1. William Irwin has edited two anthologies on the film,The Matrix and Philosophy(Chicago: Open Court, 2002) andMore Matrix and Philosophy(Chicago: Open Court, 2005). Other anthologies arePhilosophers Explore the Matrix, ed. Christopher Grau (Oxford University Press, 2005) andTaking the Red Pill, ed. Glenn Yeffeth (Dallas: Benbella Books, 2003). Single-author books are Matt Lawrence,Like a Splinter in Your Mind(Oxford: Blackwell, 2005) and Jake Horsley,Being the One(New York: St. Martin's Press, 2003). There are a number of other books dealing with the film's spirituality and the list of philosophically inspired books keeps growing.
2. Stanley Cavell's interest in popular fiction films predates the current trend. See, for example, hisPursuits of Happiness: The Hollywood Comedy of Remarriage(Harvard University Press, 1981).
3. In this paper, I will use a number of expressions as if they were equivalent. I will talk of films "philosophizing,""being sites of philosophic reflection, insight, knowledge,""being philosophy," and so on. A discussion of these various locutions is necessary but cannot be undertaken here.
4. This consideration does not force us to conclude that film and philosophy are irrevocably at odds. Instead, what it shows is that no general account of film as inherently of philosophical value can succeed. It certainly is possible that there are films that are not amenable to an interesting philosophical interpretation, but this merely justifies the conclusion that only certain films-those that we see as seeking to make a philosophical point-will have a legitimate claim on us as viable sources of philosophical enlightenment.