Denis Villeneuve's Sci-Fi Drama ARRIVAL (93% Rotten Tomatoes)

[MarcoW]

great movie, but the middle is very slow.

My girlfriend fell asleep during the middle hour, because it is so slow, but she still liked it by the end so that tells you how the end is quite good.
I liked it overall, best sci fi I've seen this year.

 

[MarcoW]

Spoiler

I get the superposition of time theory and that the first 3/4 of the movie follow a linear plot and then the loop shift starts -- movie reflecting the theme.

But how did she get fluid understanding of the language after the rogues tried to blow up the ship - was the ability to access the weapon/gift and if so, why didn't the aliens do a conscious transfer to her before all the events leading up to it -- they obviously had the ability and would know what would happen.

how come the chinese general had the knowledge of the phone call before she did -- if she is the one that obtain the ability to access the time loop

How did she know that Hannah was going to die before the events the led to aliens revealing to her the time loop capability? Did she end up telling Ian or did she alter that time and if so, would the alien scenario happen again? Did she always have the ability --if so, how come she didnt tap into the oncoming events -- if she didn't have the ability before hand, why did Ian leave the marriage?

Spoiler

the Chinese general knew about the phone call at the same time as her.
She was simply "remembering the future."
The Chinese General knew about the phone call from the time he got called, which was a number of months before Louise met him at the party in the flash forward. In Louise's present she was still coming to grips with her ability to see the future, so she struggled to remember the future and remembered her conversation with the general at that party in the future.
---
The language itself was what was giving her the ability to see through time. As soon as she started studying it, she started getting glimpses of the future.
Why Ian and the other scientists didnt get the ability is probably just because they weren't as good at language study.

But how did she get fluid understanding of the language after the rogues tried to blow up the ship - was the ability to access the weapon/gift and if so, why didn't the aliens do a conscious transfer to her before all the events leading up to it -- they obviously had the ability and would know what would happen.

I think this is a misconception, I think it was clear her understanding of the language required her specific knowledge of language and her study of the language, they couldn't simply beam the language into her brain.

How did she know that Hannah was going to die before the events the led to aliens revealing to her the time loop capability? Did she end up telling Ian or did she alter that time and if so, would the alien scenario happen again? Did she always have the ability --if so, how come she didn't tap into the oncoming events -- if she didn't have the ability before hand, why did Ian leave the marriage?

Hannah dying is likely the saddest, most emotional event of her life, therefore its probably the thing she remembers most easily, along with Hannah's life. It was the first thing she started "remembering" when she started remembering the future.
Like how an amnesiac doesn't remember everything from their past at once, Louise didn't remember everything from her future at once. At first she didn't even know she was remembering the future, she had no clue the Hannah was a real person until she had the face to face conversation with the Heptapod.

 

[MarcoW]

great movie, had a very slow middle.
Don't go into expecting lots of action, because there isn't any, at all.

 

[Organic Damage]

I am a sucker for Denis Villeneuve movies so I loved it, but I will agree that it might seem slow (especially the 2nd act).

It's nice to see thoughtful sci-fi for a change from the usual distopian actioners.

 

[mcveteran81]

thus far everyone who has liked it still cant explain it. Not saying it isnt good -- i think people are just using the "its really smart" to avoid admitting they didn't didn't understand the last 1/4 of it.

This is my linear simple take on it.

Opening frame starts in the present. From there the director takes you to the past. (The arrival) and works forward from there to get you back to the opening scene. (The present)

Movie objectives (imo) the director conveys the necessity of aliens as a means to bring world peace, unity, and cooperation. I.e one world unity, possible implication of one world governance? (I might be looking into, too much) by such the director is saying he only believes unity for humans is possible through a third party, unaffiliated to humans to make this happen.

my personal opinion. Director is well versed in Christianity and science, cleverly uses motifs from both to make an interesting movie.

Points for my opinion. The 1 of 12, correlates with the 12 disciples. The gospel given to us by God is the means of unification of people.

The Hetapods are alien in the same way that separates them from a humanly stature. They are implied to have *powers* or *ability* that defies the laws of the universe. I.e they are not subject to time, gravitational laws, or known means of transportation. Their message is unification of people.

The aliens also state they will be back again in the future for help, no time line given. This is the only statement that separates from the biblical narrative sleightly. Christ promised His return in the future , no date given, but won't need our help.

Of course this is my opinion and I could be reading into to much from my own lense of bias perspective.

 

[Dragonlordxxxxx]

Critics' Reviews for ARRIVAL

Rotten Tomatoes: 93% approval rating (199 out of 214)

Critics Consensus: Arrival delivers a must-see experience for fans of thinking person's sci-fi that anchors its heady themes with genuinely affecting emotion and a terrific performance from Amy Adams.

Entertainment Weekly - Arrival’s endgame can seem obtuse and its emotions submerged, suggesting a film as chilly as its palette of Pantone blues and grays. But it’s all in the service of building to its final revelation. A-

New York Daily News - Adams is convincing and smart-seeming, bringing appropriate queasiness to the position of being a college professor drawn into a rough military world. 3.5/5

Richard Roeper - No sense in pretending Denis Villeneuve’s “Arrival” isn’t as loopy as it is lofty, as confounding as it is exhilarating, as confusing as it is enlightening. Arrival is not a linear adventure of the mind, and it is a film probably best seen twice. 3.5/4

Rolling Stone - Amy Adams is a miracle worker-she makes us believe in this mesmerizing mindbender about alien communication, directed with searching mind and heart by Denis Villeneuve. 3.5/4

James Berardinelli - If Arrival succeeds at the box office, it will shine as a beacon in favor of not dumbing down every production to appease the distracted and disinterested masses. 4/4

 

[Amerikuracana]

Hopefully this doesn't turn out like The Day the Earth Stood Still or Contact.

Well of course it was nowhere near as good as Contact.. *hard rolleyes*

 

[MC Paul Barman]

great movie, had a very slow middle.
Don't go into expecting lots of action, because there isn't any, at all.

But there's at LEAST 3 car chases and 4 shoot outs, right?

 

[MC Paul Barman]

I'm confused by the trailers of this movie... why don't they show the main protagonist?
You never see him once in the trailer. It's cool that you see a lot of Amy Adam's character. But I don't know how much you can learn about the lead by only seeing his wife or secretary prancing around and getting all worked up into hysterics.

 

[Amerikuracana]

I saw it last night.

It reminded me, in much of its feel, to Interstellar.

This movie seemed to have too many parts from other movies within it, for such an original idea. The first 1/3, for a movie that was proclaimed to be so "smart," seemed to ME to be written by somebody with maybe a casual understanding of science. The quote from her book was generic and not very deep.. His response to it was equally on the surface and shallow. We are just getting more stupid, to be honest.

I like the idea of the movie, and it was an ok movie. Go see it, to encourage more "new idea" movies to be made. It wasn't terrible. The cast was too "pop-culturee," and so were things like throwing in "look what happened to the Aborigines."

Like interstellar, it wasn't as smart as it thought it was. It kind of quietly slipped past sci-fi into pure fantasy.. Maybe Contact did the same, but it did it more believably, and Contact was more obviously written by somebody with a science background in conjunction with a well rounded philosophy background.

The things in "The Arrival" that were supposed to be really deep; well they came off as obvious to me at times. Not all that deep. The "twist" which a sharper viewer will pick up on around half-way through the movie, was original I suppose, and left my (ditzy, but not total moron) GF a bit confused, even at the end. That surprised me.

In Interstellar, we were supposed to be "in awe" when our man was floating around a black hole that was connected to his living room. I was just thinking, "Where's the oxygen coming from? And Why is he alive? This is stupid as hell." I didn't quite get so offended by "The arrival," but I got a similar feeling of "They could have
made this a bit more realistic" that I got with Interstellar. Again, not nearly as bad. I thought 'Interstellar' was going to be about man actually traveling to the nearest stars for the first time.. But of course it was nothing like that would be in reality. At all.

I have already, in my personal thoughts, come to the realization that language not only express what you are thinking, but guides the way you think. I think people with personal experience with other languages, or people who speak them, kind of understand. I like playing with that idea, but where it lead so quickly was questionable to me.

Enough bitching. Worth watching. Go see it if you like sci-fi, because perfect or not, we still need more efforts like "The Arrival." If they keep making them we will get one that really delivers. This one wasn't terrible. 7/10

 

[Amerikuracana]

Awesome. DL just sold a couple tickets here. Well, was actually already kind of planning on seeing it. I wonder what kept it from that top, top level. I wonder if Adams could bare the load here. She's good, but we'll see. Some actors actresses have their respective limits.

Adams was at her limit here. She wasn't bad, and neither was Renner, but I think others may have been even better. Adams eeked it out. IMO. Same with Renner, who didn't move any mountains with his performance here whatsoever.

 

[DIABOLUS]

Well of course it was nowhere near as good as Contact.. *hard rolleyes*

The film has a 63% RT rating and made $171 million on a $90 budget. Numbers that very average films tend to put up. Yet it seems to have fans that treat it like 2001: A Space Odyssey.

 

[Eater of Souls]

Saw it, first film I saw at a theater in a year. Was not good enough that I would spend theater money on it again (yeah, I am a cheap old bastard).

 

[The_Renaissance]

I reckon I'll enjoy this. Looking forward to it.

 

[minute bull]

Eric Heisserer shares five things he learned adapting the novella into a film.

 

[Minnja]

I just saw this movie - and for the first time in my life I have to rate a film ?/10

I think a lot of people will dislike this movie, while a lot of us will really like it -- but to me it's not a love or hate it movie; it's a "I want to like it, I think I like it, I feel like I like it, but can you explain it to me" movie

Hence the ?/10

I agree with this. I really liked the movie up until the big reveal. At that point I was kind of thinking "oh nooooooooooo" because tbh I am not a big fan of time-travel and paradoxical shit to explain why something is happening. But at the same time I feel like maybe I'm not fully understanding/appreciating what it's supposed to realyl mean. They keep talking about loops and no beginning/end but it's a bit difficult for me to really understand how that isn't just all complete BS. I do like the message about the nuances of communication and how it is difficult but vital to bring unity but I really don't know how much I like/dislike the whole "oh well Louise is special and can see into the future"

At first I was thinking she inherited that power from interacting with the aliens but then I thought about it some more and recall her having "memories" of her future before interacting with the aliens so it threw that theory out the window pretty quickly.

I think a lot of people such as myself think "well how did her future self solve the problem in the first place" and I believe the answer is because time is non-linear in the movie and so there is no beginning/end but shit don't really make much sense to me. How did her future self even solve the problem?

 

[loyalyolayal]

I'll just wait for the Michael Bay remake.

 

[iThrillhouse]

This was easily the best film I've seen all year. 10/10

Denis Villeneuve is MUST watch...he's the comptetent version of Chris Nolan. I like Nolan but his movies are so "beat you over the head" with the message or the emotion...

Villeneuve packs a message, style and substance in his movies in such a better way...

seriously if people don't like Arrival then thats a shame. Don't know why people are saying the second half is slow? I thought it was brilliant, reminded me of like..sci-fi David Fincher

also loved the one scene that seemed like an homage to Villineuve's own Enemy

 

[Benjamin Burton]

6.5/10 it would be a lot higher if the twist had been more subtle imo. it really slaps you in the face hard with it for like 10 minutes at the end.

it also could have been probably 20 minutes shorter.

 

[TONY-T]

Was decent until the last 10 mins. 5/10

Would not watch again.