Shelf Life: Contact
Filed under: Sci-Fi & Fantasy, Warner Brothers, Fandom, Shelf Life

Admittedly, a big part of the appeal of "Shelf Life" (as a film writer, anyway) is having a legitimate excuse to go back and watch a lot of movies we remember loving, partially for the hell of it, and partially because we wonder if our feelings have changed significantly over time. Interestingly, this has thus far not begat a lot of pure reassurance, nor transformed initial or even evolved/ devolved reactions; rather, it's given us a window into – and more specifically, a stronger argument for – some of the appetites and interests we've developed as our sensibilities as moviegoers (much less critics) has evolved.
This week's case in point is Contact, Robert Zemeckis' 1997 film about humankind's first contact with extraterrestrial intelligence. Released during the summer after my college graduation, when I was at the height of my pretentiousness as a cinephile, it nevertheless knocked my socks off when I saw it, combining a sense of wonder with technical proficiency and an emotional sophistication that wouldn't register with yours truly until much later. If it still has – which is precisely why it's this week's "Shelf Life" subject. (Well, that and the fact it's just been released on Blu-ray by Warner Home Video.)
The Facts: Released in July 1997, Zemeckis' adaptation of the Carl Sagan novel of the same name went on to earn more than $100 million domestically at the box office against its estimated $90 million budget, and ultimately generated some $50 million in additional revenues on home video. Although it was nominated for only one Academy Award – for Best Sound – it netted recognition from a number of different groups around the country, and continues to enjoy a 66 percent fresh rating on Rotten Tomatoes.
What Still Works: Jodie Foster gives a powerful performance as Ellie Arroway, a born scientist who devotes her life to finding other creatures in the galaxy as a way of reconnecting and communicating with her dead parents. If I make it sound a little hokey, it isn't, mostly because Foster gives her underlying motivations a gravitas that make them authentic. Meanwhile, the media-reading of the discovery of extraterrestrial intelligence is right on the money – albeit perhaps more strongly religious than we might expect were those events to happen today – and deconstructs the frenzy of analysis, speculation and hype that could – and probably would – overwhelm the true value and meaning of such an event.
Finally, the special effects are really, really terrific; excepting a couple of less convincing composite shots of live-action footage and computer-generated imagery, the conception and design of the alien transport/ communication device is breathtaking to behold, and Zemeckis synthesizes his obsession with effects-based storytelling most effectively in this film with, well, a story worth telling.
What Doesn't Work: If anything, the romance between Foster's and Matthew McConaughey's characters. While their blossoming relationship serves a value purpose as physical manifestation of the strange and sometimes uncomfortable thematic bedfellows of science and religion, McConaughey is slightly too practiced, and Foster too driven to really find one another all that interesting. Or, perhaps as a result of the film's two-hour-and-33-minute running time, some of the development of their relationship got chopped out; the two actors share a modest amount of chemistry, but her attraction to him seems almost purely physical, leaving her motivations for deeper connection underdeveloped as the film progresses.What's The Verdict: Contact is by far one of the best hard-science films released in American cinema, perhaps and perhaps the best (except for Close Encounters, if that counts) since Stanley Kubrick's 2001. Building upon Sagan's fertile source material, Zemeckis constructs a compelling human drama that has larger-than-life dimensions, pays off as a visceral ride and intellectual exercise, and tackles virtually every aspect of its premise. Ellie's journey not only confronts her with her greatest fears but challenges her strongest thoughts, rewards her and transforms her at the same time, and still manages to offer a strong foundation against which audiences can discuss the scientific and theological implications of an event like the one that happens in the film.










Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
10-22-2009 @ 1:58AM
Jack said...
It's a great movie. What films today, often times, are not:
Smart and Exciting.
Reply
10-22-2009 @ 1:57AM
RLP said...
I remember going to see the sneak preview the week before it opened in my local theater. I saw the trailer so many times that year and had no idea what to expect. It just looked like an interesting film from Robert Zemeckis and Carl Sagan.
I thought the slow reveal of the alien messages and the building of the machine was genius. And the "space travel" Ellie goes through from a technical standpoint was unbelievable. The tension and sound design were insane.
One thing I loved was the hatred many of the people had once the film ended. I love that they expected aliens and this conventional ending that wraps everything up in a bow.
But the thing that makes it more interesting on repeat viewings after all these years is the underlying theme of faith. I was 22 when it came out, still a young man. Now I'm 35. I have studied religion, science, etc. It becomes much more of a personal journey of faith rather than a science fiction film. I agree the romance seems useless.
So I agree its one of the more profound serious science fiction films ever released, but I still think 2001 is on this other level of technical and philosophical superiority... especially in its simplicity of execution, wow.
Reply
10-22-2009 @ 12:40PM
mdk said...
I gotta disagree with everyone here... again. I think South Park said it best about this flick in that old episode where it turned out that all of Earth history was just an alien reality show. In it, an alien captures the SP kids and takes them to his mothership, then appears before them in the guise of Stan's father. Their reaction? "LAME! It's like that crappy movie Contact. You wait 2 hours to see the alien and he just looks like Jodie Foster's dead father!" That and the weak plot point where they spend years and billions of dollars building a giant, open-air, atom-shaped, alien cyclotron, a crazy guy blows it up, but not to worry, the whack-job billionaire character somehow, on his own, and totally in secret, built a second giant, open-air, atom-shaped alien cyclotron.
Reply
10-22-2009 @ 8:41AM
Baletanke said...
It's a great movie. What films today, often times, are not:
Smart and Exciting.
http://www.spomenak.com
Reply
10-22-2009 @ 10:17AM
jiang said...
It's a great movie.I like it.
http://www.christianlouboutins.de
Reply
10-22-2009 @ 1:24PM
Andy said...
This makes me want to see it again now.
The machine, and the trip she takes are so creepy and real to me that it was hard to shake. We're so used to "rocketship go blastoff", that this idea of a sort of 'warping' device was really something new and exciting.
Reply
10-22-2009 @ 1:23PM
mdk said...
Dude, Star Trek's been "warping" for 40+ years. They just do it from space so as not to destroy the Earth from the massive energies that'd be released from bending the fabric of space-time. As for a stationary, Earth-based spatial warping device, Stargate did it first!
10-22-2009 @ 2:12PM
CJ said...
The ending has always bugged me on this movie. I always wanted for information... like why the tried the machine once and then acted like "oh, it didnt work... blame the girl that went in it! Let's not try it again with someone else!" And that they were claiming the old man set everything up... seemed like a stretch. Meh, mebbe its just me.
Reply
10-22-2009 @ 1:57PM
Christian M. Howell said...
Admittedly, that was the problem I had with it too. I mean cut out a bunch of that middle crap and have a debate based on the experiences of two different people, one religious, one not.
10-22-2009 @ 7:54PM
paul said...
I enjoyed this movie when it came out. For me, it inspired thought and conversation. I think (imho) what the makers of the movie were saying (and probably Carl Sagan too. Don't know, didn't read his book) is that religion was the boost chair for us, the human race, until we reach a level of maturity to understand that there is no God. What we perceive as God is nothing more than other highly advanced scientific races. So then, science and scientific advancement is the new altar, at which they worship. Which for me, frankly, is ridiculous. I still enjoyed the movie, though. Dismissing the makers sly inculcation.
Reply
10-25-2009 @ 4:39AM
jim said...
The movie was bad because of the cop out ending. I would never bother to sit through it again. But it's not really the movie's fault--the novel had the same cop out ending and I will never bother to read the book again either.
Reply