Arrival (2016): Denis Villeneuve, Amy Adams

You'll forgive if I don't thank the normans for their historical achievements in the 12th c considering our little contretemps subsequent but otherwise yeah

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z18LY6NME1s
Decent essay, which it went further

Haven't read this thread yet. This was pretty good through the communication elements but as soon as it went into the "time is not linear to them" areas it went off the rails into awful. Had similar feelings towards Interstellar. Just corny emotionally manipulative puzzle game Science Rules! masturbation that ultimately felt so empty and nearsighted. There's no meat or legit art to it. I guess this is "adult" sci-if these days. I'm probably spoiled by seeing 2001 as a kid and meeting a lot of brilliant but stunted STEM folks as an adult.

I will immediately walk away from anyone who gives props to Primer.

Will, the board will miss you.. wait, which one are you, again?

Finally saw this on the weekend & thought it was great. Beautiful & v moving

I havent read the story but will def seek it out now

finally got around to this, it was good. The ancillary action movie stuff that was added to the story for necessary cinematic/dramatic forward motion was all handled p well and didn't get in the way of the central story's focus on language, character, time + free will etc.

move to dispute utterly your 'necessary' tbh that stuff is p much always an admission of failure or at very least lack of confidence in ability to convey an adult drama

it would be a v different movie w out that stuff, but given how this movie got made - as a big studio summer sci-fi blockbuster - the attendant action-movie scaffolding was integrated as well as it could be imo.

The story/source material doesn't really have a film-able three-act structure, so afaict the director's choices were either to make something that no one would pay to see that would probably be a v frustrating viewing experience that was nonetheless v true to the source material, or to modify the source material as necessary to make it into a cohesive filmed narrative. They went with the latter route.

Bear in mind I said from the beginning that adapting this story seemed like an insane/unnecessary undertaking, so when it turns out as well as it did I consider it a minor miracle.

reject assumption of necessity of three act and presumption of audience requirements too

just cos

xp oh yeah look i liked it just fine

this is probably the best movie i've seen in ages - but i was really stoned when i saw it, and i'm also really interested in sapir-whorf hypothesis type of stuff. babel-17 by samuel delaney is great if the language stuff is of interest to you.

speaking of unfilmable writers

I wanted to like Babel 17, I really did

I'm not sure I would have liked it if I'd read out of the blue, but it was a part of a lit class I took (we did the crying of lot 49, burning chrome, snow crash, Fahrenheit 451, and we watched blade runner - it was one of the most interesting classes I had).

is there a thread for Prisoners?

i loved most other Villeneuve movies I have seen but holy christ on a bike not even beautiful cinematography or decent performances could save this. All hat and no cowboy. For me it was a Rube-Goldbergian nothing of a story.

Very good, almost great cast, put to absolute waste

Just had a thought that maybe, maybe, villeneuve’s fascination with anti-stories that only sort of resolve b-plot bullshit none of his audiences care about (while making you feel a bit like a sap for caring about plots a & c) could actually make his Dune treatment interesting

That script was like a halfassed “Who Took Johnny” fanfic that felt like maybe there might have been the kernel of a good story in there but it was so buried!! (no pun intended). I mean jeez if you are going to wade into that water don’t piss around with a bunch of handwaving. If you’re gonna go there GO there. The storytelling was so indirect and tentative and crammed with faux-complexity, and everyone just endlessly reacting. Whole movie was just v annoying for me overall.

i loved Prisoners - it was like an R-rated beautifully shot Law & Order episode

Nhex's description is the first one that makes me want to see it

I rewatched Sicario and it's about 2/3rds of a plot with amazing cinematography and sound. I wonder what kind of deal Villeneuve has to get Deakins to keep working with him

prisoners is horrible and stupid

All hat and no cowboy.

this is a wonderful phrase btw

mh review of sicario otm nb everyone should still see it

I have bumped the sicario thread for all sicario-related musings

the first reason it’s not like a L&O episode is the cop has no partner ;_; everyone needs a Lenny

https://i.pinimg.com/originals/d1/15/30/d1153042dd94e86c6efb8d60c05fb335.jpg

well, not EVERYone

Prisoners also gets points for - less than, but like Nightcrawler - actually using Jake Gyllenhaal as a straight-up weirdo, as is his natural state

he is good in it tbf

he is so ripped!
he behaves nothing like a cop really at all, ever, in this movie but he’s jake and i love him
and i love his blinky facial tic, it’s so weird

i get the impression that the script was like 2 hours longer & so they were just like, you know i think we’re good, ppl got the gist

I just watched Arrival! The sense of the mystery unfurling was a thrilling sensation.

I've read that Sapir-Whorf isn't en vogue among linguists nowadays, but I think it's a useful analogue to understand how Heptapod can change Louise's perception of time. Hand-wavey to be sure, but imo that's the acceptable fiction half of science fiction.

The ancillary action movie stuff that was added to the story for necessary cinematic/dramatic forward motion was all handled p well and didn't get in the way of the central story's focus on language, character, time + free will etc.

I'm wondering if the actiony military stuff is handled in the same way that Children of Men depicts the disintegration of civil institutions -- a lot of the indications of either of these things are pushed to the periphery, either in the mise en scene itself or showing only part of its narrative.

Haven't seen it. But for linguists Sapir-Whorf isn't just out of vogue, it's completely discredited but frustratingly fascinating to non-linguists, apparently. One of the reasons it's nonsense is that it implies that speakers of other languages are so different in their thoughts as to be completely unable to understand each other, so it may work for aliens, but I don't know if I can bear to hear about it again.

My recollection is that it’s not presented as valid in the film! It’s just an idea to serve as a reference for what happens later.

My recollection is that it’s not presented as valid in the film! It’s just an idea to serve as a reference for what happens later.

https://i.imgur.com/pkpIc9Y.png

I don't get the impression Sapir Whorf is completely dead. I think there's been a swing away from Chomsky and there are some researchers interested in a kind of weak Sapir-Whorf hypothesis, for things like colour perception. And there's work on how people who speak sign language have quite differently wired brains etc.

Here's one researcher: https://alumni.stanford.edu/get/page/magazine/article/?article_id=29489

i don't think I saw prisoners but I really liked Enemy a lot.

i loved Prisoners - it was like an R-rated beautifully shot Law & Order episode

― Nhex, Monday, 12 March 2018 06:39 (five years ago)

I thought it was fantastic too. Probably the best film I've seen by him (not interested enough to see all his films).

apologies for returning to the original thread topic (Arrival, 2016) but this film has kind of a pro-life subtext that I found a little heavy-handed... or am i projecting?

hmm it might be tempting to read it that way but that was not how I saw it at all.

her husband eventually leaves her for going ahead with the pregnancy despite knowing what she knows - the movie/story doesn't judge him for it, and neither does she because it's perfectly understandable to not want a child that you know is going to die. but also his reaction was all pre-determined anyway. she goes ahead with it because she *doesn't* have a choice, all she can do is decide whether to embrace the future based on the knowledge gained. i don't think this necessarily means it's pro-life though.

im sure if i watched again it would support that reading but thats in no way to say it still wouldnt be projecting tbh

wearing my schrodingers hat there

I rewatched this again and was wondering if she would continue to perceive time like the Heptapods, and is she the only one? Cause that shit would be problematic.