Sign in with Facebook
Manny's Reviews > Contact
Contact
by
by
** spoiler alert **
I was quite shocked when I saw the movie version, and discovered that they had twisted the message 180 degrees. In the book, the heroine meets the aliens and is told that they have indisputable proof that the Universe was created by a Higher Power. When she returns to Earth, she has no immediate way to support her story - but she has been given enough of a clue that she knows how to find objective evidence, which she duly does. She also makes another surprising discovery.
In the movie, she comes back and can't justify her story in any way... period. So she is forced to tell people that they need Faith. This is the opposite of what Sagan was saying.
________________________________
For people who haven't seen the famous xkcd cartoon (I hadn't until this morning):
________________________________
I had not come across until I saw it just now, but apparently Sagan told Warner Brothers straight out that he was unhappy with what they'd done to the movie. "Ellie disgracefully waffles in the face of lightweight theological objections to rationalism..."
________________________________
I just noticed that God's mysterious utterance "I AM WHO I AM" occurs in Exodus 3:14.
Could this possibly have given Sagan an idea?
________________________________
This just in: "Jonmaas" on Medium says . It is the equation
111111111 x 111111111 = 12345678987654321.
I called up a mathematician friend to ask what he thought of this argument, but I'm not sure he was totally convinced. In fact, he put it a little more strongly than that.
In the movie, she comes back and can't justify her story in any way... period. So she is forced to tell people that they need Faith. This is the opposite of what Sagan was saying.
________________________________
For people who haven't seen the famous xkcd cartoon (I hadn't until this morning):
________________________________
I had not come across until I saw it just now, but apparently Sagan told Warner Brothers straight out that he was unhappy with what they'd done to the movie. "Ellie disgracefully waffles in the face of lightweight theological objections to rationalism..."
________________________________
I just noticed that God's mysterious utterance "I AM WHO I AM" occurs in Exodus 3:14.
Could this possibly have given Sagan an idea?
________________________________
This just in: "Jonmaas" on Medium says . It is the equation
111111111 x 111111111 = 12345678987654321.
I called up a mathematician friend to ask what he thought of this argument, but I'm not sure he was totally convinced. In fact, he put it a little more strongly than that.
Sign into Å·±¦ÓéÀÖ to see if any of your friends have read
Contact.
Sign In »
Reading Progress
Started Reading
January 1, 1982
–
Finished Reading
December 30, 2008
– Shelved
December 30, 2008
– Shelved as:
science-fiction
April 23, 2011
– Shelved as:
transcendent-experiences
Comments Showing 1-27 of 27 (27 new)
date
newest »
newest »
wait a second...hollywood took an important message in a book and discarded it when adapting it to a movie? Inconceivable!
Well... they frequently ignore, but a direct reversal is still a little unusual...
Starship Troopers is wildly satirical of the book...
Hear, hear! Though, I think the aliens actually bring up the possibility that what they consider proof of a higher power is just a coincidence. They clearly believe there is a higher power, and are searching for it, but they're not rejecting the idea that it's a misconception since they don't yet have proof. I think that's pretty important to the message.
Manny wrote: "Well... they frequently ignore, but a direct reversal is still a little unusual..."I Am Legend?
I don't recall. Which book is the one where they find a message encoded in the digits of PI?I know I've read it and that it was mediocre but I can't remember the book.
Kevan wrote: "I don't recall. Which book is the one where they find a message encoded in the digits of PI?I know I've read it and that it was mediocre but I can't remember the book."
That happens near the end of Contact.
Hi Kev!Yes, as Robert says, it's at the end of this book. If you check the online version of the xkcd cartoon, there is a great mouseover...
Anita wrote: "Hello My Dearest How are you doing my name is Miss Anita Zamba, it\'s my pleasure to write you today. actually,i seek for true friendship and partner so i contact you it pleased me to email you just to say hi, it will also please me to know more about you, if you wish too. I know a true friend, God no why i have chosen you. I will be happy to see your mail here is my email address ( [email protected])"
Hello Anita,
How very appropriate to place your kind message on my review of Contact! I wish you the best of luck in your quest to find true friendship and a partner; I am glad that God apparently knows why you have chosen me, because I don't. Perhaps the answer is deeply hidden in the decimal expansion of π. In any case, you may find it useful to broaden your search.
Manny
Superb review. I couldn't add a word.
I love the book and indeed it goes beyond the movie.
Thanks for adding Sagan's discontent with the movie.
I didn't know that
An adaptation that's too faithful is worthless. Turns out the book itself was adapted from a treatment for the movie.Just because the versions are different doesn't mean either is better. The book ending's more of a shock, but both versions were at least fairly good in their own ways. People whose work is adapted are notorious for complaining about the adaptations.
The understanding I had from the movie was that Arroway was visited psychically, not physically, and that there'd been no space travel involved at all, the machine having been mere hocus-pocus. Psychic phenomena in the real world tend to make electronics go haywire, as John Keel noted from compiling a great many cases, and that was reflected in the movie by the spurious time kept by the recorder. The only thing I was left wondering about was whether Arroway eventually caught on.
The understanding from the book is even spookier because of its ending.
Robert wrote: "Starship Troopers is wildly satirical of the book..."Yes, and they're each its own kind of fun. I think Heinlein had he lived would've appreciated the movie.
Robert wrote: "An adaptation that's too faithful is worthless. Turns out the book itself was adapted from a treatment for the movie.Just because the versions are different doesn't mean either is better. The boo..."
But as noted, the message about the relationship between faith and science is completely different in the movie, and Sagan didn't like it. The book IMHO presents a rather interesting philosophical thought experiment. The movie is Hollywood fluff.
I felt the same way. How could they ruin his vision like that when he was around to tell them how wrong they were?
It was extremely disrespectful. I guess they outnegotiated him on the movie rights contract.
Tasha wrote: "I felt the same way. How could they ruin his vision like that when he was around to tell them how wrong they were?"You can't ruin a vision. The book's still out there, so's the movie. And why should we care what Sagan thought about their product? As audience you either like it or you don't.
I'm not sure yet, but I think if Sagan had known Anita, his muse would have been boundless. Such a loss he didn't.
Even if the message is somewhat changed, both the movie and the book are awesome, in my opinion.
I recommend you to read Cosmos. It´s another fantastic book...
While not his message it is still a nice one with the heroine asking people to have faith especially after her conflicting opinions on the subject earlier. She grew as a person to have it or at least show she had it all along which is great for a scientist to have.
But in the book she doesn't need faith, she has proof.
Mi papá me hizo ver la peli cuando era nena, flashe muchÃsimo.Y ahora me hizo leer el libro.
Hi Alma, sounds like you had a good dad!
I wouldn’t say the movie ruined anything, I saw the movie way way before I read the book and I absolutely loved the movie when I first saw it and still do. I obviously love the book as well and I can say that the book is usually better than the movies in general. I love them both.
I think the problems come when you read the book first.
I actually think the film version is superior. The emotional development of someone understanding that faith and the irrationality of it are inescapable is much more interesting than the more simple plot of the book.Ellie grows from someone who is a simplistic rationalist into someone who is forced to accept that she believes things she can't prove - which we all do, even those of us that are ardent atheists.
In the book, she doesn't change. And the reader isn't challenged in any meaningful way.
The first question an earthling should ask of an ETI is not: What is the level of your science? but rather: Did I also happen to you?