Showing posts with label Rodney Ascher. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Rodney Ascher. Show all posts

Monday, 21 July 2025

A Glitch In The Matrix













Life’s A Glitch

A Glitch In The Matrix
USA 2021
Directed by Rodney Ascher
Valparaiso Pictures


A Glitch In The Matrix
is a documentary film by Rodney Ascher, the guy who made the popular documentary Room 237 (which I reviewed here). It seeks to explore the question, from a number of talking heads of people who tend towards believing this idea, that we are living in a simulated reality and don’t know anything of the real world at all. The title of the film comes from the popular movie The Matrix, where some people seem to imply that this is the first time they have come across this concept (although I suspect most people try and answer these existential questions in their early, pre-teen years, as did most of you reading this I would think). 

The talking head ‘eye witnesses’, so to speak, are mostly hidden behind nicely animated avatars and in at least one case this is to hide the identity of the person speaking because I’m sure the director realises that once a certain, revealing scene plays out sometime in the last third of the documentary, which has quite a dramatic impact, the audiences ability to consider the various theories about the nature of our personal realities would be a lot harder to stomach.

The documentary also uses, to punctuate the various chapters which attempt to position corroborating evidence of manifestations of the idea that we are not living in anything other than some kind of computer simulation, black and white footage of the great science fiction writer Philip K. Dick addressing a room full of people in France back in 1977. I think it’s pretty much the first time he had come out about his experiences with the ‘pink light’ which was communicating various theories about his own existence (take that as you will) but, of course, Dick’s fiction had always dealt with the idea that we are all living in a fake reality and you’ll find that idea running through most of his books and stories, to a certain extent. So, yeah, Ascher has correctly identified him as a legitimate poster boy for the idea that we are living in an artificial world controlled by someone else. 

And of course, most religions, including Christianity, set up the idea that we are living in a universe controlled by an overseer who has the ability to bring great change to that world... so the concept may be an easier one for many people to take on and swallow because of the number of religious institutions on the planet utilising similar, in all but name, ideas. 

The documentary starts off with one of the key (and ultimately problematic) people relating an idea he’d heard in school but which I think is very interesting and relevant to a lot of things. His teacher said to him that man’s perception of how the human body and brain works is always perceived as the same as the greatest technological achievements of mankind at the time. So when the big thing was the aqueducts, man thought of various fluids controlling the body. When electricity came out, we locked onto the idea of nerve impulses to the brain being sent electronically. Now we have computers, the human brain is perceived as a computer. So, we’re basically adjusting our vision of ourselves to the technological advancements we make... which is kind of interesting. 

And then, the director carries on interviewing various people, with the help of animated scenarios and montages, in order to run with the idea that we’re all just part of someone else’s simulation. So we have Elon Musk, for example, who’s obviously very much into this line of thinking and who says that the likelihood that we aren’t in a simulation is billions to one. And of course, since it’s impossible to prove we aren’t in a simulation... you have to start to take notice a little. There’s also the way we suddenly snap from one reality to another... when we wake up from a dream... which is also slung here as evidence and The Mandela Effect, illustrated by thousands of people misremembering the death of Nelson Mandela (and various other popular collective pieces of misinformation... google it), is also brought into play here as one of a few ways, like the feeling of deja vu, that you can start maybe detecting the titular glitch in the matrix, so to speak. 

And then something transpires in the recollected narrative of what happens when one of the guests took what he thought was the only path to finding out if he was living in a simulation or not. And then it becomes very clear just why the director decided to go the ‘avatar route’ and also that the location from which this person is talking may not be what it seems... and then it becomes a bit of a struggle to buy into the concept a little, after a huge tragedy takes place and, lets be honest, doesn’t prove one way or the other to that particular person as to whether he is living in the matrix, so to speak. 

And that’s probably my biggest disappointment with A Glitch In The Matrix, a documentary which never fails to hold the interest but which ultimately doesn’t go anywhere. The fact that nobody can prove or disprove any of the factors of ‘simulation hypothesis’ to any extent. Which is possibly because the safeties are all on regarding the human brain so we are never aware enough to be able to adequately explore these possibilities. This was a fascinating ride and it was certainly nice seeing Philip K. Dick talking about his own experiences (as detailed in what was publishable of his Exegesis) and I found it interesting that the idea of real life NPCs came up given that Free Guy (reviewed here) was released the same year as this. Ultimately, though, the film doesn’t really spell anything out and it’s obviously a silly expectation to assume it might hit on something. I enjoyed it for what it is but I’m not sure I could sit through it again, to be honest. I got something out of it but it’s not for everybody... although the idea would obviously provoke discussion. A well executed but ultimately trivial film, I would say. 

Wednesday, 22 April 2020

Room 237


Overlooking The Obvious

Room 237
USA 2012 Directed by Rodney Ascher
101 Films  Blu Ray Zone B


It’s funny, I thought Room 237 was only a couple of years old at the most. I remember there being a lot of fuss about it on Twitter around about that time and so I was somewhat disappointed I didn’t catch a cinema release. I think I finally got this one a couple of months ago in a 101 Films sale or some such thing and, frankly, this wasn’t quite the film I’d hoped it would be. That being said, it’s technically quite well put together if the visual equivalent of ‘needle drop’ is your kind of thing.

The documentary, if you can call it such, explores some of the less usual fan theories about Stanley Kubrick’s 1980 masterpiece, his loose adaptation of Stephen King’s The Shining. Now I was prepared to keep an open mind going in here because I’d heard good things about it and I wanted to see if I could follow some of the lines of thought which make up the basis of these separate theories, from five very different people who I think I shall keep as nameless here so I don’t actually have to ridicule a specific person. So I went in open minded and... honestly... didn’t stay that way for all that long, it has to be said.

The format of the film is probably the most interesting thing about it. None of the people explaining their theories (voices crosscut with one another over the course of the film in chaptered sections) are ever shown. Instead, the director has used found footage from old newsreels and some fairly famous high profile movies like The Brain From Planet Arous, All The President’s Men or The Thief of Bagdad cut against each other to metaphorically illustrate what’s going on in the minds of the people talking. Quite often the footage is further digitally manipulated, such as the many shots of Tom Cruise from Kubrick’s Eyes Wide Shut where he walks by and contemplates posters of The Shining in the street as he passes. Similarly, in the many times footage from The Shining itself is played, at various speeds ranging from very slow to normal to very fast (and even backwards and forwards simultaneously superimposed)... the director will use things like big digital arrows to point out the specific area of the screen which is being talked about from a particular ‘guest’. It’s all quite skillfully put together and that, along with the synthesised musical version of the Dies Irae invoking the Wendy Carlos opening of The Shining, are pretty much the only saving graces of this movie... for me, at least.

Now, it’s interesting that one of the people talking in this film says something which actually rings quite true in some respects. Frankly, it’s a very pertinent statement, even if it half feels like it’s being used in defence of what the person is saying because they suspect they might sound like they’re being unreasonable in their conclusions. It is this...

“Author intent is only part of the story of any work of art.”

Yeah, absolutely. I can get behind that statement. The identity of the artist and their cultural, religious and political upbringing are obviously going to seep into an artist’s work, whether they are conscious of this or not. Totally get this and believe it completely... a wise statement. However, there are extremes of conclusions that people can make which are, frankly, outside of the remit of even this simple, scattergun statement and, frankly, when all is said and done and the arguments for and against whichever theory is being explored have run their course, I was forced to conclude, as I had suspected within the first ten to fifteen minutes of this movie, that all of the people being interviewed for this film are, in fact, total nutters.

And it’s a shame because I love The Shining and I wanted to learn something new about it. Not 'new and completely, balls to the wall, fruit loop crazy' which, quite a lot of this is. I mean, the placement of cans of baking soda with an Indian head on them and other cumulative imagery from the movie do not, honestly, make for a movie which is actually about man’s betrayal of the Native American Indian and their mistreatment. Similarly, the numerology all pointing to sevens and forty two.... such as the numerals of the famous Overlook Hotel room number multiplied out - 2 X 3 X 7 giving us the ‘magic number’... do not constitute yet another in a line of similarly misconstrued ‘clues’ laid down by Kubrick that the film is about the Holocaust and Nazi Germany in 1942 etc. Neither does Barry Nelson’s hips lining up with the side of an in-tray and looking momentarily like a pseudo erection while he’s shaking Jack Nicholson’s hand turn us on to the fact that The Shining is a movie about sex and the sex demons that live in Room 237. Nor does the disappearance of a sticker of Dopey from Snow White And The Seven Dwarfs signify that Danny, after his first vision, is no longer ‘a dope’ and understands everything that is going on around him. Seriously people, this is some advanced level of insanity creeping in behind the normal sounding voices of the people narrating this.

For a while there it gets like people are actually making sense in the film... especially when you compare the levels of craziness of each new theory. For example, when you follow with the camera, the path into the room where Jack has his interview, the woman narrating seems absolutely right that the window showing the view outside really could not exist... it’s in the middle of the building. So yeah, points to her here and also to the person who notices that the two shots of Danny and the ball on the carpet don’t match in terms of pattern... so they were obviously filmed in different places is what that means, not that something sinister has occurred.

Similarly, the ‘apparently false’ fact that the Earth is 237 miles from the moon plus the fact that Danny is wearing a moon landing sweater when he walks to Room 237 does sound like it almost could be a metaphor for a trip to the moon but, honestly, it doesn’t mean that Stanley Kubrick faked the moon landings for the government and I don’t believe, as this guy does, that the whole of the film is Kubrick trying to signify to mankind that he did it. Of course, it doesn’t help that Kubrick himself gave an interview which I heard once that he'd faked the moon landings but, you know, he was a bit of a wind up merchant when it came to people aiming crazy theories at him, I suspect.

Actually, that’s one of the things that bothered me most about the people in these interviews. The ‘author intent’ get out clause I quoted above does not excuse the fact that they are quite often picking up on some, admittedly insane and disturbingly lax continuity errors... such as the disappearing ‘Dopey’ or a chair going completely missing behind Jack Nicholson’s head in one shot between cuts or the changing carpet pattern... and making so much more of them than they need to. Do I think Kubrick... an admittedly meticulous director... was doing this on purpose. No, I do not. I just think he liked some parts of takes better than parts of others and edited them all together from multiple sources to get the best and most consistent performance out of the actors... and there’s nothing much more to it than that.

So, there you go. Room 237 is, ultimately a somewhat intriguing film in the odd ‘clue’ to the overall ‘mystery’ of The Shining (a mystery which I’m sure doesn’t exist outside of the heads of these people) but, I have to say that, even though there were a few shiny coins laying among the pebbles, it’s a pretty dull affair. The excellent execution of the way the ‘evidence’ is unpeeled and portrayed by the filmmakers doesn’t detract from the less than mesmerising stretches of tedium as various enthusiastic but quite possibly unhinged individuals try to convince you that their insane theory, which they obviously totally believe is so obvious once they’ve explained it, is anything like an arrival at some form of truth. Proceed with caution.