I saw the movie Arrival yesterday. Oh gosh. What a great job they did for Disclosure.
We’re not here to hear about how great movies are. This is not a movie review.
I’ll be discussing the movie from an historical perspective (what its contributions are to Disclosure), without the consideration that my discussion might reveal or spoil things for some readers.
If you’re reading with that criterion in mind because you plan to see the film, then perhaps stop here and read the rest after you see it. The movie is more than just entertainment for me; it’s part of our work here and, I think, part of the orchestrated program for Disclosure.
The movie operated on several levels at once. Let me comment here on what I consider to be some of its contributions. Some of them work to shed light on Disclosure, which the movie calls “First Contact,” and some work to bond the audience to the film (eg., the cathartic scenes), ensuring that its message will stick.
These are its contributions from my viewpoint:
(1) It cast “aliens” in a favorable light, as benevolent, patient, slow to anger … well, they didn’t anger at all, really. Anger did not exist for them in the higher dimensions they haled from.
They even held back after American forces exploded a bomb inside their ship. And they persevered in their mission of peace.
(2) It used phrases like “First Contact” repeatedly.
OK, thank you very much. Catalogue that in the collective consciousness please?
Do you know how liberating it is for a writer to now know that he can quote a Hollywood movie on the subject of (what the movie Arrival called) “First Contact,” where quoting an exotic being with a strange name won’t do it? That offers me another tool in my toolbox that I can use to reach an audience who might be skeptical of an extraterrestrial source.
Aren’t we here to introduce our star family to our Earth family? To ease the way for an intergalactic reunion of parent civilizations and offspring, they being the star families who seeded the Earth in the first place?
(3) It showed how easy it would be for terrestrials to misunderstand galactics.
The “aliens” used a very clever and subtle example. What they said could have been a Zen mantra. And in fact I think they intended it to be one. It was like their calling card.
When linguist Amy Adams was trying to find a common language with them, two of the things the star beings said, to practice communication, were: “There is no time” and “We are one.”
Oh my. Hollywood presenting extraterrestrials as enlightened beings? The galactics were saying to Amy that there is no linear time, such as we believe it to exist, and that their civilization exists in a state of Oneness – and I suppose, implicitly, comes in Oneness to, with, and for us.
However, when Amy reported the comment to the military, the military heard it through their defensive filter as: “You’ve run out of time; we will attack” and “we are unanimous in our resolve to defeat you.” They fell into a low vibration of fear and turned to a well-disciplined, conditioned response, guns drawn, and missiles at the ready.
To promote understanding and comprehension, Amy later wrote a book on the universal language, derived from her study of the information the star folks left. Sound familiar? Wingmakers?
The movie certainly will help make Disclosure universally comprehensible when the latter arrives.
(4) It depicted higher dimensionality in a very subtle and clever way.
To solve the mystery of what the galactics’ message meant, Amy had to see things from their perspective and their perspective was shown to be wise, deep, and peaceful. For me, watching Amy reach up to their higher-dimensional perspective cut a really useful and inspiring groove in my impressionable mind.
In what other film have you heard higher dimensionality being depicted in so palatable a way? It went down like ice cream.
I had to watch closely to see that one open up my heart towards the depicted galactics. “Oh, these are wise beings, whom the military has completely misunderstood,” I heard myself say.
This is a foundation that others can build on, just as Close Encounters of the Third Kind and ET were.
(5) It presented channeling and made it a critical event in the film.
The critical moment in the movie (you said you wouldn’t read if you were going to see the movie; moviegoers, disembark here please) comes when linguist Amy calls the Chinese leader directly, on a secure line. He’s about to go nuclear and cannot be reached in any other way. The whole world is going to follow him.
Amy, a linguist, suddenly breaks out in Chinese, channeling his dead wife. (She’s a linguist.) Military guns are pointed at her demanding she put down the phone but she continues.
The Chinese leader is so taken aback that he listens. His wife tells him to stand down; the “aliens” are here in peace. And he does.
I know. I know. Who the heck cares? Well, channeled communication is how the galactics choose to communicate with us. Channeled communication is pooh-poohed in wider society.
The representation of channeling as being critical to saving the planet from its worst mistake – bombing the aliens, even though we couldn’t hurt them – and the sincere portrayal of the Chinese general so that the action became that much more believably presented represents a sea change in attitude toward channeling.
The representation of channeling in this film as providing the information that saved the day will leave a positive imprint on the collective mind..
I hear that channeling is going to spread in the next while rather than decrease so this boost contributes to the acceptance of it.
(6) It introduced the subject of precognition or future vision.
Half the images that Amy was seeing turned out to be not of the past – as we the audience thought – but of the future. Whoa, what a conceptual flip that was when that secret was revealed and sorted out.
That was sure to cause anyone paying attention an “Aha!” moment and lock in their acceptance of a psychic gift like future vision.
The star folks kept saying “Use your weapon” to Amy. At the sound of the word “weapon,” the military cocked their rifles. But Amy’s “weapon,” they explained, was her future vision.
Amy was sure that there had been an error in translation and that they meant “tool” rather than “weapon.”
Following their mentoring, she recognized her future vision for what it was – her “weapon” – and that again reinforced the image of the ET’s wisdom. So the ETs got a very good press, even if there appearance was … rather hard to fall in love with.
But it wasn’t something you’d be afraid of either. They looked a little … cuddly.
(Concluded in Part 1, below.)
