Contact II: the movie

[Ezechiel]

Contact had the most frustrating un-scientific ending ever.

After Eleanor Arroway makes a first 18 hour pass through a worm hole and comes back, the experiment is not repeated to get a better grasp of what happened. Instead, she goes back to Washington to explain away her sole experience and her 'gut-feeling' interpretation about it in a faith vs science confrontation .

I find it odd that no producer has had the guts to produce Contact II. What kind of information would a superior alien race be willing to share ? Why do they even bother (intent) ? You would think any small piece of validated information would have instant and dramatic global impact. Would the information destroy us or would it give us the means to travel beyond our solar system ?

Perhaps Contact II would be way too complex and speculative, but exploring relationships between highly advanced and less advanced civilizations on earth could give a hint to the authors

 

[Roro]

Hollywood made a movie based on a Carl Sagan book featuring Jodie Foster and a number of lessor movie stars, pocketed the money and walked away. I don't think Sagan wrote a sequel.

What did Science have to do with it?

 

[Ezechiel]

What did Science have to do with it?

My point exactly... this story was twisted into a confrontation between an atheist scientist (Eleanor) and the christian majority. Eleanor has used a machine to gain additional perspective which is not replicated using other observers... which thus puts her on the same level as the next religious nutbag.

The end of the movie is illogical

 

[Xylo]

The end of the movie is illogical

But probably on par with what *might* have happened in real life.

 

[Sean Elifritz]

I very much liked Contact and that includes the ending. I felt the way it ended was consistent with the rest of the film. The theme of it was science vs belief, the verified and the unverified. I liked how evenhanded and fair that was presented. There were instances in the movie where the unverified was portrayed as true, demonstrating that if something hasn't been proven or is even unprovable it may in fact be accurate. I thought the , "Do you love your father?", "Of course", "Prove it" dialog sequence was excellent. These themes were presented in a much more fair light than I came in expecting considering that Sagan's hands were on it and when the credits rolled I found myself impressed. Think about it, all 4 outlooks were presented: The true believer (Busey), the believer (McConaughey), the nonbeliever (Foster), and the scoffer (Skerritt). Only 1 and 4 were portrayed negatively, as they should be. The film was an examination of these different worldviews and the business of a signal from outer space and an encounter with aliens was merely the vehicle.

 

[tyder001]

I very much liked Contact and that includes the ending. I felt the way it ended was consistent with the rest of the film. The theme of it was science vs belief, the verified and the unverified. I liked how evenhanded and fair that was presented. There were instances in the movie where the unverified was portrayed as true, demonstrating that if something hasn't been proven or is even unprovable it may in fact be accurate. I thought the , "Do you love your father?", "Of course", "Prove it" dialog sequence was excellent. These themes were presented in a much more fair light than I came in expecting considering that Sagan's hands were on it and when the credits rolled I found myself impressed. Think about it, all 4 outlooks were presented: The true believer (Busey), the believer (McConaughey), the nonbeliever (Foster), and the scoffer (Skerritt). Only 1 and 4 were portrayed negatively, as they should be. The film was an examination of these different worldviews and the business of a signal from outer space and an encounter with aliens was merely the vehicle.

Great reply. I am always amazed at how many folks on this forum spout "science" as if they are all research scientist. Most of the time it's their "opinion" of what science is instead of any real sceince. It reminds me of religious people who spout scripture and yet have no real understanding of theology or the time and places they are talking about. "Science" isn't actually a "thing" at all. It's many different human diciplines (including mine) and has not "posistion" on anything. Is it neat? Hell Yeah! But, I often laugh at some of the dribble spouted on here by "junior sceintist" as if they have "proven" their world view by some superior knowledge of the world via test tube. Finally, IT's A Damn MOVIE! Take it for what it is. Gawd! I hate fundies be they atheist, christian or Muslims or whatever.

---------- Post added at 09:12 PM ---------- Previous post was at 09:10 PM ----------

Oh well, I posted the above so I'll leave it. I've had a tuff day at work (love my job but today has been a long one.) So excuse my outburst. OR not.

 

[Sean Elifritz]

My point exactly... this story was twisted into a confrontation between an atheist scientist (Eleanor) and the christian majority. Eleanor has used a machine to gain additional perspective which is not replicated using other observers... which thus puts her on the same level as the next religious nutbag.

The end of the movie is illogical

I take it you've read the book? I haven't read it so I don't know if Zemeckis twisted it or not. I do know that the fairness of the portrayals surprised me a bit, seemed more down-the-middle than what I saw from Sagan in The Demon Haunted World. So I don't know if it was coming from Sagan or more from Zemeckis. But regardless of what the book is like I really enjoyed the movie. Imo the best films focus on the human condition and that's what this movie did.

 

[Xylo]

I very much liked Contact and that includes the ending. I felt the way it ended was consistent with the rest of the film. The theme of it was science vs belief, the verified and the unverified. I liked how evenhanded and fair that was presented. There were instances in the movie where the unverified was portrayed as true, demonstrating that if something hasn't been proven or is even unprovable it may in fact be accurate. I thought the , "Do you love your father?", "Of course", "Prove it" dialog sequence was excellent. These themes were presented in a much more fair light than I came in expecting considering that Sagan's hands were on it and when the credits rolled I found myself impressed. Think about it, all 4 outlooks were presented: The true believer (Busey), the believer (McConaughey), the nonbeliever (Foster), and the scoffer (Skerritt). Only 1 and 4 were portrayed negatively, as they should be. The film was an examination of these different worldviews and the business of a signal from outer space and an encounter with aliens was merely the vehicle.

You nailed it...

 

[Angel of Ioren]

I take it you've read the book? I haven't read it so I don't know if Zemeckis twisted it or not. I do know that the fairness of the portrayals surprised me a bit, seemed more down-the-middle than what I saw from Sagan in The Demon Haunted World. So I don't know if it was coming from Sagan or more from Zemeckis. But regardless of what the book is like I really enjoyed the movie. Imo the best films focus on the human condition and that's what this movie did.

As I sit here, I have a copy of The Demon Haunted World right next to my mouse. Good assessment of the movie Wickerman. I totally agree with you.

 

[cottonzway]

I think the movie gets way too much hate. I personally liked Contact.

 

[Kandinsky]

I look forward to any intelligent sci-fi movie and Contact II should fit the bill. The last one I can recall was Moon...they're few and far between. Maybe one a year?

The amount of philosophy and speculation is a feature of so many sci-novels that it's frustrating how small the market seems to be. Movies like 2001 were box-office gold dust, but I think the odds of repeated success don't appeal to Hollywood. They're more likely to remake 2001 in 3D than take a chance on a new production.

Something by Cordwainer Smith could be an amazing movie...The Underpeople or Ballad of C' Mell. Alfred Bester?

 

[Plant Life]

I liked the ending of Contact. It felt very psychedelic in nature. I admire Sagan's hard scientism combined with fertile speculation, he attained a good balance I think.

 

[Ezechiel]

The theme of it was science vs belief, the verified and the unverified.

Your analysis of the movie was bang on. All I'm saying is that at the end, Eleanor's opinion before congress was premature... both positions at that point were unverified.

Remember, 18 hours of static on the tape