Hey there everyone. Well, it's June already, can you believe it? Geez, time flies.

So what's been happening...

Well, what to say?

What has struck me most in recent weeks is how many people found the first Matrix difficult to understand. I loved it, and didn't think it was that difficult to comprehend. But I can see how one might find it a bit bamboozling.

My advice: if you found the original Matrix tough to understand then The Matrix Reloaded won't be your cup of tea! It leaves far more questions unanswered than answered - presumably allowing itself the luxury of the third movie to reveal all. It also includes some of a longest monologues in recent cinema history, monologues that move very quickly and may prove hard to follow! (I had to see the movie again to fully appreciate the words of The Architect!)

I really liked The Matrix Reloaded, but didn't love it as I did the first film. It stands on its own as an astonishing piece of big-budget film-making (the Wachowksi brothers are absolutely amazing movie-makers), but to me it lacked the story innovation of the first. It needed its own brain-busting twist, to allow it to stand alone as a movie event in its own right - and while it came close (with Neo stopping the Sentinels in mid-air, suggesting that the real world may simply be another Matrix itself) I don't think it fully succeeded in that regard.

To those who found Reloaded confusing, just remember that final possibility: is Neo's ‘real world' really real at all? Or is it another Matrix? (This possibility was actually mentioned in the animated short films, The Animatrix, that came out on the Net (and DVD) recently; also consider that if a sentient program like Agent Smith can send someone back into the ‘real world' - in effect making them flesh and blood - then that world can't be that real, now can it?)

That said, I'll still go and see the third film!

Go Annika!

I love my golf, and I really loved what Annika Sorenstam did this month at the Colonial tournament in Texas. I hope every little girl (and boy) in the world with dreams of breaking through prejudice or just the glass ceiling was watching Annika when she stepped onto the first tee in a men's PGA tournament.

She must have been so nervous - with the whole world watching, and indeed, with some people no doubt willing her to fail. Yet she played well, under a kind of pressure most of us will never even imagine, especially on that first day (the US TV network broadcasting the tournament brought forward their coverage just so they could film every single shot she played).

If nothing else, to paraphrase Billie-Jean King (who played a battle-of-the-sexes tennis match of her own), Annika Sorenstam's brave act of playing in a men's tournament did something very important: it brought people's prejudices out into the open.

It showed that some people still make distinctions between men and women on issues where sex is irrelevant. Annika is a golfer, an extraordinary golfer. Whether you are a man or a woman, all that should matter in golf is how well you can swing a club and hit the ball. Annika Sorenstam stood up to be counted at the Colonial last month, and she left with her head held high.

For the record, I reckon if she kept playing on the men's tour, and the media got used to her being there, she'd become a solid contender. Maybe not a winner every week, but certainly a contender.

Good on you, Annika. I'd be honoured to carry your bag anytime.

She may have missed the cut, but to me she won.