MovieChat Forums > Communion (1989) Discussion > In defense of Communion

In defense of Communion

posted 16 years ago by zeeboe82
13 replies | jump to latest

(Fair warning: This will be a long post, and I don't suspect the mockers of this film (who are probably just young immature guys) to read much of it because reading it requires actual intelligence, patience, and having an open-mind to someone's opinions that differ then you're own.)

I feel bad for Walken. Too many people don't take him seriously anymore. He's one of the greatest actors in the world, yet a lot of fans (mostly young male morons) want to turn every one of his performances as a joke, and make fun of him and/or just not take his work seriously. (BTW: I'm a 26-year old man with a great sense of humor, but I know when to pick my spots unlike others.)

Communion is a wonderful film, and one of the scariest movies ever made. To cover up some people's fears, they want to mock this movie, the idea of aliens, and anyone who claims to have had contact with them, and the fact that Walken is in this movie only increases these immature young men's drive to turn every role Walken does as a comedy. Then they wanna point out the lack of the special effects. It was the 80's. You spoiled brats who are use to CGI need to understand that, and there are more to movies then special effects, like good acting, and a great story, and Communion has that, but your immature way of thinking blinds you to that.

People fear what they don't understand, and that fear soon grows to hate, and some people express their hate differently. Most young men just wanna smirk, and make bad jokes, and mock what they fear.

Aliens are the most realistic "monsters" in the horror world, and everyone knows that. Any one of us could be a victim to alien abduction. That is where the discomfort of it all comes in, and for anyone to think we humans are the only living creatures in this giant universe is just plan egotistic, but it wouldn't surprise me that the haters/mockers of this movie would be too cocky to know that.

[–] bastasch8647 16 years ago

It's a far from wonderful film - it's an inept attempt to depict the shadowland between imagination and concrete reality. As such, it is a failure, and worse, it misrepresents Strieber's own thinking. Strieber was unsure of just what "the Visitor" phenomenon represents, but the book itself does not seriously entertain the notion that the entire experience was up for grabs as a kind of avant-garde exploration of a horror novelist's subconscious.

The film follows the director's intellectual meanderings when it is STRIEBER'S that should be followed. There is no mention of the iconic female Visitor that Strieber puzzled over: is she an alien? a goddess? an archetype? a Buddha? Since she is central to Strieber's narrative and her portrait graces the cover of the book, any film depiction of the book is obligated to center on her. The film virtually ignores her, as well as all the rich speculation with which Strieber surrounds her.

Artistic license self-rapes in the final portion where Walken "bravely" enters the meadow light... only to find doppelgangers of himself and his wife and a surprise dance party sponsored by his non-human tormenters. Doubtless the unsophisticated director is betting on audiences finding this junk "heavy."

A wonderful film!

[–] zeeboe82 16 years ago

I was a fan of the movie long before I even read the book. I am currently reading it, and I can see why Walken told Strieber, "If the shoe fits...." when Strieber told Walken that he thought he was portraying him as being too crazy.

I use to suspect I was a victim of alien abduction, and have researched the topic religiously for several years. Not only do I think I was never a victim, I also think upon reading Strieber's book that Strieber is insane, or he is running BS central to make cash and get fame, or perhaps it's all of the above.

It'd be one thing if Strieber had one or two experiences with the visitors, but the fact that he has claimed to have had these bizarre encounters his whole life suggests to me what I typed in the previous paragraph.

It seems to me that most people who hate the movie Communion are either people who have a huge fear of aliens, and want to laugh at it to make themselves feel better, or the crazy people who like the book. Truthfully, people who believe in Aliens and that they were victims to them are no different then Christians.

The older I get, the less I believe in super natural things, and I don't see how any rational person could read the book Communion and actually believe the stories Streiber tells are real.

I believe the film is much better then the book, and presents a much better case and leaves it open to rather or not Strieber was abducted, and both sides are argued very well, and are presented equally without one side getting more attention then the other. It's not bias at all. Whereas the book on the other hand (at least from my point of view) screams Steiber is insane, or is making this all up, or both.

I also prefer the Christopher Walken "Streiber" to the real one. Strieber did well with the screenplay. The book however should be title "Diary of a madman" or "How to make quick money".

[–] jabberttp 14 years ago

Excellent 2 posts, zeeboe82!

[–] captkirk_4 15 years ago

So only young and immature guys don't believe that creatures from outer space are comming down and giving struggling horror novelists anal probes?

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"That is where the discomfort of it all comes in, and for anyone to think we humans are the only living creatures in this giant universe is just plan egotistic."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Actually, I think the idea that maybe life is extremely rare and unlikely is the unorthodox position to hold these days. We are constantly being bombarded by movies, television, documentaries speculating about alien life and they almost always take the position that ET is out there somewhere and somedays we will travel to the stars to meet him. I suspect intersteller travel is practically impossible and the odds against intellegent life evolving is so high that we are probably the only such creatures currently in the galaxy.

[–] ContinentalOp 15 years ago

People who think that humans are the only intelligent life in an infinite (or atleast ''vast'') universe are idiots, plain and simply; probably religious fanatics or something. Infinite universe equals infinite intelligent life, not only one planet with intelligent life. Sorry, such a thought might not be egotistical, but it is insane or moronic.

Whether intelligent life from the stars comes to Earth is a matter of debate. If you think they do not, that is fair enough due to our understanding of the laws of physics and the question of motivation.

"Namu-myoho-renge-kyo"

[–] captkirk_4 15 years ago

The question is what are the odds of something like people evolving on other planets. We don't know those odds yet. It is like the difference between getting four out of six numbers in the lottery vs hitting all six and the power ball. Surely we all know someone who hit four numbers and won the $50 prize, but odds are unlikely that someone in our circle of friends has lucked out on the big prize. In galactic terms this translates to our having intelligent neighbors around Alpha Centauri, to the nearest civilization being 50 million years away in the Whirlpool Galaxy. TV favors the former interpretation for dramatic purpose, but I suspect the latter scenario is closer to the truth.

I'm convinced people get most of their ideas from TV and don't even realize it. I hear the exact same phrases coming out of peoples mouths as if it were their own original thoughts. i.e. "the universe is so vast to think were alone is just...ignorant" or changing the subject "The rain forest contains millions of unknown species, some of which may hold the cure for cancer." I think South Park is one of the few shows that lampoons this group-think.

[–] ContinentalOp 15 years ago

"The question is what are the odds of something like people evolving on other planets. We don't know those odds yet."

Lets, see the universe is infinite, there are many similar suns to our own, theologies such as Christianity (which preach against life anywhere but Earth) have been proved wrong about most things, and evolution is a naturally occurring process. I think the odds are pretty damn high and most normal scientists will agree.

"I'm convinced people get most of their ideas from TV and don't even realize it"

Rubbish. In the case of intelligent life in the cosmos, most people use logic. It is highly illogical to believe that humans are the only intelligent life in the entire, infinite universe. People who think Earth is the only planet with intelligent life are deluded or belong to some fundamentalist religion or fanatical ideology.

""the universe is so vast to think were alone is just...ignorant" or changing the subject "The rain forest contains millions of unknown species, some of which may hold the cure for cancer.""

Both points are unrelated. There is more evidence in pure logic itself for intelligent life other than that on Earth that there is for a unknown species which holds the cure for cancer in the rain forests.

I think many people ignore the obvious because they either want to seem excessively different or because they confuse the belief
in intelligent alien life with the idea that said alien life comes to this planet.

When people say that an infinite universe only has one planet with intelligent life, and make ridiculous arguments to why they are correct, I laugh. It is funny at best, depressing at worst. The majority will always believe in intelligent life on other planets because the majority can grasp the very real concept of an infinite universe and their ideas in this field have not been shaped by Earth-centric mythologies (e.g. the Judaeo-Christian faiths), or fanatical ideologies that run counter to reason and logic, for the most part.

"Namu-myoho-renge-kyo"

[–] captkirk_4 15 years ago

For any kind of communication or contact with extra-terrestrials they have to be relatively close in the galaxy to our position. Sure when you take into consideration the vastness of the cosmos odds are on something similar to earth occurring. But if the odds of it happening are such that it is in a distant galaxy I doubt we can every know anything about them. It is like winning the lottery, if I play long enough eventually I'll win. But I want to win in the here and now, not after 20,000 years. The question is how likely is intelligent life, and would that probability mean that there is a civilization we might communicate with or even visit? The truth of the matter is that these movies appeal to us on an emotional level because finding out about an alien civilization would be an exhilarating experience. It is the likely hood of this happening that we need not build up any false hope over. Primarily the question of ET is more of an emotional issue than scientific.

[–] ContinentalOp 15 years ago

Who is talking about contact with them? My point was that due to the vastness of the universe, there will be intelligent extra-terrestrial life. The fact that we will never meet them is irrelevant to any points I made.

My main criticism is that people arrogantly claim that their is evidence that intelligent life cannot exist. It is absurd and probably inspired by Christian or ''humanist'' arrogance.

"Namu-myoho-renge-kyo"

[–] vonmazur 15 years ago

KingAugantyr: You have a valid point, especially when dealing with the current crop of young idiots...The existence of other species in the universe is almost certainly a fact, the question is; what has this got to do, directly, with anal probing aliens?? There are many layers between the existence of alien life and the peculiar psychosis that created this mythos...

We do not have a valid history of this phenomena thru the ages, just the tales and anecdotes of various religious authorities who investigated them...One thing does stand out, the cultural nature of the pardigm, that is; as far as we know, no one in the 17th Century reported any modern technologies, just what the culture of the time expected, and it is the same with this flick, IMHO, it is a reflection of popular fears and unconsciousness on the part of the general public. Somewhat like the Day Care Scares of the 80's...after examination, most turned out to be totally wrong and exhibited typical cultural influences...

Thanks to you for posting this thread!

Dale

"If those sweethearts won't face German bullets--They'll face french ones!"

[–] captkirk_4 14 years ago

The cultural phenomenon comes largely from science fiction stories. I'd wager that most of these science fiction shows in the mid twentieth century were influenced by the Age of Exploration of the likes of Columbus, Vasco DaGamma, Captain Cook, Magellen, Tasman, the voyage of the Beagle etc. who were finding exotic plants and animals along with isolated human tribes. I suspect traveling the cosmos will be a horse of a different color with issues and ramifications we couldn't possible imagine. I doubt though it will entail Ferengi Bartenders.

[–] asgard-5 14 years ago

I just watched this film and I have to say that it has some a) of the best Walken acting, b) magnificent cinematography, c) effective creepiness whenever it's supposed to have it, d) nice score that never distracts from the movie. Never for a second did this movie let up, even though it mostly shows happy family life, which every other movie of its kind tries to skip as fast as possible, because it generally halts the pace.

The ending though is some of the most pathetic post-modern art-house bohemian espresso-sipping day dreaming BS that still plagues the minds of individuals with artistic inclinations, a scheme being famous for not answering any questions, not resolving anything, but pretending to do so. I'm sure some real aliens might be offended by how people percieve them on planet Earth, Solar system. Man fears darkness, physical torture, loss, enemy and the forces unknown - that's exactly what the notion of "alien" consists of in popular fiction.

That's where Communion fell flat on its face, and that's okay, because it was the end of a very enjoyable experience. Still, it's the best genre movie Christopher Walken had ever been involved in, and he has made quite a few, and he's just so good in it.

my friends enjoy rides
charade social improves the quality of life
charade social is good for you

[–] kitchenaut-1 14 years ago

I enjoy this film on several levels, but there are far scarier abduction films. It's a weird film, with an eccentric performance from Walken, and the Eric Clapton sountrack when he returns to ship always makes me smile. As for the antics on the ship... Nuts.

'I think... it was the BOSSA NOVA'.