Fitting with the idea of a language shaping our
thinking/neurological processes, I think they were going for the idea that we
had to learn the language from scratch rather than merely be provided a
translation--and at any rate our own Earthly languages often don't translate in
a clean A=B fashion in many areas (cultural nuances, and yes different ways of
thinking make these translations less than clear), and so I imagine this is
very true with translations between any human language and the heptodes' (where
a "sentence" is a single holistic circle that can be written or read
in any order--I know of no human language that evolved in that fashion).
They mentioned at one point the idea that
people learn other languages most effectively when they are immersed (where
they have to listen very hard and pick up on whatever cues they can from native
speakers, with no help in their own language), and indeed forced to
"figure it out on their own" to a large extent (they might still
supplement that with classroom learning in the host country, but ideally that
is conducted solely in the target language too--just with effective techniques
of visuals, demonstration, and directed exercises given the students). The
heptodes were providing as much of an immersive experience as they could with
the on-board visits.
So for all we know (and it's plausible for
sure), they may have already figured out at least the rudiments of our
languages from monitoring our broadcasts (though still lacking cultural
contexts and "immersion" themselves), at least enough to be capable
of communicating with us in our languages. But using our language in their
"classroom" would not have taught us as effectively--and probably
wouldn't have succeeded in teaching us to "think in their language",
which was the goal of imparting the thought process changes that came with
really knowing it (i.e. being able to think in it as second nature). They
forced us to stretch our minds to figure out their language in its own terms,
and the very fact of their sudden and dramatic visit to our planet motivated us
to do exactly that to figure out what the heck was going on--with an extreme
curiosity and urgency.
Given their goal to teach us to think in their
language (so we could supposedly also perceive time holistically as they did),
all the things they did actually make a lot of sense toward that purpose. The
"why" of "so you can help us in the future"? We're not
given any more than that. It could be that we simply join in some galactic
enlightenment movement down the line, that ends up helping everyone
(particularly at some critical juncture in galactic history 3000 years from
now, when we ourselves may be an emerging interstellar civilization joining the
galactic community)--it may not be technological or other strictly material help
at all. They may be "uplifting" us (akin to the concept in the Brin
novels) for purposes that will benefit them, and hopefully be of mutual
benefit. We have no idea, except that fostering in us the ability to see time
the way they do is apparently key to it.
But “understanding” is a three-edged sword.
Who cares about seeing the future? All the fun
stuff in life (sex, skiing, driving a fast car, reading a great mystery novel,
eating a great steak, drinking a great red wine, falling in love, hearing a song)
has absolutely no connection with time, unless it's the gradual unfolding of an
event (skiing down a trail, tasting a steak, etc.).
Why is "overcoming" the distinctions
between present, past, and future seen as so desirable and so advanced? It
doesn't cure cancer or stop aging or prevent death. It's just a weapon. It's
not skiing.
If I know English, then I can enjoy Shakespeare
or Wordsworth or Keats. English has rhyme, assonance, and meter. You can't
write a sonnet in Alien.
If language exists ONLY to convey information
(maybe like a programming language), then I can see how Alien would be a
superior language, but I prefer "shuffle off this mortal coil" to
"death process." The aliens talk like robots talk. Can they write
poetry or have slang or come up with a Cole Porter song? They can see the
future, but can they craft a pun?
It's not mind blowing...unless you are simple.
It's not smart...unless you have a learning
disability.
It's not one of the best sci-fi films in our
recent history...unless the recent history you speak of is limited to the last
two months of 2016.
It's a bad film. Badly written, badly acted,
badly directed, badly scored, badly edited, and badly designed. Its lack of
originality is matched only by its pretentiousness. I can often find something
redeeming, however small, in many of the most mediocre films of all time, and
yet I can't find anything good to say about this one.
Wait...it wasn't 3 hours long! That's good,
right?
Oh, and also, it provided plentiful
entertainment for those wonderful folks who like to think they enjoy "smart"
films, so they can come up to me and say the same comical, tired, and pathetic
lines over and over again:
"You just didn't get it"
and,
"You're not smart enough to appreciate the
concepts"
and,
"You should watch Transformers
instead"
LOL! Every time. After all, being a stereotype,
means being unable to even consider you might be a stereotype. It's sort of in
the job description, right?
(Wait, I've used that Transformers line myself
in the past. Oh snap! Guess I might be a stereotype. That's depressing, now that
I think about it. Bummer.)
NB: If you like SF, read the short-story it was based on.
