2020s

Considering Reality: Rodney Ascherโ€™s ‘A Glitch in the Matrix’

A Glitch in the Matrix Documentary

Rodney Ascherโ€™s Room 237 and The Nightmare play out like the cinematic equivalent of staying up late with friends to swap scary stories, conspiracy theories and the kind of half-remembered word-of-mouth urban legends that have only grown more potent in the internet age. Ascher’s new movie, A Glitch in the Matrix, makes a fine addition to his filmography, placing simulation theory on the shelf next to sleep paralysis and an obsession over the โ€œhidden meaningsโ€ in Stanley Kubrickโ€™s The Shining.

The most wide-ranging and expansive of Ascher’s trio of films, A Glitch in the Matrix juggles a variety of bold pronouncements (reinforced by the likes of Elon Musk and Neil deGrasse Tyson) related to the idea that our experience is but an illusion, a mirage, a kind of constructed environment controlled by some superior or artificial intelligence. Popularized in its present incarnation by Swedish-born Oxford philosopher Nick Bostrom, who appears in the movie, the argument that nothing is real serves as a springboard for Ascher to hear from true believers.

More by Greg Carlson: Review: Chloรฉ Zhaoโ€™s โ€˜Nomadlandโ€™

A Glitch in the Matrix Documentary

The onscreen presence of several subjects — a Harvard-educated engineer, a clergymanโ€™s son, a teacher and artist — is intensified by Ascherโ€™s decision to retain voices but upgrade visuals using motion capture animation and Fortnite-esque 3D avatars designed by Chris Burnham. Audiences can quickly grow accustomed to the sight of the videogame-like characters communicating via Skype in their otherwise everyday home-computing environments. Better-known figures, like mysticism and consciousness enthusiast Erik Davis and graphic fiction superstar Chris Ware, appear with no digital enhancements.

The backbone of A Glitch in the Matrix is not the influential science fiction blockbuster (which still receives plenty of Ascherโ€™s attention), but the thoughts and writings of Philip K. Dick. The cult novelist and short story wizard — whose books have been adapted into Blade Runner, Total Recall, Minority Report, A Scanner Darkly and The Man in the High Castle — delivered a 1977 address to an audience in France in which he shared in fascinating detail the reasons that convinced him he was living in a simulation. The various โ€œclues,โ€ often contained within the kinds of โ€œmeaningful coincidencesโ€ associated with Jungian synchronicity, become a common feature of simulation hypothesis adherents.

More by Greg Carlson: Kantemir Balagovโ€™s โ€˜Beanpoleโ€™ Makes Oscar Shortlist

A Glitch in the Matrix Documentary

The most divisive structural choice Ascher makes is contained within the lengthy sequence in which Joshua Cooke, speaking to the director via phone from prison, recounts the night he killed his parents. Despite Cookeโ€™s stated desire to help others avoid his fate, the so-called โ€œMatrix Murdererโ€ consumes far too much attention and the segment fails to transcend its true-crime, cautionary tale aura. A Glitch in the Matrix would have been much better off giving more time and space to Emily Pothast, who does not believe that we are trapped in a simulation.

Accompanied by clips from Sam Weissโ€™ classic short animation The Cave, narrated to perfection by Orson Welles, Pothast discusses the Allegory of the Cave and emerges as the movieโ€™s strongest critical voice/voice of reason. Offering some tantalizing commentary on the erotic, Pothast proposes that (as she puts it in a post on her involvement with A Glitch in the Matrix published for Medium) โ€œintimacy โ€” that is, attending to the subjectivity of the other โ€” is the antidote to solipsism.โ€ No glitch in that thought.

Greg Carlson (@gcarlson1972) is an associate professor of communication studies and the director of the interdisciplinary film studies minor program at Concordia College in Moorhead, Minnesota. He is also the film editor of the High Plains Reader, where his writing has appeared since 1997.

3 replies »