What "The Matrix Revolutions" Is REALLY About | A Christian Analysis

And now, we've reached the end of the rabbit hole. We are literally a day away from The Matrix Resurrections, and I don't know about you, but I'm wondering how all of the things that we've discussed will serve this upcoming movie.

By the way, if you want me to review The Matrix Resurrections, let me know in the comments below. It's been now taken to another level. I hope your journey with me back into the world of The Matrix has been illuminating.

I've seen your comments and I'm grateful to be having this discussion with you all. Why? Well, because like I said, I think movies are one of the last artifacts of shared culture that we have left. That is, we can still talk about movies like The Matrix, and a lot of people will have seen it.

So therefore, we can use the films as illustrations to talk about God, about humanity, and about the nature of reality. Before we jack in one last time, it's only fitting that we reflect on our journey through the previous posts.

Baudrillard, Simulation, and the Allegorical Framework of The Matrix

Now, if you haven't seen the first two videos I did on The Matrix, you need to go back and watch those first, okay? Links in the description below. Get caught up, and then jump back in with me here. In the first video, we discussed Baudrillard's theory of simulation as the underlying allegory of the film.

We observed the Wachowskis' adherence to Baudrillard's ideas, but also some key points of divergence, particularly in their distinguishing the real world from The Matrix as two separate realities. This upset Baudrillard, but since the Wachowskis wanted to solve the problem of simulation, at least cinematically, it was necessary for a referent to exist after all.

In the second video, we discussed how the notion of liberation from control was represented through appropriated religious motifs. Remember, The Matrix is not a movie about Christianity, or any particular religion for that matter.

It's a movie that used religious imagery to tell a different story. Also in both videos, I talked about ways that these particular concepts lend themselves to formulating theological narratives, and I provided clarification that we need to be aware that these films are not intended to showcase traditional Christian themes.

So if we talk about Christian themes, we do so in spite of the movies, not because of it. At the end of the last video, I teased Neo's solution to the story, and then I showed a graphic of Smith, looking like Thor or something.

Now why did I do that? Well, it's because Smith has a vital role to play in the final solution of the trilogy. In this video, I'm going to zoom in on Smith's role as the cinematic final problem for both humans and machines.

We'll also talk about Smith's new function as the anti-Neo, and how it serves to exaggerate the notion of control. Lastly, we'll talk about Neo's solution to the problem of Smith, and how that lends itself to the biblical notion of submission.

The War for Zion and the Problem of Smith

But first, the review. The war has come to Zion. Its citizens are batting down the hatches and manning battle stations. Captain Mifune is snarling a pre-battle speech to his troops a la Maximus and Gladiator.

Niobe and Morpheus, who both appear to have attended the Lando Calrissian school of flying, are racing back to Zion with an EMP. But Niobe has a different mission. The architect told him that the war is all part of the plan.

Because of human free will, there will always be a cycle of resistance and re-assimilation. In other words, the battle between human and machine is part of the system of control. And it's only a matter of time before Zion is destroyed to begin the cycle anew.

So Niobe and Trinity are piloting their own ship to the machine city with a risky proposition. A truce between humans and machines. But first, Niobe must correct a problem that threatens the safety of everyone, and that's Smith.

Due to the former agent's newfound ability to replicate, no one, not even the system, is safe. Both The Matrix Reloaded and The Matrix Revolutions were filmed all together and then later cut into two theatrical releases.

Perhaps because of this, the ending to Reloaded feels arbitrarily tacked on in the midst of an upswell of momentum. It's a lot like the ending of Villeneuve's Dune, if you saw that. The movie just kind of ends.

Before the end credits roll, we are just learning two new facts. Niobe's abilities now extend to the machines outside The Matrix. And Bane, aka Smith, has infiltrated Morpheus and gang's inner circle.

In light of this interruption, we're all kind of slapping our foreheads at the ending to Reloaded wondering what just happened. We're also underwhelmed during the initial moments of Revolutions, which plays like a scene found off the cutting room floor.

While Reloaded employed an odd blend of CG and slow motion to cartoonish effect, Revolutions attempts a correction by speeding up the CG action. For the most part, it works. Both the sentinel invasion and the hammer chase sequences heavily rely on CG, but this time the speedy sentinels are nowhere near as garish as our friend, good old Agent Leapfrog over here, hopping on cars in Reloaded.

Unfortunately, much of the war feels unnecessarily protracted. The Wachowskis have taken a gamble by removing the most important player in the entire story, and that's Nio, for like almost the entire middle of the film.

As I mentioned in the last video, most of us in the audience are struggling to get emotionally involved with characters that are as sorely underdeveloped as these, especially those from Zion. So when the war lasts like 45 minutes or something, which is like half of the entire movie, we're not only exhausted as an audience, but we're underwhelmed by the final 8 minute showdown between Nio and Smith.

The whole thing put together feels anticlimactic. Despite these critiques, the conceptual slash philosophical devices running throughout the trilogy, they do pay off when Nio and Smith finally meet, in my opinion.

As I mentioned earlier, Smith has a newfound ability to replicate via the old Molaram hat trick from Temple of Dune. How old am I? You know, like is anybody catching these references right now? These new abilities arose as a result of Nio's first confrontation with the Agent.

Now remember, at the end of the first Matrix, Nio leaps into Smith's body and causes him to explode. In Reloaded, we realize that Nio never really destroyed Smith. Rather, he compels Smith to wake up from his own programming, to disobey the rules of the system.

In essence, he inadvertently frees Smith to initiate his own campaign of control, where to pervert the famous Hoover slogan, there's a Smith in every pot and two Smiths in every garage. Now, how many of you caught that reference?

As Jim Revira writes, Smith threatens to transform the entire human and machine world into a single self-replicated eye. This is the end of the rabbit hole, ladies and gentlemen. An absolute form of hyper-control, without any human capacity for free will.

The Merovingian's view of causal determinism can now be fully realized. Action, reaction, cause, and effect. For if we have fully succumbed to societal manipulation, and we are forced to be consumers adrift in a sea of commodity, well then we are merely objects acting without freedom as Baudrillard claims.

But the question is, why does Smith gain this ability to disobey his programming in the first place? And the answer is, because in contrast to Smith, Nio is the eventuality of the anomaly of free will.

That is, he is the embodiment of this inherent feature in all human beings. When Nio gains the ability to manipulate the matrix, he does so to perpetuate the freedom of choice. Specifically, to elicit others to wake up from control and make their own decisions.

Unfortunately, he elicits the same response from Smith. He therefore transforms Smith into his doppelganger, a veritable anti-Nio.

What is he? He is you. You're opposite. You're negative. The result of the equation trying to balance itself out.

The Oracle tells Nio, Smith is you. You're opposite. You're negative. Smith is the embodiment of the necessary instability caused by Nio's anomalous presence in the matrix. Because Smith is a machine, however, his inhumanity compels him to perpetuate a new system where he is the control, whereas Nio is the eventuality of freedom.

Smith is the eventuality of its inverse. Thus, in Smith, the Wachowskis flirt with the nihilistic outcome of Baudrillard's ideas. In so doing, they have cleverly posed the final problem and its Godelian solution.

Nio cannot win the battle against Smith. While they are, in one sense, two sides of the same coin, Nio is human and therefore subject to pain and death. Smith, on the other hand, does not appear to share these shortcomings.

So it's only a matter of time, despite his best efforts, before Nio will lose. We see this begin to happen after Smith smashes Nio into the street.

You must be able to see it, Mr. Anderson. You must know it by now. You can't win. It's pointless to keep fighting. Why, Mr. Anderson? Why? Why do you persist?

Why, Mr. Anderson? Why? Why do you persist? Right? It's a great question. And Nio replies, because I choose to. And here we see the solution to the final problem. If Nio is not free to choose, but only to react, well then it follows that he will continue to fight Smith and the machines until one of them wins.

But, if humans are truly free, then perhaps Nio can develop a synthesis out of the visual dialectic between free will and control. This is what essentially happens next. Nio submits and he allows Smith to merge with him, thereby exposing them both to the Source.

Remember, Nio has agreed to be hooked up to the Source in the Machine City. The end result of this is that Nio and Smith cancel each other out, essentially. The Matrix re-assimilates, but with an important new variable in place, those humans who wish to unplug may finally do so thanks to Nio's peace agreement with the machines.

Submission, Humility, and Strength in Weakness

Nio's free act of submission may surprise some, but it actually leads to a biblical truth. There is strength in submission to God. James tells us to be humble and submit ourselves to the Lord and the devil will flee from us, which I think follows from first submitting ourselves to God's power and his authority.

Peter tells us that God opposes the proud but gives grace to the humble. Well, it follows that we, therefore, cannot submit to God without first ridding ourselves of our pride. Of course, none of this can take place without the influence of the Holy Spirit on our lives.

The Spirit God gave us does not make us timid, but gives us power, love, and self-discipline. Once we are under the influence of the Spirit and we humble ourselves under God's mighty power, he will lift us up in honor and exalt us.

Remember, this is the same Lord who put all things in subjection under Christ's feet, thus demonstrating his unsurpassed authority over the universe. So the solution to the final problem of the Matrix trilogy actually trades on a biblical principle.

There is power in weakness and strength in submission. But the strength is not our own. It is God's strength working through us to showcase his power and authority over all creation. Therefore, as Neo's last act was to stand firm against Smith's onslaught, we also can rely on God's promises, stand firm in the faith, and be strong.

The Matrix as Tool, Not Gospel

In closing, I want to leave you with a couple of thoughts. Number one, just because the Matrix trilogy was originally an allegory, largely shaped by the postmodern philosopher Jean Baudrillard, and it used religious imagery to further that allegory and discuss certain philosophical themes that are helpful for us as Christians in conversations today, it does not mean that the new movie will be the same allegory or contain any of these elements.

We cannot merely assume that because, well, we all know what happens when we assume, right? It very well could be the case that the Wachowskis, or Wachowski, singular, it's only one of them in the director's chair now, that they'll tell a different allegory.

It could very well be the case that they'll communicate a different message with different themes. Some of you have pointed this out in the comments. Maybe the movie will be about transgenderism or something entirely more political and way more on-the-nose, you know?

Because let's face it, everything is political these days. It's my sincere hope that the concepts we've discussed from the original trilogy will be even further developed and further explored in Resurrections, because there's a lot more to say about all of these concepts.

I mean, there's a lot of excellent written materials in the area of theology and philosophy on these concepts, but they may not do that at all. And we'll know once we've seen the new movie. I'm just saying, prepare yourself.

The second thing is, while movies are a very helpful tool to communicate what we know to be true about reality, as Christians in today's culture, don't make the tool the job. People in ministry often slip up and they make this mistake.

They make the tool the job. In other words, we can have extremely long conversations about the Matrix, but at the end of the day, the Matrix is not the Gospel. The Gospel is the Gospel. So, what I'm suggesting to you is, be intentional in your conversations.

See your opportunities and take them. And when you do, the Matrix can serve as a great tool to help folks understand God and the world He has made. It was my pleasure to offer a perhaps different perspective to the more popular, well-worn interpretation of the Matrix.

I sincerely believe that properly understanding the trilogy, particularly in its usage of religious motifs and allegory, will better equip us to draw those connections between the films and the Gospel message.

As always, let me know what you think. I mean, did you like the Matrix revolutions? Did you hate the movie? What do you think is going to happen in Resurrections? Do you want me to review Resurrections?

Let me know about all this stuff in the comments below. And in the meantime, I will say, bye for now.