‘The Day The Earth Stood Still’ (Robert Wise, 1956) was an equally important film in the history of sci-fi. The plot follows the plight of an alien named Klaatu and his robot Gort who come to earth on a mission to end war and atomic weapons testing. There is one quote that is almost duplicated in POTA and The Matrix:
‘Your choice is simple. Join us and live in peace or pursue your present course and face obliteration. The decision rests with you.’ Klaatu (Michael Rennie) speaking to the world leaders.
The two heroes, Captain George Taylor (Charlton Heston) and Thomas ‘Neo’ Anderson (Keanu Reeves), also face the same decision. Immediately prior to the memorable final scene in POTA, outside the cave, Dr. Zaius (Maurice Evans) offers Taylor the chance to turn back before it’s too late or to continue travelling and face his destiny – the complete obliteration of mankind. In The Matrix, Neo twice faces the same decision. Firstly in the car where Trinity (Carrie-Anne Moss) invites Neo to stay inside the car and ultimately find peace for mankind, or to carry on down the same old road, which would lead to mankind’s obliteration without the skills of ‘The One’. A short time later, in the famous Red pill/Blue pill scenario, Morpheus (Lawrence Fishburne) again submits a question to Neo; whether to take the red pill, and find out what’s at the end of the rabbit hole, or the blue pill and continue on the road to ruin. This intertexuality between the two films and with other films within the genre show some of the similarities between the two and how they fit the stereotype of the genre, taking concepts and visions from classics and developing them further to anchor an abstraction.
The two films therefore have a common factor behind them. The belief that man is not, or will not be, the dominant species, and that man by nature is incompetent through greed and naivety of coping with our own development. There are however contrasts between the two. POTA is distinctly pessimistic, a far cry from the original Pierre Boulle novel named ‘Monkey Planet’ (also famous for writing the novel ‘The Bridge On The River Kwai’). Instead, screenwriters Michael Wilson (credited for the highly ironic ‘The Bridge On The River Kwai’, as well as ‘Lawrence Of Arabia’ and unaccredited for ‘It’s A Wonderful Life’ amongst others) and Rod Serling created that famous, original ending that has a slight irony and all out pessimism for mankind. In contrast, The Matrix, though primarily pessimistic, offers slight optimism in that mankind is capable of overcoming, much closer in outlook to such films as Metropolis. Pierre Boulle and Michael Wilson jointly create a cynical, ironic and pessimistic vision, whereas The Matrix writers and directors, the Wachowski’s, show something of a light switch at the end of the tunnel. It just needs to be turned on.
There are many other aspects of the two films which can be looked at in order to compare their vision of the future; the style of filming, the score, the representation of different peoples and production design to name but a few. When these are broken down, comparisons that are more literal can be made, not just between the visions of the future but between the technical aspects of the film and why these are relevant. For example, we, the audience, can look at the type of shots the director’s used and why.
Generally speaking, the style of filming is totally different, from the cinematography to the frame size and editing. The late Franklin J. Shaffner along with the director of photography used wide panoramic shots to photograph the desolate and baron Arizonan desert in the opening scenes. Long, slow paced cuts were used to create awe and atmosphere by editor Hugh S. Fowler. The opening fifteen minutes were what could be called complacent filming – pictures do all the work. In contrast, the Wachowski’s decided to create an intense opening sequence that provides the foundations for the whole film. Nothing longer than medium shots were used, and up-shots were preferred to add to that intensity because it makes the characters and objects look larger than life. The Wachowski’s get the audience involved more; we have to look up at the characters, we’re in the room; Shaffner decided we were just onlookers, a fly on the wall. Rather than the slow pace of POTA, the audience is submitted to Oscar winning epilepsy-inducing editing. We hit the ground running.
Straight from the word go in The Matrix we are given the impression that man in the future is always running, both chasing and fleeing. Trinity is trying to pursue something whilst being pursued herself; this creates a pace to the film which is vital in today’s action movie to gain both financial backing and healthy box office figures. Perhaps Shaffner didn’t have this same pressure in the sixties, but then again POTA isn’t an action movie. POTA is there to exercise the conscience, and the pace sets the audience in the right frame of mind to receive the final scene. If a similar twist were to happen in The Matrix it wouldn’t have any where near the same effect because it’s the suddenness and shock of the reality that Shaffner relies upon to create the emotional effect.
This difference in style is also orchestrated by the cinematography. Plenty of natural light is used in POTA, and even in interior scenes, it’s spread evenly throughout the room so there are very little shadows and darkness in any situation; the film is surprisingly light, in both senses, considering the plot. The director of photography, four-time Oscar winner Leon Shamroy (‘Cleopatra’, ‘South Pacific’, ‘The King And I’) in his penultimate film, used a very wide scope (Cinemascope 55) to shoot the film and you can feel the aura it creates; a large, faintly lit frame is used and not much put within it. The mis-en-scene is kept to a minimum by production designer Walter Scott, long time collaborator with both Hugh S. Fowler and Leon Shamroy, again to aid to the mood of the shots. He keeps the sets light and clutter free, which not only reduces shadows but also doesn’t steal the eye away from the not-so-subtle acting of Charlton Heston. All these aspects, the editing, the cinematography and the mis-en-scene, are manipulated by Shaffner in order to anchor the final scene.
In a total contrast, the Wachowski’s use these aspects to create an opposite effect. Cinematographer Bill Pope shot a much darker picture, the scenes are tenebrous which makes for a much more intense experience, plenty of greens and greys and blacks filter the light creating a shady, gloomy world. The set design and dress code also add to this. Production designer Owen Paterson who gained a BAFTA nomination for The Matrix, added to the intensity and depth of the picture by cluttering the frames, this creates shadow and silhouettes within the scene and gives the picture shape and form. He showed great attention to detail, especially on the ‘real world’ sets, where he says he used modern items in a retro style in order to create something familiar but at the same time illusory, reflecting what The Matrix is about.
The dress code in The Matrix is sui generis to say the least. Designer Kym Barrett (‘Romeo + Juliet’) creates a very original and unique look so much so that it is one of the first things that come to mind when the film is mentioned. To a large extent, Warner Bros have used it to market the film; on the video and DVD covers posters for example, where four of the main characters simply stand there in costume looking sleek. For Neo, Morpheus and the gang, the style is black and tight, black and leather trench coats, and dark sunglasses. They appear very ‘no-nonsense’ and the costume blends in well with the dark sets.
The agents wear typical black suits and tie and of course, the dark sunglasses, Men In Black style. This provides them with the stereotypical FBI appeal and they look a match for Neo, they’re not bald and wearing ripped white vests, they’re just as cool, just as stylish and just as intelligent as their opponents. All in all, the costume is there to compliment the rest of the film; it’s all about style and is in line with the set decoration, editing and score.
The score was the responsibility of Don Davis who’s used to working on action thrillers needing dramatic scores, and here he assembles a very modern blend of dance and rock, the beats anchoring the sound effects during action sequences. The sound and sound editing won Oscars for their respective custodians. The score in POTA however is completely different. This was the care of a real legend in music composing, Jerry Goldsmith, whose career spans over half a century and includes scores for over two hundred films and television shows including the likes of ‘Chinatown’, L.A. Confidential’, ‘Alien’ and ‘The Omen’ for which he won an Oscar.
His score for POTA will no doubt rank among some of his more experimental and unusual projects, his work did merit him an Oscar nomination though. Within the composition, there are many resemblances to John Barry’s score for ‘Zulu’, which embodies a fusion of contemporary orchestral pieces and indigenous beats. Goldsmith actually wrote the score whilst wearing a monkey mask and these simian creative beginnings do seep through into the music, which is random in that it doesn’t flow, instead chopping and changing between strings and piccolos to tribal percussion rhythm’s. This modern/primitive contradiction in the score reflects the whole plot of the film and the fact that the film is set in the future yet has gone into the past back to the roots of civilisation.
There are also other aspects in POTA where this going forward in time yet backwards in development can be seen. The increasing role of women in society during the sixties is turned on its head in Shaffner’s interpretation of the future, which appears very sexist. There are only three female parts in the film and they are each portrayed as weak characters that are dependent on their male counterparts. The main female character, chimpanzee doctor Zira (Kim Hunter) is indeed brave and honest but turns out to be under the spell of Taylor once he’s been set free. A female must succumb to the hero is the attitude, and Zira ultimately does, captivated by Taylor’s personality and domineering physical presence.
The other two female parts are smaller in screen time and given less character development but are portrayed even less complimentarily than Zira. Nova, Taylor’s mute human soul mate, is presented more ape-like than even Zira is. Nova is from the Latin ‘novus’ meaning ‘new’, and that is exactly what Nova represents – a new creation. As a result of this, she is totally dependant on the hero, literally clinging to him, which makes her very naïve and makes Taylor look all the more strong and intelligent.
The first woman appears only in the first scene where she and three other male crewmembers travel through space and time before crash-landing on a planet. The character played by Diane Stanley is a typecast blond, very feminine and defenceless. Of the four, she is the only one who doesn’t survive the wreck and subsequently sinks to the bottom of a lake along with the spaceship, showing the vulnerability of females and that there’s no place for heroine’s in action movies alongside a hero.
The Matrix challenges this principle however. Female characters in the film are much more important to the plot than they are in POTA also have strong personalities and assets. The main female character, Trinity, is a tough and capable woman easily content at taking on and beating four armed, male police officers. As it turns out, the hero, Neo, is at her mercy and is indebted to her after the heroine saves the hero’s life, turning tradition on its head. This is a much more positive, or maybe just politically correct vision of women in the future. Another member of Morpheus’ crew is Switch (Belinda McClory), the only other female aboard his ship. Switch could easily have been put there just to make up the numbers, but the Wachowski’s tried to develop the character as much as possible even with her comparatively small significance. They achieved this by not giving her more screen time or lines but just by making her more noticeable in the scenes she’s in. Whilst all the other characters are wearing black in certain scenes, Switch’s dress code is strictly white, from her shoes to her hair. This makes her much more noticeable for no obvious reason other than to give her more individuality and a bit of personality, it makes her Switch and not just a random, insignificant woman.
The other female character is the particularly interesting Oracle (the late Gloria Foster in her last appearance). The Oracle is a respected, honourable figure within the matrix. A psychic and prophet of sorts, she is even wiser and above-board than the highest male character, Morpheus. The Wachowski’s decision to present this character as a normal, everyday housewife in preference to the typical wise old man caricature is both original and surprising, another example of how the two visions of the future differ in respect to the representation of women in the plot. Overall, in the Matrix, women are seen as equal (there’s a scene where a male accomplice chauffeurs Trinity and Switch and is at their requests) a stark contrast to POTA.
A hero can only be a hero if he is compared to other men. If he has nobody to look better than then he is not particularly special. The two heroes’ in POTA and The Matrix, Taylor and Neo, have to look superior to their male counterparts in order to have hero status, so the way other men are represented have a knock-on affect. In POTA, Taylor crash-lands with two other male astronauts who are both strong and capable but respect Taylor’s superior rank. In the following battle scene with the apes, both Taylor and one of his comrades were shot, but with different consequences. Taylor survived his injury to fight another day, but his black co-pilot showed his inferiority to the hero by dying and not being able to survive the same ordeal the hero was put through. Of the remaining accomplice, unlike Taylor, he does not escape the prison compound and hence undergoes brain surgery that leaves him dumb and disabled. This representation of other men in the future makes the hero worthy of his title; they’re there to be sacrificial lambs, to be compared to the hero, proving that he is a stronger, braver man than they are.
In The Matrix, Neo is a different kind of hero. Neo fits the typical comic book hero stereotype of an everyday guy that has the responsibility of using his powers for the good of society (the comic book likeness is also reflected in the action sequences, where the stunts performed are reminiscent of the manoeuvres likely to be found within the pages of a comic strip). Neo doesn’t start the film a hero; he’s just normal Thomas A. Anderson. The story then follows Neo through his realisation that he is ‘the one’, his slow awakening to the powers he has and then finding and carrying out his destined mission, à la Spiderman (Sam Raimi, 2002). For this reason, the characters around him act differently than the characters around Taylor; the characters around Neo don’t recognise his superiority at first just as the audience doesn’t either, so Neo has to prove himself to both. Therefore, the other men in The Matrix aren’t portrayed as weakly as they are in POTA, it’s not up to them to slip up, it’s up to Neo to rise above by his own accord.
Taylor is the total opposite of Neo’s hero. Charlton Heston is steely jawed, hard bodied, terse in speech, an American man's man, a hero unto himself. His sexual appeal is more compatible with females of the equivalent age, who in the sixties, were a much larger cinematic market than today where the primary market is the teenage audience to whom Keanu Reeves would appeal more to. Heston has portrayed many hero’s and epic characters in his time including Henry VIII, Marc Anthony, Michelangelo, John the Baptist, El Cid, Moses and of course, Ben Hur. As mentioned, choosing such a burly veteran to play the main action hero was a sign of the times, and there are many other features of the sixties which are reflected in the film.
The sixties will always be remembered for the rise of teen culture, free love and flower power, and many indiscreet references in the film are made to this culture. For a start, male nudity would have been frowned upon until then, but POTA includes a scene with male nudity in. What’s more, this scene is only included for the sole purpose of showing nudity because the scene doesn’t advance the plot in any way whatsoever. It’s just included to send out a message to the audience that the film is in with the times. But more blatant references are included in the screenplay; lines such as:
‘ I didn’t think man could be monogamous’ uttered by ape Dr. Zaius, reflect the thoughts of many in society, who for the first time in history, were actually beginning to believe such things. Specific enticements were made to the teen and twenty age group with lines like:
‘You can't trust the older generation’. In fact, there are connotations to almost every line of dialogue in the scene outside the cave towards the end. They not only comment on the sixties society, but also talk a lot about mankind’s nature:
‘He must be a warlike animal who gives battle to everything around him -- even himself’, and religion:
‘Defender of the faith? Rather guardian of the terrible secret. Isn't that right, doctor?’
The sixties was also a time for war. America was at war with Vietnam and the cold war and space race was at its height. Like at any time of war, propaganda was required in all mediums of the media to boost patriotism, POTA is no exception. The spaceship and suits are proudly decorated with the stars and stripes, and after landing on this unidentified planet, Taylor proceeds to plant an American flag, which is an interesting gesture because the moon landings hadn’t yet taken place in real life.
Due to a number of factors, including the relatively peaceful times, the scale at which Hollywood now operates, and new technology such as the internet, there’s not nearly as much ideology evident in most of today’s pictures. The Matrix, though it does include connotations, it has very little ideology. Hacking is of course a very modern concept and is beginning to appear in more and more Hollywood productions such as ‘Swordfish’ (Dominic Sena, 2001). The drug and club culture explosion is briefly seen, but the film doesn’t raise any moral issues about this.
In the end, POTA and The Matrix share similarities, they must do because they come from the same genre. The differences are mainly as a result of the different plots. The Matrix belongs to a sub-genre of sci-fi called ‘Future Dystopias’; this category includes others films such as Metropolis, 1984 (Michael Anderson, 1956) and Blade Runner. Their vision of the future couldn’t be more contradicting in a visual, physical sense to POTA, but the many ethics explored by the two films remain similar, all based on the paranoia that mankind is not in control of its own destiny.
I believe film has an ever-increasing important role in our society. Cinema explores areas of our lives never previously touched upon, and is constantly breaking down the barriers of society. As with POTA, they can present and exploit issues society needs to face. A good film stands the test of time, thanks only to its screenplay; the effects, score and sets can all be outdated, but a good script will never date until dealt with. Many of the influential screenplays, hence films, have risen from the sci-fi genre and they will undoubtedly continue to do so as long as the genre keeps re-inventing itself visually. This is something the Wachowski bros have done; they’ve started a new chapter in the history of cinema and sci-fi, one which has already spawned the likes of ‘Pitch Black’ (Ian Thorburn and David N. Twohy, 2000), ‘Minority Report’ (Steven Spielberg, 2002) and of course, the next two Matrix sequels.
As long as sci-fi continues to re-invent itself, the genre will remain relevant, challenging, and entertaining, which is why it will survive as long as cinema itself.
