Poll: Matrix or Inception

[alphamalet]

My friend and I were having a lively debate over which movie we thought was better, and I was wondering what the fine folks of the Escapist thought. Do you think The Matrix or Inception is a better movie?

I was arguing Inception becuase, though both movie explore similar themes of reality, dreams, etc. I felt more involved in Inception because it put more of a personal touch on the subject material and made the world and themes revolve more around the characters in the movie.

Let me also add that I'm only talking about the FIRST Matrix movie and not the sequels.

 

[Able Seacat]

I really enjoyed both but I think Inception wins for me. Better overall acting in my opinion.

 

[Sandernista]

I like the matrix significantly more. I believe it explores a more interesting scenario, and while I love me some DiCaprio and Ellen Page, I hate Christopher Nolan and think his movies are boring.

 

[Goofguy]

Tough one but I have to go with Inception because I prefer the concept and actors.

 

[w9496]

Matrix. I found it to be more interesting because it had a more interesting concept and great action scenes like the "bend backwards while dodging bullets" part that everybody remembers.

 

[Sexual Harassment Panda]

I find the Matrix more appealing.

I liked the overall concept more(though I do wonder if it makes any sense that a person in a pod could generate a worthwhile amount of energy), and the details were cool enough to become iconic in no time at all (red pill, blue pill).

I had more trouble suspending disbelief during Inception. Dreams within dreams seems sillier than a computer generated world.

The biggest plus I'd give to the Matrix would be that the pacing just felt better to me. I found myself getting quite bored with Inception at the time when it probably should have been at its most exciting.

 

[hazabaza1]

Hmmmm...
Well, Matrix uses power of love bullshit to justify a twist where (shock horror) the protagonist doesn't really die.
And Inception ends on "Give us a sequel guys, pleeeeeeeeeeeease" cliffhanger bullshit.

So I'm ambivalent towards both.

 

[Casual Shinji]

Inception was just boring as all hell. You present me with a movie about dreams, you're gonna have to give me more than just guys having shoot-outs in different locations. Like Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind and Paprika... Those were good dream movies. Christopher Nolan also needs to understand that constant exposition is not good storytelling. But then this is a guy who made Batman go to China for no reason at all.

The Matrix was a terrific action movie with some nice curve balls. It's shot beautifully, tightly paced, and the fightscenes are intense. Not much else to say, just a great film.

 

[Shocksplicer]

I think Inception works better as a stand-alone movie. It's self contained and satisfying, whereas The Matrix leaves the story unresolved unless you watch the dismal sequels.

 

[DanielBrown]

Haven't actually watched The Matrix since it was new, and I was rather young at the time so the story blew right over my head, thus my vote is on Inception. In spite of wasted possibilities, being completely ripped from a Donald Duck comic and that annoying kid from that tv-serie I thought it was a great film.

Can't stand Keanu Reeves either. From what I've read he's a really great guy, but his acting... Damn.

 

[Pinkamena]

Matrix, definitely. It was surprisingly deep for being an action movie.

 

[Casual Shinji]

I think Inception works better as a stand-alone movie. It's self contained and satisfying, whereas The Matrix leaves the story unresolved unless you watch the dismal sequels.

Quite the opposite, I would say. The first movie wraps things up pretty definite.

Spoiler

Neo is an all powerful cyber god, and can bend the Matrix to his will. The end.

The reason the sequels sucked was because there was nowhere else to go with this concept. So they had to come up with nonsense in order to keep the movies going. Also bad, bad CGI.

 

[Shocksplicer]

I think Inception works better as a stand-alone movie. It's self contained and satisfying, whereas The Matrix leaves the story unresolved unless you watch the dismal sequels.

Quite the opposite, I would say. The first movie wraps things up pretty definite.

Spoiler

Neo is an all powerful cyber god, and can bend the Matrix to his will. The end.

The reason the sequels sucked was because there was nowhere else to go with this concept. So they had to come up with nonsense in order to keep the movies going. Also bad, bad CGI.

Because, you know, fuck the billions of people still plugged into the Matrix, and all the people in the hellish real world.
That's not an ending. The entire plot is utterly unresolved. We are given no indication of how Neo can stop the machines, and frankly by the end of the movie the humans haven't really accomplished anything. They've gained one new asset in the Matrix, powerful though he may be, and nothing at all to help them fight the battle in the real world.

 

[Smeatza]

The Matrix, because once the world and it's rules had been set, it didn't go about doing it's best to forget everything from the first half an hour of the film and confuse the hell out of anybody who paid attention to the start.

 

[Palindromemordnilap_v1legacy]

Inception. Because the Matrix seemed to think quoting Alice in Wonderland somehow made it deep and philosophical and that I should care about the deaths of those two guys who'd done nothing but stand around doorways all through the film. Also, its plot holes bothered me more, possibly because I spotted them at the time

 

[Shoggoth2588]

I saw The Matrix on VHS when I was a kid but within 15 to 20 minutes it had put me to sleep. I woke up somewhere in the middle and fell back to sleep. When I woke up the second time I went upstairs and played something on the N64. I saw Inception in theaters and while it didn't put me to sleep, I didn't really have any desire to seek it out again. Inception wins out by default for me though so there's that.

 

[Total LOLige]

The Matrix. Laurence Fishburne is the greatest actor that ever lived. Say what you want about the sequels but I liked them, quite a bit.

 

[chozo_hybrid]

I'd have to go with the Matrix, think of the impact it had when it came to effects and pop culture in comparison. Not to mention it's a pretty solid action film with a premise that was done really well for its time, as well as being unique.

 

[bartholen_v1legacy]

The Matrix. Inception was good and all, but it shares a common problem with a lot of Nolan's films: it feels a bit cold and sterile with little emotional attachment. The Matrix was in no way a parade of memorable and lovable characters (maybe Morpheus and Agent Smith aside), but it had way better action scenes where Inception's feel more like set pieces from Call of Duty, a more interesting and detailed premise and more sense of physicality and grime. Also as a side note, its CG still holds up quite well (not comparing it to Inception, but how many other movies can you name from that era whose CG doesn't look like ass today?)

Because, you know, fuck the billions of people still plugged into the Matrix, and all the people in the hellish real world.
That's not an ending. The entire plot is utterly unresolved. We are given no indication of how Neo can stop the machines, and frankly by the end of the movie the humans haven't really accomplished anything. They've gained one new asset in the Matrix, powerful though he may be, and nothing at all to help them fight the battle in the real world.

I'm treading on thin ice here, but at least for me the first Matrix was never about defeating the Matrix, but rather about Neo; At first he needs to figure out his reality, and then he needs to figure out his role in the new reality he's been brought into. By the end of the movie he's done them both, and the prophecy of the One leaves the audience with a feeling that he will fulfil his destiny.

 

[DoPo]

Hmm, I just like the Matrix more. The themes explored were more appealing personally.

(though I do wonder if it makes any sense that a person in a pod could generate a worthwhile amount of energy)

No. It's impossible, especially considering humans must be fed which alone would probably turn the energy total to negative. However, there are some possibilities:
- Morpheus is talking out his ass. Not a far stretch - maybe somebody (maybe even Morpheus) just assumed humans were a power source and everybody rolled with it being wrong. This may lead to at least one of the others...or none
- It's actually the orignal concept - people are used as nodes (neurons) in a giant neural net. OK, still weird and I am not sure if it would work but more plausible
- the machines have some pervers, but working, First Law of robotics and after they won the war against humans, they still made sure the human race didn't go extinct. That's actually one I heard quite soon (well...last year, I think) and it makes a surprising amount of sense.