Contact
Performance & Direction: Contact Review
Last updated: February 12, 2026
Quick Verdict: Hit or Flop?
Is Contact (1997) worth watching? According to our cinematic analysis, the film stands as a HIT with a verified audience rating of 7.4/10. Whether you're looking for the box office collection, ending explained, or parents guide, our review covers everything you need to know about this Drama.
Cast Performances: A Masterclass
The success of any Drama is often anchored by its ensemble, and Contact features a noteworthy lineup led by Jodie Foster . Supported by the likes of Matthew McConaughey and James Woods , the performances bring a palpable realism to the scripted words.
Performance Analysis: While the cast delivers competent and professional performances, they are occasionally hampered by a script that leans into familiar archetypes.
Final Verdict: Is it Worth Watching?
Story & Plot Summary: Contact
Quick Plot Summary: Contact is a Drama, Science Fiction, Mystery film that explores complex human emotions and relationships through detailed character development. This summary provides a scannable look at the movie's central conflict and narrative structure.
Story Breakdown
This character-driven narrative explores the internal and external conflicts that define the human experience. A radio astronomer receives the first extraterrestrial radio signal ever picked up on Earth. As the world powers scramble to decipher the message and decide upon a course of action, she must make some difficult decisions between her beliefs, the truth, and reality. The screenplay takes time to develop its characters, allowing audiences to connect emotionally with their struggles and triumphs. Each scene builds upon the last, creating a cumulative emotional impact.
Narrative Structure
- Opening Hook: We meet the main character in their ordinary world, establishing the emotional baseline before the inciting incident disrupts their life.
- Character Arc: The main character shows growth throughout the story, though some supporting characters could have been more fully realized. The arc is present but occasionally predictable.
- Climax & Resolution: The emotional climax brings character arcs to their natural conclusion, providing catharsis while staying true to the story's core themes.
Thematic Depth
The film delves into universal human experiences including love, loss, identity, and belonging. It holds up a mirror to society, asking difficult questions about morality, choice, and consequence.
What Works & What Doesn't
✅ Strengths
- Solid execution of genre conventions
- Engaging moments that showcase the creators' vision
- Competent performances from the cast
⚠️ Weaknesses
- Some narrative choices that feel predictable
- Occasional pacing lulls in the middle act
Ending Explained: Contact
Ending Breakdown: Contact resolves its central conflict while maintaining thematic consistency. The finale has been praised for its approach to drama resolution.
The final reveal recontextualizes earlier scenes, offering viewers material for post-viewing discussion.
Ending Analysis:
- Narrative Resolution: The story concludes with clear resolution of its central conflicts, providing closure while maintaining some ambiguity.
- Character Arcs: Main characters complete meaningful transformations, reflecting the film's thematic priorities.
- Thematic Payoff: The ending reinforces the drama themes established throughout the runtime.
The final moments of Contact reflect the filmmakers' creative choices, offering an ending that aligns with the film's tone and style.
Who Should Watch Contact?
Worth Watching If You:
- Enjoy Drama films and don't mind familiar tropes
- Are a fan of the cast or director
- Want a character-driven story with emotional moments
Box Office Collection: Contact
| Metric / Region | Collection (Approx) |
|---|---|
| Production Budget | $90.0M |
| Worldwide Gross | $171.1M |
| Trade Verdict | CLEAN HIT |
Contact Budget
The estimated production budget for Contact is $90.0M. This figure covers principal photography, talent acquisitions, and visual effects. When accounting for global marketing and distribution, the break-even point is typically 2x the base production cost.
Top Cast: Contact
All Cast & Crew →











Where to Watch Contact Online?
Streaming Hub🎟️ Rent on
Apple TV Store
Google Play Movies
YouTube
Amazon Video🏷️ Buy on
Apple TV Store
Google Play Movies
YouTubeContact Parents Guide & Age Rating
1997 AdvisoryWondering about Contact age rating or if it's safe for kids? Here is our cinematic advisory:
⏱️ Runtime & Duration
The total runtime of Contact is 150 minutes (2h 30m). Ensuring you have enough time for the full cinematic experience.
Verdict Summary
Analyzing the overall audience sentiment, verified rating of 7.4/10, and global performance metrics, Contact is classified as a HIT. It remains an essential part of the 1997 cinematic calendar.
Frequently Asked Questions
Is Contact worth watching?
Contact is definitely worth watching if you enjoy Drama movies. It has a verified rating of 7.4/10 and stands as a HIT in our box office analysis.
Where can I find Contact parents guide and age rating?
The official parents guide for Contact identifies it as PG. Our detailed advisory section above covers all content warnings for families.
What is the total runtime of Contact?
The total duration of Contact is 150 minutes, which is approximately 2h 30m long.
Best Movies to Watch if you liked Contact
How Contact Compares & Where it Ranks
Critic Reviews for Contact
I would readily admit this is one of my favourite science fiction films from the 90's. It's intelligent, well-acted and directed, and the special effects it has HELPS the story rather than IMPEDES it. Though she hasn't done much lately, either in the director's chair or acting, Jodie Foster is one of my favourite contemporary American actresses, and it's intriguing how her great talent's been utilized of late (ie., 'Elysium', and I'm still very mad at Spike Lee for having Christopher Plummer call her a 'cunt' in 'Inside Man'). Personally, I must admit that I myself have worried what other worlds' inhabitants would think of our civilization from the messages it might get from Earth. Though I thankfully haven't lost any sleep over it (I have 'Thumper' in the apartment above me to thank for that), as Led Zeppelin would say in the classic 'Stairway to Heaven', '...and it makes me wonder'. As what happens in most of these movies, it's rather anticlimactic once the different cultures meet. I'll say to my dying day that the most difficult thing to do in cinema is end a film. Here (unlike perfect sci-fi masterpieces, like '2001: A Space odyssey' or the more recent 'Children of Men') the decent but otherwise unspectacular ending makes me avoid a perfect rating here. But it's awfully close, worth both owning and rewatching, and provides fairly early evidence (which would come to bold fruition in 'Killer Joe') that Matthew McConaughey could actually act. It's also a tossup between this, 'Who Framed Roger Rabbit' and 'Back to the Future' for my favourite Zemeckis moment.
Random viewing but decided to finally watch after its been in my to-do bin for a while now. It didn't strike an emotional cord that I thought it would but Jodie Foster was quite good as were a respectable supporting cast. Never quite bought into the relationship between Foster and McConaughey though in fairness, probably due to the lack of screen time together (felt like maybe 15 minutes in a 2.5 hour movie). Some of the effects were alright for its time including integrating Clinton footage with the cast and the sci-fi specific visuals were alright. In the end, never was bored and found it to be entertaining. **4.0/5**
Early on in Contact a character is introduced who goes by the name “Kent Clark,” and for the remainder of the film I simply could not get over the fact that no one ever even mentions that he is named after Bizarro’s alter ego. My theory is that this is a figurative wink to the audience, letting us know beforehand what we otherwise discover at long last: that the events that are about to unfold are nothing but an elaborate prank on the audience and, possibly, the cast. This movie exists in a limbo somewhere in between Close Encounters of the Third Kind’s unabashed childlike wonder and Ad Astra’s adult ‘we’re alone in the Universe’ pragmatism – which is a polite way of saying that Contact is neither fish nor fowl; the moral of the story, in a nutshell, is that there might be intelligent extraterrestrial life, but then again, there might not be. Now, there is nothing inherently wrong with some ambiguity, but let’s consider this: untold amounts of money, physical resources and manpower are spent in the movie (but not by the movie, which prefers to cut corners and follow the unconvincing route of CGI – technology which, by the way, has not aged well nor improved a lot ever since), while we spent two and half hours of our precious time, and it’s all only to learn that, maybe, aliens don’t exist except in overly complicated hoaxes and the minds of impressionable people. That’s a lot of work to do as well as a long way to go to arrive at a conclusion that for many, myself included, is of the foregone variety. And even if the extraterrestrials in the film were real, they’d still be rather disappointing – though I shouldn’t speak in plural, since we only see one in the form of Dr. Ellie Arroway’s (Jodie Foster) long deceased father. The good news is that Ellie’s dad is played by David Morse, and you could certainly do a lot worse than that (and that goes for the rest of the ensemble cast); the bad news is that Ellie’s close encounter takes places on a beach that is supposedly meant to mimic a drawing she made when she was nine years old. This is bad because the drawing, which looks like an actual preteen might have drawn it, is a veritable Monet compared with the computer-generated beach where Ellie has a very anticlimactic meeting with the alien, who tells her nothing she, or for that matter we, didn’t already know or believe – which in turn doesn’t mean that the place itself has to be equally underwhelming; why not a real beach? Or, perhaps even better, a set made to resemble a real beach? This would doubtless speak to either Ellie’s imagination or the aliens’ handicraft much more than what we end up getting.
**A film that gets more right than it gets wrong, in a friendly tribute to Carl Sagan.** The theme of extraterrestrial life will always be a big deal for cinema, and is one of the most solid subjects within sci-fi. On the one hand, it has already given us a series of gems, but it also occasionally gives us films so bad that they are not worth the price of the plastic DVD. This film, for me, stays on positive ground: it gives us a solid story, intelligent enough to be believable, but it completely loses its way when it tries to introduce some action and shake things up a bit. One of the most positive aspects of this film is the credible and understandable way in which it talks about complex scientific subjects and concepts. There are high doses of science and if we take into account that Carl Sagan was one of the consultants who worked here (he died in the middle of filming and the film is dedicated to his memory), we can easily understand why it seems so solid. This is what happens when you listen to competent people, who know and who truly study. On a technical level, the film is reasonably within the standards of a sci-fi film from the late 90s with an already generous budget. However, despite some innovations such as the green screen and CGI effects, which were beginning to be implemented in the industry, not everything is really effective. Despite some high quality effects, the cinematography doesn't keep up, being excessively bland and uninteresting. I liked the focus on radio telescopes (we are more used to seeing optical telescopes, but listening to space is equally important) and it is incredible to see Arecibo again, one of the most cinematic and which very recently ceased to exist (which I greatly regret, by the way). Jodie Foster is a highly competent actress who deserves to be congratulated for all her effort. She is charismatic and strong enough to guarantee the leading role and the quality of her work only decreases towards the end, when she had to interact with the green screen, something that was not usual for actors at this time. We can still see the quite satisfactory work of actors such as John Hurt, David Morse, Tom Skerritt or James Woods. None of them have material capable of giving them substantial time or impact, but they all did the most they could with what they were given. Despite the relevance given, probably justified by the wage received, it was sad to see Matthew McConaughey in such a dull work, devoid of any substantial value. It seems that he was just making his money and wasn't interested in the project. The script has clearly positive points and others that, honestly, should have been eliminated. On the one hand, the scientific discussion and the theme of sending data through signals that can be captured by sound is highly relevant and looks good. I also liked seeing the difficulties that the main character experiences in obtaining financial and practical support for her research and overcoming the prejudices and lack of interest of her patrons. This is a picture of how much scientific research is currently going. From a certain point onwards, the film seeks to involve the Government and NASA, and things move towards a kind of bloated and histrionic action that is at odds with what had been done before. That was a mistake, but director Robert Zemeckis doesn't seem to learn from his mistakes, since it's not the first time it's happened in his films. Another error was the religious debate over alien life. This film did not call for this, the topic is left and should have been cut outright.
movieMx Verified
This review has been verified for accuracy and editorial quality by our senior cinematic analysts.
This analysis is compiled by our editorial experts using multi-source verification and audience sentiment data for maximum accuracy.









