I love the Matrix. I don't care that the Wachowski brothers are trannies and haven't made a single good movie except the first Matrix. The first Matrix is a masterpiece.
But there was this narrative that started getting thrown around in the early 2010s popularized by sites like Cracked where "was it really necessary to kill those innocent guards who were just doing their job in the building lobby".
Yes, for many reasons established by the movie.
-
Time is of the essence. Every second matters. Morpheus could break at any moment and the fate of humanity is at stake (reveals the location of Zion and all humans are killed off). This is not a time where you can waste valuable seconds trying for a more humane approach. Just like in wartime, when drastic measures are called for, sometimes unfortunate side effects happen with bystanders.
-
They can't teleport in and out wherever they want. They have specific ins and outs, that are specific telephone booths around the city. They can't just teleport in to the top of the building. They found the closest portal into the Matrix to the building where Morpheus is being held and proceeded.
-
Those weren't just security guards, they were the first line of defense of a small military wielding heavy armory guarding the agents and by extension Morpheus. The security guard immediately radios "send backup" to these military combatants. Meaning at the very least, these human guards, though they know nothing about the Matrix, knew there was a higher risk of threat that day as no normal building has guys right around the corner with M16's, Spaz shotguns, etc. The guards were innocent as far as knowing what the actual threat was, but they had to have known that there was an increased chance of threat and were probably fed some lie about a high level political figure who has threats on his life. So they knew it was a risky day on the job, they just didn't know the true nature of the reality.
-
All the guns that Neo and Trinity spawn in weren't for those security guards. They were for the military force that they knew inevitably the agents would have as a barrier between them and Morpheus. Humans who have no idea about the reality of the Matrix were always going to die in this scenario, whether they be security guards or soldiers. You don't have the time nor the means to have a pacifist way towards getting to Morpheus.
-
The soldiers were just as innocent as the security guards. No one feels bad about the soldiers dying, but they were just as unaware of the Matrix as the security guards. The security guards were just the less trained initial defense, that needed to be dealt with quickly, hopefully before they could radio for backup, which Neo and Trinity failed to do. Neo actually tried to kill the guy before he radio'd for back up but he dove out of the way and was just able to before Trinity killed him. So the security guards were actually more competent than you'd expect.
So yeah, it's this narrative of "they needlessly murdered these innocent security guards". Well if the standard for getting Morpheus was "no innocent people die" then they couldn't kill the soldiers either. In the Matrix if someone stands in your way, whether they be a normal cop who's just trying to do their job, or a military person, you kill them if you have to. In the lobby scene, these security guards were threats in terms of the preciously little time they had to get to Morpheus and mount the rescue.
The reason I rant about it is that little narrative spin on that scene has penetrated the zeitgeist where even non-online normies spout it, because inevitably they've watched it with someone who is a redditor type or an online type who's pointed it out and the normie goes "huh, yeah that is cruel" and then it gets repeated.
Except it ignores everything about the scene and the situation and why it was inevitable. It's also why Trinity said it was suicide and everyone was ready to pull Morpheus' plug because they knew wherever Morpheus was going to be kept, it would be guarded like Fort Knox. So zero innocent human, non aware of the Matrix deaths, was never an option when the decision to rescue Morpheus was made.
That's true too. If action movies always adhered to sensitivities they'd suck....which is why action movies suck now; and why every bad guy is now a Russian because "villains have to be people we hate them in real life, not just in a movie" and the action movies aren't testosterone fantasies anymore...they're liberal murder fantasies, which is why they leave such a bad taste in your mouth.
So the new Bond game came out which, of course, prompted me to go back and play 007.
The vast majority of people you kill in that game are "innocent".
The dam level is a chemical plant that the guards are defending from thieves/terrorists (realistically, it would be morally better to kill the scientists making the chemicals than killing the guards stopping them from falling into the wrong hands).
Severnaya 1 is just you checking out why they're excavating a new facility; you kill dozens of guards.
Silo is just a soviet satelite launch facility that happens to be launching the Goldeneye. Again, dozens.
Sevsrnaya 2 is killing Russian troops investigsting the same terrorists you're chasing in order to keep a lid on MI6's involvement.
Statue Park and the whole Russian sequence is basically just killing police officers.
The only levels in which you are explicitely killing bad guys are Frigate and when you actually storm Janis' base.
But, if you read the briefings, it's made clear that more people will die if you don't do these things (chemicals used in terror attacks on civilians traced back to the Facility, Goldeneye would be used against allied targets, etc).
So these things are usuallu justified, morally; though you could go a bit more in depth, would it help these stories to do so?
It's like that in a lot of older action games, especially espionage and military games like Syphon Filter, basically every 007 game up through Blood Stone, and various Call of Duty games before they went full-on pozz.
But back then the theme was the people who died getting in your way did so because you were trying to save more people from whatever catastrophe was about to befall the city, region, nation, world, etc.
Back in the day the concept of "the greater good" was an important aspect of heroism. Just as others pointed out, it was even common in action films, where plenty of innocent people were caught in the crossifre or part of an unfortunate side-effect of some antics by the hero to save the day.
In Golden Eye, Bond had no trouble wrecking the city with a tank, and he did the same thing in Everything or Nothing with that experimental tank. But if he hadn't, there would have been a much larger global catastrophe.
These days you can only get away with collateral damage if the people being harmed or the places being wrecked are associated with Russians, Conservatives, Whites, or a mixture of all three.
That's partly because the "greater good" line has been heavily co-opted by bad actors; see Israel.