Doesn't some languages require you to completely alter the way you think?

>Doesn't some languages require you to completely alter the way you think?
>Yes!
>alien language is non-linear
>learn alien language
>now I can now time travel lol
This is so fucking dumb. Why can't you see that?

Is it? I haven't seen the movie and was planning on buying the book. Should I not?

if the aliens could see the future then why did they bother travelling back in time?

The movie is well made but the story is fucking stupid.

I hope no one seriously thinks this is a movie about time traveling.

those alien are the most reddit creatures in existence

Haters always will find something to hate on.

It's a completely idiotic movie

One of the best executed first contact scenes in cinema history.

Villeneuve is truly a tension master.

>Aliens land all over the world
>Aliens teach language
>Language is literal mental time-travel
>Alien imply war, because fuck it we need drama
>Governments on edge to blowup aliens because they implied war.
>Aliens weren't actually implying war.
>Protagonist prevents war by violating causality.
>Aliens just GTFO because they were all just one big plot device.
>Protagonist decides to have baby despite knowing baby will die because she's a woman and children are accessories.


&Feminist appeal
>strong, independent womyn pls save the day
>k
>we men want to fuck everything up
>strong, independent womyn sees further with logic and only she can unite the world with the power of her feelings and knowledge of blots
>so smart, so brave u da best strong, independant womyn
>that man who left you, because he wasn't strong enough to deal with his daughter's fate/illness - yeah, fuck him
>you are strong enough for everyone, independant womyn

>Arrival thread
>ctrl+f "time travel"

Yup we have an idiot over here

>Protagonist decides to have baby despite knowing baby will die because she's a woman and children are accessories.
To be fair it was never established that anything could be changed

Her mind time travels, deal with it.

IIRC the side of the free will vs determinism that she falls on at the end is that it is her choice to have a kid even though she knows the tragic outcome. She is, therefore, exhibiting her free will in having a child even though she also knows it will end in disaster (perhaps not that different thought process to a drug addict who knows that his abuse will kill him but sees it as his choice to nonetheless get high)

p.s. not saying I agree or disagree with this just, as i said, iirc that was her kinda reasoning.

Yes it was. I don't think you were paying attention desu

What was changed?

Here's an excerpt from an interview with Villeneuve:
>The idea is that the heptapods see life like a [scripted] play. They know what will happen, so they have the choice — either they do it bored to death, or they embrace it and try to be at their best, like an actor on a stage."

So you are basically saying that the director of the film is wrong too

I just watched the movie yesterday actually, I've got a question

So Louise saves the world from war by telling the Chinese guy his wife's dying words, which she learns in the future. But this future could only possibly exist by her saying these words now in the present, in which case how could she know them?

Maybe I'm retarded, and I'm probably explaining it terribly, but this didn't make much sense to me. It's kind of a paradox.

While you're completely correct to bring up the director in support of your arguement, it is not critically insane to question the significance of the director's interpretation (the death of the author and all that).

Stick to Chris Nolan films.

thats the point fucktard

>Protagonist decides to have baby despite knowing baby will die because she's a woman and children are accessories.
yeah this really pissed me off

I also had a hard time buying the part where the american troops mutiny to blow up the aliens.

It's a paradox.
But let's be real here the movie doesn't really explore any science fiction to speak of.
It can't decide whether to be proper sci-fi or a commentary on the human condition.
In short: it's trash.

the problem with this scene isn't that its a paradox, the problem is that its literally the only time in the whole film where someone is able to gain new information from seeing the future and uses it to effect the present. That makes it just feel like a plot device.

How long do you think those heptapods can live?

The heptapods knew they would need the humans help in the the future, which is why they came to earth in the first place.

The point is that it's a paradox?
That's a pretty shitty point, unless they're trying to get across that the language also lets you see alternate timelines. Because that future literally couldn't exist otherwise.

what makes the immutable future theory impossible.

Im finnish


The grammar is not closely related to anything, does not help to learn new languages

Some terrible memes

>language also lets you see alternate timelines
There is only one timeline.

>It can't decide whether to be proper sci-fi or a commentary on the human condition.
>implying those are mutually exclusive

>implying those are mutually exclusive
they are in this movie, because it does neither

lol no, shut the fuck up you embarrassing mongoloid.

It's literally the same guy who keeps making these threads.

et al

you complete idiots
it's a storytelling device for dealing with relationships, family, loss, and other themes
kind of embarrassing discussion really

see If you want a real story about loss with a coat of sci fi, watch "The Leftovers".

It's just a shitty interpretation of Slaughterhouse Five. I don't see why people think this is Best Movie worthy at all. Sure it was decent, but not even close to good

>That makes it just feel like a plot device.
I mean it literally is, and there's a reason the screenwriter is talking to the audience through the chinaman when he says "I don't presume to know how your mind works, but here's the info to resolved the external threat/ticking clock in the movie."
It's a causal paradox when you look at everything linearly (the information she gets in the future she uses in the past, but the future wouldn't exist if she didn't have the information in the first place). But it's not a paradox when viewed through the context of the nonlinear view the heptapods and other people who can into handsquid jizz circles.
I also don't think it's at all coincidental that heptapods resemble upside down Tralfamadorians, and that the protagonist becomes "unstuck" in time.

>It's just a shitty interpretation of Slaughterhouse Five.
Finally someone else get's it.

Only delusional assholes support this tripe garbage. I love that actress and would suck her asshole for free, but this movie is beyond stupid.

I just want a faithful adaptation of Ringworld.
Is that too much to ask?
It's practically made for hollywood.

at least 3000 years did you even watch the movie

..Her knowledge of Mrs. Bing Bongs dying words.

She got information from her future and used it to solve said dilemma in her past.

No I'm saying the movie is shit bc that shitty logic doesn't work for humans and it also doesn't fit with the events that took place in the movie.

The entire movie is a mess.

Doesn't mean a single heptapod has to live that long. If the entire race and language is nonlinear then it stands to reason their history would be too.
A heptapod "history book" could conceivably be the entire timeline of their race, past, present, and future. I mean humans achieved civilization when we were able to externally bind information and pass it along instead of each generation starting from scratch.

>that shitty logic doesn't work for humans
Movies aren't real user. As long as its internally consistent in the movie then your arguments about how things would REALLY happen are irrelevant.

this

However this creates another problem.
If Heptapod history is nonlinear then why would they be worried about extinction at all? After all the meaning of "end" makes little sense in a nonlinear context.

>>Doesn't some languages require you to completely alter the way you think?
>>Doesn't some languages require you
>>Doesn't some languages
>Doesn't some

I'm literally no longer surprised when critics of this film out themselves as idiots.

buy the superior book about ayy lmaos

>the meaning of "end" makes little sense in a nonlinear context.
Sure it does. There are still boundary conditions. If something happens to their species and it almost dies off, but doesn't because 3000 year old humans help them out, then in order to no go extinct, you do the thing that helps the humans 3000 years in the past, so they could be there to help you out from not going extinct. And you do that thing because you *DON'T* go extinct there. The point in their history where they eventually die is the boundary condition for them, but who's to say they ever end? Maybe it's a continuous evolution of their species to some transcendental state and the heptapods are just a far downstream tendril of a non-corporeal/non-temporal life form like the ayy's in childhood's end.

non linear existence doesnt even make sense

It's not a paradox
It's a closed loop
But it's only confusing you because you're looking at it linearly

Let me explain as best I can
let t1 be the time when she calls the general
let t2 be the time when they meet at the party or whatever event

at t1 she uses information learnt from t2
but t2 is in the future is the problem, so how can the future affect the past, right?
but if time in non-linear, then they are all happening simultaneously and there's no such thing as the future
but then how is there a chain of cause & effect? that's a separate problem that the film doesn't address, but it is 100% separate, this isn't me downplaying a problem

So, back to the problem, her conscious isn't timeless, she can still perceive time. What's not explained is if that will always be the case and if it's the case for the heptapods. But at the end of the film at least, she still experiences time - just in an order of her own choosing

That means that just because t2 takes place after t1 to us, to her t2 takes place before t1
Thus she uses information learnt from t2 in t1

The trap is thinking that there is an objective "present"; that time can be observed objectively
But if you know anything about special relativity, you'll know that this isn't true anyway in the real world

>If something happens to their species and it almost dies off
Thats linear

>The trap is thinking that there is an objective "present"
Which is exactly why the movie starts with her and her daughter (and event from the "future"), and a monologue of her saying "I used to think this is where it started..." Which is then the last scene in the movie because it's a loop.

>So Louise saves the world from war
and from the aliens themselves they were going to crush the planet with their ships

How are brainlets unable to comprehend such a simple fucking movie?

The angrier the polerina hamplanets insulting a movie on this board, the better the movie probably is. It's a really hilarious correlation to notice.

op theres 12 steps to time travel
she just unknowingly had 11 of them inside her all along and as soon as she learned the language she could time travel

It's literally one super autistic neckeard, from the particular flavor of autism I'm assuming it's the same guy who used to start the ex machina threads.

Why was she getting flashbacks(flashforwards) of her daughter even before contact with the heptapods

Same type of person that over thinks Interstellar. It's a paradox/ deterministic universe. There is no "first time." It's a sci fi movie not a documentary.

This is what plebs actually sound like. Pathetic.

>What is suspension of disbelief?

>time travel

finally people see the fucking light.

How embarrassing for you.

The movie started out pretty well but ended up being really stupid.

Why does time travel almost always ruin a serious sci-fi?

autism

because time travel is dumb

>It's a Sup Forums has trouble understanding determinism episode
>It's a Sup Forums doesn't understand 12 monkeys episode.

>>

>that one girl who creams herself at the chad murdering all those ringworldians with a sword

i fucking loved that, I can promise you thats how itd go down in real life.

The answer is that there is no free will and causality is an illusion, shit happens because it happens.

"Doesn't some" isn't even what's incorrect in the sentence, it's "does" preceding "languages" which is plural and therefore it should be "do" or in this case "don't"

Good job outing yourself as an idiot, idiot

>Protagonist prevents war by violating causality.
General Shang straight up telling her everything she needed to know was hilarious

not an argument

come back when you can prove she's not time traveling within her mind

It only worked in the original superman as far as I know, because love.

Movie had some good points, Forest Whitaker if they must put a black authority figure in, decent looking female lead and reasonable CGI. Could have chopped the entire future love child scene at end, movie was already over. Two black secret agents in interview scene should have been white Mormons. The Pope and Vatican should have been into the aliens, and a lot of other plot holes. OK time waster.

>but then how is there a chain of cause & effect?
There still is one, because Shang meeting her there in the "future" is a straight up result of a past situation t1, resolved with t2.
I understand what you're saying, but the problem is that seeing time non linearly should just completely fuck everything up, seeing that you can just close loop everything by seeing future situations.

you and everyone who agrees with you are beyond retarded and need to get a trip so everyone else of us, even the ones who didn't really like the movie but realize it's NOT ABOUT TIME TRAVEL can stop reading your dumb opinions on other movies as well

the movie is about the fact that we perceive time in a linear manner, and how by learning an alien language, she stopped seeing it that way, she never time traveled, she just "sees" her whole life simultaniously, since time suddenly is irrelevant, and what has been, what will be, and the present are the same thing

So what's the point of living if you can just experience your whole life at once ? Thanks aliens !

they didnt travel in time idiot

if you were to kill yourself 5 years later, you'd just see "your whole life" consisting of, say, 45 years instead of 69.
Time would still be irrelevant the moment you learned the language

The problem is that we don't know if we're able to see different futures or not, the movie lets think that there is only one possibility, and while the screenwriter said choice was possible, it was not in the books. In the first case it makes the protagonist of the movie look like a stupid whore, and in the second case it's a "fuck you deal with it" message

i think it's highly agreed upon that if one were to timetravel IRL, you wouldn't be able to change the future, at most create a new timeline for you and everyone in there.
AND since there's no timetravel here, just "seeing" the future, nope, you can't change shit.

>there's no timetravel here
She can pass information between different points in time, that's time travel.

>i think it's highly agreed upon that if one were to timetravel IRL
It's pure speculation and there is no scientific way to prove that, but yeah, it makes more sense than paradox anyway, and the result is the same, you change your future, since the timeline becomes different

it's not timetravel, the reunion with the chinese dude happened in the future, but she "saw it" because she learned the language.
She never traveled back and forth with information, it was part of her future and she can see it all

>She never traveled back and forth with information
Except when she used it in the present ?

The main problem I have with the movie is that it doesn't have an internal logic it's sticking to.

The scene with general Shang telling Amy how to solve the problem tells us that the universe the film is positing is deterministic, there is only one possible timeline. This is compounded by the fact that throughout the film Amy's flashes are of a single future not of different versions.

But then the film's emotional core is the fact that Amy chooses to have the kid despite knowing that things will go badly. If there is only one timeline however there's no weight to this choice, there is no other choice. If she could see various timelines and chose this one, that would give it some emotional weight (better to have loved and lost than never to have loved at all and so on), but as it is the choice means nothing, and the film posits it as an important, maybe the most important character building moment.

I agree that the movie isn't ABOUT the sci-fi stuff or about mental time travel and shit, it's about human emotions and dealing with grief maybe, but it's hard to connect to a movie about dealing with grief if the main character 1. knows about all the moments in her life at once and 2. presumably understands that there is only one possible timeline. She, as a character, doesn't have to 'deal' with anything, she can choose to be anywhere she wants on the timeline at any point.

On a side note, I also didn't like very much that the movie presented us with flash forwards before Amy had any knowledge of this ability. It makes sense by the end of the film, but it's a bit of a cheap trick because I, the audience member don't know the future, I am experiencing the film linearly so being shown stuff from the 'future' of the film makes no sense to me until I realize what the movie is about. This is a small gripe compared to the above, but still...

are you retarded or what? "in the present" she suddenly knew everything the chinese man said, she knew she'd fuck hawkeye and have a daughter and that she would die at 20ish years old.
She knew it all.
It's not time travel, how do i have to explain it to you? it's "TIME NOT BEING LINEAR".
not time travel, which implies "a jump back or forth in a linear time"

fucking retards man. get some education

Thank you user

She doesn't simply knows everything. She uses information from a future moment, into a present situation, meaning that information has traveled not from past to present as it normally should, but from future to present. That's time travel.

>n the present" she suddenly knew everything the chinese man said, she knew she'd fuck hawkeye and have a daughter and that she would die at 20ish years old.
As clearly said, it's weak and doesn't hold on itself. Is there many possibilities or only one ? In both cases there are problems arising from it.

>TIME NOT BEING LINEAR
No. Time is still linear, because it's part of the fabric of the universe and we don't change it as we want. She just SEES time non linearly. There are still moments happening one after another, because otherwise her daughter wouldn't be able to grow.

"some" implies plural making "doesn't" grammatically incorrect you illiterate

you seem to be smart enough to argument your ideas, so i'll treat you with respect bro.

Still, how is it not emotional to know you're having a daughter and she's gonna die, even if you have no choice?
She doesn't "choose" where to be in a timeline, she's in all of them at the same time. She's living everything at the same time. You can't possibly picture something like that with images, or in a movie, which is linear. Here you get subsequent scenes of her talking to chinese man, and then using that code to call china. But that's from "our" linear perspective of time and events. She "dealt" with the fact she's having a daughter and she died the moment she got this "power".

You can't observe something that hasn't happened yet without literally hopping forwards in time. I'm not sure how the hell a language enables one to do that, but obviously the alien language enables her mind to travel through time. She sure as shit isn't imagining the future in her head, so it's time travel, plain and simple.

They didn't travel back in time.
I'm not going to read this thread, but this movie was good. The idea was even better.

Determinism doesn't take away the weight of freedom of choice
It maybe true that there is no reality where I didn't decide to go to uni, for example. That doesn't take away from the emotional weight of my decision. I still make the decision; even if I would always make that decision
Whether or not this counts as true free will is another question. But a lack of free will doesn't make decisions pointless

The film doesn't address what a potential situation would like if she did want to do something different to what she was to happen; but that can be interpreted as a logical impossibility

premonitions are not time travels. You might as well call her thing a premonition OF HER WHOLE LIFE.
Does it make sense to you now?.
Also, yes, time is not linear for her, of course. Otherwise the universe would be frozen or something, that's just dumb i assumed we agreed on that.

Are you telling me that when I have deja vu, I time travelled? You can see the future but not interact with it. That's not time travel, that's foresight.

If this movie was just about first contact and the weapon/tool was not time travel, it would be perfect.

wow someone gets it!

That's what it was about. And there was no time travel.

>Protagonist decides to have baby despite knowing baby will die because she's a woman and children are accessories.

I don't think you get it. If she doesn't have the baby, all of the future memories of her child would disappear because she was never born.