“Knowing” film inspires thinking in movie-goers
Posted: 06 April 2009 12:14 PM   [ Ignore ]  
Member
Avatar
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  306
Joined  2007-10-24

Heh - good title, eh?  I should become a journalist, haha.

No spoilers, I promise. 
I went to see “Knowing” last night with hubby and two eldest nieces (14 and 17 y/o).  I started a conversation afterwards that hopefully inspired some deeper questioning in the 17 y/o.  The movie brought up questions about origins of life, science versus religion, and looking for purpose and meaning.  I won’t go into how it answered those questions, but I appreciated the fact that it introduced them without being slanted and prejudiced. 

I think I’ll post again in a bit with more specific stuff to discuss that will have a spoiler alert.  Hard to be general about this stuff and have an interesting discussion.  Overall, it’s a pretty good movie.  I enjoyed it.

By the way, hey!  I’m back.  smile
Jeanie

 Signature 

Modern science has been a voyage into the unknown, with a lesson in humility waiting at every stop. Many passengers would rather have stayed home.
          —Carl Sagan, Pale Blue Dot

Profile
 
 
Posted: 07 April 2009 01:22 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 1 ]  
Member
Avatar
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  951
Joined  2007-06-23
Jeanie - 06 April 2009 04:14 PM

By the way, hey!  I’m back.  smile
Jeanie

Niceta-cya. I wondered where you went.

 Signature 

He who is not a misanthrope at forty can never have loved mankind  -Chamfort

Profile
 
 
Posted: 07 April 2009 06:00 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 2 ]  
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  1835
Joined  2006-03-26

I want to see this film. My sister and I were going to go but she said it got a lot of bad reviews and they dissuaded her from wanting to see it. Maybe I’ll talk her into it.

 Signature 

Bill Maher’s New Rule About Religious Tests for Office

Sam explains the difference between the belief in Elvis and belief in Jesus

Support the Separation of Church & State!
Freedom From Religion Foundation

Profile
 
 
Posted: 10 June 2009 10:04 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 3 ]  
Member
Avatar
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  892
Joined  2007-12-04

I just watched the movie myself. To be honest I’m extremely torn about what to think. Without spoiling anything for anyone who has not seen it I guess its one of those movies where the symbolism makes it possible for believers or nonbelievers to make up their own interpretation.

But I can’t help but feel that I just watched two hours of christian dogma cleverly recasted in a different form, and if anything. To all those people watching this movie that are not strong unbelievers. Its just going to further romantizise the nonsense of the faithful.

It was a good movie though. I liked it for what it was, but I dread the kind of “inspiration” I think it instils. Just another Dawinci Code using modern art forms to give some sort of credence to creation myths.

 Signature 

What can be asserted without evidence can also be dismissed without evidence.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 23 June 2009 12:40 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 4 ]  
Member
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  585
Joined  2007-10-11
Unbeliever - 11 June 2009 02:04 AM

I just watched the movie myself. To be honest I’m extremely torn about what to think. Without spoiling anything for anyone who has not seen it I guess its one of those movies where the symbolism makes it possible for believers or nonbelievers to make up their own interpretation.

But I can’t help but feel that I just watched two hours of christian dogma cleverly recasted in a different form, and if anything. To all those people watching this movie that are not strong unbelievers. Its just going to further romantizise the nonsense of the faithful.

It was a good movie though. I liked it for what it was, but I dread the kind of “inspiration” I think it instils. Just another Dawinci Code using modern art forms to give some sort of credence to creation myths.


So what is the upshot of the whole story? I mean are they pro or con religion ? Or neither ? It does sound like the kind of movie I am interested in.  I wish Sam Harris or another one of the “Four Horsemen” would make another film . Will they ever ? Isn’t it time for another video or book ?

Profile
 
 
Posted: 09 July 2009 12:45 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 5 ]  
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  1044
Joined  2008-02-15

Just watched this on DVD, WOW, I thought it was awesome!

 Signature 

Why is there Something instead of Nothing: No reason or ever knowable reason.

Kissing Hank’s Ass
Pope Song (rated NC17).

Profile
 
 
Posted: 09 July 2009 08:05 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 6 ]  
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  1044
Joined  2008-02-15
Jefe - 09 July 2009 11:12 AM
GAD - 09 July 2009 04:45 AM

Just watched this on DVD, WOW, I thought it was awesome!

I watched it on PPV and thought it was marginal.

The depiction of the Skeptic Professor (Nicolas Cage) was 1 dimensional and fraught with assumptive stereotypes.
And what was that ending?  A mix of death-cult apocalysm and scientology?

PS:  What was with that revelatory scene at the observatory?  The one where cage essentially says “remember that groundbreaking research i published” that was never ever mentioned at any other point in the movie?


Very sophomoric in plot structure, IMHO.

It was a story not religion. I think you are projecting, but was it prefect, no, but what film is “The Big Lebowski”, please…......

I took that scene to be that he had published groundbreaking research on the said phenomenon (he was an MIT astrophysicist after all), but never had considered it an issue for the earth, and why should he until the events of the movie led him to it.

Anyway, I loved it.

 Signature 

Why is there Something instead of Nothing: No reason or ever knowable reason.

Kissing Hank’s Ass
Pope Song (rated NC17).

Profile
 
 
Posted: 09 July 2009 06:27 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 7 ]  
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  1835
Joined  2006-03-26
Jefe - 09 July 2009 11:12 AM

And what was that ending?  A mix of death-cult apocalysm and scientology?

I agree. The ending was dumb. It was like the Garden of Eden on acid.

But the special effects were kick ass!

 Signature 

Bill Maher’s New Rule About Religious Tests for Office

Sam explains the difference between the belief in Elvis and belief in Jesus

Support the Separation of Church & State!
Freedom From Religion Foundation

Profile
 
 
Posted: 09 July 2009 09:07 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 8 ]  
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  1044
Joined  2008-02-15
rab - 09 July 2009 10:27 PM
Jefe - 09 July 2009 11:12 AM

And what was that ending?  A mix of death-cult apocalysm and scientology?

I agree. The ending was dumb. It was like the Garden of Eden on acid.

But the special effects were kick ass!

The river bed scene made the movie, the movie could of ended there, but the final scene still made sense in context.

 Signature 

Why is there Something instead of Nothing: No reason or ever knowable reason.

Kissing Hank’s Ass
Pope Song (rated NC17).

Profile
 
 
Posted: 10 July 2009 02:34 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 9 ]  
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  1835
Joined  2006-03-26
GAD - 10 July 2009 01:07 AM

The river bed scene made the movie, the movie could of ended there, but the final scene still made sense in context.

Then I must be a little dense. Would you mind explaining it to me? Where to hell did they take the children? Who were these whisperers and why did they care? And why go through all the trouble of the time capsule bullshit when they could have snatched the kids with the technological powers they had?

Silly premise. But the special effects were awesome!

 Signature 

Bill Maher’s New Rule About Religious Tests for Office

Sam explains the difference between the belief in Elvis and belief in Jesus

Support the Separation of Church & State!
Freedom From Religion Foundation

Profile
 
 
Posted: 12 July 2009 07:05 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 10 ]  
Newbie
Avatar
Rank
Total Posts:  12
Joined  2008-12-28
rab - 10 July 2009 06:34 PM
GAD - 10 July 2009 01:07 AM

The river bed scene made the movie, the movie could of ended there, but the final scene still made sense in context.

Then I must be a little dense. Would you mind explaining it to me? Where to hell did they take the children? Who were these whisperers and why did they care? And why go through all the trouble of the time capsule bullshit when they could have snatched the kids with the technological powers they had?

Silly premise. But the special effects were awesome!


Overall, I liked the movie, for its special effects and as something different to watch. I did like how the numbers were worked into the storyline. (There were some things that I found distasteful, and for them, see the bottom portion of my post.)


Mr. Rab: I think that Mr. GAD meant that the river bed scene could have made for a decent ending. The scenes after it, and the final scene just add more info to the story.

As for your other questions:
1. The children were taken to another planet to begin life anew. The multitude of spaceships leads me to conclude that there are plenty of other creatures deposited on Neo-Earth. (Including other humans.)

2. The ‘whisperers’ were a spooky race of aliens, who for some reason saw what our sun would do, and wanted to salvage what they could of Earth’s life. (They probably saw us as primitive, and wanted to ‘save’ us from an untimely destruction, much as we would expect from an episode of Star Trek.)

3. The time capsule thing was just a plot byproduct to add tension to the story. One would have to conclude that the aliens were probably ‘broadcasting’ their spooky ‘signal’ to many people, all over the world, in the hopes of reaching some of the population. It seemed that the only people whose minds were receptive to the signals were those individuals who were able to become ‘attuned.’ I think the whole deal with this was to ‘filter’ out amongst us who would be worthy of saving.

4. Why did the aliens ride in a brown car in that scene, by Nicholas Cage’s house, if they have access to spaceships?—I think that scene was stupid. Just put into the movie to add pointless tension. It would have been better to have the ‘main’ alien we saw during the movie gain the attention of the Nich Cage’s son, and then walk behind a tree and ‘disappear’ from view. (A car with three grown-looking men in it, who are beckoning a young boy to come over to them is just icky.)


One of the things that I found distasteful in this movie was the apparent Christian overtone. The benevolent ‘aliens,’ who seem to be powerless to stop the devastating solar event, are nonetheless going to attempt to ‘save’ some of us.

This gave the movie, a resemblance to the fictional apocalypse and rapture that so many of our nutty fellow citizens believe will really occur. The solar event was the ‘apocalypse,’ and the notion that only the special few who could ‘hear the warning’ was the rapture.

The funny thing is that these aliens, who are capable of interstellar space travel, somehow cannot seem to give a clear warning to us. The movie began with us having only 50 yrs left on the ‘clock’ so to speak. But the ONLY messages of incoming peril that the world receives are the cryptic warnings—that only a few can hear. And, if no one seems to fricking understand the message, then what fricking good is it!

I may as well tell you that, “Exactly one year from now, to the minute, I am going to tickle you.” Only, I will transmit the warning to you via morse code, as blown on by a dog whistle. (A dog whistle is a device for making a shrill noise that is completely inaudible to humans.) When you are tickled a year from now and are weirded out by it, I can then say that you had plenty of warning. Another example of this would be how the Earth is taken care of in the novel, “The Hitchiker’s Guide to the Galaxy.”

The very end of the movie was reminiscent of the garden of eden mythos. What is also insulting it that the aliens drop the kids off, and apparently leave them to fend for themselves. Whether the aliens extended the natural lifespan of the children or gave them any knowledge of survival is just speculation, as we cannot know for sure. What we do know, is that the children are released into the wild wearing nothing but robes. They aren’t even given tools or a shelter.

Aren’t the aliens wonderful? (not)

 Signature 

Mathematics says:

If Church ? State ? ø , then we are all f(k) = d.


“If the intersection of Church and State does not equal the null set, then we are all fucked.”

Profile
 
 
Posted: 12 July 2009 09:49 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 11 ]  
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  1044
Joined  2008-02-15

I think your working to hard on this. This was like a parallel universe for religion. The aliens had been sending messages for 1000’s of years, which is where religion got it’s prophecy, voices, angels, end of the world, ideas from, the movie parallels that right up to the river rock scene, and then in a slap in the face to religion it shows that none of it came from god but from aliens.

While I think the movie should have ended at the river rock scene, and left it to us to wonder, I took the final scene to be a new garden (bring up the question of is this the same process that brought us to the earth), and the tree being an alien device that will help teach guide and protect the children until such time as they rebel and strike on their own, another bible parallel…

At least that is how I took it.

As for driving in the car, they did it for the same reason as they made them selves look human, to move around unnoticed to protect and guide the children to the ships.

 Signature 

Why is there Something instead of Nothing: No reason or ever knowable reason.

Kissing Hank’s Ass
Pope Song (rated NC17).

Profile
 
 
Posted: 12 July 2009 07:26 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 12 ]  
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  1835
Joined  2006-03-26
Mathemagician - 12 July 2009 11:05 AM


Mr. Rab: I think that Mr. GAD meant that the river bed scene could have made for a decent ending. The scenes after it, and the final scene just add more info to the story.

 

3. The time capsule thing was just a plot byproduct to add tension to the story. One would have to conclude that the aliens were probably ‘broadcasting’ their spooky ‘signal’ to many people, all over the world, in the hopes of reaching some of the population. It seemed that the only people whose minds were receptive to the signals were those individuals who were able to become ‘attuned.’ I think the whole deal with this was to ‘filter’ out amongst us who would be worthy of saving.


One of the things that I found distasteful in this movie was the apparent Christian overtone. The benevolent ‘aliens,’ who seem to be powerless to stop the devastating solar event, are nonetheless going to attempt to ‘save’ some of us.

This gave the movie, a resemblance to the fictional apocalypse and rapture that so many of our nutty fellow citizens believe will really occur. The solar event was the ‘apocalypse,’ and the notion that only the special few who could ‘hear the warning’ was the rapture.

The funny thing is that these aliens, who are capable of interstellar space travel, somehow cannot seem to give a clear warning to us. The movie began with us having only 50 yrs left on the ‘clock’ so to speak. But the ONLY messages of incoming peril that the world receives are the cryptic warnings—that only a few can hear. And, if no one seems to fricking understand the message, then what fricking good is it!


The very end of the movie was reminiscent of the garden of eden mythos. What is also insulting it that the aliens drop the kids off, and apparently leave them to fend for themselves. Whether the aliens extended the natural lifespan of the children or gave them any knowledge of survival is just speculation, as we cannot know for sure. What we do know, is that the children are released into the wild wearing nothing but robes. They aren’t even given tools or a shelter.

Aren’t the aliens wonderful? (not)

First, it’s Ms. Rab.  wink

I agree with the above points, and this is why I found most of the film silly.

And that tree when we see the kids running in that field of golden wheat I felt was like a tree of knowledge. Except maybe this time the kids will be able to eat from it without being tempted by an evil snake and actually learn something.

 Signature 

Bill Maher’s New Rule About Religious Tests for Office

Sam explains the difference between the belief in Elvis and belief in Jesus

Support the Separation of Church & State!
Freedom From Religion Foundation

Profile
 
 
Posted: 06 October 2010 06:26 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 13 ]  
Newbie
Rank
Total Posts:  22
Joined  2007-10-13

“The funny thing is that these aliens, who are capable of interstellar space travel, somehow cannot seem to give a clear warning to us. The movie began with us having only 50 yrs left on the ‘clock’ so to speak. But the ONLY messages of incoming peril that the world receives are the cryptic warnings—that only a few can hear. And, if no one seems to fricking understand the message, then what fricking good is it!”


God decides to save us all from hell by sending an apparently mentally deranged individual pretending to be a messiah to a small region of a earth filled with messiahs and a largely illiterate population.

Perhaps the movie is more insightful than I thought…

Profile
 
 
   
 
 
RSS 2.0     Atom Feed
newrelic.loglevel = "verbosedebug" newrelic.daemon.loglevel = "verbosedebug"