With the onslaught of space-related movies in the past few years, I’ve found my knowledge of physics lacking. After learning the basics of special relativity, however, Arrival made a bit more sense than previous movies like Interstellar and the Martian. The concept that time is dynamic and subjective changes the way we see the world and interact with others. In Arrival, it brings about world peace. I think it says a lot about human nature that knowledge of the past and the future is able to rectify the world’s major problems. Our tendency to misunderstand each other and assume what others’ intentions are leads to conflict that can easily be avoided by understanding each other.

Language is an ongoing motif throughout the film. The translation of “weapon” in languages on Earth to “tool” in the Heptapods’ language speaks to our worldview of things as ways to compete with others and become better. It also portrays the power of language in relationships and its ability to show the values of a society.

The most moving part of Arrival was when Abbott sacrifices his life to save Louise and Ian. His commitment to their mission and his selflessness shows his ability to empathize. Additionally, Abbott and Costello had individuality–Abbott was more talkative and open and Costello more aloof and reserved. Though the heptapods were just one take on extraterrestrial life, it was extremely positive and unique. ET life is usually portrayed negatively–they’re trying to conquer Earth and destroy the human race. Do we see the world as we are?

I am in general wary of watching science fiction movies about an alien invasion or a close encounter for fear of it being cliché, poorly produced, or unoriginal. Yet Arrival proved to be a fresh take on the first-contact alien movies by pitting intelligent communication front and center.

Most directors or writers would likely opt to depict the fallout or consequences of aliens landing on Earth, yet this movie had none of that nonsense. By focusing on communicating with these creatures, the movie elevated the genre to an almost academic level; teaching the audience about the fundamentals of communication and language and exploring the consequences of trying to interact with an intelligent species with an entirely different mode of conveying language. The careful dissection of each branch and turn of the aliens’ circular writing system was not something you’re likely to find in a Transformers movie.

Of course, the rest of the movie added to the substance; the acting was quite good (Amy Adams rarely fails to disappoint), the cinematography and special effects were seamless, and end was satisfying.

It was quite a good movie. I would recommend it.

Arrival is a science fiction film that explores the role of communication and language in our society. After the arrival of 12 alien spacecraft around the globe, the global community must work to communicate with the mysterious extraterrestrial guests to discern their purpose. Amy Adams plays an American linguist Dr. Louise Banks who is tasked with dissecting the complex circular alien language excreted in order to communicate with the voyagers and discover their intent before a global war breaks out as tensions rise internationally. Through her investigation, it is quickly discovered that the language is fundamentally different than human languages–it has no discernible beginning or end but rather is fluid and endless, much like a circle. This reminds me of a TED talk I saw years ago about the impact of the structure of our language. The Sapir–Whorf hypothesis states that your native language determines the way you think and perceive things on a fundamental level. As our native language plays such a strong role in the way we structure and organize our thoughts, nuances within any given language are theorized to impact human perception and experience. Fundamental to this movie is the structure of the alien language and the unique attributes granted to those who are able to comprehend it and thus think in a manner that normally falls beyond the bounds of the human mind constrained by any language of Earth. Overall, I greatly enjoyed Arrival, and I was pleasantly surprised at the departure from some of the standards of the genre–lasers and faster than light travel–to the different focus of diplomacy and interpersonal discovery.

This movie wants to tell us how important to be a kind people, by showing us how we welcome aliens. But….why human being should welcome Aliens, even without any information about them?! Imagining US’s Custom has been attacked by strange foreigners from unknown country with unknown purposes, what will we do? Defending ourselves from unknown attacks is out natural actions. It’s usual as we will buy a concrete door for house. If we didn’t trust human being, why we should trust Alien? “Trust alien, pls start from dismantling your doors.” But after all, any creative imagination should be encouraged. Besides this unrealistic logic, it’s a good film.

This was actually my second time watching the movie Arrival, and it felt much better than the first time I watched it.

Sitting in a dark dining hall, the ambiance of the atmosphere deepens my immersion of the aliens. The woob woob sounds as the heptapods Abbott and Costello dart into the screen instill in me a sense of wonder as well as fear at the same time. Watching it as just an individual without even thinking about the consequences of what these aliens are to humanity as well as international relation is already overwhelming, trying to imagine those scientists, soldiers, politicians figuring out what to do with them is just mind blowing.

Like most catastrophe, if it can even be called that, the focus of the movie is less on the creatures themselves, but rather the human interpersonal relations. The first time through, I watched it on my phone, but I simply cannot feel the same charm as I did on the bigger screen. The emotions through the intersecting narrative wasn’t exactly Momento in terms of nonlinear structure, but instead gives the story a heartfelt sentiment. The scene when Louise sprinted with the phone to call the Chinese general as the future self tells her what to say in the present gave me chills because it just felt so emotional and intense. There were so many save the world plots in different stories, but I really enjoyed this one.

The movie was very intriguing although it is a little hard to understand and definitely warrants multiple viewings.

This science fiction movie with Amy Adams, as Dr. Louise Banks, is about a Linguistic Professor that is recruited by the US Army to try to communicate with extraterrestrials that landed in 12 countries on earth. The movie challenges the order of time, as it starts when we learn that Dr. Banks’s husband left her when he found out that their daughter will die of cancer. Dr. Banks reminiscences about her daughter’s childhood and dead. When the oval-shaped vessels land, Colonel Weber, played by Forest Whitaker, asks Dr. Banks to join him to attempt to communicate with the beings that landed. Dr. Banks agrees and is joined by a physicist, Ian Donnelly (played by Jeremy Renner) in the mission. The different countries involved with dealing with the vessels are so diverse that the lack of trust makes Colonel Weber fear that a war leading to destruction of earth may be launched if the extraterrestrials are challenged. Communication becomes the only way to overcome the challenge but Professor Banks soon realizes that it will take time as she has to rethink entirely simple ways for how to introduce herself to the extraterrestrials, and also how to make sure she communicates to ask them questions such as: what is their purpose on earth, where do they come from, what do they want and how did they get here. The extraterrestrials are heptapods (with long elongated heads and seven feet resembling huge squid) and use their ink to generate circular symbols, which are more of a nonlinear orthography compared to the way we communicate. Professor Banks realizes that the extraterrestrials came to help humanity and she will teach others their language, and that Ian Donnelly will become her husband. It is an odd fiction but makes you think if you could see your life from start to finish would you change something?

Before they first entered the alien spacecraft, there were several shots toggles. From the hand touch the shell of the ship, to the character’s face close-up, to the hand close-up, and then back to the face close-up. Can not help but guess who this hand is, male or female.

Although men and women are divided about what constitutes the foundation of civilization, when we encounter a new thing, our instinctive reactions are the same. We are both afraid and curious. We both want to go near it and because we want to keep safe. distance. The people, the soldiers, and the stock market all show our fear of the unknown. For the first time into the spacecraft, the only light source is high above, a closed dark environment, solemn and mysterious background music, and a rising channel. And all the preparations that human had made before were merely in exchange for the obscure figures of two aliens.

When the alien language first appeared, the feeling was three-dimensional and dynamic. There are several close-ups in the movie. And when their language is translated into a flat 2D image that we can understand, hasn’t it been changed? The heroine’s understanding of alien language and alien language is gradual. Even at the end of the film, I’m not quite sure whether she fully understood and mastered such a language. From weapons, to tools, to gifts. The three words that seem to translate to each other express a completely different willingness. Weapons are understood as malicious, tools are neutral, and gifts express the goodwill of aliens. What aliens give is a tool. As for whether the tool is a science and technology or a process or a method, it is not very important. It is only the heroine’s understanding of this matter. Nuclear energy is a tool, a science and technology, it can also be a weapon, it can also be a gift. Just like our future, how it is depends on how we look at it and on how we choose to look at it.

Last Friday, I had the opportunity to watch the film Arrival. The film centers around 12 alien spacecrafts that land on earth with no apparent motive. Soon after, we learn that the aliens have arrived to give mankind a weapon.

This weapon happens to be language and those who wield it can see the power of language and how it binds us. Only when the countries come together and reach a peaceful agreement, do the aliens bestow upon them the ultimate gift of language and it’s power.

One interesting aspect of this movie is how language gives the power of seeing into the future. The movie plays with this as it shows how the main character knows their child will die and her husband will leave him but she continues to engage in the relationship. This presents an important dilemma that leaves many viewers like me asking what we would have done in that situation. However, what’s more interesting to think about is that if the main character tried to avoid the situation, would the events in the future still have happened? A similar case is present in Oedipus and I wonder if the same thing would have repeated here.

All in all, this movie is fairly interesting and a good viewing for any Sci-if fans.

I can say with a certain amount of confidence that I am not a big fan of the sci-fi genre. I think it’s surprising since I find the actual premise of science fiction interesting. However, when it comes to the movies and the books, my interest tends to fade.

Arrival is somewhat different than other sci-fi movies. The emphasis that is placed on language is refreshing when compared to the never-ending science fiction films that are primarily action-based. While this film did have explosions of it’s own, they were never at the core of the film. Language played the largest role. This was set up in the movie from the very beginning, when it was seen to revolve around a linguist. The film’s emphasis on language showed the importance that it has on everyday lives and the way that we communicate. Although the film did place some extra qualities to language (it is science fiction), just the communication among the countries in the film when tensions were the most high show how a few simple words can change an outcome. The movie showed the importance of language as a way of reaching people and being able to empathize with others in a way that promotes better relations.

Last week watching The Arrival was eye opening for me. In understanding how aliens were talking using circular references for times instead of the linear, structure time measurement that humans use, this really allowed me to question the linearity of the world. Why is it that when we do certain things, we expect other things to happen. For example, we correlate getting a job with getting happiness as we will get paid an live independent lives. Similarly, we correlate good health with making us feel empowered to do everything we desire. In living in a world where each action, has a supposed negative and positive action, we lose sight of the continuous flow of events that shape our lives. I’d prefer the alien’s concept of representing time in a circle, and would extend that to representing all life events as a circle since a circle has no sharp ends and twists and has a constant influx of certain scenarios which lead to others and which then revert back to the original. In this sense, a circular way of life allows for a life that is more fluid and dynamic but repetitive and consistent in that every path of the circle is continually repeated. I feel that the circle is a proper metaphor for life since we do encounter similar situations and repeat aspects of our lives consistently, however we are often times bombarded with obstacles and difference events which in the end still allow us to complete our continuous cycle instead of viewing our paths as strictly regressive or progressive.

I was also impressed at the assimilation of communication skills that took place when trying to understand the language of the aliens. I believe that this action showed how language is more than words, language is so dependent on the context, the way the words are said, the emotions, etc. I believe this relates to my interactions with people since I am more focused at times regarding people’s body language, facial expression,etc rather than what they are actually saying which shows how everything besides words itself can be powerful communication tools. I also thought it was interesting to imagine a world time is uniform. As a person that spends a lot of time worrying about the future,and feeling guilty over my past, I would wonder what it would be like if all those time periods were to merge together and I could truly live in the moment and take life situations as they go simply because I would have no other choice. In this regard, I learned to appreciate the non-linear structured way of life because at times I feel that societal structures and expectations have made me more unhappy.

Arrival is a film which delves into the concept of learning as a way to alter your mind. Here at Cornell I had the pleasure of taking an introductory linguistics course and the hypothesis that learning a language can change the way you think was brought up. It has not been well studied, but a real life example brought up was color perception. Some languages have names for colors which english does not, i.e. the hue of color between orange and yellow doesn’t have an english name (other than yellow-orange) but some cultures do have a unique name for this. The people in these cultures also see these colors “better”, that is they notice them and distinguish them easily. If you lack the vocabulary, or alternatively have a wider selection of words to choose from, the way you sense the world changes. Newspeak, the official language in Orwell’s novel 1984, is perhaps similar in this regard. By limiting vocabulary and losing your ability to express yourself, you thus lack the conceptual ability to even think for yourself. I only know one language (my Cornell transcript shows I have mastered 3 semesters of Latin but that dubious at best) so I don’t fully understand how this works in real life. I do have friends who are bilingual, and they mention all the time that “this sentence is so much better in the original French”. I have to take their word for it, but this sentiment is again more evidence that languages force you to consider the world in different ways. The traditional hypothesis of human development says that once people had brains large enough, language followed. However, scientists have learned today that its not just the size of brain, but also the way the brain is internally structured that leads to human’s greater intellect. So maybe instead of better brains creating language, language rewired our brains to change the way we viewed the world.

Last Friday night, I attended Rose’s screening of the sci-fi drama Arrival. This intriguing film focused upon Louise Banks, a linguistics professor tasked with deciphering the language of extraterrestrials who have peacefully landed on Earth. In the process of learning this extraterrestrial language, Louise gains the ability to see the future. She foresees that she will conceive and birth a daughter who will die as a young adult from illness. Despite envisioning such a future, Louise decides to conceive the baby anyway. Once the daughter is born, Louise’s husband separates from her upon discovering that Louise knew the child’s fate prior to conception.

I initially had a hard time understanding Louise’s decision to conceive despite knowing the baby’s eventual tragic fate. It is difficult to imagine putting a child through such a sad, stressful, and fatal ordeal knowing it could have been prevented. Additionally, I struggled with the fact that Louise kept such a secret from her husband, who also had to go through the unfathomable tragedy of losing a child.

However, I had an interesting discussion about Louise’s dilemma with a friend who had a different perspective on the situation. Despite dying early, the child likely brought joy to Louise and her husband’s lives, and, it was also highly possible that the daughter lived a fulfilling life she wouldn’t regret, despite it being cut short. Therefore, is it so bad that Louise conceived the child knowing it would die? The issue is further complicated by Louise’s foresight, as, in visualizing her future experiences and interactions with the child, Louise may have already felt she had developed a real relationship with the child. Thus, it would make it hard to decide not to conceive a child whom she already “knew.”

Louise’s decision is more complicated than it initially appears to be. Although I can’t find it in myself to say what she did was right, I will admit that I do understand her reasoning.

A few days ago, I watched The Arrival. It’s basically a movie about a alien landing and a Linguistics academic is the only one who has the patience/knowledge/skills to figure out a way to communicate with them without having the world combust. I really loved the movie, especially because it was sort of a sci/fi futuristic movie and it featured a heroine as the protagonist.

I remember in high school, I used to watch one movie every weekend, I basically looked up every single Oscar nominee and tried to watch them all. In my freetime, I would browse trailers for hours on YouTube. It makes me kind of sad that I don’t even know what movie trailers are out there anymore. Not just movies, but also browsing new music used to be one of my favorite activities. :’)

***

I think the movie industry is going to experience a lot of change with the influence of data science specifically in the area of attracting viewers. MoviePass is this hot startup that has lots of funding from their seed rounds. Currently, it’s in the process of losing a lot of money in exchange for data collection to bolster the strength of their algorithm. The company is giving out unlimited movies at any movie theatre in their system for $10 monthly. You are essentially paying $10 and your privacy (they keep track of what movies you are watching). Clearly, from the Cambridge Analytica mishap, it seems fairly simple to allocate different buckets of personalities for people and micro target them. So, I will not be surprised if what MoviePass is able to do changes the landscape of movies and trailers entirely. This is really sad to say I think, but I am fine with them sending me targeted ads about products I might like based on my personality and past searches. I guess the problem comes when they try and influence my political and social views… that’s not ok!

Last Friday, I watched the movie Arrival  with other Rose Scholar fellows. It was my second time watched the movie, but it still brought very strong feelings for me. The movie is about the main character, Louise, can see the future. She knows that she will marry her colleague Ian, but their daughter will die early and Ian will eventually leave her.

I think about this choice with my own experience and ask myself: If I can see the future, especially some heart-broken event, will I still make the same choice? I am 20 years now. I enjoy studying in Cornell and getting along with my friends, especially in Cornell in which most of them come from completely different backgrounds and offer me a brand new view of the world. However, I also experienced some failure/heart-broken moments. I know that this seemly not so pleasant moments bring me valuable lesson, and makes me much more stronger and mature than before, and cherish what I have more. So if I were Louise, I would do the same choice, because life is not only about results, the love, happiness even sadness during the process of getting the result is also very valuable.

Since my post will largely ignore this fact, I want to say that Arrival is one of my favourite movies I have seen all year. It was visually stunning, thematically thought provoking, and, at any rate, I am a sucker for stories about first contact with extraterrestrial life.

One of the key features of the film ‘Arrival’ is its “non-linear” narrative. There are multiple points where Louise is observing events in the future or past that influence the direction the narrative goes. The opening scene takes place well after the climax of the movie, for instance. Thus, we are invited, as the audience, to see the story unfold in a sequence that goes against the standard flow of time. However, I am not convinced that this counts as non-linear in a a deep fashion, because as I consider this, it seems to me that the concept of “narrative” itself depends on a form of linearity.

Since I’ve argued this point with other Rose Scholars already, and there digressed to some more radical definitions, I’ll stay conservative here. Narrative, as I’m considering it, is simply a story. Thus Arrival is a narrative. As we watch Arrival, the director has chosen a sequence in which to present the scenes. We observe the scenes as they play out in front of us. This is the sense in which I think Arrival is truly linear – within the universe of the narrative, the characters experience things atemporally, but within the viewer’s conception of the narrative, it plays out in a sequential, linear order.

Since I don’t exactly have a proof that ALL narrative is linear, I’ll consider two classical examples of non-linear narratives in an attempt to drive my point home further. The first is ‘Pulp Fiction’, which, similarly to Arrival, displays scenes in an order which is not the order that the characters experience them. For example, the final scene of the movie takes place immediately after the first, despite multiple days of story taking place in between. However, just as Arrival, there is a linear order to the scenes as presented, so the narrative, as experienced by the viewer is linear. The second is ‘Primer’, as story about two guys who invent time travel and find that using it gives them power that destroys their lives. It’s difficult to say whether or not the scenes as presented to the viewer are out of order with respect to the perspective of the characters in the movie – the plot is deliciously convoluted. But, again, the narrative as experienced by the viewer moves in a specific sequence chosen by the director. This may seem like a trivial point, but I’m fixated on it for a particular reason; it means that, no matter how hard we may try, we will always experience narrative linearly. A story told will be heard in the order it is told, and to me this suggests something fundamental about stories. Perhaps fundamental about our perception of time itself. Though Arrival, of course, would argue that this perception can be contested.

For those interested in exploring some atemporal philosophy, Book XI of Confessions by St. Augustine is something I read for a class this week and is related to a number of the temporal themes of arrival, particularly our conception of time. Jake Januzelli pointed this out to me originally.
http://pm.nlx.com/xtf/view?docId=augustine_iii/augustine_iii.01.xml;chunk.id=div.aug.confessions.137;toc.depth=1;toc.id=div.aug.confessions.137;brand=default

The central character of Arrival, Louise, is a linguist. She is tasked with deciphering the language of a visiting alien race, the heptapods. Louise’s ultimate mission is to find out why the heptapods are on Earth. The aliens eventually explain to Louise that 3000 years in the future, they will need the humans to help them. In exchange for their assistance in the future, the heptapods have come to offer something in exchange: their language.

As a result of learning the heptapod language, Louise begins to perceive time in a non-linear fashion. We learn that her visions of her daughter, Hannah, who died a terminal illness, are not flashbacks, but flash forwards. Louise will marry her colleague, Ian, and one day have a child named Hannah.

While it’s not the focus of the plot, Arrival raises interesting questions about the nature of time and of foreknowledge. Specifically, I wondered whether or not the events in the flash-forward visions that Louise and the heptapods have are inevitable, or whether, by knowing the future, the heptapods, and Louise, can change it.

Examining the film, the evidence in the case of the heptapods seems mixed. If knowing the future allowed them to change it, why don’t the heptapods simply avoid whatever trouble they’re going to be in 3000 years in the future? Perhaps it’s because that trouble is inevitable – or maybe reaching out to humanity is simply the most effective way to solve the problem.

In Louise’s case, the film seems to suggest that Louise choose to allow her future with Hannah and Ian to unfold, even though she knew it would end painfully. This suggests that the visions are not inevitable. Yet, if what you’re seeing doesn’t have to happen, you’re not really seeing the future, are you? You’re seeing a possible version of events.

It’s interesting to consider what heptapod society would be like if all individuals have this forecasting ability. Would it complicate the visions if everyone involved could see them and change their actions in the present if they wished events would turn out differently? How would it affect you in the present if other people know you will do something bad in the future?

Louise also faces an interesting dilemma, in which case she knows that her future will bring both great happiness and great sadness, and must decide whether to let it happen.

Or, maybe the visions –  or at least certain components of the visions – are inevitable. In this case, the real question is not what choice you would make in Louise’s shoes, but whether or not you would prefer to know the future if you did not have the power to affect it.

Both interpretations raise interesting questions. I’m not sure which one I would prefer. One offers the power to choose your future – but also a great deal of responsibility. The other one would likely make you feel powerless. Either way, it is fascinating to consider to what extent the future the heptapods see is in flux.

The movie “Arrival” was an interesting find. I’ve never gotten around to watching it on my own even tough I’ve heard great things about it. The entire story line was a tiny bit confusing because it wasn’t exactly in chronological order. Although the term evades me, it added to the mystery and slightly dark nature of the film. In the beginning of the film, with the bleak opening (I’m trying not to reveal too many details and this event really dictates a lot in this film), the audience is left questioning what is the true storyline. The protagonist is a linguist who seems very disheveled and unsure about her own position in life on her own story line. She’s confused about her husband although she isn’t married and there’s this aura of sadness that surrounds her in the opening scene. The audience believes that this sadness is attributed to the event that occurs in the beginning of the film. However, at the end you realize she just has knowledge of this event but, she hasn’t gone through the pain as of yet. This brings to a light a very important question on whether or not would anyone like to know what will happen in their lives in the future or in a certain timeline. If you would like to know, would you try to change it?

Even though this movie brought up several points to discuss, I think it takes a particularly brave soul to continue on with a certain life knowing the consequences. When I initially saw the movie, I thought her decision was dumb because her particular choice in life would cause her a lot of misery and that haunted and hollowed look we see in the opening. Personally, if I acquired the power to somehow break the normal way of perceiving time, I would probably try to scan through the several different possible storylines and find the one that I would end up being the happiest. There’s no point in walking into heartbreak. Because your perception of time would change, you’d be able to scan through these different time lines. Her choice baffled me and was kind of expected. I guess from the opening they determined the timeline she would choice and I wish they added a separate timeline. Maybe they could’ve changed some other event that would preserve who her life partner is but, would save her from her fate. I guess that’s  a question we should all ask ourselves and not just in retrospect, would we do certain things all over again?

Last Friday, I saw the movie Arrival. It was an interesting movie. In the end, we find out that the main character, Louise, can see the future. She sees that she’ll marry her colleague, Ian, and that they’ll have a daughter. Unfortunately, her daughter will get a disease and will pass away and Ian will leave them. Even though she knows this, she still chooses to be with Ian. I understand why she does this, but I don’t think that I would be strong enough to do the same thing. I can imagine that losing a child and a husband would be a terrible thing, and I just wouldn’t want to go through that. In a way, her choice is also selfish. She doesn’t tell her husband about this until it’s too late, and so, in a way, she makes the choice for him. He might not have made the same choice that she did, but he did not get that option. But this is an impossible situation. Since she can see the future, she saw how happy her family was while they were still together, and she might have felt that that happiness was worth the eventual sadness. Since Ian can’t see the future, he can’t see the happiness, and therefore even if she had told Ian about what was going to happen, he never would’ve been able to understand the entire situation. Louise was very strong to make the choice that she did, but I don’t think that I would’ve done the same thing.

The movie Arrival, we watched this Friday is a very interesting science fiction movie about aliens, UFO, but instead of depicting the appearance and personalities of the aliens, it emphasis on their language. The story led by the main character a linguist Louise Banks, who managed to communicate with the aliens learn about their languages and figure out their intentions to earth.

This movie reminds me of the Cognitive Science class that I’m taking right now about how humans learn new languages and the universal language grammar. In this movie, the weapon that the aliens bring to the earth is their language, which could foresee the future and the past. This is a huge power, but yet the ending of the movie Louise realized her sad future if she fall in love with Ian, and have a child with him despite the fact that she know the child’s fate. This is really devastating because she has to follow her fate, and she can’t change it. The timeline explanation has always been a tough problem for this time travel story, because if we change the present how will the future change is always unknown and it’s easy to reach a contradiction for either way of explanation. Luckily, this movie mostly focused on the communication and how the main character unravel the mystery of the language instead of showing how the further story develops after humans have the power of knowing the future. This decision made the audience enjoyed the movie , instaed of picking the logic contradiction within the assumption of the movie.

Therefore, overall this is a very enjoyable movie, and I’m glad that it reminds me of some fun knowledge I learnt from my course.

The arrival is yet another story about lack of communication and the need for humans to feel threaten by the things they do not understand. In watching this movie, I realized that all is takes is for one person to stand up for the misunderstood in order for the world to really understand their purpose. After watching this movie, a question really stuck with me: If you could see your whole life from end to beginning, will you change things?

If I somehow was blessed with the gift of time from a bunch of visiting aliens, I would feel the need to change things if my end turned out to be bad. I feel that this kind of gift could be a blessing and a curse due to the fact that one could spend a lifetime changing things in their future that is not liked. In all, I thought this movie and event to be enjoyable.

I am not typically a fan of science fiction but Arrival was definitely one of the better science fiction films I have seen. It was very creative, from the flashforwards Louise experiences with her child to the language using ink and circles that the heptapods used to communicate. I thought it was interesting how Louise could see the future and I wondered if I had the ability to do so, would I consider this be a good or bad thing? I think that knowing the future would just make me anxious and make me feel like I have no control over my life because what is going to happen is going to happen anyway. I am curious to know if Louise’s ability to see the future is very detailed (she can see everything) or if she can only see certain outcomes. Overall, I enjoyed the film’s focus on linguistics and on the importance of communication in solving problems. I find it fascinating how we are able to understand sentences with little to no effort but when you think about teaching sentences to someone else, there are actually many components to it.