Matrix blue pill red pill movie#

Thomas Anderson? He’s back online, living an amusingly meta existence but feeling itchy with doubt that what he’s experiencing is real. Obviously, he downs the red one.īut what of Neo, a.k.a. If he instead takes a blue pill, he will return to the simulation, living happy but deluded, a willing cog in a grand design not of his making. In The Matrix, if the messianic hero Neo ( Keanu Reeves) chooses to ingest a red pill, he is accepting the bitter reality that the world he lives in is a lie, thus gaining the strength of purest clarity. I am speaking, of course, of the red pill.

Matrix blue pill red pill movie#

In the two decades since the first Matrix movie debuted, one of its core premises has been seized upon and warped by a particular subset of noxious online culture. Those themes lead to the perhaps more pressing issue of ownership. On one hand, Resurrections is Wachowski’s chance to gripe about the economics of what she and her sister made, the way this deeply personal special-effects spectacular was long ago co-opted as a mere commodity-its ornate gunplay and slick aesthetic ruthlessly peddled while its deeper themes were cast aside. It’s a pertinent question for a number of reasons. But rather, who owns those movies and their mythology? That is, in essence, the question of Lana Wachowski’s new Matrix film, Resurrections (in theaters and on HBO Max, December 22). Who owns The Matrix? Not the computer simulation meant to keep people in a complacent stupor that’s pretty definitively owned by the sentient computers who, in Lana and Lilly Wachowski’s grand 1999 vision, have enslaved humanity.