Good example, bad philosophy
in Adapting philosophy
Abstract only
Log-in for full text

You are not authenticated to view the full text of this chapter or article.

manchesterhive requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books or journals - to see content that you/your institution should have access to, please log in through your library system or with your personal username and password.

If you are authenticated and think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.

Non-subscribers can freely search the site, view abstracts/extracts and download selected front and end matter. 

Institutions can purchase access to individual titles; please contact manchesterhive@manchester.ac.uk for pricing options.

ACCESS TOKENS

If you have an access token for this content, you can redeem this via the link below:

Redeem token

This chapter offers a meta-critical analysis of the extensive literature on the philosophical aspects of The Matrix Trilogy, exploring the theoretical assumptions that underpin general conceptions of the ways philosophical and filmic texts can be inter-related. Much of the writing on the trilogy offers the films one of two options: to be celebrated as accurate albeit derivative, or castigated for misrepresenting the original sources: good example or bad philosophy. Discussions of the ways in which the trilogy takes up Jean Baudrillard's work have been dominated by the question of fidelity to the 'original' source, usually Simulacra and Simulation. The chapter addresses the work of two key theorists: Thomas Wartenberg and Christopher Falzon, whose exchanges offer a detailed discussion of the ways in which philosophical and filmic texts might be inter-related.

Adapting philosophy

Jean Baudrillard and The Matrix Trilogy

Metrics

All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 72 32 7
Full Text Views 12 2 0
PDF Downloads 15 4 0