REEL REFLECTIONS

TWO BLOCKBUSTERS ADDRESS GOD, PROVIDENCE, AND FREE WILL
Reviews of "The Matrix Reloaded" and "Bruce Almighty"

David Greiser

Two of summer 2003’s biggest blockbusters were theological at their core. The last time I checked the box office totals, "The Matrix Reloaded" and "Bruce Almighty" had grossed about half a billion dollars between them. Not a bad take, considering that the themes of these films involve some of the weightiest and thorniest theological dilemmas ever posed.

On the surface, there seems to be little commonality between the two films. One is a slickly produced sci-fi cyber -adventure, while the other is a heartwarming date film blending physical and relational comedy. "Reloaded," like its predecessor "The Matrix," has already spawned several hundred websites on which its philosophy and theology are discussed in detail.

The film is talky, didactic, not a little pretentious. Amateur philosophers, as well as professionals, have been drawn to the film in droves. In the words of Roger Ebert, "Reloaded" plays "like a collaboration involving a geek, a comic book, and the smartest kid in Philosophy 101." Just for starters, the film’s official website contains three pages of parallels between Neo and Jesus Christ.

"Bruce Almighty" poses its questions with a lighter touch, through Jim Carrey’s physical and conversational humor. Mishaps drive Bruce Nolan, Carrey’s character, to question the Almighty’s competence and caring. "The only one not doing his job around here is you," he tells God. God gives Bruce his supernatural powers for a week to see if he can do the job any better.

Only two limits will be placed on Bruce during this experiment: He cannot tell anyone about it, and he is not allowed to "mess with free will." Therein lies a dilemma explored by both films. What, indeed, is the nature of free will? Does it even exist?

"Reloaded" explores the mystery from the human standpoint. The Matrix itself, as the first film explains, is a virtual reality dream world in which human beings live. It produces the illusion that people are active, happy and productive when, all the while, they are being used as a nutrient source for the machines that actually run the world. The plots of both the original "Matrix" and the sequel are driven by the desire of the main characters to awaken a colony of people to the true nature of their existence and thus to become truly free. To what extent do humans live in a dream world, and to what extent are they free?

"Bruce Almighty" approaches the mystery from God’s perspective. How can Bruce, as God, exert his will without violating other people’s wills? How can he answer the prayers of some without changing answers already given to others?

God declines to solve the puzzle. Instead he simply asserts that "I have to deal with that all the time."

Neither film offers profound theological exploration. At its best, "Reloaded" is a beginner’s guide to philosophy; "Bruce Almighty" is more mirth than metaphysics. But both films display a persistent earnestness about the kinds of questions that have possessed philosophers, farmers, and those of us in between, since the beginning.

In the words of Asa Berger, "What pop culturists recognize . . . is that when you can read all things not only in a cathedral or a grain of sand, but also in a meatball, you are on the path to understanding humanity and society." In "The Matrix Reloaded" and "Bruce Almighty," we have a film that reaches for the cathedral, a cinematic meatball, and two above average attempts to explore the meaning of being human.

—David Greiser, Souderton, Pennsylvania, a pastor and a prof, likes cathedrals and meatballs. He has been asking profound philosophical questions since the day he first heard Bill Cosby ask, "Why is there air?"