yeah those are better executed films. i guess it's just because i am more of a sucker for sci fi movies
-
kaine-qld — 9 years ago(November 14, 2016 12:57 PM)
My main problem with the film (I still like it) was
The love story that ends the film was not built to at all. We learn that Hawkeye is the father of the little girl and there is a scene of the two together where she says some crap like 'I would do it even knowing the outcome' and 'I forgot how it felt to be held by you' but the film didnt really show the pair having any romantic interest up until the very end. Also, he learns the language toowhy cant he see the future? -
aznxscorpion517 — 9 years ago(November 14, 2016 01:02 PM)
- Because the Heptapods don't understand our language maybe they just didn't know both of those ships was in a single country. Russia is freaking huge. If you tossed darts at a map its not impossible that you might hit Russia twice.
- Why they need our help is not important. The story isn't really about aliens but we needed a reason for them to show up and do what they did. It's like a plot device. The story is actually about humanity. In fact the original short story doesn't ever mention why they arrive or why they suddenly leave and I liked that better. Though, granted the short story is simpler and would require less explanation of things.
- Maybe the data from all 12 ships would give them a better understanding of the language. As in it could be used to teach people faster and easier. Louise was the focus and breakthrough but she's just one person and even she had trouble understanding it for a long time. She was also treated special. She had an actual close encounter with the alien. That seemed to have a great affect on her, didn't it? Not everyone else got that opportunity. Maybe the original plan was for the aliens to have humans figure out and combine the data from all 12 ships to learn the language but Louise was able to learn it on her own (with help from Costello) because beep was about to go down.
-
jryu-20952 — 9 years ago(November 14, 2016 01:22 PM)
My take on it was:
No one language will have 'correct' translation of the language. If there are 12 educated guesses to the translation, then maybe the united earth can derive a closer translation of Heptapods' language.
I think the 12 ships were just randomly chosen with the 'faith' that there will be a synergistic effect on earthlings to cooperate, share the info, and solve the problem together.
On earthlings helping in 3000 years, I was thinking in the line of, "what if humans became advanced enough (WITHOUT Heptapods' help), became greedy space colonizers, then attacked Heptapods' world?" Because that's what humans have done throughout history. And still doing it. In response to this human tendency, Heptapods arrive on earth to convince earthlings to not do that. I think that makes more sense then humans travelling to their world to save the Heptapods from whatever catastrophe they may be facing. -
patrickconnors2000 — 9 years ago(November 14, 2016 06:40 PM)
THis would assume that the Heptapods know they need to do this and want to avoid the evil human timeline. I got the impression they couldn't change anything. The past and future and present all merge together, but it is all still destined to happen.
Otherwise Castello wouldn't have had to die. -
aznxscorpion517 — 9 years ago(November 14, 2016 11:27 PM)
Yes. In the short story it is pretty clear that they cannot change the future (although there is no explosion to be avoided in the short story). This excerpt from it I've been sharing on these boards explains it pretty well.
"The heptapods are neither free nor bound as we understand those concepts; they don't act according to their will, nor are they helpless automatons. What distinguishes the heptapods' mode of awareness is not just that their actions coincide with history's events; it is also that their motives coincide with history's purposes. They act to create the future, to enact chronology.
Freedom isn't an illusion; it's perfectly real in the context of sequential consciousness. Within the context of simultaneous consciousness, freedom is not meaningful, but neither is coercion; it's simply a different context, no more or less valid than the other. It's like that famous optical illusion, the drawing of either an elegant young woman, face turned away from the viewer, or a wart-nosed crone, chin tucked down on her chest. There's no correct interpretation; both are equally valid. But you can't see both at the same time.
Similarly, knowledge of the future was incompatible with free will. What made it possible for me to exercise freedom of choice also made it impossible for me to know the future. Conversely, now that I know the future, I would never act contrary to that future, including telling others what I know: those who know the future don't talk about it. Those who've read the Book of Ages never admit to it." -
iangb_2000 — 9 years ago(November 14, 2016 02:12 PM)
I took it as a plot device to flag the issue of how the world is so divided - how its different parts can't work together, can't even communicate with each other. That Adams was learning to communicate with the aliens at the same time as China, Russia and elsewhere were refusing to communicate with each other.
Thus when the aliens make the point that each ship is one twelfth of the whole, the contrast is made with the disunited state of the people on earth. -
lenlenlen1 — 9 years ago(November 14, 2016 05:46 PM)
- Signifigance of the Landing Zone: They talk at length about what the 12 sights mean, but never come back to this idea. I've heard some people say they were scattered to unify us, but then why would Russia need two, and some other countries none?
The only significance of the landing locations might have been to spread it out over the world, but I'll admit, that's just a guess. - The Aliens purpose: They say they will need our help 3000 years from now, and we need their language for that. But then.. nothing. The aliens have magic floating starships that break laws of physics we don't think can be broken. But they need our help. Not answering the why of this is sidestepping the entire point of the movie.
That they will need our help in 3000 years is enough explanation for the purposes of this particular story. First things first. - Why do you need all 12 ships: They say again and again that you need data from each ship, but they don't say for what. Evidently they are just trying to teach us their language, but the female linguist seems to pick this up from one ship, so who cares about the other 11?
Evidently they are just trying to teach us their language. What you said.
THis movie raises a bunch of interesting questions, and then pretends it didn't raise them by shoving an emotional cancer story in the audiences face.
Without the personal connection story this movie would have had no heart. It had to come down from a big picture story to a personal story in order to catch us in our heart as well as our mind. I thought the two stories dovetailed well. That she chooses to still live her life even though its all going to end sadly is profound because she chooses at least a few years of loving her husband and daughter.
- Signifigance of the Landing Zone: They talk at length about what the 12 sights mean, but never come back to this idea. I've heard some people say they were scattered to unify us, but then why would Russia need two, and some other countries none?
-
Uvtha — 9 years ago(November 15, 2016 01:02 AM)
- They landed in 12 areas where there were people to try and hit everyone? I really don't think it matters all that much, but I think that's the general idea.
- Their purpose was to teach us their language so that we could aid them in the future. We don't need to know any more than that as it's not important to the plot of the film. That they need help and in order to get it they needed to be understood and needed humanity to be united is all that matters.
- The 12 ships were to unite the planet. She didn't figure it all out, she figured out enough to be able to get the information from the future that stops the Chinese from attacking, and ends up uniting the 12 groups so they could fully understand the alien language.
I took the death of her daughter to be the thing that her brain latched onto, due to it's importance in her life, in order to start seeing time differently, which lead to the understanding of the language, and the unification of the planet.
I think it's unnecessary for the movie to explain in detail whats going on, in fact it would be a tedious waste of time that would only negatively impact the end result. I think the problem here is that you are looking at this as the story of aliens coming to earth rather than the story of the experience of the woman in the middle of it, and how her life was impacted.
-
bensfiction — 9 years ago(November 15, 2016 05:33 AM)
Hey, didn't read the whole thread so I'm not sure if this was answered, but to answer number 3 you have to understand this sort of plays into their non linear time and sort of creates a predestination paradox. Basically she understood reading their language from the first shop because she was able to look at time like they do and jump to the future where humanity had banded together and shared the language and she would know the whole thing, remember she says she knows it after her vision of opening her book assuming that we all shared knowledge. Hope this helps
-
arrgh-46956 — 9 years ago(November 15, 2016 05:43 AM)
I can get why you felt cheated by the plot holes. But I think they were there for a reason. I think the director wanted to leave a few things unexplained so that viewers could form their own perceptions of the story. That's what makes a good sci-fi, I reckon; one that gets you thinking. It's like Stanley Yelnats said at the end of Holes: "I guess you'll have to fill in the rest of the holes yourself."
I seem to recall Stanley Kubrick employing a similar technique to his adaptation of The Shining. And few deny that THAT'S a first-class movie, so why should we slake Arrival for it? -
svalinanikola — 9 years ago(November 15, 2016 05:47 AM)
That's not what a plot hole is. Plot hole is something like: OK, imagine if it's established in some movie that there's this special glass that can't be broken by anything, but later in the movie it gets broken so the characters can get out and it's never explained why they were able to do it. The movie broke its internal logic, therefore' that's a plot hole.
Things that are left unexplained in this movie are just that, things that are left unexplained, they're not "plot holes".
I seem to recall Stanley Kubrick employing a similar technique to his adaptation of The Shining. And few deny that THAT'S a first-class movie, so why should we slake Arrival for it?
Oh, I definitely agree with this. Certain things in The Shining make a little more sense only if you read the book (it's not necessary, but it does explain certain details, like the guy in a bear suit). -
arrgh-46956 — 9 years ago(November 15, 2016 06:37 AM)
Thanks for the correction. I must have gotten confused due to Stanley Yelnats having metaphorically referred to the use of a not-totally-explained ending by using the word "holes"; that must've created a false association or something!
Glad you agree with my views on The Shining as well. -
rvpals — 9 years ago(November 16, 2016 07:32 AM)
I totally agreed with you here.
All the unanswered questions really bring down the movie as a whole. I was very disappointed after I saw the movie last night.
It's ok for Sci-Fi to not have answers, but not when you kept string people along as if there's going to be some big reveal at the end, and it did not happen. That kills the viewer's faith in your movie.
All good questions that they try to have you believe that they're going to answer eventually, but answer never come.- Why 12? and why the 12 located where they are.
- Why does Louis have the ability to have vision about future?
- Why do the aliens just leave?
-
svalinanikola — 9 years ago(November 16, 2016 07:41 AM)
- Why 12? and why the 12 located where they are.
- Why does Louis have the ability to have vision about future?
- Why do the aliens just leave?
All of those questions have been answered in the movie, though.
-
svalinanikola — 9 years ago(November 16, 2016 07:52 AM)
When they decode the sentence, they realize it relates to the concept of time and that the one they recieved is only one twelfth of the intended whole.
As for why they were located where they were, probably because they want everyone to decode them. -
Frostbite22 — 9 years ago(November 16, 2016 06:32 PM)
I enjoyed the movie quite a bit, albeit different than I originally thought I would. For example I also went in hoping for more "SCI/FI" and ended up getting too much emotional baggage thrown in there, but it still was a good movie.
but yes, the big questions were never answered and it was disappointing. -
aznxscorpion517 — 9 years ago(November 17, 2016 12:50 PM)
Since the movie is about the human condition and specifically Louise those questions are not important to the story. Maybe they are important to you and you would like answers and that's fine but they didn't need to be answered in terms of the story. Hear me out.
- 12 sites. Could have 13. Could have been 11. Could have been random. If those sites were in any other place how would it change any major plot points? General Shang would have been General Hamilton instead? General Morimoto? General Guerrero?
- Aliens arrive and by the end of the film we know they came to give us the tool of their language. Louise and likely the rest of humanity will eventually gain the ability to perceive time as nonlinear. I don't think they needed to tell us they needed our help 3000 years from now but they did so whatever fine. If they didn't tell us the 3000 years thing how would it change any major plot points? If they did tell us why they need our help in 3000 years (disease, war, traveling to other worlds) how would it change any major events to the movie we actually saw? Louise still learns the language, prevents a potential tragedy. We learn the twist as we were supposed to. Basically same movie.
- Others and I answered this question previously.
-
C-Younkin — 9 years ago(November 17, 2016 09:47 PM)
Yeah, I thought so much of this movie just seemed like they were throwing ideas in there but then tries to do some misdirect with that lame directors trick of going backwards and forwards in time and giving us a really contrived and ridiculous ending. This isn't great sci-fi. A movie like Contact for example will inspire debate and questions. This just simplistically tells us stuff (like we need to communicate more) before moving to the next idea.
Trying to create a funny, engaging YouTube channel. If you guys check it out, hope you enjoy what you see. Thanks in advance.
Review of the film here- -
james-mac — 9 years ago(November 18, 2016 05:41 PM)
"Science fiction, good science fiction, is a special kind of genre that is about answering questions with our current understanding of Physics, and making predictions about where science is headed."
Who says? Fahrenheit 451 is not about physics but is considered a science fiction classic. Where did you get this idea?