# Contact wasn't really about alien contact at all, was it? (Spoilers within) **URL:** \ **Category:** Cafe Society\ **Created:** [March 8, 2006, 12:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/contact-wasnt-really-about-alien-contact-at-all-was-it-spoilers-within/347460 "2006-03-08T00:54:25Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 7\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![UncleRojelio](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/unclerojelio/32/3160_2.png) [@UncleRojelio](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UncleRojelio)\ **Post date:** [March 8, 2006, 7:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/contact-wasnt-really-about-alien-contact-at-all-was-it-spoilers-within/347460/21 "2006-03-08T19:57:40Z")
> [@tdn](#): > > If you decide to reply to this message, please do so with your computer, which, as you know, is an electronic device that works via binary numbers. What are binary numbers? ---
**Author:** ![tdn](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/94ad74/32.png) [@tdn](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tdn)\ **Post date:** [March 8, 2006, 8:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/contact-wasnt-really-about-alien-contact-at-all-was-it-spoilers-within/347460/22 "2006-03-08T20:47:20Z")
> [@UncleRojelio](#): > > What are binary numbers? There are only 10 binary numbers. ---
**Author:** ![Elendil\_s\_Heir](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/7cd45c/32.png) [@Elendil\_s\_Heir](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Elendil_s_Heir)\ **Post date:** [March 9, 2006, 7:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/contact-wasnt-really-about-alien-contact-at-all-was-it-spoilers-within/347460/23 "2006-03-09T19:09:27Z")
Like _tdn_, I first saw the movie - which I liked very much - and then read the book, which I didn’t think was nearly as good. One of the few examples, for me, of the movie actually being better than the book. I think Sagan was trying to get across the sense of wonderment that he felt when he looked out at the Universe. It’s a story of faith, but not necessarily of religion, as such - He was warning of religious fanaticism and humanocentrism (is that even a word?). And, perhaps revealing more than he meant to, he was telling us that scientists are human beings who, even when wounded and hurting inside as Ellie was, are capable of great things. Roger Ebert praised the movie when it came out, and later wrote a column arguing that everything Ellie saw and heard during the first contact occurred in her own mind, in the brief moments as her sphere fell from the tower. Can’t find the column either on his website or through Google, though - maybe someone else can? He didn’t entirely persuade me, but he made some good points. ---
**Author:** ![Loopus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/loopus/32/15343_2.png) [@Loopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Loopus)\ **Post date:** [March 9, 2006, 7:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/contact-wasnt-really-about-alien-contact-at-all-was-it-spoilers-within/347460/24 "2006-03-09T19:33:29Z")
> [@tdn](#): > > “The aliens are sending us a signal consisting of prime numbers…” > > So far so good. But it goes on: > > “…which, as you know, are numbers that can only be divided by one and themselves.” Heh. That’s a great example of what my high school creative writing teacher called the “as you know, Bob” style of exposition, in which the characters give each other background information they already know about for the sole benefit of the reader. It is really clumsy and obvious when you’re paying attention. It’s been a long time since I either saw the movie or read the book, but I know I liked the movie better. One specific thing I remember is that the book, for some reason, had four other characters go with Ellie. The book is quite clearly about Ellie more than anyone else, and I couldn’t see what those other characters added. The movie wisely left them out. ---
**Author:** ![Agenais](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/b19c9b/32.png) [@Agenais](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Agenais)\ **Post date:** [March 9, 2006, 10:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/contact-wasnt-really-about-alien-contact-at-all-was-it-spoilers-within/347460/25 "2006-03-09T22:35:47Z")
[An extremely in depth analysis of the novel and film](http://www.coseti.org/klaescnt.htm)…I found it to be a nice supplement to the story. I might not agree with everything in the essay, but it was good brain food. ---
**Author:** ![JRDelirious](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jrdelirious/32/9531_2.png) [@JRDelirious](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JRDelirious)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2006, 1:31am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/contact-wasnt-really-about-alien-contact-at-all-was-it-spoilers-within/347460/26 "2006-03-10T01:31:16Z")
> [@Loopus](#): > > Heh. That’s a great example of what my high school creative writing teacher called the “as you know, Bob” style of exposition, in which the characters give each other background information they already know about for the sole benefit of the reader. It is really clumsy and obvious when you’re paying attention. Hey, didn’t hurt Dan Brown… ---
**Author:** ![JohnT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/johnt/32/15048_2.png) [@JohnT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JohnT)\ **Post date:** [March 11, 2006, 4:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/contact-wasnt-really-about-alien-contact-at-all-was-it-spoilers-within/347460/27 "2006-03-11T16:36:23Z")
I loved the book, thought it much better than most here. And I thought the movie to be so atrocious as to be a slap in the face of the audience. In regards to the writing flaws, it was Sagan’s first novel and possibly his first piece of published fiction. Given that, it’s not a bad job. **Contact** was about one womans search for God. She was unsatisfied with approaches that necessitated faith, she wanted _evidentiary proof_ of God’s existence. It’s why she was a radio astronomer, it’s why she wrestled with religious thought, it’s why she asked her “father” ‘do you believe in God?’ He gave her the answer she craved - Yes, the universe was built, yes, there is evidence of a creator. He gave her a clue, a rather simple one, and she set her computer to work finding it. The movie fvcked it all up. The movie destroyed the central message of the book, claiming that God could only be found through faith and blind acceptance. Her brainwashed look at the end of the Congressional hearing, when she says “yes, take me on faith”, has Carl Sagan spinning in his grave every time it’s viewed. He would have _never_ wanted anybody to say about his story what **Cunctator** (correctly) noted: > [@](#): > > I haven’t read the book. The film seemed to me principally to be about faith. Well, the book isn’t. It’s as clear a denunciation against faith as he could make it. **Shalmanese** was closest to my view: > [@](#): > > I’m convinced that Contact, ultimately, was about God. Not the standard Judeo-Christian God, but a sceptics God. The notions of faith and certainty and belief. The sheer incomprehesibility of a higher power and humanitys struggle to grapple with these concepts. > > As an atheist, Contact remains to this day, the closest I’ve ever had to a religious experience. > [@Anaamika](#): > > When they finally meet the so-called aliens, they look just like us, they are people we know, they understand or at least accept emotion (Ellie cries all over her “father”) and they make the human visitors look like incompetent fools, insane, or worse yet, outright liars when they let the humans take no record back. Surprisingly, I actually understand that. Their goal it seems was to make the human race learn the secrets for themselves. > > However - Ellie then goes and discovers the secret the aliens were looking for, in a year or less! When they’d been looking at it for quite a while! This struck me as rather silly and serving one’s own purpose - must end the book on a high note. 1. The aliens don’t look like us. They formed the image of the one person that Jodie loved, and missed, the most, a person she had learned to idealize. Using her idealized image of her father, they were more capable of breaking down any psychological barriers she would’ve thrown up. In the book there were four other passengers who all went through the same experience, so what happened is made much clearer. 1. She doesn’t discover “the” secret, she discovers the secret behind the clue given her by her “father”. The aliens have known about the anomaly in pi for megayears. Oh, and Ebert’s wrong. The trip happened. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/contact-wasnt-really-about-alien-contact-at-all-was-it-spoilers-within/347460.md?page=1)