The Matrix - A false reputation.

[Theone0581]

I would like to take a bit of time and give my option upon the roles that the agents had plaid in the The Matrix. I'll do my best to keep this brief. After watching this movie I've come to the conclusion that the agents weren't really the bad guys. I believe that they were the protectors of a society of freedom of an organized populace. They had laws and rules in which this society in. There was no reason to adapt, because what they lived in was natural ignorance. The people who lived in the matrix lived in a parallel world that we live in today. People were offered freedom of religion and organized construction of civilization. The idea of an agent (excluding smith) was to protect this balance. Now don't deviate from my thesis, the machines could be considered a type of monarchy restricting control to the world in which they wanted to control... I'm not saying that was right. I am saying, however, that the agent's were given the title "bad guys" which in fact, I believe is not so much the case. The "unplugged" on the other hand, might be considered to be that of a protagonist. To me, Neo and the others were anarchist trying to bring down the balance of a society in which people could in fact, live freely. Even if it was artificial.


Just something to think about.

 

[Umbran]

I'm not saying that was right. I am saying, however, that the agent's were given the title "bad guys" ...

The folks who do things that aren't right are Bad Guys. That's kind of the definition.

So, it boils down to this - if what they were doing was wrong, they're bad guys. If what they were doing was right, or at least morally and ethically neutral, then they're not bad guys.

 

[RSKennan]

The folks who do things that aren't right are Bad Guys. That's kind of the definition.

So, it boils down to this - if what they were doing was wrong, they're bad guys. If what they were doing was right, or at least morally and ethically neutral, then they're not bad guys.

Interesting point, because I always thought killing sleepers such as the security guards in the lobby in the first movie was wrong, even with the explanation of why. That would make the rest of the characters bad guys too.

 

[Umbran]

Interesting point, because I always thought killing sleepers such as the security guards in the lobby in the first movie was wrong, even with the explanation of why. That would make the rest of the characters bad guys too.

yes, I've heard that argument. By the same logic, Luke Skywalker is a mass murderer, for how many people died when he blew up the Death Star.

I generally consider Neo and Luke to both be at war, and for many folks that implies a different moral and ethical standard. You only go to war when the need is very great, and the deaths of some who aren't the BBEG are acceptable when compared to the need.

If you don't think needs Luke and Neo were trying to meet justified a few extra casualties, then yes, they are Bad Guys.

 

[jonesy]

They are at war. It never really ended. At the moment that the first movie begins both sides are fighting against the threat of extinction caused by its effects. The machines use the humans who are hooked up for energy, and part of this energy is used to combat the resistance. There is no freedom on any side, because they are all locked in to the constraints of the sitation, and it keeps repeating. It's only at the end of the trilogy that there is a change for freedom with the truce.

 

[tomBitonti]

Neo and the others were anarchist trying to bring down the balance of a society in which people could in fact, live freely. Even if it was artificial.

That becomes a key question. Morpheos calls the sleepers slaves. The machines do use them for power, and restrict them to a dream world. But many dreamers are not ready to be awakened (according to Morpheos) Even one (Cypher) whom was awakened wants to go back.

Of the agents which were presented, most seem simply as unthinking cogs in the system. They do their role without questioning it. Smith does question his role, and finds that he hates what he is doing, and hates being in the Matrix.

Thinking about this now, I hadn't seen this parallel between Smith and Neo: Both are wanting a way out. What seems to make Smith evil is that he turns to hate and directs that at Neo.

To your point, a question is how much knowledge the Agents have about the system, and whether they believe that is necessary, or even changeable. Are they acting as stewards or herdsmen?

Thx!

TomB

 

[frankthedm]

I prefer to take the first movie at its face value. Agents are the arms of the machine overlords which must be stopped and those not out of the matrix are a threat and are doomed past a certain age. In the Matrix anyone not with the resistance is a tool of the system and should be dealt with accordingly.

Sadly the movies lost the beauty of a conflict where than can be no compromise, in at least part I suspect due to a certain RL tragedy. I almost threw up in my mouth at the compromise ending of the third movie.

I try not to read too much into the love story given that the directors' own father has referred to the siblings as having a marriage.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbi...-prior-sex-change-case-family-reject-her.html
Miss Wachowski, who is notoriously coy about her private life, now has what their father jokingly calls a 'marriage' with brother Andy, who co-directed the Matrix series with her.

 

[the Jester]

I would like to take a bit of time and give my option upon the roles that the agents had plaid in the The Matrix. I'll do my best to keep this brief. After watching this movie I've come to the conclusion that the agents weren't really the bad guys. I believe that they were the protectors of a society of freedom of an organized populace. They had laws and rules in which this society in. There was no reason to adapt, because what they lived in was natural ignorance. The people who lived in the matrix lived in a parallel world that we live in today. People were offered freedom of religion and organized construction of civilization.

No they weren't- the humans weren't offered anything. They were FORCED into a situation against their will, a situation in which they were basically food for the machines. The Matrix was a pacification technique, not some paradise of freedom.

I might be able to go along with your premise ("the agents weren't bad guys") if the humans had any choice. As it was, the agents were the Matrix' secret police, tasked with keeping any uppity humans in line without mercy. Never once does an Agent do anything because it's the right thing to do.

 

[Ulrick]

The Matrix raises so many philosophical questions that really only a person, as an individual, can determine the answer for themselves.

Personally, I see good and evil as relative terms, more or less. What you see with the Matrix movies is a cycle, a dichotomy between man and machine, creator vs. created, slave vs. master, and two powers of belief. With every thesis, with every act of creation/establishment of order, there is always something that threatens to oppose and unravel it. Neo and the resistance are that opposition.

You can see this as Hegelian, if you wish: Thesis + Antithesis = Synthesis. The compromise in the third movie was a synthesis, a dawning of a new age in the wake of much violence.

Or you can see it a struggle for Enlightenment and the feeling of importance. Nearly every person wants to feel important and not just a cog in the system.

Or you can see in gaming terms of Law vs. Chaos. The agents are law and they see the resistance as chaos. Meanwhile, the resistance are trying to restore their own law and the machines are chaos.

You choose.

 

[darjr]

Also didn't the machines, as part of the pacification plan, kill almost everyone periodically?