The most significant weakness of animation in comparison with live-action films is the inherent reality-detachment of animation, which requires the audience more time to "get familiar" with the characters and find some emotional links with those animated (aka. "not real") characters. Thus it is even more difficult for anthology animation to "absorb" the audience since each segment often has its own distinctive illustration style, which will bring "gaps" to the film, in the eyes of the audience, no matter how strong the common storyline is. This is exactly the problem with "The Animatrix", for its segments have varied quality, from the superbly stylishness of Shinichiro Watanabe (the legendary director of "Cowboy Bebop"), to the traditional "ukiyo-e" of Yutaka Minowa (similar to the style of his beloved animation "Ninja Scroll"), from the abstract art of Takeshi Koike to the "state-of-the-art" (by early 2000s standard, which means a little bit scrappy in comparison with the current technology - how things change in only 10 years!) 3D illustration of Andy Jones. The mismatch in term of illustration style is also apparent in term of storytelling, as Watanabe's (both of his parts!) and Maeda's sections are clearly superior than others' and closely reflect the philosophy and story of "The Matrix". But in overall, this is a very, very good companion piece to "The Matrix", as "The Matrix"'s world was expanded way farther with more detailed background stories and a clearer "modus operandi" that help the audience understand, and appreciate, even more the beauty of "The Matrix". Too bad the Wachowski "siblings" cannot have another good piece like this, maybe not anymore... (the last part by Aeon Flux's Peter Chung is the weakest, despite its close style to Aeon Flux, bizarrely enough).