Hey, you should edit your post, and move it to "General".

Content Issues is only for reports that are automatically posted in the content issues section. so it appears on the forums in Content Issues too for the mods to look at :)

svetiev--

I do not believe the Heptapods needing our help in 3,000 years was intended as a plot device for a sequel. This film is brilliant on its own, and in my humble opinion, it does not need a sequel.

I also don't think there is anything we can deduce from the movie that tells us what exactly the aliens are going to need from us in 3,000 years. I know for many people that is a frustrating answer, but I don't think what the aliens are going to need from us is important for the audience to know; it is not the point of the movie.

The point of the movie is a hypothetical first-contact scenario, the meaning of Time, and, as you said, the very powerful subplot of Louise and her daughter Hannah. At least that's what I took from it; it may have been something different for you. This beautiful film is very open to personal interpretation.

For the record, I don't think the aliens we see in this movie are from the future; I think that because of the nature of their language and their understanding of Time, they merely saw what was going to happen to their species in 3,000 years and decided to contact humanity now in order to prepare us to help them. In 3,000 years, the humans who go to help the aliens will be dealing with future Heptapods; the Heptapods who came to Earth in this movie will all have died by then (I do not think they are immortal). But again, all of this is just my opinion:)

I loved this film.

I took it to be a different approach to like the idea of aliens building the pryamids. They're basically intervening and presenting the possibility to advance civilization. They said there were 12 others so I took that to mean they went to 12 planets and attempted to introduce the time machines to them.

Hi. They decided to change the final part because it was too similar to the end of Interstellar. In this movie the original idea was different. In an interview, Eric Heisserer, a writer, said about the script

"I would say the only real significant change is the gift that the heptapods leave us with. In earlier versions they were leaving sort of the blueprints to an interstellar ship, like an ark of sorts. And then Chris Nolan’s Interstellar came out and all of us got together and said, ‘Well this doesn’t quite work now’ (laughs). So we focused more on what we had there in front of us, which was the power of their language."

The souce: http://collider.com/eric-heisserer-arrival-interview/

@Myxomatosis said:

Hi. They decided to change the final part because it was too similar to the end of Interstellar. In this movie the original idea was different. In an interview, Eric Heisserer, a writer, said about the script

"I would say the only real significant change is the gift that the heptapods leave us with. In earlier versions they were leaving sort of the blueprints to an interstellar ship, like an ark of sorts. And then Chris Nolan’s Interstellar came out and all of us got together and said, ‘Well this doesn’t quite work now’ (laughs). So we focused more on what we had there in front of us, which was the power of their language."

The souce: http://collider.com/eric-heisserer-arrival-interview/

So the goal of humanity would've been the same, to help the aliens in the future, except the gift were blueprint to a space ship to help us colonize. This makes sense from a practical standpoint, but then the movie was so focused on the alien language, and the linear time aspect, that I don't know how they could've made blueprints work.