A part of the issues I am facing with this latest film is trying to justify that I got something out of it that others seem not to. I claim the existence of hidden messages and hidden meanings; I claim this film is somehow “art.” But I haven’t provided satisfactory evidence to back up my claims. I resisted because I had hoped simply telling others that these messages existed would be enough to motivate people to discover them on their own. Unfortunately, I was wrong to think this.
And so, this will be me revealing a key to understanding The Matrix Resurrections. I say “a” key because I’m confident there are other keys out there. This is simply the one I found and used to decode the film with. Huge warning now, that the following includes a shit ton of spoilers!
I will lay out my key as three steps that need to be considered in order to understand the hidden messages. After revealing these keys, I will elaborate in detail.
Step 1: This film is not entertainment. This film serves itself.
Step 2: The dialog spoken by the characters does not originate with those characters. The words and ideas are actually the words and ideas of real people in our very real world.
Step 3: Once you have figured out who actually said what the characters have said, consider what was said in the context of the scene, in the context of the film in its entirety, in the context of the film industry, and in the context of the creators.
If you endure these steps, you will find a ton of messages and ideas that themselves raise their own questions regarding the film and its very existence. Now to elaborate.
In step 1, one needs to start by realizing this film is not for them. That is, many modern films are designed as consumer products. As products, their purpose is to entertain people and provide motivation for people to part with their money. The film industry is, first and foremost, a business. The Matrix Resurrections is challenging this very idea.
As such, in order to actually understand the film, one needs to abandon the idea that the film will entertain the audience. The film might appear to be for their consumption, but it really is not. The film serves its own interests, not the interests of the audience. In other words, do not expect the film to fulfill in the way other films might.
This also raises the next issue: passive versus active. Most modern films, designed for consumption, require very little from the audience (aside from opening their wallets). The audience can enjoy the films very passively. The audience does not need to put forth much effort. This film is not passive; this film is active. This film requires the audience to put in an effort. Any audience who expects the film to serve them will certainly be disappointed.
Properly prepared, we are now ready to enter step 2. In step 2, the audience has to do some work. People have already identified that the dialog issuing forth from the characters is often broken and jilted. There are breaks in continuity. This is because the dialog isn’t necessarily for the scene or the characters. Someone else said these things, or something very similar, outside the scope of the film. The trick is to figure out who said it, and why.
Much of the time, and especially when one is stuck, assume it was Lana herself saying the dialog. If that doesn’t work, try Lilly. Still not working, try others, including Warner Bros. executives, crazy film fanatics, and even film critics. Often, the clues as to whom should be considered are there in the scene itself.
This leads to step 3: analysis. Consider what was said, and by whom, in the context of the scene itself. What does it tell you about the scene? If there are deficiencies in the scene, perhaps this is why; perhaps it is intentional. If the scene doesn’t entirely make sense, this may reveal where the problem exists.
Next, consider what was said in the context of the film as a whole. Perhaps it is telling us why the film was even created in the first place. In the context of film industry, perhaps a commentary is being made regarding the state of affairs of films in general (see my step 1 above). And in the context of the creators, perhaps they are trying to tell us something. Do not assume immediately that it is sarcasm or malicious. Try to be charitable. Try to be empathetic.
At this point, these hidden messages should start to reveal themselves. These hidden messages will tell their own story, not necessarily the same story that appears to have been presented. For me, the story mostly begins by telling me that this is NOT a Matrix film at all.
Now for an example of what I am talking about. The beginning of the film starts very similarly to how the first film in the trilogy started, though with marked differences. As someone else pointed out, after the initial trace sequence, instead of a light being pointed directly at the audience, the light is seen reflected in a pool of water on the ground. This, by itself should alert the audience that this new film, though seeming very similar is being presented from a different perspective than the first.
Before the light, there is a brief conversation between two characters: Bugs and Seq. “Looks like old code,” says Seq. “It feels really familiar,” says Bugs. Already we are being alerted. Perhaps this is a conversation between a Warner Bros. executive and Lana, discussing a draft of the new upcoming film. “A quick peek can’t hurt.” “Bugs, this feels like a trap.” Could this be Lana expressing concern about the draft? Or perhaps even her being dragged into a project she never wanted to be a part of?
We watch the opening sequence unfold, and yet it pales as compared to the first film. The iconic floating kick is strangely absent this time and the choreography is somehow less impressive. Following the scene to its conclusion, we also notice that Trinity does not actually escape this time. Bugs and Seq are there with the audience, watching. “But something is happening here. Something important.” “We know this story. This is how it all began. This is where he began.” The character, Bugs, is talking about Neo. But if these were not Bugs’ words, then “he” would also not be who we think either. “So deja vu and yet it’s obviously all wrong.”
I believe these words are self-referential. Lana and/or Lilly talking about themselves from the beginning. From the time they first created the first film. Before they were “she,” they were “he.” The next line, “Why use old code to mirror something new?” pulls it all together. Perhaps not a complete answer, but the beginning of one. It sounds like someone at Warner Bros. sought out Lana and/or Lilly and presented them with their own take on the Matrix. A draft of a script perhaps. Upon reading it, it awoke something inside them. Reminiscing. Remembering. And then concern. Their story had already been told. It had been concluded, hadn’t it? And this story, the one remembered is somehow inferior to the original as well. Trinity was supposed to have escaped. Trinity was supposed to have got out.
“If that’s supposed to be Trinity, that’s not what happens.”
“Maybe this isn’t the story we think it is.”
“Bugs, you have to get out of here. It’s gotta be a trap.”
I think this opening could be talking about how the initial project that eventually became this film began. How Lana and Lilly were initially drawn back in, someone else wanting to renew the Matrix franchise and tell more story. More likely, in order to try to cash in. The recurring references to it being a “trap” suggest that perhaps whomever actually approached Lana and Lilly may themselves have been naive and didn’t realize what they were doing. Perhaps motivated by a “higher power” (say the Warner Bros. executive team).
But all this is only one possible interpretation as well. Another could be that Lana is talking directly to her audience instead. Perhaps she is telling that audience that the film itself is the trap, and the audience is about to be deceived. A warning perhaps.
The next line is, I believe, the first reference to something: “Shit”. This singular word is strewn throughout the entire film. I don’t think it is ironic. I don’t think it is an accident. I don’t think anyone is trying to be funny. I think “shit” has a very specific meaning in the context of this film. I think “shit” is a representation to the sorts of things that are expected, like in the phrase “the same old shit.” This likely includes such things as the iconic action sequences and “bullet time,” which of course are referenced later in the film.
I will stop here, as my intention is not to decode the entire film. Doing so does the film, the creators, and the audiences all a disservice. I honestly, think I’ve already said too much as it is. However, I cannot assume that most people will be able to see what I see. Some people may need some assistance in the decoding. It is my sincere hope that this little bit is enough to get people started. Perhaps this is enough to convince people to take the time to see what I think this film is all about.