Critics tend to be arty-farty types who prefer mysterious confusing plots that don't actually make any sense - like the
-
iceblink1 — 9 years ago(November 27, 2016 09:05 AM)
You have obviously built a wall and refuse to see over it.
LOL, it's always the unscientific and religious types who say that - when in fact science is the discipline most open to criticism, and in fact requires it to develop.
It is the religious and arty-farty cliques who prohibit progress by not allowing true criticism and suppressing voices that do not agree with the latest fashion so religiously beloved for nothing other than irrational reasons.
The movie is stupid, even if the science was ok, it hides behind a few weak layers of pretentiousness and political-correctness to conjure a feeble plot that only a weak-minded fool could admire
5 people liked this comment -
-
-
Farshnoshket — 9 years ago(November 27, 2016 10:26 AM)
So it does appear it's hard for you to separate your life from rating a film based solely on it's own merit? You weigh you own bias heavily with many films?
I guess that's fine, but I try to keep my bias out of rating a film.
I suppose it might be extremely hard to separate your own bias when it comes to something like someone you know suffering like that, however in a film like Pulp Fiction it seems like the only one's who suffered were criminals, except that one fat girl on the street who got shot in the leg. Damn fat chick! -
doorclosed321 — 9 years ago(November 27, 2016 09:23 AM)
Science, aka the new religion. It used to be open to new ideas and now it's fastly becoming the very thing that it help marginalise. Anyone who wears a white coat these days think they know about how things work and the plebs should just go along with it. That's probablaby partly the reason TED chiang wrote this story. He probably got sick of hearing all the dogmatic views of the scientific community, just as he obviously had with the religious community
-
iceblink1 — 9 years ago(November 27, 2016 09:52 AM)
You know I partly agree with you, especially with stuff like the promotion of Climate Scientists to the most prominent and well paid positions, even though they were the stupidest group of science students as teenagers.
But in its pure form, without political correctness intervening, Science is the most true form of knowledge.
5 people liked this comment -
mrwnmero — 9 years ago(November 27, 2016 08:48 AM)
Erm, based on your words, this movie is a science fiction. since it didn't introduce any new ideas, everything in the movie have been discussed "scientifically" before, the existence of aliens, getting affected by another language, even the psychological approach of every country leader in the situation. except in that last part I really think the united states would have shot first..
Nobody panics when things go "according to plan." Even if the plan is horrifying! -
mechaileh — 9 years ago(November 27, 2016 04:41 AM)
Indeed! This movie is completely nonsense.
How could she forgot the phone call to the Chinese general? Why only one woman in the entire world is able to see the future? What do the aliens left here after their visit? With all that technology they are not able to easily translate their thoughts to the Earth people?
The first thing to be considered when creating any sci-fi movie is logic. Without logic any script will be a disaster, like this one. I'm really surprised with the overall score at imdb (8+). -
RightPalmOfMaedhros — 9 years ago(December 11, 2016 03:53 PM)
But all your questions have been answered in the film, and quite logically at that. For example:
She didn't forget the phone call, for her it was all happening at the same time.
She didn't see the future. After understanding the premise the alien language works on (which she was able to do because she was one of the best linguists in the world) she was also able to see existence the way aliens do. It's a known linguistic theory, discussed earlier in the film. In her case, that meant mentally stepping out of linear time. She wrote a book about it, which implies afterwards others had at least the possibility to learn as well. She was just the first one.
Nowhere there is implied this alien technology is advanced enough for them to just translate their thoughts to the Earth people. Just because they have a fancy space ship doesn't mean they own a Babel fish. Furthermore, it is essential for Earthlings to learn the alien language so we can help them when they need us. -
The_Foxcatcher — 9 years ago(November 27, 2016 06:10 AM)
This movie has a plot which makes no sense unless you transfer to the world of Harry Potter and allow magic. Even if the nonsensical ability to see the future by thinking differently was possible, the consequences in the movie are silly - just ONE woman appears to have the ability, never mind that the the biggest event in the history of human civilization has just occurred with ALIENS VISITING, no, never mind all that, the lady goes back to a standard life, gets married and has a baby even though she knows it will die of a rare disease before adulthood.
Well said!
You summed it all up.
Retard Pussy Sinister_prig -
tommyjonzie — 9 years ago(November 27, 2016 01:29 PM)
To the O.P., I agree. As best I can tell this story is more in the Harry Potter vein (Magic) than real science fiction. Logically it doesn't compute, but tries to disguise it with mumbo jumbo plotting. Anyone with a science background would be bored silly. (But I like Amy Adams, so I guess I'll see it for her)
-
propinquity4 — 9 years ago(November 27, 2016 04:18 PM)
OP apparently did not grasp certain things about this movie that shares a lot with Slaughter House Five. Because you did not grasp the POV on time or appreciate the non-linear narrative does not mean the movie is stupid or politically correct.
Your post speaks more about your intolerance to other points of view and demand that everyone thinks or looks at the world the same as you.
I don't think this movie is a masterpiece but it hits most of the marks it needed to for the points it was trying to make.