For me, Arrival is a bit of an odd movie to review. Both the shot composition and the film’s careful pacing are masterfully executed, and if I were to judge the movie on its technical prowess alone, I’d say it sets the bar for every sci-fi movie to come. But Arrival doesn’t quite do that. While the first two acts feature some of the most gripping and intricate storytelling I’ve seen in years, the movies conclusion seems to let all that thoughtfulness slip away in favor of forcing a think piece out of a story that doesn’t need to be one.
Arrival’s pacing and cinematography are immaculate. The story is structured in a nearly flawless way that drip-feeds you information at an exciting pace, keeping you thoroughly engrossed in the story but not starving for answers. Arrival's stunning camera work is pristine and sets the tone for the antiseptic feel of the films sparse environments. The lighting and cinematography serve director Denis Villeneuve’s vision well by conveying so much information in so few shots. When you finally get a glimpse of what’s hiding behind the curtain, I think the creatures have a really inventive design to them and a lot of thought was given to how they move and interact with the world. On a technical level there are so few issues I could manage to point out, it really is a water tight production.
In addition to its technical proficiency, Arrival has no shortage of emotional heft. While I can’t discount the structure and narrative weight of writer Eric Heisserer’s script, it’s the strong performances from the likes of Amy Adams, Jeremy Renner, and Forest Whitaker that really bring the material to life. I especially commend Adams, whose relatable and layered work bring a human touch to a very calculated film.
Until this point I’ve had nothing but praise for Arrival, so where do things go wrong? The truth is that nothing goes wrong, per se. But while the first two acts focus on answering the viewer’s questions in a satisfying way, the movie’s ending takes not only a less grounded approach to wrapping up its themes, but also a less gratifying one. I can appreciate a movie that leaves itself up for interpretation, or one that respects the audience enough to let them fill in the blanks on their own. But Arrival initially approaches its subject matter in a question-and-answer style that I find far more effective. The film takes great care to fill in any holes left in its storytelling, and in a way it betrays that attentiveness with an ending that feels both vague and uncharacteristically implausible. It certainly was a deliberate choice, and one that’s surely resonated with plenty of people, but it left me starving for answers that I felt I’d been promised.
I think my overall experience with Arrival was positive, as the first two thirds of the film are fantastic. Arrival takes a smart approach to telling its story and has an emotional backbone that keeps it from feeling lifeless. But while I was impressed with the talent of everyone involved, the conclusion left me wanting more. Arrival’s premise and execution were interesting and thought provoking enough in it’s own right without forcing the viewer to fill in the gaps of it’s story. The choice feels too deliberate to be unfinished but still somehow elicits the same feelings. Thematically it feels disconnected from the bulk of the story telling here and because of this I’m left feeling unsatisfied by the conclusion. I can’t say it completely overshadows the film, there is a lot here to love and I encourage people to judge the film for themselves. But for me Arrival did not answer a lot of the questions it had posed, and in a film that seemed so centered around answering question it seems like a disconnected design choice that ever so slightly hollows the experience as a whole.