Bitt, first of all, thank you for providing the first truly insightful explanation of why you didn't like the movies.

That said, I (of course) disagree. I feel that a huge part of the appeal of the story is the process: the fact that the ending is fairly anticlimactic is, to me, a large part of the point. Since so many people connect it to the Christ myth, we'll go with that. Other than the horrific way the character of Christ was put to death (although scores of other people met quite similar fates), what was really "climactic" about his end? Not much. It's the value believers ascribe to his act that's important. And more importantly, it's the process he followed, the journey he took, that's important to those believers. I'm glad the Brothers Wachowski didn't take the Salieri approach and give it a big finish so we would all know they were done.

As for the action sequences, I agree up to a point. I think in certain instances those sequences perfectly accomplished their goals. In particular, the "defense of the dock" sequence was, for me, oppressive. Oppressive in that it was at least 20 minutes long, without a moments reprieve. Oppressive in that it was, in all ways, a slaughter. And in that I think the B.W. got it just right: I felt like I was being overpowered, just as the characters in the film were being overpowered. But yeah, I could have done with fewer "Army of Smith" fights. But even that worked for me on some level. It just kept getting more surreal, just as the Matrix did as the system started to break down.

Just my 2¥.

EDIT: Hit POST too fast.

I think it's important to remember that it's no more correct to say that "The Matrix" was "a sci-fi movie with some religious overtones" and the sequels "religious fantasy with sci-fi overtones" than it is to say that "Fellowship of the Ring" was a road-movie and the sequels were war movies. The Matrix was intended from the start as a trilogy, and as such, each part focuses differently.