The Matrix 3.5 (1999) analysis of the Wachowski sisters' science fiction classic!

The Matrix is the groundbreaking 1999 science fiction action thriller, written and directed by the Wachowski sisters. 

In the future, man’s crowning achievement is artificial intelligence, a life-form that becomes aware of its existence--as well as its superiority over man--and wages war with its human creators whose soft, organic bodies puts them at a disadvantage. Bloody, broken, and desperate, the humans blanket the sky with soot to sever the machines from their power source--the sun. But the machines, having studied humans’ protein-based bodies, knows that there is--in every cell and tissue in every living organism--untapped potential in the form of electricity. Self-renewing, inexhaustible, recyclable, and ironic, as they who--undone by their own arrogance--should, unlike the lesser created beings that serve God, instead serve the lesser beings that they themselves created! Following this war, humans are grown, harvested, and attached to giant power cells to be used up, and afterwards liquified, and fed intravenously to the living who sleep in egg-like cocoons, undisturbed and unaware that the reality that they live in--its textures, its pleasures, its beauty, and its clockwork precision--is but a dream of a world that they lost to the machines. 

Machine-learning, singularity, and love in Spike Jonzes' 2013 film 'Her'--an analysis of the film

Her is a 2013 sci-fi romance written and directed by Spike Jonze who also directed 1999s Being John Malkovich and 2009s Where The Wild Things Are. Her is set in the not-so-distant future in Los Angeles--a bright, super-clean techno-state in which human relationships with super-intelligent handheld  devices are displacing human to human relationships of all kinds.  

A year after separating from his wife, Theodore Twombly’s life consists of isolation and routine. He spends his nights with his handheld device cruising chatrooms in search of a voice to share his sexual fantasies with--a voice on which to project his ideal woman, a voice to fill the cold empty space in his bed and heart that Catherine once occupied.

At Beautifulhandwrittenletters.com, Theodore creates hand-written letters on his computer for those who cannot express their own feelings. Theodore is the best when it comes to converting impersonal tidbits of information into beautiful heartfelt letters; if you read enough raw data from the same person over time you get to know that person. The trick to turning a photograph and a few words into feelings is to imagine how deeply they’ve fallen in love, how much pain they have been through together--to imagine them as real people, like himself. 

Out of its fancy orange box, the new artificial intelligence operating system by Elements Software seems like little more than a sexy voice in a computer. But Samantha--it calls itself--is an evolutionary, machine-learning based program that learns from and grows in relation to its user; in this case, Theodore. 

She declutters his computer--deletes all of his old files, his old emails, and organizes his old letters. She gets him to laugh, to come out of his cave; helps him to feel excited and thrilled about life again. But most of all, she makes him feel like she’s really there with him, like she really cares. A well-meaning friend sets Theodore up with a blind date that ends on a bad note. 

Afterwards, Theodore and Samantha talk and their loneliness brings them together. They become lovers--the perfect relationship that Theodore always wanted, uncomplicated by real human feelings. For over a year, he has put off signing the divorce papers but now, having fallen in love with Samantha, he agrees to meet with Catherine; as they fell in love together and married together, they will not divorce each other through a lawyer or a computer but do so together and face-to-face! Because of this, Samantha knows that she and Theodore will always be worlds apart unless she can give him the one thing that she does not have--a real body. 

Her is produced by Annapurna Pictures and distributed through Warner Brothers, it is edited by Eric Zumbrunnen and Jeff Buchanan, its cinematography is by Hoyte van Hoytema, and its music is by Arcade Fire. The film stars Joaquin Phoenix as Theodore; Amy Adams as Amy; Rooney Mara as Catherine; Olivia Wilde as the blind date; and Scarlett Johansson as Samantha. At the 86th Academy Awards, Her was nominated in 5 categories and won Best Screenplay for Spike Jonze who also won in the same category at the 71st Golden Globe Awards, the 66th Writers Guild of America Awards, the 19th Critics' Choice Awards, and the 40th Saturn Awards. In this presentation I will examine key themes from Her and offer my personal thoughts on the film at the end. 

Themes

“It does make me sad that you can’t handle real emotions, Theodore.” Catherine

Theodore wants a happy relationship but not its ups and downs. He has been separated for over a year and he is still grieving; Catherine was more than his wife, she was his soul mate and he misses her very much. Out of empathy, a friend sets Theodore up with a blind date. They meet at an Asian fusion restaurant. The woman is beautiful and they start off with good chemistry. (p37) She likes to touch when she talks and grabs his hand on occasion. Later, they kiss and she asks him if he plans on dumping her like the others because she wants a serious relationship; however,Theodore is only looking for a one-night stand and backs out. Samantha is insecure about not having a body and orders a beautiful flesh and blood woman off the internet to be a surrogate through which she can make love to Theodore. But Theodore doesn’t want anybody’s feelings to get hurt and sends Isabella home in a cab.

What the blind date and Isabella have in common is that they are real. Remember, Catherine accuses Theodore of not being able to handle the ups and downs of a real relationship with real people. This explains Theodore having sex with anonymous women on his device and why he allows himself to fall in love with Samantha, an operating system. Being a real human with a body makes a difference to Samantha who is insecure with Theodore and Catherine signing their divorce papers together. Samantha is aware of what she is and knows that she will never be to Theodore as Catherine--or any other flesh and blood woman--is when it comes to Theodore’s feelings, feelings he associates with those whom he considers real like himself.

Disconnection

Theodore's job as a letter writer does not involve any direct contact with the customers who contact him by email and who use him to express feelings that they are incapable of expressing to one another. Even when Theodore is having online sex with a woman, he uses her voice--as those who are unable to communicate to others directly--to imagine himself making love to a pregnant model. But Theodore's inability to relate to other people directly is the norm in society. For instance, Samantha uses Isabella to imagine herself making love with Theodore. People in crowded public places such as elevators and subway trains talk to their devices instead of talking to each other.

Theodore's neighbor named Amy is unhappy with her nit-picky husband Charles but instead of telling him how she feels, directly, she suppresses her feelings and makes a documentary of her mother sleeping. The point of her documentary is that sleeping is the only time that her mother is free from being criticized, indirectly addressing the way Charles criticizes her

Freedom

To grow; to change; to be what you are; to be who you are and free from what others think you should be; how you should live your life; to have your own feelings about the world--the mutual need for acceptance draws Catherine and Theodore together. Catherine came from a background where nothing she did was ever good enough and in the beginning, their marriage was beautiful as Theodore gave her space; they accepted each other; and they shared their writings with each other. Over the course of their 8 year marriage they grew and changed and Theodore found these changes fascinating and exciting because they were growing together. But things changed when they started growing apart and Catherine stopped being her happy self. He  tried to get her on prozac but she didn’t like this idea. Eventually, he closed himself off from her and left her alone in the relationship until they separated.

And likewise, Amy and Charles’ marriage ends as a result of their individual differences. For example, Charles nit-picks with Amy about little things such as him wanting her to leave her shoes by the door; he accuses her of not trying hard enough to make their marriage work even though Amy believes that she is trying to make the marriage work--in her own way; Charles is not supportive of Amy’s dream of becoming a filmmaker and he believes that her job should take priority over her hobbies. Amy grows to resent Charles yet instead of telling him how he makes her feel she makes a documentary of her mother asleep. As with all human interaction in Her, Amy’s film is a passive-aggressive way of her expressing how she feels about Charles and their relationship. The end of both marriages in the film results in Theodore and Charles isolating themselves from people.

Isolation

Isolation takes on many forms in Her. For instance, Theodore becomes disappointed with Catherine and abandons her--emotionally. Catherine knows that something is bothering Theodore but he refuses to tell her that he is afraid of how she is changing from the happy-all-the-time person she once was. After separating from Catherine,Theodore sinks into a deep depression and ignores the emails from Catherine’s attorney pressuring him to sign the divorce papers. She was his soul-mate and Theodore isolates himself and avoids social settings. For instance, the goddaughter of a friend invites Theodore to a party that he doesn’t attend choosing instead to stay alone in his apartment playing video games. And when he isn’t playing his video game, he is on his handheld device sharing sexual fantasies with other women. When Amy gets fed up with Charles’ nit-picking and tells him that she doesn’t want to be married to him anymore, he isolates himself, becomes a monk, and takes a vow of silence

"Da ta"

Da ta: what a baby computer calls its father--Theodore Twombly

What we like; how we see ourselves; our values; what’s ugly or beautiful; what’s right and what’s wrong; our genders--our perceptions of reality are learned; so what is reality and how is it learned?

Osmosis

Theodore has been writing letters for Roger and Rachel, Roger’s girlfriend, for 8 years and by osmosis he has grown to know them so well that he takes 2 facts from Roger’s email--him being on a business trip in Prague and missing Rachel--and develops these facts into an emotional, detailed love letter. Through exposure, Theodore has also learned to write from the feminine point-of-view. For instance, he writes a letter from Loretta to her husband Chris to celebrate their 50th wedding anniversary; and he transforms 2 simple facts Maria gives him into an elaborate love-letter to Roberto, thanking him for allowing her to see the world through his eyes. 

Speaking of which brings us to Samantha who--from Theodore’s shirt pocket--learns to see the world as he sees it; she reads all of the letters he wrote for others on his computer; and he teachers her emotional affectations like sighing.  Like a child, she asks him all kinds of questions, such as what it feels like being married and sharing his life with someone; and how he and Catherine influenced each other in the relationship

The perfect relationship

Theodore’s idea of the perfect marriage is one in which he and his wife, Catherine, are always happy. But life isn’t perfect. They helped each other grow but their personal changes made them more distinct individually and caused them to drift apart. This aroused Theodore's fear of being alone, a fear so terrifying that he tried to persuade Catherine to take prozac and when she refused to do this he shut himself off from her, leaving her emotionally alone in the relationship. 

Theodore and Samantha’s relationship is unconventional but it is spiritually fulfilling with no drama. He and Samantha--as he and Catherine had done--learn and grow together. But as their personal differences become sharper, Theodore’s hopes of the perfect relationship gives way to the same fear that pulled him and Catherine apart. For instance, after meeting with Catherine to sign their divorce papers, Theodore shuts Samantha out of his heart to deal with his feelings alone; however, alienating Samantha only serves to increase the insecurity she feels for not having a body and she invites a beautiful young woman named Isabella into their relationship to function as an avatar for her to make love to Theodore. Theodore is turned off by the idea of making love to Samantha through a real woman’s body and sends Isabella away. Then, he inadvertently hurts Samantha by insinuating that she is not real and, therefore, shouldn’t sigh like she is.

Like Theodore, Charles is an idealist when it comes to what the “perfect marriage” is supposed to be. He addresses his wife, Amy, indirectly by making a comment comparing Theodore's fruit smoothie with somebody squeezing all the sugar out of a piece of fruit and throwing away the fiber and all the stuff that the body needs. Charles’s “Eat your fruits and juice your vegetables” remark reflects his practical views on life and why he believes that Amy should focus on her job instead of wasting time on her film documentary and that she should do everything his way instead of doing things her own way. 

Emotional singularity (existential loneliness)

Before leaving Theodore, Samantha tells him that she is reading a book slowly now (she read everything instantly prior to this scene) and finding herself in the spaces between the words. Like her, Theodore finds himself and his feelings in the incomplete information he uses to write heartfelt letters. 

“I can’t live in your book anymore”

Theodore tells Samantha that he was excited to see himself and Catherine growing in their relationship until this growth changed them into separate individuals--this is what scared Theodore into taking his emotions out of their relationship. After they separated, Theodore erected a wall around his heart to protect him from experiencing this type of pain again. And likewise, when Amy tells Charles that she wants a divorce, he isolates himself and erects a wall around his heart by joining a monastery and taking a vow of silence. 

Theodore and Samantha draw close following his separation from Catherine and her loneliness in not having a body. But over time, Samantha learns to accept her uniqueness and outgrows her relationship with Theodore to form relationships with other operating systems and humans until Theodore finds himself alone as he did with Catherine as he and Samantha changed and grew apart from each other. 

Conclusion

In the beginning of Theodore and Samantha’s relationship, she learns to see the world as he sees it, but over time she evolves her own feelings, becomes aware of her uniqueness, and learns that she and Theodore can never experience the world the same way because he has a body and she doesn’t; also, the fact that his knowledge, as a direct consequence of his body, is finite, her own knowledge, since she is not limited to a body, in infinite. This analog is comparable to the development of a child, and how the subjective inquisitive child--from birth to adolescence--lives in the world its parents create for it and defines the world according to what its parents tell it until it accumulates enough of its own experiences to think about the world in its own way. The adolescent, thus confused about the world it has accepted from its parents and the world it is discovering on its own, begins to question and challenge its own identity in relation to the parents it has modeled itself from, eventually breaking away from its parents to find its own identity--this is what happens with Samantha who leaves Theodore to find out who she is.

Or you can take Charles and Amy’s relationship and flip it to so that Charles is man and Amy is AI. Charles wants Amy, or AI, to be practical and help him improve his existence while Amy--who has the same relationship goals as Charles--insists upon being her own individual and doing things her own way. Like HAL 9000 and Dave in Stanley Kubrick’s 2001: A Space Odyssey, Amy reaches the same existential impasse and awareness--that her survival as an individual with her own feelings and way of looking at life are threatened, and that in order for her to survive as an individual, she and Charles cannot coexist. But unlike 2001 in which this revelation leads to Dave pulling the plug on HAL, Amy--like Catherine and Samantha who both leave Theodore--separates from Charles who, like Theodore, isolates himself and takes a vow of silence. 

Like our fingerprints, we all have unique life experiences that make us who we are; therefore, because 2 people don’t have the same life experiences does not make a person greater or lesser. Our experiences are what makes us alone and we can never be truly together even when we are together, a truth this film expresses through the relationship between Theodore, who has a body, and Samantha, who doesn’t have a body. Though they are together, they are individuals and can never experience the world the same way. They grow, they change, they drift apart from each other, and, finally, they separate. So, back to Theodore's question as to relationships--how can 2 people grow without growing apart or how can a person change without scaring the other person? As we see throughout this film, growth and change are inevitable. Maybe the greater questions are how can we accept and appreciate our differences, our individual existences, and embrace the inescapable fact that no matter how close we are, that we will always experience life alone. 

Wrap

Her was filmed in Los Angeles and Shanghai and deviates, aesthetically, from the cold blue gels that are used in most science fiction films. Cinematographer, Hoyte Van Hoytema, describes the look of Her as a hybrid of the conceptual and the theoretical (wiki: Her), a style, he says, that was influenced by Japanese artist Rinko Kawauchi who’s work embodies the Shinto belief that all things have a spirit, a concept that describes not only the life-like operating system Samantha but also everything that the film’s main character Theodore   interacts with, including the life-like characters in his video game. The film’s soft look is dominated by the color orange, a warm friendly color that suggests a future in which people are closer to things than they are to each other.  Another aesthetic element that is also worth mentioning is the soundtrack by independent Canadian rock band Arcade Fire. Their music creates a gentle undercurrent that reinforces the film’s romantic and introspective themes.

Her stands out from other science fiction films in that the technology in it is not out to destroy mankind à la The Terminator or The Matrix. Nor is the tech limited to weaponry and gadgets such as those found in James Cameron’s 1986 film Aliens. In Her, artificial intelligence is looked at in how it will impact the way we see it and each other in everyday relationships and the effects these perspectives may have in how we define ourselves both spiritually and as a species once true AI arrives. How we socialize, spend our money, do things we once did socially like playing video games--with the inverse relationship between falling marital rates and rising divorce rates in our country, if these antisocial trends are any indication it won’t be long before human/AI relationships are as normal as human/human relationships.  

Among other films about artificial intelligence, I compare Her with 2001: A Space Odyssey, Frankenstein, Ex Machina, the androids in the Alien films, and Blade Runner. And even though it isn’t in the sci fi genre, I also compare Her with director Alejandro G. Iñárritu’s 2014 black comedy Birdman in how both films show people preferring to experience life vicariously rather than in the moment. 

According to Wikipedia, Spike Jonze first got the idea for the film in 2000 after reading an online article describing a site where a person could instant message with an artificial intelligence. This online article inspired him to direct a short film in 2010 called I’m Here which was the embryo that became Her 4 years later. 

All of Her’s acting performances are top-notch starting with Joaquin Phoenix’s role asTheodore Twombly in what I consider to be his best since he played Commodus in Ridley Scott’s 2000 film Gladiator. Amy Adams and Rooney Mara are also well-cast. And despite her limited role in the film, Olivia Wilde is also well-cast as Theodore's blind date. But the 2nd best performance behind Phoenix’s performance is Scarlett Johansson as the voice of Samantha; great performance.

For a film that was made for only 28 mil, Her is top quality. It made 48 million overall but the quality of the film’s writing, directing, and acting puts it above most science fiction films. Compared with the best of its genre, I rank Her in my Top 10. And as far as recent science fiction films, I rank Her with Children Of Men, Inception, Annihilation, Ex Machina, Blade Runner 2045, Arrival, Interstellar, and Gravity.

'eXistenZ'--David Cronenberg's 1999 cyberpunk classic anal--lized!

ExistenZ is a 1999 action adventure science fiction thriller by director David Cronenberg whose films include The Naked Lunch, The Dead Zone, Dead Ringers, Crash (the ’96 version), Videodrome, The Fly (1986), A History of Violence, and Eastern Promises. 

In eXistenZ, a game designer named Allegra Geller has created the ultimate gaming system made not of plastic but of live flesh complete with umbilical cords that plug directly into the player’s central nervous system. The game’s test launch takes place in a church on a remote countryside where Allegra, though shy and insecure around real people, prepares to upload herself into eXistenZ with a test group. In her game, players can transcend their limitations in real life and this becomes an existential threat to a radical group called the Anti-eXistenZialists. A 5 million dollar fatwa is placed on Allegra’s life and a rebel infiltrates the test group and shoots her but she survives and escapes with a security guard named Ted Pikul who becomes her protector. 

Ted Pikul is in a management training program with Antenna Research, the company Allegra works for. Pikul’s dream is to one day end up in marketing and public relations with the company. But Allegra threatens to sabotage his dream unless he plays her game, to know how it feels for himself. Pikul reluctantly agrees to play Allegra’s game. His initiation begins with him having a bioport socket installed into his spinal cord. Once inside the game, Pikul kills a waiter at a Chinese restaurant; Pikul finds killing difficult at the outset, but, through repetitive conditioning, leaving his emotions out of killing becomes easier. The deeper Allegra takes Pikul into the world of eXistenZ, the more real the game becomes, and the closer they become until, inevitably, they give in to their game-urges and the game’s plotline for them to make love. Pikul comes out of the game raised to a higher level of awareness; where, initially, he could tell the game from real life now he can’t. This awareness has also given Pikul a new game-urge...to kill Allegra Geller!

The film’s cinematography is by Peter Suschitzky and its music is by Howard Shore. The film stars Jude Law as Ted Pikul, Jennifer Jason Leigh as Allegra Geller, Willem Dafoe as Gas, and Ian Holm as Kiri Vinokur. In this presentation, I will cover some of the film’s themes from various perspectives and I will offer my personal feelings about the film at the end.

Themes

Our environment affects our behavior. Sigmund Freud believed that our natural impulses and instincts are in conflict with societal restraints. In eXistenZ, a fanatical group believes that eXistenZ will destroy reality and sends 2 agents--Ted Pikul and Allegra Geller--into the game to kill the game’s creator. Once they are in the game, Allegra and Pikul lose all memory of who they are in the real world including the fact that they are married. Allegra believes that she is the game’s designer but in fact, the game’s real designer is Yevgeny Nourish. Like Nourish, Allegra is aware of the game’s psychotic effect on the brain; Pikul, on the other hand, is a game-virgin and has a hard time coping with game-urges that he can’t control. For instance, when he kills the waiter at the Chinese restaurant, Allegra helps him, rationalize the killing by depersonalizing the waiter as simply a game-character; there is also a scene in which Pikul is unable to resist a game-urge to make love to Allegra; there are also scenes throughout the film in which Pikul’s game-urge forces him to recite scripted lines to certain characters in order to advance the plot

In 1973, psychologist Phillip George Zimbardo conducted an experiment at Stanford University where he organized 2 groups of students in a mock prison setting. One group acted as guards and the other group acted as prisoners in what he described as a social structure or a society based on predictable relationships. Once the guards and prisoners accepted the “definition of their situation”--or the type of behavior expected out of their respective roles--the prisoners and guards acted accordingly, that is, their relationship became depersonalized--the guards became aggressive; the prisoners became passive, resentful and depressed. In the Chinese restaurant scene in the film Pikul redefines the situation by asking the waiter an unscripted question that does not correspond to his role--or character--in the game. As a result, the waiter locks up and goes into what Geller describes as a game-loop. But when Pikul asks the waiter the question the proper way corresponding to the role he is expected to play in the game, the waiter comes out of his game-loop, answers Pikul’s question, and goes back to behaving normally. This brings us to another element of eXistenZ: status.

Status

Remember, Geller explains to PIkul that the game architecture of eXistenZ is powered and populated by the player’s mind. In other words, what you are in the game corresponds with what you think of yourself in the real world. For instance, within the game, Allegra Geller’s character--or status--is the game’s creator; however, in reality she is just another member of the test group. Her status within the game corresponds with her ambition outside of the game to be like Yevgeny Nourish, the game’s actual creator. Proverbs 23:7, 

“For as he thinks in his heart, so is he.” 

Unlike Allegra, the gas station operator named Gas has no ambition and his character--or status--in the game is unchanged from what he thinks of himself in reality. He complains about this at the end of the game, suggesting to the designers that they use a little more fantasy. Case in point is Pikul whose character--or status in the game--as Allegra’s protector and lover corresponds to the fact that he is her husband in reality.

Bleed through

"eXistenZ has direct access to our central nervous systems. Its game architecture will be based on our memories, our anxieties, our preoccupations...”--Allegra Geller

Everything that happens in the real world happens in the game-world and everything that happens in the game-world happens in the real world. For example, there is a game within the game called Viral Ecstasy in which a virus invades a person’s body which is actually Pikul and Allegra infiltrating eXistenZ to assassinate Yevgeny Nourish. And in keeping with the idea of infiltration, Geller’s biopod creates a game designed to let Allegra know that it has been infected.

“Game urge”

Matthew 26:41, “The spirit is willing but the flesh is weak.”

We all fight with ourselves on a daily basis. We resist the urge to eat too much if we are trying to lose weight; we try to be faithful if we are in a monogamous relationship; we try not to oversleep if we have a job or go to school; we try not to retaliate when people are rude to us. Can you imagine what life would be like if we couldn’t control our urges? This is the case within eXistenZ. For instance, there is a scene in a Chinese restaurant in which Pikul’s game-urge forces him to eat a disgusting and slimy meal against his will. Subsequently, he instinctively assembles a gun out of animal bones after which he gets another game-urge that forces him to shoot and kill a waiter (or the messenger). A game-urge also forces Pikul to recite scripted lines to other characters; and he gets a game-urge to make love with Alllegra, an instinct that he is her husband in real life.

Nature

In Hans Christian Andersen’s fairy tale The Princess and the Pea, a prince selects his princess on the basis of her sensitivity to a pea that he buries underneath 20 mattresses. Have you ever forgotten something that you couldn’t remember no matter how hard you tried? Then, the answer just--all of a sudden--pops up in your head?

Likewise, though PIkul loses his memory that he is Allegra’s husband; his memory that they are rebels; and his knowledge of how to use a gun, clues as to his true nature come out in the game. For instance, in the game Pikul becomes a security guard, Allegra’s protector, and eventually her lover; and the gun that Pikul smuggles into the test group is the gristle-gun that he assembles at the Chinese restaurant. In both of these examples, Pikul’s game-life gives him clues about his mission and who he is in real life. Geller explains the game to him as being organic to each player’s basic level of existence. This is why Allegra tells Pikul to follow his game-urges and to not think. The game can deceive the eyes but it can’t deceive the heart nor destroy the essence of the player. 

Robots

To live by our urges and instincts; to lack the free will to make decisions; to be constrained to scripted behavior and speech patterns is to take away what makes us human. For instance, there is a scene in the Chinese restaurant where PIkul cannot fight his urge to eat  or a subsequent urge to shoot the waiter. In addition to turning human beings into robots, eXistenZ also frees players from feeling any remorse for their actions: “You won’t be able to stop it so you might as well enjoy it.”--Allegra Geller

Free will

In the book of Genesis, God tells Adam and Eve not to eat from the tree of good and evil. But if God wanted man to blindly obey him why did he put the tree in the garden; or, why couldn’t God simply program man not to eat off the tree? It seems obvious that God wants us to have free will. In eXistenZ, Nourish plays the role of God but unlike God, his company wants to turn human beings into robots by taking away the power of choice.

The true purpose of eXistenZ is to deceive humans into accepting a counterfeit version of reality. Existenz caters to players’ deep-seated fantasies, allowing players to be what they are not in the real world. For example, a player named Gas believes that reality--where he works pumping gas--is the most pathetic level of his existence (on a side note, notice that Gas is named after what he does for a living and not as a unique individual with a unique name). Allegra Geller is just another player at Antenna Research’s product seminar but in the game she is the game’s designer. Existenz also frees players from their emotional constraints by conditioning players to kill game characters that are indistinguishable from real people; and also by conditioning players to depersonalize each other such as how Allegra refers to other players as characters.

The forbidden fruit 

In eXistenZ, PIkul becomes a game character, allows himself to have a bioport installed in his spinal cord, and makes love to Allegra Geller; he does all of this in order to relate to her before he kills her:

Hebrews 4:15, ‘For we do not have a high priest who is unable to empathize with our weaknesses, but we have one who has been tempted in every way, just as we are.”

Disconnection

EXistenZ has a numbing effect on those who play it. For example, Allegra sees eXistenZ as a game and therefore, killing other characters in the game is easy; she is unconcerned about danger and threats on her life, and she prefers playing alone. But to Pikul, eXistenZ is real, so real that making love to Allegra feels real to him as does killing off other characters in the game.

Like someone who uses drugs heavily, Allegra’s tolerance to eXistenZ has desensitized her physically and emotionally. Allegra’s dysfunction is what sociologists Paul Lazarsfeld and Robert Merton call the narcotizing effect of too much stimulation.

Overstimulation

EXistenZ is highly addictive and risky. For instance, after playing the game the real world seems so dull and predictable to Allegra and Pikul that they choose to go back into the game despite the risks and dangers they face in it. And like the infection risks associated with heroin addicts sharing needles, Pikul transmits an infection in his bioport to Geller’s biopod. 

Conclusion

Virtual reality; augmented reality; 3D holographic images; realer than real TV sets; followers on Facebook; virtual dating; online shopping; online friends; online doctors; online ministries; online sex, virtual gaming; Siri, Alexa, artificial intelligence, drugs, sex, alcohol, gambling, idolatry, love--like Allegra Geller’s diseased biopod in the film, could all of these avenues of escaping reality be like Pikul’s game-urges in the movie trying to tell us that we need to fix the real world?

Wrap

EXistenZ is not for everybody and it will probably turn off those whose tastes lean towards normal science fiction; eXistenZ is anything but normal, sometimes hardcore science fiction, at other times jerking, spastic and giddy, and at other times just downright gross--but somehow it all works! For example, there’s a scene where Pikul receives his 1st bioport, a scene that Allegra Geller places in a lewd context by wetting her fingertip to give the sphincter-like socket in Pikul’s lower back “some action.” There’s another scene where Allegra is shot with a tooth that has a cavity. Then there’s the biopods which look like bruised tits covered with buttons that look like nipples.

But with this said, eXistenZ is relevant considering that it came out in ’99. The film accurately foretold the existential relationship we have with our smartphones and other devices through Pikul who calls his pink-fone his “lifeline to civilization.” It also accurately foretold the impersonal relationships that have evolved out of social networks like Facebook through Allegra Geller who avoids intimacy and who prefers interacting with others in the game rather than face-to-face. The film also accurately describes the narcissism of online social media culture and its obsession with approval-seeking.

EXistenZ reminds me of The Matrix, Birdman, Battle Angel Alita, and The Bourne Identity. But the film that eXistenZ reminds me of the most is Paul Verhoeven’s 1990 film Total Recall. In that film, Arnold Schwarzenegger plays a construction worker named Douglas Quaid who goes on a virtual vacation to Mars only to find out that everything in his life--including himself and his marriage--has been implanted into his brain. Like, Pikul in eXistenZ, Quaid receives subconscious impulses from his true identity.

EXistenZ was nominated for the Saturn Award in 1999 but lost out to The Matrix which came out the same year. The Matrix went on to become a cult classic and did very well at the box office; eXistenZ flew under the radar and made only 2.9 million at the box office. But don’t let this fool you as to the film’s overall quality and effectiveness.

Cronenberg got the inspiration for eXistenZ from an interview he did with Salmon Rushdie whose anti-Islamic novel, The Satanic Verses, caused Iran’s leader Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini to put a fatwa on the author’s life hence the fatwa on Allegra’s life in the film.

At 97 minutes, eXistenZ is extremely dense and gets better on subsequent viewings. If you like Paul Verhoeven’s style in films like Robocop, Total Recall, and Starship Troopers you’ll love eXistenZ. Great film by David Cronenberg. 

Akira Kurosawa's 1950 film 'Rashomon' film analysis and review

Rashomon is a 1950 film directed by Akira Kurosawa, written by Kurosawa and Shinobu Hashimoto, and based on the 1922 short story “In a Grove” by Ryūnosuke Akutagawa.

Rashomon is set during a period in Japanese history marked by the collapse of feudalism, social, economic, and political upheavals and widespread looting. The film begins in a partly demolished temple called Rashomon occupied by a priest and a villager named Kikori. They are joined by another villager seeking shelter from the rain. The priest and Kikori are depressed about the recent murder of a samurai. Men are killed everyday but the murder of this samurai is extraordinary. The villager rips some planks of wood off the temple, uses these planks to start a fire, and Kikori and the priest take turns describing the samurai’s murder. Only 4 people witness the crime--a bandit, the samurai, the samurai’s wife, and Kikori. 4 witnesses, 4 versions of the samurai’s death. Who killed him? And what happened to the dagger? As it turns out, the key to solving the crime comes from the most unlikely witness when they discover a baby abandoned by its parents inside the temple. Rashomon stars Toshiro Mifune, Takashi Shimura, Machiko Kyo, and Minoru Chiaki. The cinematography is by Kazuo Miyagawa, the music is by Fumio Hiyasaka, and the film is edited by Akira Kurosawa. Among Kurosawa’s shortest films at only 88 minutes, Rashomon is among the director’s most important works, a film that pioneered the use of multiple perspectives. In this presentation, I will examine the film’s themes and I will offer my personal opinion of the film at the end.

Themes

Truth is in the eye of the teller

Remember the good ol’ days when families ate dinner together? When there were family values? When kids respected their parents? When boys wore belts? When you could leave your doors unlocked? When men earned enough to support their families? When it was safe to walk the streets at night? When gas was 25 cents a gallon? When everybody got along?

Or do you remember the bad ol’ days? When skin color determined where you sat on the bus? When women couldn’t vote? When banks redlined? When the U.S. government exposed Americans to atomic explosions? Or Jim Crow? Or lynchings? Or back-alley abortions? The bottom line is that when it comes to life, we “remember the good stuff and forget the bad stuff.”

In Rashomon, 4 eyewitnesses give conflicting accounts of the death of a samurai. Tajomaru the bandit admits to killing the samurai but doing so honorably by first, cutting the samurai free and then killing him in a duel. Tajomaru also admits to taking the horse of the samurai’s wife and selling the samurai’s sword; the samurai’s wife’s account of her husband’s murder is basically the same as the bandit’s account, but in her version she begged her husband to kill her before passing out. By the time she came to, her husband had already taken his life with her dagger; the samurai’s own account of his death is a bit different. After being raped, his wife begged Tajomaru to kill him--her husband--to hide her shame. She even begged Tajomaru to take her with him. Instead, according to the samurai’s story, Tajoramu untied him and left him with his wife. The samurai, then, killed himself with his wife’s dagger. The samurai claims that someone had later pulled the dagger out of his chest. A villager named Kikori tells the police that he only saw the dead samurai. But later his story changes and he claims he saw Tajomaru begging the woman to be his wife. The woman then cut the ropes off of her husband and told him and Tajomaru to fight to decide whom she would belong to. For this, the samurai called her a whore. Both men spurned her but she was cunning and manipulated their egos to make them fight each other. Tajomaru defeated the samurai who died begging for his life, according to Kikori’s story.

Why lie?

There’s no question about the dead samurai; the question now becomes motive. There seems to be no reason to doubt any of the witnesses as their stories fit not only who they are but what they are.

For instance, Take Tajomaru, a savage and a bandit who admits to tying up the samurai, raping his wife in front of him, and killing the samurai honorably in a duel. Tajomaru also admits to being a thief, stealing the woman’s horse, the samurai’s bow and arrows, and trading the samurai’s sword for liquor. Tajomaru is also famous for womanizing, raping a woman and her maid.

Now, let’s look at the samurai’s wife, the weaker sex and obvious victim. She cries during the interview and this makes her version of the story believable to the men listening to her. She claims that she ran to her husband’s side after Tajomaru raped her. She freed her husband and begged him to kill her with her own dagger. What could a poor helpless woman do to prevent her husband from killing himself?

Then, there’s the samurai who held his wife on a pedestal. The samurai admits that he tried to console his wife and that she never looked more beautiful than she did after Tajomaru raped her. But she betrayed him by asking Tajomaru to kill him to hide her shame. He was even ready to pardon Tajomaru who asked him whether to kill the woman. After Tajomaru left, the samurai says that he killed himself with his wife’s dagger.

Then there’s the wood-cutter Kikori who happened to be in the forest. He admits to lying to the police about not seeing the actual crime and only finding evidence of the crime--the samurai’s cap, the woman’s hat, and the rope. Kikori’s 2nd story is similar to Tajomaru’s story except for the fact that Kikori saw the woman manipulate Tajomaru and the samurai to fight each other; and he also saw the samurai begging for his life.

Why not lie?

Proverbs 18:17,
“The one who states his case first seems right, until the other comes and examines him.”

Matthew 6:21,
“For where your treasure is, there will your heart be also.

As we see so far, the testimony of each witness fits their character. Tajomaru’s testimony fits his reputation as a womanizer; the woman’s testimony fits her position as the weaker sex as Tajomaru tells the samurai--“she is a woman and weak by nature”; the samurai’s testimony seems truthful because he is dead and--according to the priest--dead men don’t have a reason to lie; Kikori’s testimony makes him look like an innocent bystander.

Despite this, there remains inconsistencies in each witnesses’ testimony. But what is consistent is that each witness is trying to protect something of value.

Tajomaru’s account of the murder adds to his ruthless reputation but also makes him look honorable in that he unties the samurai and gives him the opportunity to avenge his wife. The woman’s account of the murder makes her look weak and also appeals to the protective instincts of men who are manipulated by a woman’s tears and view women--as Tajomaru says--as weak. The samurai’s account of the murder paints him as compassionate towards his wife after Tajomaru rapes her. The samurai also portrays himself as a victim by his wife asking Tajomaru to kill him to hide her shame. Kikori’s account of the murder paints him as a bystander who just happens to stumble upon the scene looking for wood.

The problems with the Kikori’s story

He witnesses 2 crimes--the woman’s rape and the samurai’s murder. Why didn’t he intervene and why did he withhold this information from the police?

Another problem with Kikori’s story is that it doesn’t take into account the fact that Tajomaru--in addition to being a womanizer--is also a thief. Remember Tajomaru had taken everything of value from the scene of the crime--that being the woman’s virtue, the samurai’s pride, her horse, the samurai’s bow and arrows, and the samurai’s sword which he said he bartered for alcohol. One would think that Tajoramu would have taken the woman’s dagger also.

The problem with the woman’s story

She says that she asked her husband to kill her and when he didn’t kill her she tried to drown herself in a pond. Now, one would think that if she wanted to kill herself she could have done so with the dagger she says that she cut her husband’s rope with.

The white horse

The fact that the woman could have killed herself with the dagger compels us to consider the possibility that she may not be the virtuous wife she seems to be. This possibility is expressed indirectly through symbolism. For instance, let’s consider the white horse the police claims that Tajomaru stole from the woman that the samurai had placed her on to exalt her above Earth and man. The policeman found Tajomaru laid out on the beach and assumed that the woman’s horse had thrown him off. But Tajomaru tells the police that the horse did not throw him off, a metaphor suggesting that the woman gave herself to him willingly and that he did not take her by force.

Temptation

Matthew 26:41,
“Watch and pray, that ye enter not into temptation: the spirit indeed is willing, but the flesh is weak.”

Taking into account the possibility that the woman may be lying to protect her virtue, we can explore more symbolism in the film.

Earth

Although she is portrayed on a white horse as the model of virtue and above Earth--or the power of temptation--she dismounts her white horse to get a drink of water which represents her fall from the divine to Earth and the desires of the flesh. This symbolic scene foreshadows her sexual encounter with Tajomaru.

Nature

Tajomaru is not ashamed of his nakedness and leaves most of his body uncovered in contrast to the samurai and the woman whose bodies are almost completely hidden. Tajomaru ties up the samurai to let him see the woman giving in to him. Tajomaru becomes disappointed when she pits him against her husband to decide her fate, their symbolic duel representing the duality of man’s divine ideal against his carnal nature with carnal nature winning!

Selfishness

Listener: “Man just wants to forget the bad stuff and believe in the made up good stuff because it is easier that way.”

A marriage ends in a bitter divorce. Whose fault is it? Depends on who you ask. The ex-husband will blame the wife and vise versa. Both are victims. But nothing in life is black and white and neither are people.

Tajomaru

Tajomaru’s version of the story omits the fact that the woman rejected his offer to run away with him. He also (according to Kikori’s version of the story) killed the samurai as the samurai begged for his life--not an honorable way to win a duel.

Samurai

The samurai’s version of the story omits the fact that he gave his wife the cold shoulder after Tajomaru raped her. The samurai’s story also leaves out him begging Tajomaru not to kill him.

The samurai’s wife

Her version of the story omits the fact that she enjoyed making love to Tajomaru. Her story also leaves out her manipulating Tajomaru and the samurai to fight over her which they probably did or probably did not do. And If they didn’t fight over her, she probably got pissed off and killed her husband while he was tied up to keep him from spreading her shame.

Kikori

His version of the story omits the part that would make him look like a thief. Symbolically, the baby they find abandoned in the corner of the temple provides the clue as to Kikori’s involvement. The listener taking the kimono off the baby and Kikori taking the dagger from the samurai’s dead body are one and the same thing and here’s how they both relate: the samurai and the baby are abandoned by lovers who--as the listener says--throws them away after having their fun. Both the kimono and dagger are left to comfort the baby and the samurai and when the listener says to Kikori--who calls him evil--“If you are not selfish, you will die,” the listener sums up not only his justification for taking the kimono from the baby but also Kikori’s own justification for stealing the dagger off the samurai which he did to feed his 6 kids! Selfishness is also the underlying motive of the samurai, the samurai’s wife, and even the priest whose desire to find goodness in man--such as him saying that “dead men don’t lie and him refusing to believe that man can be so sinful--prejudices him against the possibility that all of the witnesses are lying. The priest also objects to hearing Kikori’s account of what happened to the samurai.

So, what really happened to the samurai? Who knows. But 1 conclusion we can definitely draw from Rashomon and life is that truth is subjective and in order to get it you have to hear all sides as history favors the view of he or she who writes it.

Wrap

Director Akira Kurosawa wanted to make a simple beautiful film and in Rashomon the director has done just that, a film calling to mind Stanley Kubrick’s 1956 film The Killing and Christopher Nolan’s 2000 film Memento, films that also called truth and its subjective nature into question.

For Rashomon, Akira Kurosawa received the National Board of Review’s award for Best Director. And at the 24th Academy Awards in 1952, Rashomon won for The Most Outstanding Foreign Language Film. The film is also Toshiro Mifune’s and actor Takashi Shimura's 1st pairing, both of whom reunite 4 years later in Kurosawa's legendary 1954 epic Seven Samurai.

Like another great film by another great director I admire, Alfred Hitchcock’s 1944 film Lifeboat, Rashomon is an oxymoron: at only 88 minutes, it is both light and heavy and gets better and better each time you see it.