>le time travel plot about learning to live in the present moment and and enjoying life even though it inevitably ends in loss
Cool. but what was the point of the aliens though?
 |
 CRIME Shirt $21.68 |
|
>le time travel plot about learning to live in the present moment and and enjoying life even though it inevitably ends in loss
>drags a bowl onto your jpg in photoshop
>here's your poster and entire movie
>but what was the point of the aliens though?
Plot device
>time travel
please put down your phone when watching movies
her mind traveld in time to read the solution to the movie like in SpaceBall, moron
Playing sematics won't change that shitty deus ex machina
>her mind traveld in time
No it didn't.
Semantics.
For any pratctical ad narrative purpose it was "time travel".
It's like saying that TLOU zombies aren't ackshually zombies
Nope. It wasn't time travel. Simple as; you just got filtered.
It was, moron. Her fricking mind is a time machine
It's not a time travel movie, it's a movie where the for any practical and narrative purpose the mind of the protagonist travels in time
>the mind of the protagonist travels in time
So, you're moving the goalposts to her mind only? I'll let it slide, but a less kind Anon would've claimed victory here.
Problem is, her mind also does not travel in time. It doesn't move from point A to point B, it's at all points simultaneously, therefore there is no travel.
>She doesn't travel in time, she is just simultaneously in different times at once
That's semantics and your definition of moving through time becomes more and more restricting as you move the goalpost.
>time travel
>semantics
>goalpost
Stop using words and terms you don't know the meaning of, you must be an ESL
>moving through time
>moving
What movement? are you moronic?
Jesus man, even if you are "trolling" you surely could do something more interesting with your time.
>you surely could do something more interesting with your time
No, because that would be time travel too.
By your logic any movie where a character has future sight or prophetic dreams is a time travel movie.
Correct
NTA. If the prophetic sight & the way it affects the story is the focal point of the entire plot then yeah it's a time travel movie
So, Final Destination is a time travel movie? Weirdest take I've ever seen.
>So, Final Destination is a time travel movie?
Yes
Yes dumbass because for that light has to travel through time fool
did you even watch the movie, or perhaps did the plot go over your head? She didn't time travel.
>It's not time travels, she just gets ability to think beyond time thanks to ayy language perspective.
It's just obfuscated time travel, functionally it makes no difference when plot is solved due to timeloop
Traveling implies moving from one point to another. There's no travel in the protagonist's experience with time.
If you want to be so anal about it she doesn't travel in time with her body but her mind does thanks to new insights in perception.
It's still dumb plot device and I hate the implicit "what if we fight wars because we just don't understand each other", it's so dumb it makes my blood boil.
>she doesn't travel in time
glad we're in agreement.
t. moron
I accept you concession sir.
>"what if we fight wars because we just don't understand each other"
That's exactly why people fight wars, and also because of money. My interpretation of her seeing the future was that time is not linear and that everything is happening all at once, so you can see any point of time if you know how to. That's not time travel, the other two anons are right, why can't you accept you're wrong?
>That's exactly why people fight wars, and also because of money.
This is moronic post-historical post-cold war liberal way of viewing things.
People even inside one society have opposing goals and conflicts arise because of the opposing interests and unwillingness to compromise, not because robber doesn't understand that you actually wanted to give him your wallet because you don't speak ebonics.
>People even inside one society have opposing goals and conflicts arise because of the opposing interests and unwillingness to compromise
Woah, that's kinda like not understanding each other
>You just don't understand I want to kill you to get your things, stop resisting
Wow, you are so right
Yeah and you've been nothing but wrong this entire thread, it's embarrassing
It takes a special kind of stupidity do don't grasp that one can understand motives of the Other but oppose them for objective reasons.
You're blind to narrative conventions. A common sci-fi time travel trope is "what happens when you change the future or past" (whether it breaks casuality, creates alternate universes, etc.) and "it's just a circular loop where consequences of the time travel itself fulfills the predetermined events of the future" is how Arrival did it, and it's one common answers to that question. There's a tvtropes page about the trope called Circular Time Loop. Any movie that plays with common time travel tropes or answers common time travel questions is a time travel movie.
But they never travel in time.
>I enjoy Cinemaphile - Television & Film
The theme of the movie is essentially Fredrich Nietzsche's Amor Fati. It uses the Sepir-Whorf hypothesis as the framework for how the character perceives time differently. The alien language is what teaches her to do that.
Yeah but why do the aliens have to land though
The reason they landed is never discovered because it isn't apparent to creatures that perceive things in sequence. The aliens landed due to something in the past or future, porobably.
You're missing the point
There is no point narrative to have an alien story at all in order to convey this narrative.
Their language is how she perceives time differently. The book is all about physics and language. The author just wanted to explore the extreme conclusion of the Sepir Whorf hypothesis, like how an alien language could change how you see the world.
Ok but the plot with aliens landing and nations fighting over it, and "humanity will help us in 3000 years" and world peace and the weird thing with the chinese general was completely unnecessary.
Well Them needing humanity's help is why they landed, and them landing is what led to Louise learning their language, which led to her perceiving time differently. That's all necessary and makes perfect sense in the story. The Chinese general...yeah his character is fricking weird.
I hate to break it to you but you're the kind of midwit who cannot possibly understand narrative. "The story had to be written this way because X causes Y which causes Z..." that's not how it works, it's circular logic. You can't justify why the plot is the way it is just because the plot is logically consistent within itself. If there's no thematic consistency between the A plot and the B plot then it's just a puzzling decision and shit writing, it doesn't matter if the A story provides a plausible explanation for the events of B story, you still have to justify how the A story relates at all to the overall narrative, otherwise it's going to be shit.
I already explained this earlier in the thread. The story is about the Sepir Whorf hypothesis, which states that language informs your perception of the world. One day an author thought, "What if you learned an alien language? Surely that would change your perception of the world!" and he wrote the short story Arrival is based on. I guess I am too midwit to understand what you mean, but everything about the aliens and their language, and time perception is all intrinsic to the story. No part of it can be removed because that was all sprouted from the core idea the author had.
You're wrong. Also the original short story didn't even have the thing about saving humanity in 3000 years or the plot about world unification, because it's not necessary to tell the story.
You're right, the short story didn't spell out why the aliens came, but them not seeing time linearly made it pretty easy to figure out that their motivations had to do with something in the future. The movie just gave an explicit answer. I am starting to think you are the midwit...
>the plot has to be the way it is because [thing entirely made up by the author] has to be logically consistent with [thing entirely made up by the author]
Stupid moron
>The story is the way it is because the author wrote it that way
Yeah. I am kind of baffled at this point by what you are trying to say. I wish you'd spell it out instead of doing this weird game of tag. You're saying the story could have been a different story? Yeah...it could have but that would be, you know, a different story.
Yeah and it would've been better
>Yeah...it could have but that would be, you know, a different story.
Actually it couldn't have, because free will doesn't exist.
Well it couldn't have been because it isn't. I still don't know what the other anon's point was...
The problem is that the concept of aliens landing on earth and provoking a world conflict is so far removed from the plot of a character having nonlinear time hallucinations and learning that they're going to use a child
Instead of the cliche narrative device of an alien invasion and le world unity (which has absolutely no relationship whatsoever with what the story is trying to say thematically) there could have been another justification for seeing time nonlinearly in order to tell the story. It feels like the aliens are just there to shoehorn the concept into a hollywood blockbuster and trick people into watching it.
If I was writing this story, I'd make it so the woman is a linguist studying a lost advanced civilization who are said to have discovered the meaning of life. Then the twist is that the ancients discovered a language that lets them see in nonlinear time, realized life is about le experiences, decided seeing the future isn't productive to the human experience, and gave up and dismantled their research to prevent other people from trying to unlock the secrets of the universe.
Considering the main character in the movie decides that it actually isn't worth changing the future even if you know it, it would make more sense thematically for the message to be something like "don't try to understand, just let it be"
Instead we get le aliens and an unrelated plot about world unity that doesn't do anything to support the character's inner struggle.
(me)
My example is equally as tropey as le alien invasion trope. The difference is that one actually works in this case (because it supports the theme and message)
That's not a very high bar either. Anything would have been better.
>write your own movie then trololol
It's not actually as hard as you think. If the movie's plotting wasn't sloppy then I, a random Cinemaphile anon wouldn't have been able to think of a better example, but I can because the narrative is thematically sloppy and carried entirely by a cool concept.
Fun fact: a trope isn't the same as a cliche. Especially in science fiction and fantasy, tropes define the narrative. Common patterns become tropes. A trope transforms into a cliche when it's used a way that doesn't support the themes and fails to understand why that trope exists in the first place. Cliche is unintentional self-parody caused by a lack of understanding of the genre, not repetition of the genre conventions. It's caused by naive usage of tropes.
Vileneuve's (and the original short story author's, although vileneuve made it slightly worse) usage of aliens is a cliche, but it distracts you form the fact that it's a cliche because the actual visual depiction of the aliens is unique and well-done in the movie. It's still cliche narratively.
So you actually have no criticism or anything remotely insightful to say other than 'what if it was something else'. Thanks for clearing that up
(Not the guy you were arguing with btw)
The criticism is that the alien plot has nothing to do with the theme or message of the story.
Mysterious aliens arriving on planet earth for the MC to decipher their message is just a big a part of the story as anything else. You can't get away from it
Imagine being so stupid that even after a lengthy reply, you just repeat the same initial thing, fully oblivious to what the reply means. I actually pity you
Triggered by villenkino. Let me guess you also goy filtered by TENET
>The story is about the Sepir Whorf hypothesis
I'm not sure about that. It seems more like "what if we are helpless observers to the universe, powerless to effect change". That seems more like the running theme in Ted Chiang's writing. Like the one where the lady discovers a basic logical flaw in mathematics, and her entire reality slowly unravels. Or the one where God is obviously real and routinely shows himself, yet remains unpredictable to the point of perversity. Or the one where AI completely takes over scientific research, and human scientists are reduced to puzzling over the pronouncements of the AI.
The story certainly makes you think about determinism and all that, but to me it is clear that the focus for this story was language and perception, predominantly.
>suggesting that the structure of a language influences its speakers' worldview or cognition
syntax cant do that. Extensions of natural language(like math) can though
>syntax can't do that
Citation needed
ummm yeah it can you moron.
That movie is so fricking stupid. It astounds me how many people I've heard say they actually like it
The short story it's based on is really good. How is the movie bad? I was drunk when I saw it.
It's based on a short story? That explains why it's so drawn out and boring. The story could have been told in 10 minutes.
It's obvious that you never reproduced
Pretending to like bad movies won't give you pussy
oh really? i said i liked Barbie and now i have a qt trans gf =P
Don't look how Amy Adams looks today
>aliens tell you your future is to have a child and lose it
>tie your tubes
now what you stupid fricking movie
>inb4 it just shows your potential future
if she were gonna tie her tubes the alien wouldn't have told her about a child
how about she just kills herself after she gets told that what then? or is she now just invincible until these events play out
if she were gonna kill herself they wouldn't have told her that something else would happen
you're asking someone to draw a square with 5 sides here
cringe reddit flick
Cringe reddit post
criiiinnggeee
arrival is the cringiest, most cringe inducing "movie" ever made
One of many le tweest movies that is accidentally too obvious with its hints and so you figure it out 20 minutes in and then have to roll your eyes for the next 2 hours as they pretend it's still a mystery
What is the twist?
The flashback sequence in the beginning (where the main character loses a child) is actually a flash forward to the future
>uh, so whats our spayship gonna look like Mr Villeneuve?
>*looks at pistacchio shell*
Bravo Dennis
It isnt time travel you absolute midwits. Its the perception of time in which one is aware of all time simultaneously. She can't be commit suicide or tie her tubes because that isnt what she does, she is perceiving a definite reality. Awareness and actionability are separate.
>It isnt time travel
this, though jeremy renner wishes it were
To stop the accident and save his penis from becoming a penwas?
"I'm going to force a child to suffer and die but it's not my fault because p~r~e~d~e~s~t~i~n~a~t~i~o~n. I'm not being a selfish c**t, I'm just p~e~r~c~e~e~e~v~i~n~g the inevitable future."
Yes, we don't have free will. Whatever illusion you have that you are in control is a cope made up by your frontal lobe. We're no more than actors portraying the role given to us.
Nice way to absolve yourself of the responsibility for your idiotic actions.
>absolve yourself of the responsibility
Responsibility is a man-made concept, it's not real, Anon.
This is true, but your brain is acting on information it has, so if you learn about the future then that obviously counts as something that might steer you in a different direction to avoid that future. That doesn't require free will, it's just cause and effect (stimuli and reaction) just like everything else.
Yes, time travel (or perception) isn't real and fricks with causality. Shocker. In this movie you just have to accept that her perception of the future is already baked into the choices she makes/has made/will make.
The guy who wrote the short story "Story of your Life" on which this is based, Ted Chiang, has a boner for this sort of thing. He also wrote another short story along these lines in which devices which can predict one second ahead if you're going to push a button of not become popular and cause everyone to sink into catatonic depression. Published for free in Nature of all places:
https://www.nature.com/articles/436150a
I'd rig up an LED triggered by the decay of a radioactive source, which is provably random. I'd then look at the LED and ignore the predictor, and only press the button if I see my radioactive LED trigger. There's no way to predict this.
Ted Chiang is actually one of my favorite short story writers. His prose is obviously very dry, like the sci-fi writers of the 60s and 70s, but he explores some pretty great concepts. His story Exhalation about a world where robots are gradually slowing down due to their breathing mechanism no longer working is a great one.
Yeah I really like his collection containing the story I mentioned. Very varied settings. There's one where they're building the tower of Babel in Mesopotamia. Unusual setting but it's written so realistically and well that it works. I'll have to read that collection again.
>Exhalation
I was just thinking of that one the other day. They first notice something is wrong because an air pressure clock is running slow. Then the protagonist has to investigate the mechanics of his own air-powered brain. Really well done.
I just read that story and it is utter dogshit, this chinky chinadog cannot write anything of value and it is no wonder arrival is a steaming pile of excrement.
It was destiny that you would be filtered this way.
Hyper-materialism is reductive, anon
Also prove determinism is real
>Its the perception of time in which one is aware of all time simultaneously
This is literally meaningless nonsense, and only seems possible if you take Relativity as fact, rather than a limited mathematical model which it actually is.
Good thing it's just a story then, nerd.
There is no practical difference.
It's like saying Termianto has no time travel because i'ts akshually a time loop.
I don't remember clearly, but does one of the elephant Black folk die at the end?
>tfw abbot is death process
One of the most boring movies I have ever seen. And I absolutely love Blade Runner 2049.
I loved the movie and I want to frick Amy Adams
For a director who hates dialogue his imaginary and directing is so bland and boring.
>Have a daughter knowing she will die a slow painful death
>Literally anyone having a child, ever:
People usually die, so...
No, it's way different. The cause-and-effect is much clearer, and the amount of quality years of life is much shorter. You realize the main character is psychopath when you stop and think about these two things.
I don't think you really got the movie. With the main character's new perception of time it doesn't matter how long her daughter lives, giving her a chance at life is what matters. She always will have lived, so the Mom and her will always be together.
I've got you squirming around trying to appear correct. But you just compared the movie to a real life pregnancy, and now your saying comparisons like that shouldn't be done. Squirm squirm squirm!
The movie is about abortion. You should always give people a chance at life. I never deviated from that conclusion, though I didn't outright say it until now.
Frick life and frick you. I’ll swim through the fetus filled river in hell.
But imagine the Instagram likes
I HATE VILLENEUVE WHY DO PEOPLE LIKE HIM SO MUCH
Why do you hate him? Even if you don’t like his movies, they are at worst boring and forgettable, it’s not like he is ruining modern cinema.
he's doing something worse than ruining cinema, he is a false prophet. He's the cinematic anti-christ. He appeals greatly to midwits who will settle for his bland koolaid. People will consider what Villeneuve is putting out to be the great standard. "This is what movies are!!!" says Hideo Kojima, the beast with seven heads. Everyone will be happy and content seeing movies that are like Villeneuve's and all our collective worries about the death of cinema will be sated while it is suffocating before our very eyes.
At least when capeshit was popular, we knew it was shit. Everybody did. People were waiting for the revival of true film. It didn't come, Villeneuve came. He is propping up a zombie corpse of cinema and everyone is praising it. There will be no want for anything greater, obviously Villeneuve is great. You can see all the sheeple go "Wow Dune Part Two is what we really needed!" as they settle for big instead of grand, deep instead of profound. It's capeshit in disguise and we're stuck with it for the rest of time.
I unironically prefer David Lynch's Dune in every respect. At least it's interesting to look at.
This. very well said
Also this
Imagine having to seethe this hard in order to consolidate your contrarian urges with reality. we haven't seen this level of seethe on Cinemaphile since Christopher Nolan. We're so back
He's right, tho
>"I am leh smart" stupid movie
>you think they're flashbacks... they're actually flashforwards
>you think K is the human... it's actually the girl
>you think Jake's imagining the doppleganger... it's actually real
why does he do the same gimmick everytime? did he do it in DUNC too?
You forgot
>2 is 1! *gasp*
The aliens could have spoiled the film in the first 10 minutes
I hated this piece of shit and I have low standards when it comes to scifi
Sci-fi is just window dressing for the author to explore psychological and philosophical ideas. I mean that can describe a lot of sci-fi, but in this case the sci fi really is just window dressing.
There's someone like you in every thread on Cinemaphile. Nobody on Cinemaphile likes any movie.
Stupid fricking frogposting tourist
Go back to /r/greentext or /misc/ or learn to integrate
>Pepe enrages you
>using "tourist"
>using "/pol/" as an insult
This is post is like a master class on how to not belong here.
Holy shit you're embarrassing
Just stop posting. It's shitting up the thread.
I've been on /teevee/ since before /LOST/, methinks that it is perhapst you, thine epic narwhal baconer, that donth belong here
Black person dhalit neck beard
Ah shit sorry man, meant to quote
>buzzword buzzword buzzword
Go back.
He didn't even use any buzzwords you dumb newhomosexual
Lol
Lmao, even
Do you even SHIGGY DIGGY?
>Being a redditor in the year of our lord 2024
I bet you don't even know what DSFARGEG and FGSDF are.
>t. Met Snacks at Anime Weekend Atlanta in 2008
Things I am tired of on Cinemaphile
>Trannies
>Redditors
>Discord users (see trannies)
>Indians
>Feds
Made sure to use some buzzwords for you this time
Cringe.
I like plenty of movies, truckloads of them from every era, except those made in current era because they are made by people who don't care about movies for people with no standards.
Same with games, comics, cartoons, books...
You just refuse to accept modern media. Why? Because you're a chud who feels a wienertail of anger and spite when you see normies liking something, since you can't possibly align yourself with normalgays. So the only way you can get away with still consooming and brain rotting by watching movies is by jacking off about past generations and fetishizing cinema that isn't popular anymore.
No, because it's bad and made by peopel who don't care about what they make for people with no standards.
I'll accept new stuff, like I accept many different stuff from many eras, when they will be good again, but they will need to be compeltely different to begin with.
You are not entitled to acceptance and agreement, fascist.
>takes off mask
>it's actually a /misc/gay
Like pottery
>mentioning le pol out of nowhere
>revealing thate he was a leftist that's only defending a bad movie for his own politcs
You are mentally ill.
Name FIVE (5) good movies
5 good movies I've actually watched (I don't watch many movies, this isn't a definitive ranking in any 0rder):
Unforgiven (1992)
Fight Club (1999)
The Social Network (2010)
The Hunger Games (2012)
The Departed (2006)
>The Social Network (2010)
>The Hunger Games (2012)
>The Social Network
A great film, as expected considering it's directed by the same person who made Fight Club
>The Hunger Games
An underrated masterpiece
I enjoyed the money pit
the point of the film was propaganda that believing aliens to be demonic and to be skeptical of them is something a bad crazy person does
Well the CIA and Army work closely with Hollywood with any movie depicting them, so they definitely collaborated on Arrival. It could absolutely have been predictive programming. And then just 2 years ago we had all those UFO sightings where the US was shooting down "weather balloons."
It certainly wasn't part of the short story, as I recall at least.
A bit like how Thanos' motivation was changed from simping for Lady Death, to trying to prevent climate change.
Totally. Fricking hollywood.
Movie was alright. Most naysayers are just pseudo intellectuals who are over thinking it.
Unstuck in time but good
Yeah but that would never work as a movie, I can deal with Arrival just about covering the concept in a few hours.
Slaughterhouse is an incredible book, funny but moving. I really like how the character completely goes with the flow in every situation in his life. He’s even chilled about having a fat plain wife. To be like that would be bliss
Because resistance against it is completely futile. His path is already laid out. I haven't read the book in 15 years or any at all
How come Villeneuve can show what it looks like to experience time non-linearly in this flick but can't do it in Dune, the one story about non-linear time perception, and the inspiration for the short story that this film is based on?
Take it one step further. How come the offices of the Wallace Corp in BR2049 resemble a Fremen sietch's hidden water reservoirs more than they do in the actual Dune movies?
not another sci fi movie that's just zen underneath, surely? another one?
Why do the Chinese declare war on peaceful alien visitors without provocation? That seems insane.
Why wouldn't the aliens know it was going to happen?
They did. It was what led to the breakthrough, it was necessary.
In the short story no one knows why they landed. In the movie the aliens say in 3000 years they will need humanity's help, so they came now to help humanity in return. Or so we would help them later in return.
Why would them knowing it would happen change anything?
>peaceful alien visitors
the Chinese know there is no such thing.
Just rewatched this. It's really not that great of a movie. It doesn't present you with the right story. It doesn't show you breakthroughs that hint at the aliens' perception of the world, it just keeps showing people drawing circles until at one point Amy Adams's character just blurts out, "When you learn their language you can perceive time differently."
>Just rewatched this. It's really not that great of a movie
That's Villeneuve for you
To give a lesson to humanity and to not seek immortality in vain.
The film’s play with memory, fantasy, and political truth is primarily carried by the emotional complexity that Amy Adams gives to Banks’s character. She subtly moves between caution and fear, control and freaking out and then sustained awe; uncannily, she resembles Donald Trump as he took measured steps toward the microphone when accepting the 2016 election results. No one in U.S. news media seemed to have enough movie-watching experience to note the fluctuations of feelings, the mix of egotism and humility, apparent in Trump’s expression. This harkens back to the scene in Michael Moore’s Fahrenheit 9/11 that caused some to callously misunderstand George W. Bush’s momentary perplexity immediately after learning of the attack, when he was reading a story to a roomful of children. Because we maneuver daily between media-controlled narratives and personal responses to social phenomena, Banks’s quip about “that damned channel” takes on surprising significance.
>learning to live in the present
It's more like learning to live in the present, past and future simultaneously.
Another fine title for pretentious pseudo-intellectuals to touch themselves while analyzing its ludicrous plot.
So, I watched Arrival, a movie many pseudo-intellectuals out there are calling a masterpiece. The hook is, aliens arrive on Earth and they do not seem to want to destroy it. Most of the movie is about humans trying to communicate with them by deciphering their weird language.
Up until the big revelation, I was fine with it. It was slow and mostly uneventful but was taking itself seriously and had a very captivating atmosphere. There was even tension and high stakes in the form of some countries across the world not trusting the aliens and be constantly one step away from bombing the hell out of the spaceships. If this escalates amongst those who see the aliens as allies and those who consider them invaders, it would mean the beginning of a new world war.
But then the revelation happens and the movie loses all its appeal. Turns out deciphering the language makes you see your future, turning the whole movie to be about fatalism. There never was any tension or high stakes because everything was supposed to happen as such. The resolution was predetermined because once the main heroine saw her future, she knew what she was supposed to do, as well as she knew everything will turn out fine while the crisis was still at large. Thanks for nothing.
And it doesn’t stop there, no sir, it even insults your intelligence by resolving the military conflict through circular reasoning. The general who was about to attack the aliens was convinced they are harmless when the heroine spoke with him over the phone. His phone number was top secret and the reason she knew about it was because the general showed her the number in the future, so she would know it in the present. Freaking hilarious!
Oh, and if you are wondering how the general was convinced she was telling the truth, it’s because she told him things only he knew about. And how did our heroine know about those things? Because the same general told her in the future what to say to his present self, so he can be convicted! Damn son, that’s like a free ticket out of any situation imaginable! I facepalmed so hard at this.
Wait, there is more. Throughout the movie, the heroine has these flashbacks where she is interacting with her daughter. It was a cheap way to make her more sympathetic to the audience, since she doesn’t really have a personality other than looking worried with her mouth constantly open. Turns out those were not memories because they hadn’t happened yet. They were not flashbacks, they were flash forwards to the daughter she will have, therefore she never had a life to make us care about her for who she is, compared to what she accomplishes as a plot device. And she accomplishes everything simply by finding the answer into the future, so it’s all lazy and contrived.
Arrival boasts about making you think a lot, and I agree that it does. I was constantly wondering what kind of people would like this moronic revelation and give the movie anything higher than an average score. And here is a question the movie never bothered to explore. What is the beauty of life, if everything is predetermined and you know about them from the moment you are born? You are just a robot acting out a predetermined set of actions.
The movie never addresses that, because it’s too busy trying to look mysterious and be in a constant state of danger when in retrospect there is none. It also explains nothing about the aliens as a species. Where do they come from, what is the threat they speak of, how do they appear and disappear in an instant? Why did they even send a dozen ships when one was enough to make the heroine decipher the language? Because it was predetermined that they needed to send 12? How about the alien that was killed in an explosion? He knew it would happen but did nothing to save himself! There is no free will!
What a pile of nonsense! Another fine title for pretentious pseudo-intellectuals to touch themselves while analyzing its ludicrous plot.
>griping about well-trodden sci-fi time travel tropes instead of picking apart the many problems in the movie
Is this parody? It's good bait
>Because the same general told her in the future what to say to his present self, so he can be convicted!
sigma male tip: sit your family and friends down and tell them things that will convince you not to do things you did in the past just in case they invent time travel in the future
>time travel
It's not about time travel.
Because love is stronger than gravity
Did Arrival do the "see all time" thing first, or did Attack on Titan do it?
>inb4 Watchmen
Not explored as a key part of the story.
AoT has been going since 2019 so I'm not sure
Slaughterhouse n. 5 was made in the 70s,based on a book from the 60s
I felt this was boring
apparently its supposed to be good
they hooked you in
anyway, I thought for the longest time it was a Nolan movie. Doesn't it feel like a Nolan movie?
If it was a Nolan movie then half the film would be characters having moronic monologues about the nature of life and choice and free will, and the part where Louise explains the Sepir-Whorf hypothesis would be a 30 minute long autistic wikipedia dump interposed with cuts at the climax
So it would at least partially about translating language and wouldn't be just Amy Adams being sad and silent in poorly lit rooms?
Sounds already better than what we got
One of the worst movies I have ever seen. Amy Adams is shit in it and the first 20 minutes makes no sense whatsoever.
Daytime Cinemaphile are even dumber than their reddit counterparts. They all shill for free and slop up everything corporations feed them from media that is always full of israelites. If you tell them that's they're zombie consumers, they'll reply that you're an anti-semite!
>Cool. but what was the point of the aliens though?
To demonstrate to the audience that intelligent life elsewhere in the universe more than likely has a completely different conception/relationship with time than we do
Those aliens were really boring but that was the point, it was literally just two dudes from space who see things differently from literally everyone on Earth because theyre not from here
I watched it, but don't remember it. Was it the one where aliens came and they were living in some tin huts?
That's district 9
Yooo remember District 9? It's like Borat if the reporter was less funny and the country he's visiting more civilized.
Shit movie. Shit script. Shit director.
basically sci-fi for thosee who who don't liek sci fi, like all sci-fi made in the last decade
NOPE is unironically a better movie about aliens. I just don't buy the idea of aliens coming from outer space to tell us something or warn us. But a lost alien animal flying around in the clouds just eating people is a more convincing option.
I love this movie (I'm a Denisgay, I like all his movies) but unfortunately they did the stupid hollywood trope of having a character that's supposed to be fluent in Chinese, but when she starts speaking you have no idea what she's saying, her American accent is so prevalent that it prevents you from understanding a word (Chinese is a tonal language). Clearly she wasn't trained/had terrible training from the accent/language coach on set. It was distracting how bad it was, like I could believe the story about ayys and shit but this was a bridge too far kek.
And the funny part is that in her mind, she was speaking correctly, she even went on Jimmy Kimmel to defend herself, and since the wipipo who watch youtube videos can't speak Chinese anyways, they take her at face value and all the comments are people sucking her off for being such a dedicated method actress, and the few native speakers are leaving comments like "i can't understand a fricking word she's saying"
I know most Americans ITT probably don't care, but I'm sure there are some Europeans who hear the same butchering done to their languages in movies.
>t. Chang
This is disappointing and a completely valid criticism.
>t. monoglot Denisgay who studied Linguistics
Deep down I suppose it's not a huge deal because it's a western movie intended for western audiences, so of course they're not gonna understand it anyways, but the worst part is she's supposed to be the best linguist in America, fluent in 9001+ languages, and when she speaks Chinese you can't understand any of it. It'd be like if a character in a movie was a mathematician and they can't do 1+1. Or a more apt comparison is if she was a linguist and had to speak German but pronounced all the "w's" as English w's instead of "v's", as it should be. Again, I'm sure Germans have to put up with this kinda shit all the time, so I can only commiserate lel
Arrival is part of a recent series of movies I'd describe as Dunning-Kruger Sci-Fi. Along with Interstellar and to a somewhat lesser extent The Martian, they perfectly play to the crowd that fancies themselves as (and, to be fair, may truly be) smarter than average audiences but are not as smart as genuinely "smart people." They are movies designed to make the audience feel smart by introducing complicated and heady concepts, and then holding the viewer's hand the entire way through until there is next to nothing to be left up to interpretation.
If you didn't already know the twist in Arrival by the time she was in the milky section of the ship with the aliens AT LEAST, you perfectly fit the audience I am talking about.
There is no reward for being smart while viewing these movies because everything is eventually spelled out in big fridge magnet letters. Any clever idea is made so transparent that even the most simple in the audience will get it. It also removes any reward for rewatching or trying to figure out what you just saw.
Granted, there is a difference between Arrival and Interstellar. I think where Interstellar was pretending to have a brain it actually didn't have, Arrival has a brain that it is refusing to let the audience use.
Completely disappointing movie.
Also
>so that just happened
>Arrival has a brain that it is refusing to let the audience use.
Arrival was a braindead movie through and through.
All it had was a cool and interesting synopsis that had nothing to do with the movie.
An incompetent movie with empty characters (like all Villememe movies), Sci Fi for people who don't like sci fi
>Circular Time Loop
Stable Time Loop*
So you know that one alien who died? Well they fricking hated that guy.
They wanted to do something about him, but the problem is the aliens basically can experience their whole life at any point, they can't do anything to him themselves or he'll know about it his whole life and be an even bigger ass to everyone. So the aliens concocted a scheme to put them in a situation where the humans would end up bombing the craft and killing that one alien. Once that guy is dead, they're free to discuss him and plot how to get him killed without him finding out.
My personal head-cannon is that that alien is the one guy who kept bugging everyone else to just learn to write in a human language some point when they are close frends so they can communicate effectively on their first meeting, since it's obvious they learned the language later, then used that to understand them on that first trip. He never figured out it was that was just to stall and make things tense so that guy would use the bomb and the annoying alien would get killed, because of how annoying he was with the whole writing ide he was always going on about his whole life.
kek, I like your theory anon. This interpretation improves the movie.
>The Heptapods want to give a gift to humans so that, in three thousand years, humans will help them.
dumb woman movie
it's about as smart as women think they are
Time for a rewatch, thanks lads
The alien first contact part is much more interesting than the main plot with the linguist chick ngl.
>Seeing the future is functionally equivalent to your future self having a conversation with you
Wow
Holy shit, even