Film Score Monthly
FSM HOME MESSAGE BOARD FSM CDs FSM ONLINE RESOURCES FUN STUFF ABOUT US  SEARCH FSM   
Search Terms: 
Search Within:   search tips 
You must log in or register to post.
  Go to page:    
 Posted:   Nov 22, 2016 - 5:47 PM   
 By:   Grecchus   (Member)

It's your thread, Joan, so I'll follow your advice. smile

 
 
 Posted:   Nov 22, 2016 - 7:39 PM   
 By:   joan hue   (Member)

Don't understand your message. Post whatever you want to, Grecchus. I enjoy reading all thoughts.

 
 
 Posted:   Nov 23, 2016 - 2:48 AM   
 By:   Thor   (Member)

One of the main points of the story was that how you process reality through language absolutely determines your point of view. So in the story her "innate" ability is the ability to learn language, and when she learns the alien language, it changes her perspective of time.

Yeah, as I said earlier, it was the communicative aspect that interested me the most after the first viewing -- how (deliberately or not), the mise-en-scene and thematic ideas mirrored ideas in linguistics and semiotics, which I have studied somewhat over the years. There are bits and pieces of De Saussure, Barthes, Langer, Levi-Strauss, Derrida, Eco, Peirce etc. all jammed into in the film. Which is why it requires some further deconstruction for me (a propos Derrida).

Just like THE MATRIX (which channeled Plato, Baudrillard, Descartes, religious philosophy) or EX MACHINA (which channeled Plato, Carroll, Gita...), I love it when science fiction films incorporates these ideas into a seemingly streamlined genre form.

But obviously the 'time' aspect is relevant too, also as it relates to communication (this is not an idea I have explored much in my studies), as is the human aspect which Villeneuve emphasizes strongly. These are things I would need to investigate further.

What makes a film like ARRIVAL interesting is that it presents these complex ideas in a simple, more or less straightforward story -- as opposed to a more artfilm-oriented aesthetic wherein the complex ideas are communicated through a complex and more metaphysical form (like, say, SOLARIS, THE FOUNTAIN and 2001).

 
 Posted:   Nov 23, 2016 - 9:55 AM   
 By:   Sean Nethery   (Member)

Thanks for posting the vulture article, Joan. I like that they called out "Hannah" as you did in your first post. (I don't think the daughter is ever named in the story. It's in first person from the main character's pov, so the daughter is always "you.")*

*I know I keep harping on the story. That's the English major in me. I may love films, but I love words and music more.

 
 Posted:   Nov 24, 2016 - 10:11 AM   
 By:   Grecchus   (Member)

I don't know what it is about this story/movie, but it's got everyone crawling out of the woodwork:

http://www.forbes.com/sites/chadorzel/2016/11/21/the-physics-that-got-left-out-of-arrival/#50badb667aa4

http://www.theverge.com/2016/11/16/13642396/arrival-ted-chiang-story-of-your-life-film-twist-ending

 
 
 Posted:   Nov 24, 2016 - 10:32 AM   
 By:   joan hue   (Member)

Thanks for those articles, Grecchus. Both affirm what I said earlier which was that Ian and his physics' background were really not utilized. The first article clarifies the physics of the story or movie, but scientifically it was too advanced for me. The second article tackled the question of free will and choice when seeing the future. Really good stuff. Thanks!!

Oops, forgot to add that in the second article, the title of the short story was suppose to refer to Hannah's life. Never thought of that notion.

 
 Posted:   Nov 24, 2016 - 10:41 AM   
 By:   Grecchus   (Member)

Oops, forgot to add that in the second article, the title of the short story was suppose to refer to Hannah's life. Never thought of that notion.

Yes, but I think that in Chiang's very obvious eastern mystical leanings the pronouns 'your' and 'our' shoot in all directions at once. One word is even a subset of the other. Jeez, I'm fusing into the ether-net. smile

Edit: puts a whole new slant into that saying about it being better to travel than to arrive. If one wants to get a little more serious about the way one thinks about things there is something other than the false dichotomy of a hip sci-fi movie/short story and it's apparent philosophy, such as Alfred North Whitehead's process thought:

http://www.ctr4process.org/about/what-process-thought

 
 
 Posted:   Nov 30, 2016 - 9:25 PM   
 By:   lsuepet   (Member)

I just saw the movie last night. I thought the end was confusing and I can understand that she was seeing the future rather than having flashbacks. With one exception. At the beginning of the film she narrates something like "I thought this was your beginning and this was your end. But now I'm not sure." "Since their arrival, time is not so clear" Or something like that. To me that implied that she had her daughter and her daughter died BEFORE the arrival. So - what am I missing? My take on the end was that there was no beginning or end of time. That although she had given birth and raised her daughter who had died, she was now given an opportunity to re-experience it. How else explain what she said at the beginning of the movie?

 
 
 Posted:   Nov 30, 2016 - 11:03 PM   
 By:   joan hue   (Member)

Welcome Isupet. Hopefully you have read the above comments. I just thought we were duped in the beginning thinking it had already happened. (Her daughter's life and death.) I don't remember the mother's narration at the beginning, but now that you mention it, it can fit into the notion of simultaneous time. Maybe she is experiencing her daughter's life and death again, but she really didn't grasp the aliens' concept of time until she learned their language which seemed to be before she married and had her daughter. I'm confused too.

 
 Posted:   Dec 1, 2016 - 8:01 AM   
 By:   Heath   (Member)

I enjoyed the movie very much, although I still can't rationalise why the aliens came to Earth in the first place. Altruism? Hmmm...

Also, my favourite sticking point with alien "invasion" movies: any aliens advanced enough to achieve intergalactic travel must have EVERYTHING they need already... so why come here, and why filly about learning/teaching languages when they could do it instantaneously? In fact, they could do just about anything instantaneously.

Personally, I expect no alien visitations any time soon. I dare say they have better things to do. wink

 
 Posted:   Dec 1, 2016 - 8:55 AM   
 By:   Sean Nethery   (Member)

I enjoyed the movie very much, although I still can't rationalise why the aliens came to Earth in the first place. Altruism? Hmmm...

This was my disappointment with the original story, which didn't even have the "we'll need your help in 3,000 years" gambit. Unfortunately, the aliens are just a deux ex machina widget that makes the story go, they have no intrinsic meaning. They came to earth just to give the main character the new way of experiencing time and space. That's not good science fiction, even if the story is an excellent illustration of the underlying concepts.

 
 Posted:   Dec 1, 2016 - 8:59 AM   
 By:   Grecchus   (Member)

The ending was a bit comical. Louise suddenly starts spouting Mandarin/Chinese to the general and then when they meet, he turns out to be a James Shigeta lookalike/soundalike. wink

Renner has the best moment in the movie, when one of the meetings comes to an end and the hep on the right glides upwards into the smoky distance, like a rocket lifting off, and he gets that 'wow' feeling.

I think it's more likely the aliens were teaching the humans their version of intergalactic Ouija.

 
 Posted:   Dec 1, 2016 - 11:34 AM   
 By:   RoryR   (Member)

I'm thinking of going to this movie this weekend (there's not much else to see). Solium says it's as boring as hell. Well, I might just check it out anyway.

 
 Posted:   Dec 1, 2016 - 12:22 PM   
 By:   Solium   (Member)

I'm thinking of going to this movie this weekend (there's not much else to see). Solium says it's as boring as hell. Well, I might just check it out anyway.

And not because it's to slow, or doesn't have lots of explosions. I would love a smart engaging sci fi story with interesting characters and a unique visual style, but this isn't it.

 
 
 Posted:   Dec 2, 2016 - 7:42 PM   
 By:   lsuepet   (Member)

Welcome Isupet. Hopefully you have read the above comments. I just thought we were duped in the beginning thinking it had already happened. (Her daughter's life and death.) I don't remember the mother's narration at the beginning, but now that you mention it, it can fit into the notion of simultaneous time. Maybe she is experiencing her daughter's life and death again, but she really didn't grasp the aliens' concept of time until she learned their language which seemed to be before she married and had her daughter. I'm confused too.


I am going to have to watch the movie again and listen to her words. I did get that you thought we were duped in the beginning, but I'm not so sure. To me the movie may just represent a circular or simultaneous notion of time. Although she did seem to indicate that she was just learning why her future husband would leave her. On the other hand she said "I forgot what it felt like to be held by you". I'm not sure . . .

 
 
 Posted:   Dec 3, 2016 - 7:56 AM   
 By:   joan hue   (Member)

Isuepet, when I get a stack of books finished that are sitting on my dresser, I think I'll track down the original story that Sean recommends. (see above.) Also, when this comes out in DVD, I will rewatch the movie too. Like you, I think a second viewing may provide more insights. (Or I'll just be more confused. LOL.)

 
You must log in or register to post.
  Go to page:    
© 2024 Film Score Monthly. All Rights Reserved.
Website maintained and powered by Veraprise and Matrimont.