Ritayan Mukherjee

It is disappointing and even funny to think how this movie is nothing while seeming to be everything. While it takes off through an absorbing strong start showing the bitter story of Louise and her daughter, it ruined out of everything the expectations I had from it by the climax moments. Even though we get to see tons of computers in military camps like the average Hollywood creature bim-bam, the heroism is centred not on mindlessness but on something believable - through the course of the story which, on its way, makes some attempts to criticize this mindlessness, often introducing some political elements - but only until the climax starts. But by the end - I mean only within that climax sequence - it is very likely you will end up with a soup in your head, which you may or may not want to decipher. A soup and an intriguing cinematic experience are two things which are polar opposites according to me. (Spoilers: Climax sequence overview) What happens is that the protagonist, no doubt played brilliantly by Amy Adams, gets carried off into the spaceship and learns that Abbott is dying, and that she is actually one of them - and that the aliens are probably going to be needing humans' help in 3000 years. And then we see that Louise discovers that she's had the ability to look into the future like the aliens. And then, of course, I really do not know why she had to recite General Shang's wife's last words (whatever they were though) to convince him to stop military from taking action. Whatever did happen, the story, even the mild contemplative core of it which the film had dashed into dust by then, really does create an array of useless questions to which no answer is provided in the film. For example, why do the aliens come to earth to ask for humanity's help in 2016, injecting one of their own into humanity, when they're gonna be needing it in 5016? And that's only one of many; the list is long. And Its better not to talk about how the scientists and linguists deciphered "circles" of alien script in months. Even if I admit that they could, Arrival stands lifeless in itself. I know what you'll say. Its not necessary that a movie must give all its answers, it's for the audience to imagine and think about. If you just did think this, I urge you to watch and think through the films of a generation of filmmakers who have devoted themselves to the medium of cinema - and not Arrival (2016) of all films. By reading some of the reviews here, I was forcefully able to come up with a conclusion of the blunder they created in the end: it's that whatever visions Louise has are basically of the future, right from the beginning. Which only just worsened my already bad taste for the film. And let me not talk about the love-and-loss subplot (which I just discovered) of Ian and Louise. What is disturbing is that the film did nothing worthwhile with such a wide base and with so much scope for imagination. All in all, Arrival is Hollywood alien mainstream ideas that's narrowed down to almost no violence - and it is DEFINITELY not a sci-fi parable. So if you didn't understand the movie and struggled to interpret it to something worthwhile in the end (irrespective of whether you succeeded or not), you're not the only one. Do not feel bad that you didn't like what most others did.

This review is spoiler-free. This film truly deserves to be among the BBC list of the top 100 films of all time. It's one of the best of the best metaphors ever portrayed on the big screen, that too in a wholly unexpected way. It shall take matured viewers into the realm of thought, imagination and analysis that knows no bounds. Magical and at the same time incredibly dark and intense, this film is one of the best examples of how a fantastic auteur's mind works. Hats off to the crew and del Toro for bringing this great imagination to life on the big screen. P. S. It must be mentioned that this film is NOT FOR KIDS. Even OLDER TEENS may not be able to stand the violence portrayed in the film.