4 ms·
Don't read/watch this if you intend to see the movie! It works much better in context and as a surprise.
by bondarchuk 6y ago
Don't read/watch this if you intend to see the movie! It works much better in context and as a surprise.
- godelmachine 6y agoThis is a very important comment. Will start watching the movie right away if you say it’s good enough? Edit - is this the movie? -> https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contact_(1997_American_film) https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contact_(1997_American_film)
- chaoticmass 6y agoIt's very good.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- stronglikedan 6y agoIt's a little long, but entertaining and interesting. They could have told the same story in 45 less minutes though.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- erpellan 6y agoBoth the movie and the original book are, IMO, great. The science in the book is possibly more consistent and is a 'better' story. I rewatch the movie about once every couple of years on average.
- godelmachine 6y agoIs this the movie? -> https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contact_(1997_American_film) https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contact_(1997_American_film)
- fthiess 6y agoYes, that's the movie.
- netsharc 6y agoOh my god dude, learn to figure shit out yourself instead of spamming your question in everyone's replies. The second paragraph of the linked article tells you the year, main actress, and director of the movie, compare that to the movie described in your Wikipedia link to get the answer.
- yashap 6y agoYes, that’s the movie, and I think it’s worth watching. To compare it to a more modern movie, I think Arrival was inspired a fair bit by Contact. If Arrival is up your alley, you’ll probably like Contact too.
- JadeNB 6y ago> To compare it to a more modern movie, I think Arrival was inspired a fair bit by Contact. Do you think Chiang's story was based on Contact (movie or book), or only that the movie was? Neither of those seems likely to me—more just a case of two authors independently writing about similar themes than of direct inspiration—but I haven't seen Contact for some time, and never read the book.
- fredski42 6y agoRead the book! It’s different and, imho, better, although the movie is very good as well.
- yashap 6y agoI’ve only seen the movies, but my understanding is that they reasonably closely reflect the books, at least in terms of major themes and plot points. Based on timelines, my guess is that Chiang’s novella was inspired by Sagan’s novel. The stories are far from identical, but there are lots of similar themes - aliens sharing knowledge with us, the challenges of deciphering their language, world governments and extremists acting somewhat as antagonists, the interleaving of the protagonist’s personal life/family with all this. I could easily be wrong too, but I certainly got Contact vibes when watching Arrival.
- JadeNB 6y ago> I’ve only seen the movies, but my understanding is that they reasonably closely reflect the books, at least in terms of major themes and plot points. Arrival is a good movie, but it's radically different from Story of your life, which is an intensely interior novel. It also substitutes a familiar time-travel plot for the, to me, radically novel linguistic approach to (not really but, for want of a better word) time travel that the novel creates. > The stories are far from identical, but there are lots of similar themes - aliens sharing knowledge with us, the challenges of deciphering their language, world governments and extremists acting somewhat as antagonists, the interleaving of the protagonist’s personal life/family with all this. I agree that these points are in common (although I'd argue that the role of world governments, while still important, is more peripheral in Story of your life), but they seem like quite common sci-fi tropes to me. Perhaps Contact is the ur-text for the trope after all ….
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]