a lawless or institutionally oppressive society that is dominated by advanced computer technology.  This extends into the creation of cyborgs and other biotech science fiction. The mood of cyberpunk is both style and substance. It has the neon of the 1980’s punk, dance aesthetic with the grimier world of Noir. This makes the usually pristine imagery of advanced societies/ technology seem more tactile and lived in. A lot of futuristic Neo-Noir films and stories have a cyberpunk edge to them.

So, while The Matrix is of historical importance to the Cyberpunk aesthetic, it did not create the genre. Cyberpunk was born out of the new age science fiction of the 1960s and 70’s with the work of J G Ballard and William S Boroughs. Yet, when citing the foundational texts of the Cyberpunk aesthetic, the work of William Gibson, Neal Stephenson, Bruce Sterling, Bruce Bethke, Pat Cadigan, Rudy Rucker, and Philip K. Dick are also invoked. While none of the films in The Matrix franchise saturate the audience in a neon bubble gum world of harsh bright lighting evocative of modern Japan in current cyberpunk imagery; instead coating its visuals with a Neo-noir garage grunge of Gen Xers of the time, while still incorporating the Cyberpunk basics:

1)      It centers around Artificial Intelligence and Hackers

2)      Set in a post-apocalyptic dystopia

3)      A protagonist sense of rebellion against a non-governmental entity   

  

 The incorporation of the merging of human and technology is ingeniously woven into the first Matrix film in the way that people “free” from the matrix could “jack back in”. While The Matrix films are light on the body horror focus, a lot of these amalgamate depictions, still have a grand appeal to the disenfranchised youth culture of any generation.

Experiencing “The Matrix”

 By taking the grunge music of Gen Xers, and styling the characters in vinyl, latex and PVC, also tying into the BDSM culture, which at the time of production on the first film, was still in the cultural fringes, the filmmakers are steeping their heroes in a counterculture of anti-capitalist robber barons and misfits, which regardless of the generational cultural iconography they drape their characters in, speaks to the youth in a very direct way. This is because of the way that our integrated capitalist system works. The youth culture, again of any generation, is going to be far more radical (and therefore these films can speak to them more) in part because they have little to no social power, and less investment in the system as it currently operates; and therefore, have more to gain with its reformation or elimination.  Granted this is deliberate, but more on that in the social analysis section.

No one could realize just how prophetic the Wachowskis were in 1999 with their depiction of the rise and integration of technology into culture. And while this is a staple of the Cyberpunk genre, the extent to which “living in The Matrix” can be analogous to the ways in which all of us engage with the world through our screens (for both work, pleasure, and social contact), operating through a variety of avatars that allow us to have a “real presence” in digital space. Sure, we do not have a digital autonomously conscious avatar that can consequently interact with the world in real life; but since everything involving human interaction is digitized and exists in the space of the world wide web, dating, education, shopping, and socializing are all done through our digital avatars, with which we make real, concrete decisions to take that class, go on that date, buy that food etc.  It may not be visually represented in the same cinematic way that the Wachowskis depicted it, but if we are looking at screens, we are living in the world of The Matrix.

Wrong lessons from The Matrix

One of the walls that I often run into being an academic media critic, is that most people believe that art is individually subjective. This position makes any analysis from a Sociological perspective difficult, because of the focus the sociological perspective has with broader cultural and social knowledge. Understandably then, I bristle when people give their individual opinions as evidence to negate the conclusions of a sociological analysis of media content; as if the two are equivalent, and sociological evidence is just another opinion. This happens repeatedly online where all conversations are unfortunately equalized. We believe everyone’s positions on content are valid. By extension, this has allowed dangerous and vile interpretations of media content to be born and flourish, especially in social media spaces. The Matrix has not avoided individuals generating “bad takes” and learning the “wrong lessons” from the film franchise, especially the first film.

When you look at The Matrix (1999), it is a sci-fi film for and of the time. Yet, it also plays on a lot of Western, particularly American, narratives that we have seen before, and love to revisit.  The first film, aside from the post-modern philosophy garnish on top, tells the very linear story of the typical hero’s journey (Joseph Cambell would be proud). But like a lot of characters on the hero’s journey embodying epic heroism,[6] Neo in the first film, is a two dimensional shrill who realizes he is a digital messiah[7]. A messiah who doesn’t really have any agency until the end of the second film, when he makes a different choice (than his predecessors) after meeting with The Architect. Yet, that agency is scoffed at by the public who seem to not be bothered by a lack of dimension if the empty character in question is “ungodly powerful and kicks ass.” When that happens, the public, and fans specifically, eat it up with a spoon.          

What this points to is that, like a lot of things in the US, Americans like simple stories and solutions; especially when what they are presented with seems complex.  This also socializes the desire of epic heroism in individuals. The idea that the public needs to do something with their life that is grand, and on the scale of the heroes in the stories that they consume. Otherwise, they have somehow failed.  This is especially part of the socialization of boys and men. Through masculine gender socialization boys and men are marketed this ideal, and it is enculturated as a part of their own masculine identity, to “be the hero of their own story”. This is in direct opposition to the Everyday heroism of human existence that is often gendered feminine. The everyday heroism of giving birth, or raising a family for example, are often minimized in a lot of storytelling marketed to boys in favor of the epic hero’s journey. Thus, in the first film, like a lot of other stories, boys and men could see themselves as Neo, the hero, the savior, the god who defeats the evil corporate machines and gets the girl in the end.[8] However, this gets upended and complicated with the sequels (especially the amazing Resurrections) resulting in a lot of boys hating it, feeling alienated, and end up questioning why the Wachowskis had to ruin a story that they, the male audience, could so easily insert themselves into before. 

Secondly, if we maintain a simple individualistic focus on media consumption through this “art is subjective” scripture (which also seems to be pro-capitalist, since everything should be for everyone, and mean whatever it is they want it to mean), we allow for some of the more disgusting and despicable interpretations to find support, fester, and grow.  Such is what happened with The Matrix and “The Red pill” movement. The Red Pill movement appropriated the iconography of the Matrix (itself signifying gender transitioning by taking estrogen pills that are red) to rally INCELS (involuntary celibate) and other misogynistic men to “wake up” to the tyranny they believe is being inflicted on them by feminism and general female autonomy.  This movement, beginning  as a sub reddit page, has been connected to the alt- right and a few Extreme right lawmakers whose beliefs and opinions often intersect with those who stormed the Capital on Jan 6^th . Having a acceptance of these interpretations under the guise of “all art is subjective”, does more harm than good. But by encouraging artists to speak out against any interpretation of their art that is aggressively against their intentions, or speak out against an interpretation that can damage social stability, by promoting any type of violence and dehumanization; that challenge can hopefully provide evidence against these skewed interpretations of content and minimize the spreading of toxic, dangerous ideas that inevitably will end up helping to shape both public perception, and overall decision making.

 

SOCIAL ANALYSIS

The social analysis of The Matrix franchise is dense in socio-cultural theory. From post structuralism/ Post modernism, and Body Theory, to systems theories of Rationalization and Surveillance. In this section, I will go over a brief general analysis of the basic overarching themes of the entire franchise, before diving into the theories and themes of each film individually.

General Theme: Agency and Structure

At first glance, the story of The Matrix films is one of conflict. The conflict between the machines and humans. Typically, whenever anyone says the word “Conflict” around a Sociologist, that conjures images of Karl Marx and basic Conflict theory: conflict as a natural state within society, and that those in power try to maintain and expand their power through the maintenance and prevalence of socio-political laws that benefit them. This perspective might have worked if there was only one film. What the additional films reveal, is that the story they are telling is not just about conflict. The conflict is a function of a larger system of organization attempting to rationalize the irrationality of human choice.  Thus, when looking at all The Matrix films, conflict is the mechanism of control. If people are too busy fighting, they ignore the system that might be the overarching cause of their disenfranchisement.

This push and pull between control and choice is epitomized in the Sociological ebb and flow between agency and structure.  Agency is defined as the ability to have free, non-coerced choice. The term may also be used in conjunction with Autonomy, the ability to make your own decisions and trajectory of your life. Structure is defined as any relatively stable pattern of social behavior often coalesced into a series of groups and institutions for the purposes of governance.  The existence of every society rest along this spectrum between agency and structure. The more agency the society has, the weaker the cohesive social order, and the greater focus on the satisfaction of individual desires.  This leads to normlessness, what Emile Durkheim called “Anomie”.  The more structure there is within society, the less there is independence, potentially leading to Totalitarianism. This necessary balancing between agency and structure (equal or not) is epitomized by Rousseau’s (and later Weber’s) idea of the Social Contract: the idea that individuals must give up some amount of personal freedom to enjoy the stability and security that the structure may provide. How much personal freedom for how much stability is, in a “democratic” bureaucratic rational system, consistently in flux, as opposed to other systems with a tighter or more relaxed grasp.

For generations, Americans (especially white middle class men) have been fed the dangerous rhetoric of American Exceptionalism and a sense of individualism that is both polarizing and isolating. This is because it frames Agency as “all good” and The Structure as “all bad”, not as a necessary balanced compromised between the two. It is this bifurcation that maintains complex problems, because through this paradigm, we are only looking for simple solutions. This is the lens through which the first Matrix film was seen by several Americans, and subsequently contributed to the film’s overall success and popularity.

Through such an individualist focus, The Matrix (1999) is a simple story of a deified Messiah and his revolutionaries breaking the yoke of their machine oppressors to be free (pure agency) in the “real” world.  To be “woke” in this context is to be free of machine control and see the world “the way it is, a dystopian hellscape of war. This freedom is perceived as always desired, to the point where the one character that wants to “go back to the Matrix” is painted as a betrayer, villain, as evil. Suddenly, The Matrix fits in the socio-political paradigm of agency over structure, in part because the simplistic storytelling of a messianic figure liberating people is compatible with Judeo-Christian religious mythology that has dominated the American culture since its inception. It also reaffirms the individualism and American Exceptionalism message, while maintaining white male interests through violence, explosions, and the sexualization of its female characters. This perceived reinforcement of these American, pro agency perspective indicative of a white male gaze, was rewarded through capitalism by the film being popular and making a worldwide gross of $466,625,730 off a 63-million-dollar budget.  However, when the subsequent films began to question this individualism, the simple pro capitalist public rejected its complexity.

In the context of agency and structure, the complication of Neo’s journey and purpose in the sequels, points to an understanding of the fluidity between these two concepts, rather than a strict and valued binary.  The realization that Neo’s path, and his liberation of people, were all an anticipated part of the operation of the Matrix in Reloaded; even though he makes “a different” choice at the end of that film and eliminates the virulent Smith from the Matrix in Revolutions, Neo does not eradicate the machines. Those that want to stay in the matrix can remain, while those that want out will be released. In Resurrections, the matrix (through its construction by the Analyst) prey on this individualism and desire for agency to better control us. The Analyst says to Neo: “The closest emotions are desire and fear. You desire what you don’t have, and fear to lose which you do.” Then later to Trinity: “The sheeple aren't going anywhere. They like my world. They don't want this sentimentality. They don't want freedom or empowerment. They want to be controlled. They crave the comfort of certainty.”[9] Essentially, what the entire franchise is saying, from a broad context, is that people want stories of Freedom (The Matrix) without going through the messy complexity of change to achieve it (Reloaded and Revolutions); and that many of us would rather use those empowerment stories to make our systemic prisons more comfortable (Resurrections), rather than actually be liberated.

The Matrix (1999) Specific Themes: Hyperreality     

Outside of the simplistic linear narrative of the hero’s journey that the first Matrix film comports itself to be, there is a greater post-modernist/post-structural sheen that is far more compelling to dig into. One of the reasons the principal cast was given Baudrillard’s Simulacra and Simulation, is that the matrix in the film is an allegory for Baudrillard’s (1994) concept of Hyperreality. The Matrix is explained to Neo as a simulated dream world in which human beings are grown to be a power source for sentient machines. In the opening moments of the film, Thomas Anderson/Neo keeps his hacking programs in a copy of Jean Baudrillard’s text open to the chapter titled “On Nihilism”.  In this chapter, Baudrillard (1994) explains that “the universe and all of us have entered live into simulation”, from which nihilism has been realized (p159). But that state was not achieved specifically on the first try, instead there are three orders of Simulacra, the first is represented by the utopia (Baudrillard 1994). This corresponds to the film when Smith tells Morpheus that the first Matrix was constructed as a paradise. But too many people rejected it as reality because, as he states, humans define their reality by the pain and suffering they endure, rather than pleasure. At first glance, the matrix that “worked” might be considered one that faithfully copies the reality of the world of the late 20^th century, thus, being the faithful copy, the simulacra of Simulation. This is incorrect. Instead, in the context of the film, you must compare the matrix world with the world established in story as “the real world”. By that comparison, the matrix is Pure Simulacrum. Even if you compare the matrix with the actual reality of the historical time period of when the film was released, it is not a faithful copy. The entire Matrix Franchise is the Pretense of reality; something to distract us, giving us hope, while we’re imprisoned.  The major diversion between Baudrillard (1994) and the Wachowskis is in their level of hope. The Wachowskis believed that you could break through to actual reality, whereas Baudrillard (1994) states that not only is society in a state of Pure Simulacrum, but that it is completely indistinguishable from what we would call “real”. For Baudrillard (1994), there is no way to escape it. Unfortunately, you cannot make an interesting sci-fi film about dystopian revolution, if there is no mechanism by which people can free themselves.  A constant unending prison, while fascinating when looking at the social order, it is not narratively satisfying nor cinematic.

Secondarily, when looking at the Matrix franchise as this multi-media cross promotional platform that includes films, games, comics etc. and its impact on culture, especially the way that it changed the science fiction genre, is proof for Baudrillard (1994) that the film is not an exploration of his work or his ideas, but its bastardization, a gross misrepresentation, by way of a simple science fiction film.       

            The Matrix (1999) Specific Themes: The Panopticon/Docile Bodies

The opening moments of The Matrix (1999) gives the audience a lot of imagery of State authority and State actors. This becomes a fundamental representation of the overall Surveillance State we live in. These “Agents” of the matrix are dressed, act, and are treated like an extension of the governmental system. They are easy to spot because both film and reality have crafted a specific image of the standard government agent. It doesn’t matter who they are working for, they are all uniformly the same. In the context of the film, these men are “Agents of the Matrix”. Because of this, even before we as the audience know “the agents are programs” of the matrix; we understand their ability to track and capture individuals because of the invocation of the “Government Agent” type. We’ve seen and experienced surveillance in our lives, therefore we understand their capabilities through this imagery. Yet, in both the Criminal Justice System (CJS) and in the depictions of the Agents in The Matrix, there is a limited use of, and miniscule number of government agents when compared to the populace. Whether the comparison is among local police, to FBI, CIA or any of the other alphabet organizations, there are still more people than State Actors/ “agents”. Thus, the CJS and other institutions cannot rely on constant individual surveillance by specific personnel. Rather, they must rely on the perception of constant surveillance to maintain order. The social system, and the institutions of its contents, require individual self-regulation. The assumption, and possibility of being watched, is more effective and efficient to the systems than actual continuous constant vigilance by an authority (Foucault 1975).

In The Matrix this Panopticon (Surveillance) is explained to Neo by Morpheus, during the agent training program.  He explains that anyone that is still “jacked in”, is a potential threat. Because, at any time, someone’s body can be taken over (over written) by an Agent. Morpheus bleakly states, “if you are not one of us, you are one of them.”[10]. Additionally, one of the reasons that the Agents can be anyone and everywhere, is because the bodies that are still a part of the matrix are Foucauldian docile bodies, experiencing body boundaries, from the machines that have biopower over them. Simultaneously, those that are freed from the Matrix, but can go back into the simulation, are able to engage in Butler’s body construction; allowing them to look and express their body based on their own desires and self-perception.

By acknowledging Butler’s body construction, or as the Wachowski’s put it “the mental projection of your digital self…you look how you want to look.”, this allows for body presentation to come to the forefront, and where The Matrix as an allegory for gender transition and gender expression along the spectrum begins.  In addition to the taking of the red pill to be able to wake up to reality also being emblematic of taking estrogen; with the taking of pills a marker for transition (as previously stated), one of the crew of the Nebuchadnezzar, named “Switch” could present as a man in the “real world” but present as a “woman” in the matrix.  Even early drafts of the script had Neo present as male in The Matrix but present as female in “the real world”.[11]   

The Matrix (1999) Specific Themes: Deployment of Sexuality    

One of the more subtle concepts in a dystopian sci-fi cyberpunk film about hackers, is the interplay of sex and sexuality. On one hand, the structure of the matrix and the rationalization of the machine world deploys sexuality through the Foucauldian repressive hypothesis. The institution of the matrix itself, organizes and determines sexuality, sexual expression, and sexual performance.  These parameters point to the Foucauldian relationship between power and sex.

 According to Foucault (1978), there is a negative relationship between power and sex; sex being focused on pleasure and desire while power seeks to repress, control, and deny it. To that, sex is understood as revolutionary, as one can see in the sexualized attire of the characters in The Matrix, they are usurping the machines and reclaiming power through desire and sexual expression. The matrix also represents and formulates licit and illicit sexual behaviors through the binary system, regulated by the cycle of prohibition on sexual activity and the overall suppression of sex (Foucault 1978). It could be argued that one of the reasons many of the characters have Kink and BDSM flavors to their attire, is because sexual consent is such an important aspect to sex, especially in the Kink and BSDM realm, that an expression of its iconography or evocation in attire, in the Matrix, is in direct opposition to the oppression by the machines which, in its most light reductive euphemism, is decidedly non-consensual.

  These power/sex dynamics create a normalization of sexuality and a formation of the acceptable sexual identity. Therefore, if we ever want to revolt against the structure, we need to see sexuality not only as a strict identity, but as just a series of behaviors that give pleasure (Foucault 1978).  It is also through language that the relationship between power and sex can be established. Once we can talk about sex as openly as we would talk about other hobbies and interests without shame, then sex itself no longer becomes taboo, and can grant freedom and power. This is loosely depicted in the final scenes of The Matrix, where Neo does not become “The One” until Trinity declares her desire for him.

Unfortunately, the theme of sexual deployment and sexualization gets muddled in later films[12], instead settling for establish aesthetics for the purpose of “looking like The Matrix”, rather than having any narrative and thematic heft. This, coupled with the way characters in the film were sexualized by the film going public (specifically Trinity), mutes this sex as revolutionary message; as it often gets coopted by the system (in this case by the white straight masculine able-bodied capitalist patriarchy) to reinforce itself. A theme which is explored in The Matrix: Reloaded.

The Matrix Reloaded (2003) Specific Themes- Power and Masculine Domination

In expanding The Matrix universe beyond the definitive ending of “the hero’s journey” in the first film. Reloaded accepts, reflects, and doubles down on the Weberian notion of power. During his inevitable conversation with Neo, The Architect (Who looks suspiciously like Max Weber himself) reveals that even though Neo has the abilities of a god in the Matrix, those abilities, and his existence was all part of the system itself; expected and controlled. Therefore, Neo doesn’t really have power, because even though he and several people resist, the system, the matrix, persists. Moreover, because The Architect presents as a cis male, he is exerting his masculine domination over all of humanity. Thus, social behaviors and practices are integrated into a social system to maintain the primacy of masculinity (Bourdieu 1998:82). It is the social order that functions as an immense symbolic machine which ratifies the masculinity on which it was founded. (Bourdieu 1998: 9). This is acknowledged and supported in Resurrections, when The Analyst confirms that The Architect was so rational that he did not care about human emotion. Instead, the Architect saw humanity as a problem, proclaiming that his first Matrix (the idyllic utopia) was perfect, and that it was humans that destroyed it. It is a very masculine point of view (present in a lot of Greek tragedy’s) of an egotistical ambitious hubris that results in a lack of self-reflection and ownership of one’s own failings, with an added sense of superiority, a God complex.

The Matrix Reloaded (2003) Specific Themes- Rationalization, the Iron Cage and Cheerful Robots

Prior to The Matrix: Reloaded we only understood the Matrix to be one elaborate Total Institution that is exercising institutional, symbolic and Bio forms of power over humanity. However, when Neo enters the door “where the path of “The One” ends, he and the audience are surprised to be in a room with a lot of screens greeted by a man behind a desk. Introducing himself as “The Architect” he explains:

“Your life is the sum of a remainder of an unbalanced equation inherent to the programming of the matrix. You are the eventuality of an anomaly, which despite my sincerest efforts I have been unable to eliminate from what is otherwise a harmony of mathematical precision. While it remains a burden assiduously avoided, it is not unexpected, and thus not beyond a measure of control. Which has led you, inexorably, here. The function of the One is now to return to the source, allowing a temporary dissemination of the code you carry, reinserting the prime program. After which you will be required to select from the matrix 23 individuals, 16 female, 7 male, to rebuild Zion. Failure to comply with this process will result in a cataclysmic system crash killing everyone connected to the matrix, which coupled with the extermination of Zion will ultimately result in the extinction of the entire human race.”

This simple monologue is the clearest distillation of Weberian Rationalization and The Iron Cage I have seen on screen. “The One”, like the matrix itself, is all still apart of the structure. This illustrates one of Weber’s (1919) most overlooked points: that a system can maintain a more complete hold on individuals by giving them the illusion of freedom. While this illusion is often multi-faceted and polymorphic, in The Matrix franchise, this is done through the construction of a messianic figure. This is what Weber (1919) calls disenchantment, the routinization of belief. The thing that individuals believe is unique and special outside a system of control (e.g. separation of church and state) is actually one of the shackles keeping them confined inside the system.

            The continuing cycle of “The One” (the Neo we know is the 6^th version) is an example of the way rebellion to the system is anticipated, then incorporated into the way that system operates; thereby standardizing resistance. We see this in the way that our institutions operate. The system is designed to carve out spaces for rebellion, usually by age, allowing a period in everyone’s life where they can “reject the system.” However, these “allowed radicals” are usually openly disenfranchised young people who have little to no social power. So, while their frustrations are warranted, they lack enough influence to make any permanent change to the system. Then, as we age, and become more socially, politically, and economically invested in the maintenance of the system, by cultural and social norms learned through the process of socialization, we become fully integrated and passive. Weber (1919) understood that strict oppression is not sustainable without allowing people to feel like they can resist. But, if you incorporate resistance as a part of the system, then you eventually get greater compliance.  You get Millsian Cheerful Robots.

Ironically, we have learned in recent years that it does not take much to satisfy this desire for resistance and rebellion. These feelings can be satiated through simple acts of “speaking truth to power” by exercising speech rights. Whether that be speaking at a rally, or tagging someone in a tweet, these little acts of resistance and rebellion are pressure valves designed into our structural system, ultimately allowing the system’s maintenance and expansion. Because the system operates with the understanding that many people, even the ones that spout and fight for social change (especially those who are white and middle class), often do not want their lives disrupted. Instead, the desire for resistance is satisfied by having the ability to complain, regardless of the achievement of effective change or not. This is part of the reason why, regardless of the countless civil rights and social justice movements (past, present, and future), the progress they make won’t eliminate the systems of power unless we institute a whole system reboot. Otherwise, as “The Architect” says to Neo: “There are levels of survival [The system of power] is prepared to accept.”  

The Matrix Revolutions (2003) Specific Themes: Marxian Capitalism

As stated earlier, The Matrix: Revolutions is better understood as a second part to Reloaded. Therefore, any analysis of the themes included in the third film, are primarily present in the second. That being said, the thematic allusions of Revolutions are so sparse, even Cornel West has a difficult time diving into the film’s philosophy during the movie’s commentary.[13] Revolutions contains a lot of allusions and “easter eggs” surrounding computers and its language. As other analyses have mentioned, the character of Seraph  is a log in (handshake authentication program) as is Sati and her parents Neo meets in the Train Station. Even in Resurrections, Trinity in the Matrix calls herself Tiff, which may be a reference to the TFF file which is a graphic file that is larger than seen but does not lose its image quality. I cannot speak to this much, as I am not a computer programmer, and a lot of these references are lost on me. What is not lost on me, and the one aspect I can discuss in a sociologically allegorical way, is Agent Smith becoming a computer virus after the first film. 

When looking into Marx’s (1867) general critique of capitalism, what would come out of this profit driven cycle of capital accumulation, would be a commodification of life itself. Everything in human life, including human life, would be able to be bought sold traded or exchanged. Every emotion, every thought, impulse, or idea will be corrupted by Capitalism to be reduced to its base exchange value.  Smith corrupting files and digital identities in the matrix until he is the only thing that is left, is a clear representation of this process.

The addition of Smith being able to copy himself and “leave” the matrix, seems like a beta test for an idea eventually realized by Lana in Resurrections, with her inclusion of sentient programs outside of either the machine world or the matrix. But the freeing of Smith as existing independent of the system was certainly part of the story she wanted to tell. It is still unclear if Smith’s line to Neo at the end of Resurrections, is another reference to his construct of virulent capitalism and that while “Neo could have been anyone [Smith] is everyone.” identifies capitalism as never-ending…but this is admittedly a stretch, and the limits of my analysis.

The Matrix: Resurrections (2021) Specific Themes: Nostalgia

The fourth Matrix film was envisioned, created, and produced during a time of unprecedented nostalgic media marketing. I mention in an earlier article:

While the use of nostalgia to sell products is certainly nothing new, it seems as though the use of this marketing technique has, in recent years, increased in speed and become more acute. Previously, it seems that nostalgia marketing was present in creating a general feeling of a nondescript past. Such as a feeling of innocence or of childhood, without any specific reproduction of a particular form of pop culture.  Adam Gopnik of The New Yorker talks about “The Forty-Year-Itch” describing a piece of pop culture's affinity for a certain time period; the way that films of one era can call back, and have a similar flavor to those of the past. Unlike the pop culture cycle of the past, which had certain time periods invoke the zeitgeist of another time period; now we’ve moved on to specific remakes, looking at a reproduction of something every 25-30 years. This process was noticeable starting in the early 2010’s mining the childhood of now 30-35 year olds. And in the last 5-6 years, the industry has moved to mining the childhood of 20-29 year olds. This tactic is often easily dismissed as being motivated chiefly by Capitalism and the Profit Motive; that the studio is just looking for an easy “cash grab” (industry term ;).

However, as we go into the third year of a global pandemic that shut down film production for over a year, and the HBOMAX Warner Bros. streaming deal for all 2021 slated films, profit was not the only motivator to produce this fourth film. Additionally, unlike a lot of other properties that just use nostalgia as a marketing tool, wielding it like a blunt hammer against the audience and screaming at them to “Remember this?!” as they get clubbed with one callback, easter egg and referential nod after another. Instead, The Matrix: Resurrections weaponizes nostalgia to investigate and deconstruct the franchise’s place in culture. Many of the themes I have been going through in this essay, are presented in the film through a delightful montage of writers and developers talking about what “The Matrix” means. Each piece of dialogue drips with delicious double/triple entendre:

“We all exist in these strange repeating loops”

 “Warner Bros is going to make this with or without you.”

 “After all this time, you’re going back to where it all started, back to the matrix.”

 “At least we entertained some kids.”   

 

Yet, these are not references for the sake of them (or for profit). Through this investigation of cultural relevance through nostalgia, Director Lana Wachowski crafts a story that clarifies and recontextualizes the franchise. By centering on the bond between Neo and Trinity, and its importance to the algorithmic anomaly of “The One”, she deconstructs the simple “Hero’s Journey” application to the first film (beloved by white dude misanthropes and misogynists in equal measure) and complicates it into something more human, and quite lovely. Neo is nothing without Trinity and vice versa. In the previous films, it was Trinity’s belief in Neo that gave him power, in Resurrections it is Neo’s belief in Trinity that gives her back that same power.  This is how nostalgia can be used to make a statement, beyond just a simple “cash grab” (industry term  ;).

 

The Matrix: Resurrections (2021) Specific Themes: Surveillance Capitalism   

 

            The Matrix Resurrections (2021) finds Thomas Anderson/Neo trapped in a separate program of the Matrix, being fed anesthetizing narcotics by his therapist who has convinced him that his life experiences were a break from reality; confusing his life with a popular trilogy of video games that he had created. This isolation, incarceration, and sedation is reminiscent of The Great Confinement against the disabled, mentally ill and neurodivergent persons. Like Neo, the disabled and neurodivergent and mentally ill were treated using pharmacology while within state custody (Foucault 1965). It was during this time that history also saw The Birth of the Clinic where both the patient and visitors are gaslit as to the function of the clinic itself. Usually, the prevailing image is one of calmness and serenity, yet this hides the realities of what the clinic does to the actual patient (Foucault 1973). In Neo’s case, he is being drugged (by the blue pills) isolated (in a separate part of the matrix.) and he is being gaslit as to the reality of his own biography.  This was able to be done through the new arbiter of The Matrix, “The Analyst” whom, after Neo’s sacrifice in Revolutions, began learning about humanity to better control them.

 

     “My predecessor didn’t care about humans; he was all about rationality. I on the other hand, wanted to understand you. The world that matters is the one in your own mind. It’s all about fictions, and what validates and makes your fictions real is feelings (belief). And feelings are easier to manipulate than facts. The worse we treat you, manipulate you the more energy you produce…zero resistance. For 99.9% of the population this is reality…The sheeple aren't going anywhere. They like my world. They don't want this sentimentality. They don't want freedom or empowerment. They want to be controlled. They crave the comfort of certainty.”

 

Rather than subject humanity to the Iron Cage of rationality (as the Architect did), The Analyst learned about humanity and built a better more convincing prison. The Analyst’s near perfect Matrix is an allegory for a more elegant form of human control through the understanding of psychology, emotions, and social behavior by the collection and consumption of personal information by major corporations.      

Shoshana Zuboff (2019) contrasts Industrial Capitalism with this new age of Surveillance Capitalism. She elucidates that whereas Industrial Capitalism’s focus was the production of products which would then be sold for profit to consumers; under surveillance capitalism however, the person is the product. Zuboff (2019) further explains that one of the reasons social media is “free” to the consumers that use them, is because the consumer’s information, called metadata, which is a detailed profile of the consumer, (constructed by the consumer themselves in what they “like”, “subscribe to”, “retweet”, “repost” etc.) collated by the social media company they participate in, and then sold to advertisers, governments, and private investors. This surveillance is a part of the information economy and has a larger impact on political campaigning. The ability to shape public opinion on a variety of social issues (through the mining and profiteering of data) is a powerful weapon able to transform society.  We essentially show the public who we are by using these programs, then that information is used against us for profit, politics, and passivity. The Analyst is an embodiment of this practice in The Matrix Resurrections and a stark reminder that systems of control are never stagnant, always looking for ways to become more efficient wardens (Weber 1919).

The Matrix Resurrections Specific Themes: Love

The commodification of emotion is standard in a capitalist system, love being chief among them. We buy flowers, chocolates, and a variety of diamond encrusted accoutrements, all to corporealize our amorphous feelings; and in true capitalist form, we’ve been socialized to believe that there is a direct correlation between how much money we spend, and the depths of love we feel for that person (Marx 1864). At the same time, the social institution we exist within minimizes our senses of desire and love to only be expressed by labor (Marcuse 1974). To that end, many people work to give their loved ones a better/more sustainable life. Socialized toxic forms of masculinity often positions itself outside of the direct and open expressions of love. Instead, labor is the mechanism by which love can be expressed, especially for men. Thus, we are then trained to work for love, and consume for love within the Capitalist system. It is this form of love that is used to confine most people who are stuck in the matrix. However, the story of Neo and Trinity is one of the liberating power of love.

In The Matrix Reloaded the Architect proclaims himself “the father” of the Matrix and The Oracle as its “mother.” She was a program designed to understand human motivation and emotion to create a sustainable Matrix program. By the 6^th iteration of “The One” the Oracle tried something different, rather than imbue “The One” with a more collectivist love for all of humanity, she had this 6^th savior (our Neo) experience a very clear individualist attachment to humanity through Trinity. Now on the surface, this can be interpreted as a pro western individualism, seeing that this iteration of “The One” was able to create some semblance of peace for a time. It is only until The Matrix Resurrections that we find out the extent of The Oracle’s manipulation of the 6^th cycle of the Matrix. The Analyst, during his “villain monologuing” to Neo, casually mentions that during the process of rebuilding both Neo and Trinity’s bodies, he found that there was nothing spectacular about them individually; but when brought together, Neo and Trinity were able to produce a power that could destroy everything. That power is love.

The Matrix franchise has always been a love story. Neo was not able to become “The One” without Trinity’s love and belief in him. When you contextualize The Matrix through the lens of Resurrections, we see that Trinity was the focal point of Neo’s power, and one that she could have hypothetically accessed herself if she so desired. However, in the first film, she, like Neo, are socialized into a patriarchal mechanism which defines femininity through women’s relationships with other people. So, women are encouraged to access patriarchal male power through the relationships they have with men. Thus, Trinity not accessing the power of “The One” until Resurrections, could be understood as an example of The Patriarchal Bargain, common in the media depictions of the time, especially involving white women (Kandiyoti 1988). The shift of the power from Neo to Trinity and their sharing the abilities of “The One” in Resurrections, moves their relationship from a selfless devotion to love, to one of loving mutual respect, understanding, and passion in an egalitarian context.

             According to bell hooks (2001) love being a part of the patriarchal bargain exists because we often don’t get socialized to choose love, instead love is defined for us as something that just happens; and we are passive against it. When we fall in love with “the girl of our dreams” or our “prince charming” it is always framed as an inevitability, rather than an active choice.  Since love is fated, it is also seen as an entitlement, again fueling the heterosexist patriarchy (hooks 2001).  In addition to this being heteronormative and allowing it to fit within the structure of the patriarchy, this is also another way to maintain control over us. “You have to wait for love to find you.” Love is a powerful motivator, even when causing inertia. Yet, in Resurrections, Neo and Trinity are actively trying to find love and each other. They are approaching love with intentionality, and the system, knowing how transformative the power of that choice can be, tries to stop them.  

 hooks (2001) also states: “We can only move from perfect passion to perfect love when the illusions pass and we are able to use the energy and intensity generated by intense, overwhelming erotic bonding to heighten self-discovery.” (179) This is epitomized in the relationship between Neo and Trinity in Resurrections. Their bond is so strong that any true discovery of themselves (when they both become self-aware of their past and their love) has enough power to destroy and remake the system. Their love in the matrix is a WMD, which changes the landscape of the matrix, and the lives connected to it forever.

 

CONCLUSION

I have never experienced a film franchise like The Matrix, a collection of films that I continually go back to and change my opinions upon every rewatch. This analysis has yet again caused me to rethink the value of each film and their importance to culture as well as their sociological merit. While the cultural impact and influence of The Matrix is undeniable, what this analysis shows, is that the first film in this franchise is far less complicated or interesting than the public (my self-included) gave it credit for. While most people would still put the first film at the top of their list, this has become increasingly more difficult for me with the inclusion of Resurrections. A film which takes a lot of what people loved about the first film and makes it superfluous, recontextualizes it in the broader narrative, or turns it into a joke. Unfortunately, rather than come to a better understanding of the franchise, most people are going to reject Resurrections as they did Reloaded and Revolutions for not being what they thought it was going to be. And rather than be self-reflexive in their media engagement, they are just going to shit over the whole thing. This is the path of least resistance, it is easier, it’s less scary, and does not require any effort to engage with the film.   If these harsh critics took the time, they, and the public at large, may find as I did, that Resurrections is a far superior film in its narrative than any of the others in the franchise; because it gives us hope and “a second chance.”; which is something we both need and deserve in our current socio-political climate.    

          

   

GLOSSERY OF THEORETICAL TERMS AND CONCEPTS

            To really dive into an analysis of The Matrix franchise from a sociological perspective without this analysis turning into a series of lectures on a variety of Sociological subjects, this section is designed to provide a quick reference guide for ideas and concepts that the essay will be talking about in its historical context and social analysis sections.  Each subject covered here is written to be within 100–200-word description of the concept, intended to be easily understood and digestible by the public. Unfortunately, this approach runs the risk of minimizing and oversimplifying dense theoretical ideas, and if that is indeed the case, no disrespect to either the Theorist or the Concept is intended.

 

Body Theory -An umbrella term this essay is using to encompass many theoretical conceptions of the body from theorists Judith Butler (1990/2004), Michel Foucault (1975), Herbert Marcuse (1974), and Susie Orbach (2009).

 

Body Boundaries- the feeling that our bodies are not our own, that they do not belong to us. The realization that our bodies are socially used for something else, whether that be to market products, as a vessel for the next generation, or to maintain an economy through labor. There are not enough body boundaries between us and the identity we have in our bodies, and what our bodies are used for in the broader society…usually as a product (Orbach 2009).  This may also have a Trans component to this as well.

 

  Body construction Judith Butler’s term, Butler notes that while there is separation between sex and gender (that gender can be applied to anybody) it is not without consequence and are excluded from recognition unless the “Gender performance” is representative of a person’s sex assigned category. This limits the ways the body can be constructed and still retain acceptance. This is despite the inherit validation of the male body. So, not only is a there a devaluing of a female body, but there is also no trans body acceptance at all. Additionally, the body’s construct is legitimized through scientific diagrams and charts.

 

Docile Bodies Foucauldian term to describe a type of body that may be subjugated, used, transformed, and “improved”. The operations of the docile body are meticulously controlled through various systemic disciplines which manufacture a state of learned helplessness. This correct use of the body is organized through disciplinary control that monitors and positions the body for maximum systemic efficiency. The body that has the most proper functioning is the body that is the most docile.

 

Trans Invisibility From Judith Butler’s article on “Undiagnosing Gender”, the “sex” category embodies the differences between the male and female bodies only through a specific cultural framework that identifies and values a binary understanding of both, which also reinforces heteronormativity and the kinship patterns created around it as validation. There is no acceptance of the spectrum. (Brady and Schirato 2011).

 

Deployment of Sexuality- How sexuality is deployed throughout our society; in that the way our Society organizes itself around sex so that every aspect of our society there is a connection between power-sex and knowledge (Foucault 1978)

 

1)      Hysterization of women’s bodies.  This is the idea that the concept of the woman’s body is only understood in terms of sex.  Reproduction and sexual pleasure she is regulated to the family space and the life of children.  Thus the roles of wife and mother

2)      Contradiction of child sex.  This is the idea that all children are prone to indulge in sexual activity, but we try and suppress it even though that children will eventually become adults and sexual beings  

3)      Socialization of procreative behavior: Our economy, politically social society is based around the idea of procreation economic (children recreate the labor force) political (having children and the ability to have kids gives political power (i.e. family values).

4)      Demonization of perverse pleasures Identifies certain types of sexual behaviors as being pathological, wrong and should be avoided. various sexual behaviors are pushed to the periphery

 

Much of this deployment of sexuality is through an Alliance of disciplinary structures marriage +family (kinship ties), military, religion (churches), medicine (hospitals), workforce (jobs/factories) education (schools) where their social organization exercises strict control over our bodies and manage them in a particular time and space

 

     The Repressive Hypothesis- a part of the mechanism of the deployment of sexuality according to Foucault (1978), the repressive hypothesis is an attempt by the system to exert power and control over the populace by defining sexual desires as taboo. We are not supposed to talk about it in public discourse. We cannot talk about our enjoyment of sex the way that we speak about our enjoyment of Pop Culture. While Foucault rejects this, it is a reason why sex can be saturated in our culture and used to sell products.

 

Great Confinement- Period in history described by Foucault (1965) in which those with mental illness or physical disabilities began to be institutionalized in asylums, hospitals, and eventually prisons as a mechanism to remove them from the rest of society, that has defined themselves as “normal” through the process

 

  Birth of the Clinic- Book by Michel Foucault. This also connotes the creation of several institutionalized structures to house the disabled and mentally ill.  Foucault states that these clinics often have a false front that masks their true intentions. Upon first glance, the clinic (usually in a alpine or ocean view setting) seems pristine and quaint; a quiet retreat where healing and treatment can happen. This masks the reality that the clinics whole purpose is the control manipulation and often mutilation of bodies.   

 

Hyperreality: An ideological and delusional trap created by symbols (objects in social reality that are given expressed social meaning through social interactions) to organize our social world. The trap is triggered when these simulations of knowledge and reality that we use to understand the world, become more real to us than reality itself. We define ourselves and our understanding of reality around the constructions (simulacra and simulations) we develop, to the point that they become indistinguishable between reality and its copy (Baudrillard 2007).    This is the seduction of the Subject (Humans) by the Object (Non-living things)

 

These simulations take on four forms, each moving farther away from reality:

1)      The Faithful Copy- The perfect reflection of reality. We think it may even be real. Ex: TV dinners, Meat from a grocer.

2)      The Perverted Copy- The Simulation that masks and obscures reality- Ex: Plastic surgery, Professional athletes/Celebrity persona, Candy (Starbursts), HD TV, “Facing” in retail stores.

3)       The Pretense of Reality- The copy is formed, but there is no basis for reality Ex: TV shows, Movies and Video Games, high end Sex Dolls (simulation of the unobtainable), Las Vegas, The World Showcase (DisneyWorld)

4)      Pure Simulacrum- No relation to reality whatsoever Ex: Soft Drinks especially Mountain Dew, Coke and Pepsi Disneyland and other Theme parks.

 

Masculine Domination: a form of Symbolic Violence (the gentle, often invisible, and imperceptible form of violence especially to its victims) in which the established social order “its rights, prerogatives, privileges and injustices perpetuates [Patriarchal and Masculine authority]so easily, apart from a few historical accidents [of social Justice progress] …is perceived as acceptable, even natural (Bourdieu 1998:1). This notion is buoyed by a biological definition of gender that effectively naturalizes the social contract. Social behaviors and practices are integrated into a social system to maintain the primacy of masculinity (Bourdieu 1998:82). It is the social order that functions as immense symbolic machine which ratifies the masculinity on which it was founded. (Bourdieu 1998: 9).

Panopticon (Surveillance) Foucauldian mechanism of social control within social institutions indicating the capacity for individuals to regulate their own social behavior through the internalized norms learned during the process of socialization due to the assumption of constant observation [from the State and other Authority mechanisms] and a desire to avoid Punishment. Named for the carceral structure by Jeremy Bentham  (Foucault 1975).

         Surveillance Capitalism- Term coined by Shoshana Zuboff (2019) to define the way that the human experience has been transformed into a monetizable resource in which the production of goods and services are built around behavioral modification by those who achieve wealth and power through knowledge (Meta data) compiled and sold by corporations.   

Patriarchal Bargain Term coined by Denzi Kandiyoti to explain the different forms of patriarchy present women with distinct "rules of the game" and call for different strategies to maximize security and optimize life options with varying potential for active or passive resistance in the face of oppression.

Power: The ability to realize your will, even when others resist (Weber 1919). This is a socio-political interpretation of power that can exist in the social institutions in which we operate (Mills 1956), within the interplay between value, social behavior, and specific social spaces (Bourdieu 1991) and among individuals residing in interpersonal relationships (Foucault 1972), Power is often segmented into different types:

Institutional Power: The authority one has because of the positions that they have in powerful social institutions (Mills 1956).

Symbolic Power: The power of Constructing reality using indirect influence through language; shaping the way that individuals understand and define the world around them (Bourdieu 1991). Think of the way in which language is used to establish meaning and value and therefore and understanding of reality.

Bio power: The ability to control how an individual defines, accepts, and experiences their body. This includes the understanding and defining the reality of a person’s body, to how that body is performed (when the individual can eat, sleep, use the restroom etc.) (Foucault 1972).

Rationalization-The process by which social institutions operating under a bureaucratic rational authority are organized with a focus on calculability (quantity over quality), Predictability (lack of change), and efficiency (minimization of complexity) with the intended result of control over social behavior (Weber 1919, Ritzer 2004).

 The Iron Cage- the ideological prison of rationality experienced by individuals living within a rational bureaucracy that restricts individuality through Objectification (defining what is real) Depersonalization (You are treated as a number), Disenchantment (the routinization of Religion), and standardization (everything becomes like everything else) resulting in designed inefficiency experienced by the populace, causing:

1)      A loss of individuality- as you are sold to someone else

2)      A loss of autonomy – others dictate your worth

3)      Individual obsession with achieving higher status

4)      Lack of freedom

5)      Hyper specialization- leading to a lack of a common purpose; and alienation

 (Weber 1919, Ritzer 2004).

 

Cheerful Robot- Term coined by C. Wright Mills to describe the apathetic workers of a mass society who blindly and complacently accept their life chances as being determined by fate (Trevino 2012: 191). It is the feeling of mid-level workers in a bureaucratic corporation where all their behaviors are routinized resulting in an alienation that strips them of their humanity. They reside in occupational boredom and frustration: “They may not laugh, sing or even talk they must follow the rules and not violate the fetish of the enterprise…each day [workers] sell little pieces of themselves in order to try and buy them back each night and weekend with the coin of “fun”. With amusement, with love, with movies, with vicarious intimacy, they pull themselves into some kind of whole again.” (Mills 1951: 236-237)   

 

Eros and Civilization- Book by Herbert Marcuse that looks at how systemic institutions actively repress desire within society to redirect those feeling into economically viable labor. Essentially it is the way that our society teaches us to love our work, and gain pleasure from it. According to Marcuse (1974) “The need to relax in the entertainment furnished by the culture industry is itself repressive, and its repression is a step toward freedom. Where repression has become so effective that, for the repressed it assumes the (illusionary) form of freedom, the abolition of such freedom readily appears as a totalitarian act” (224).

 

Total Institution: This is any social Institution in which its members are required to live all or a part of their lives away from society. The entirety of the member’s social lives is encompassed, performed, and regulated within one location, in the presence of other people. This location is usually heavily policed by an authority. Erving Goffman (1961) uses this to describe an number of social Institutions within Society namely prisons, Asylums, Hospitals and some Schools. Where all of the daily activities are tightly scheduled with a series of formal rules individuals has to follow, otherwise they will be punished. All behavior is regulated to reinforce and achieve the overall goal of the Institution itself whether that be reform, warehousing, education, or wellness. 

 

 

REFERENCES

 

Baudrillard, Jean 1994. Simulacra and Simulations Michigan: University of Michigan Press

 

Brady, Anita and Tony Schirato 2011. Understanding Judith Butler California: Sage Press

 

Bourdieu, Pierre 1991. Language and Symbolic Power Massachusetts: Harvard University Press

 

          ________ 1998 Masculine Domination California: Stanford University Press

Foucault, Michel 1973. The Birth of the Clinic: An Archeology of Medical Perception New York Vintage books  

 

________ 1977. Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison New York: Vintage Books

 

________ 1978. The History of Sexuality Volume 1: An Introduction New York: Vintage Books

 

Goffman, Erving 1961. Asylums: Essays on the Social Situation of Mental Patients and Other Inmates New York: Anchor Books

 

Hemphill, Jim 2021. “‘The Matrix Resurrections’: Inside How Lana Wachowski Changed the Franchise’s Visual Approach” Indiewire Retrieved on 12/30 Retrieved at https://www.indiewire.com/2021/12/matrix-resurrections-cinematography-daniele-massaccesi-lana-wachowski-1234687515/

 

hooks, bell 2001. All About Love: New Visions New York: Harper Collins

 

Kandiyoti, Deniz. 1988. “Bargaining with Patriarchy.” In Gender and Society 2, no. 3 pp 274–90. Retrieved on 1/3/22 Retrieved at http://www.jstor.org/stable/190357

 

 

Lang, Derrik J. 2015. "Wachowskis unfazed by negativity ahead of 'Jupiter Ascending' launch". Times Colonist   Retrieved on 12/28 Retrieved at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Matrix_Resurrections

 

Marcuse, Herbert 1974. Eros and Civilization Massachusetts Beacon Press

 

Mills, C. Wright 1951. White Collar: The American Middle Classes Oxford: Oxford University Press

 

Orbach, Susie 2009. Bodies New York: Picador Press

 

Romano, Nick 2021. "Lana Wachowski says bringing back Neo and Trinity for The Matrix 4 helped her grieve". Entertainment Weekly. Retrieved on 12/28 Retrieved at https://ew.com/movies/lana-wachowski-neo-trinity-return-matrix-4-helped-her-grieve/

 

Shohini Chaudhuri 2005. Contemporary World Cinema: Europe, the Middle East, East Asia and South Asia. Edinburgh University Press

 

Trevino, Javier A 2012. The Social Thought of C. Wright Mills California Sage Press.

 

Weber, Max 1919. Economy and Society Massachusetts: Harvard University Press

 

Weintraub, Steve 2015. "The Wachowskis Talk JUPITER ASCENDING, Creating the Chicago Sequence, SENSE8, and More". Collider. Retrieved on 12/28 Retrieved at https://collider.com/wachowskis-jupiter-ascending-interview/

 

Zuboff, Shoshana 2019. The Age of Surveillance Capitalism: The Fight for a Human Future at the New Frontier of Power. New York: Public Affairs Press

---

[1] On a normal film set it is common to shoot things out of order due to scheduling, doing this with two films worth of story, there is potential to make it difficult on the actor to be able to play different emotional places in the same day. For instance, if they have to play the conclusion of the third film while then do a scene that is placed in the middle of the second film. However, it is also common for a lot of actors, on any set, to not know how the film is going to turn out regardless of whether they are doing one film or several.

[2] Richard Donner’s Superman and Superman II were “mostly” shot back-to-back until Richard Donner got fired and replaced by Richard Lester

[3] And no studio will greenlight one

[4] I will continue this analysis a little later in historical context.

[5] This was subsequently used, in Yuen’s next project after The Matrix, Ang Lee’s Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon for which he was highly praised

[6] *Cough Luke Skywalker Cough*

[7] There are a lot of Christ metaphors in the first film

[8] I am sure there is a gross libertarian reading of The Matrix, but I do not want to read it.

[9] We’ll come back to this quote later.

[10] This takes on another dimension entirely when you place it in the current historical context of Several states passing laws that allow any civilian to be able to bring lawsuits against other individuals in an attempt to limit one or more than one of their freedoms.

[11] There is some delicious irony that “The red pill movement” that is based in anti-woman misogyny uses as their allegory something that was intended to express acceptance of gender fluidity and expression acceptance.

[12] Another scholar may find value in an analysis of the way the camera changes focus from one film to the next. The Matrix being fully ensconced in “the male gaze” then becoming more egalitarian as the films progress, ultimately landing to romantic humanism by Resurrections     

 

[13] Observed from the Commentary