Arrival (2016): What Do You Think? SPOILER ALERT

In summary, the movie presents an interesting premise - that learning an alien language can change the way a person thinks - but it's not fully explored. Additionally, some aspects of the story are clearer in the novel.
  • #1
pixel
545
147
SPOILER ALERT. I saw this movie recently and, as usual, there are some things that I found puzzling and was wondering what other people thought.

For one thing, the aliens were very much more advanced than us, so why didn't they figure out our language, instead of us having to figure out their apparently far more complicated one?

Also, how was the ability to experience the past and future imparted to Amy Adams?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
They probably could understand our language, but letting the humans know that would undermine their real mission.

They say in the film that learning the septapod language is what let's her remember the future.
 
  • #3
Learning their language was important. It took me two views to realize why.
 
  • #4
Algr said:
They say in the film that learning the septapod language is what let's her remember the future.

I thought that was the case, but how is that explained? How can figuring out a language change your mental state in such a manner?
 
  • #5
Noisy Rhysling said:
Learning their language was important. It took me two views to realize why.

Can you share that realization?
 
  • #6
pixel said:
I thought that was the case, but how is that explained? How can figuring out a language change your mental state in such a manner?
The premise is that when you learn a language and think in it your thought processes change, different "symbols". The heptapod language goes that one better, allowing a person to think nonlinearly, to do a Billy Pilgrim if you will
 
  • Like
Likes jim hardy
  • #7
Learning a language can rewire your brain. So what could learning an alien language do?

Well, it is just a movie. I liked it.
 
  • Like
Likes Noisy Rhysling
  • #8
But in the movie weren't her "flashbacks" occurring before she even got involved with the aliens?
 
  • #9
pixel said:
But in the movie weren't her "flashbacks" occurring before she even got involved with the aliens?
Although I think the movie is better, some points are more clearly displayed in the original novel.
The novel tries to convey some of the nonlinearity of the alien language/viewpoint. It's tuned down in the movie, so it's just acceptably confusing, but it's still there. The events are not linked by a straight timeline, but more by a thought process.
 
  • #10
The film plays with the concept of language influencing thoughts. At one point it drops a hint, when dr Banks dreams up a conversation with Ian where he mentions the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis, which was a rather strong version of the idea (where language determines thought).

The language of the heptapods is described in the film, both in conversation and visually by the use of circular patterns as not having the concept of a beginning and the end of an utterance. All sentences are formed already whole, so in the accordance with the aforementioned hypothesis, one can imagine their thoughts being similarly already-formed, with no perception of what's before and what's after.

The conceit here (the 'fiction' bit in the S-F that we need to suspend our disbelief for) is that this extends to the whole of their existence, that they see all of their life experiences as already existing, rather than being a series of temporally-ordered events one has to either wait for or remember. When Banks begins to learn their language, she begins to 'remember' her whole life (i.e. see the future) - but there's more. As in this new way of seeing the world there is no beginning and no end, and all of experiences exist at once, it means that she has always known what she will ever know. That her flashbacks (premonitions? flash-forwards?) did not begin only after she learned the language.

That she doesn't always understand what's going on, or doesn't remember everything, can be blamed on it being an alien language that she struggles (have struggled, will struggle) to grasp in its entirety. It all fits rather nicely, I thought.As for why didn't the aliens learn human instead - it's a film about communication. About meeting half-way and understanding each other. But also about the concept of 'uplifting' by a more advanced race. One can argue that the most advanced 'technology' the aliens wanted to transfer was their language with everything it makes possible.
 
  • #11
pixel said:
But in the movie weren't her "flashbacks" occurring before she even got involved with the aliens?
Why would that matter? She's "unstuck in time".
 
  • #12
Bandersnatch said:
As for why didn't the aliens learn human instead - it's a film about communication. About meeting half-way and understanding each other. But also about the concept of 'uplifting' by a more advanced race. One can argue that the most advanced 'technology' the aliens wanted to transfer was their language with everything it makes possible.

If they had learned Earth's languages first - something I assume they could have done in less time than us learning theirs - then they could have more efficiently transferred their language to us. As it was, global war almost broke out until at the last minute their language was finally understood. But I guess they already knew that would happen. o0)

I did enjoy the movie and may appear to be nick-picking, but I just like to understand the logic of how and why things were done.
 
  • Like
Likes russ_watters
  • #13
There was liberal use of handwavium, I think.
 
  • #14
pixel said:
If they had learned Earth's languages first - something I assume they could have done in less time than us learning theirs - then they could have more efficiently transferred their language to us. As it was, global war almost broke out until at the last minute their language was finally understood. But I guess they already knew that would happen. o0)
That part is also a thing which is hard to deduct from the film since it was just lightly touched in a few sentences. The novel is more centered on the opposition of the 'know the future' and 'losing the free will'.
They did know what will happen, but after getting that knowledge they had no free will to change the future...

I personally think that this should have been displayed more clearly in the movie. It's a big missing part.
 
  • #15
FWIW - There is an older NPR Nova show on the subject of brain development and language. In one segment an experiment was reviewed on the results of MRI scans of the active brains of native speakers of various languages doing things like reading and listening to music. Example: native Japanese speakers use an entirely different part of the brain for music than native English speakers do. @jim hardy put up the link some thread in discussion I think.

[aside]
There are languages with phonemes that non-native speakers never become able to "hear". Apparently, we all start out able to interpret any phoneme. If we do not hear that phoneme regularly as an infant and small child, the ability is completely lost. Forever. This fact is noticeable when foreign speakers learn your language. They may not pronounce some language sounds quite right, but you still understand what is being said.
[/aside]
 
  • #16
jim mcnamara said:
FWIW - There is an older NPR Nova show on the subject of brain development and language. In one segment an experiment was reviewed on the results of MRI scans of the active brains of native speakers of various languages doing things like reading and listening to music. Example: native Japanese speakers use an entirely different part of the brain for music than native English speakers do. @jim hardy put up the link some thread in discussion I think.

I first read of that in Richard Restak's 1984 book "The Brain", companion to a PBS series by same name. I caught a re-run of the series around 1990 i think and remember those scans vividly.

Now i can only find links to a newer video, "The Secret Life of the Brain" , also featuring Restak's work..
http://www.pbs.org/wnet/brain/about.html
http://www.pbs.org/wnet/brain/outreach/press.html
I think i remember seeing that one but the memories are way less vivid.

This might be the old link

jim hardy said:
Back in the 80's i read and enjoyed this book
https://www.amazon.com/dp/B00162PJWK/?tag=pfamazon01-20
the one i read said on the cover 'Companion to the PBS series'

it had a chapter on that effect of language mentioned by jim mcnamara
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #17
This movie made me think...
 
  • #18
MartTin said:
This movie made me think...
The source story made my brain hurt. In a good way.
 
  • #19
I finally got round to buying the film in Blu-ray a couple of weeks ago and I've really enjoyed it. Nevertheless, I've learned far more about the plot from reading up about it in this forum than on the two occasions I've watched the film thus far. . . why? Well, according to my ears at least - and this may come across as faintly ironic/dispiriting given the film's linguistic theme - Arrival suffers every now and then from the 'mumbles'. Yes, I did whack up the volume whenever I sensed the narration and my listening abilities on the verge of parting company for good. All the same the audio contrast between the film's occasional action scenes (e.g. those thwumping choppers) and the dialogue had me diving for the remote more times than I care to remember (I do have neighbours). It's great film, all the same, one of the best SF films I've seen in a long while. . . well, since Gravity. The next time I watch Arrival, though, I'll flick on the subtitles and pretend it's a foreign language film. It might even add to the mystique. Who knows? I don't. . . at least not yet.
 
  • #20
How exciting could it be if they only needed one Avenger and Superman's girlfriend?
 
  • #21
I know this was old, but I just saw this movie and now this thread, so...

I liked the movie and am generally the type to let a movie wash over me without thinking about it, but both of these did bother me too:
pixel said:
For one thing, the aliens were very much more advanced than us, so why didn't they figure out our language, instead of us having to figure out their apparently far more complicated one?
Agree that they should have and there is no good reason not to (more on that later...).
Also, how was the ability to experience the past and future imparted to Amy Adams?
The explanation was that language affects how you think...which is true, but doesn't enable one to violate the laws of physics!
Algr said:
They probably could understand our language, but letting the humans know that would undermine their real mission.
I assume by that you mean problem solving via collaboration (or perhaps collaboration resulting from problem solving). This is not an uncommon theme in alien first contact stories (like... Contact), but to me it is arrogantly human-centric. Because 'cmon: if an obvious alien spaceship lands on the White House lawn, we're all going to sit passively glued to our TVs and our government will do pretty much whatever they ask of us. Because any alien race capable of traveling here is also capable of crushing us like the bugs that we are. We'd be at their mercy, would know it and would act accordingly.

So there's no need for the game to trick us into cooperating. They would just need to land and hand over a note that says "stop fighting for a minute; we need a hand with something" and we'd say "yep, whatever you need, we'll give you!'
 
  • Like
Likes jim hardy
  • #22
russ_watters said:
They would just need to land and hand over a note that says "stop fighting for a minute; we need a hand with something" and we'd say "yep, whatever you need, we'll give you!'
You know, you and I might feel that way, but I can't help thinking that a certain minority of people who took the movie 'Independence Day' to heart would go charging down Pennsylvania Avenue with their AR-15's to chase those buggers back to Mars.
 

1. What is the premise of Arrival?

The movie follows linguist Louise Banks as she is recruited by the military to communicate with extraterrestrial beings who have landed on Earth in mysterious ships. As she learns to decipher their language, she also begins to experience flashbacks and memories of her own daughter who passed away.

2. What is the twist at the end of Arrival?

The twist is that the flashbacks and memories that Louise has been experiencing are actually glimpses into her future. The alien language has allowed her to perceive time non-linearly, and she is able to change the course of events by using this knowledge of the future.

3. How is the science portrayed in Arrival?

The science in Arrival is portrayed fairly accurately, with the concept of non-linear time being based on the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis in linguistics. The movie also explores the concept of the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis in relation to perception and understanding of language.

4. What is the significance of the title "Arrival"?

The title "Arrival" has multiple meanings in the movie. It refers to the arrival of the extraterrestrial beings on Earth, but it also symbolizes Louise's own arrival at a new understanding of time and the interconnectedness of all events.

5. What is the message of Arrival?

The message of Arrival is that communication and understanding are key to solving conflicts and bridging differences between individuals and cultures. It also explores the idea that time is not linear and that the choices we make in the present can have a profound impact on our future.

Similar threads

Replies
12
Views
2K
  • Science Fiction and Fantasy Media
2
Replies
51
Views
8K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
21
Views
1K
  • Science Fiction and Fantasy Media
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • Programming and Computer Science
Replies
11
Views
1K
Replies
10
Views
1K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • Sci-Fi Writing and World Building
Replies
7
Views
1K
Replies
79
Views
5K
Replies
90
Views
5K
Back
Top