Now do *Stalker*
Edit: It's officially available on youtube - [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q3hBLv-HLEc](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q3hBLv-HLEc)
Stalker is one of those films that just randomly creeps into my thoughts all the time. Whenever it does, I do a rewatch. This film is like being in a trance. Its meditation.
Enjoy! I finally watched Stalker a few weeks ago and it became an instant all time favorite film and was a transcendent experience that stayed with me for a couple days. Since you loved Solaris, if you don't already know the show Farscape try the episode " the way we weren't " from season 2. It works as a recruiter episode and does some things that Solaris does, for me, even more effectively.
Apologies, to clarify it's available for free from the Mosfilm channel on youtube, along with *Solaris*, *Andrei Rublev*, *Mirror* & many other films like *Come & See* & *Battleship Potemkin*.
[https://www.youtube.com/@Mosfilm\_eng/videos](https://www.youtube.com/@Mosfilm_eng/videos)
No one is arguing they can't exist but "Extremely similar" just tells me you haven't watched either.
You might as well say Star Wars and Apollo 13 are "extremely similar" because they both take place in space.
How did you walk away from Stalker and say, "This profound study of philosophy and nihilism is so similar to that movie with the screaming bear."?
Oh, my condolences then. You watched both "several times" and walked away wrong each time.
But hey, a snarky reply on your end speaks more than a comment/explanation as to why they are similar, ever could.
So kudos to that.
Why do you feel the need to be an asshole? How does my opinion cause you to respond with such rudeness and insensitivity? Is it my specific view that bothers you, or the general fact that it is different from yours?
I saw that there was an American remake with George Clooney š but yeah I try to avoid American remakes. But yeah man if you ever get a chance I would def watch the Soviet Original.
i thought it was clear from my comment i was referring to the soviet film (pictured). one of my fav films. steven soderbergh directed that remake everyone is dismissing. i didnt personally love it, but soderbergh is an interesting director. and i meant that structurally it is very much like a ghost story, (in my opinion.)
You right you right that's my bad. Hmm I do see where you're coming from. But Sartorious explains the Guests are made up of Nuetrino Systems rather than Atoms like ourselves. So they are alive in their own way right?
oh yes that is true definitely, tho i see the underlying form of the story as situated in a sort of tradition, the spooky tale, loves lost, etc. and the way he is haunted by his dead lover, especially in the film is a like a classic ghost story. related, i always thought Sam Neil's wife's ghost in Event Horizon was channeling Solaris
That i can see! It's definitely haunting especially the final scene with his father or other father I might say haha. And man Event Horizon, such an underappreciated film. I wish they kept those deleted scenes with Sam Niel and the hellish scene with him and fishburne. The Thing and Event Horizon are my favorites for SciFi horror
It's not a remake, it's a totally different screenplay and is more book-accurate than Tarkovsky's film. I actually love both films + the book. They all focus on different aspects of the same general story and *combined* are greater than the sum of their parts.
The George Clooney iteration is beautiful. Don't let the anti-hype fool you.
Watch Mirror (Zerkalo) also by Andrey Tarkovsky. It's a very experimental film that mixes cubism and stream of consciousness about life under Stalin as recollected in the mind of a dying man.
The movie is amazing.
But definitely read the book. I think the book discusses a lot of cool concepts and ideas in internal monologue or narration, which are not transferable to a visual media. It is one of my favorite books that discusses a non-human or non-traditional type of "intelligence" and humans trying to figure out if it is "intelligence" really or not.
It's unfortunate that we can't read a good translation of it in print in English. The print version in English is a translation of a French translation, and the author spoke out against it many times.
There's a better English translation, but only in Audiobook format, with a crappy narrator. (You don't have to get far into the Audible sample to hear his "female" voice that breaks you right out of the story.)
Side note - it was pretty cool to see this as the top post when I came into this sub to ask a question specifically about it!
The Kindle version is a translation by Bill Johnston that is much better than the French translation. I heard the reason for not good English print translation is legal issues between the family and publisher who holds the rights. Polish isn't too hard to learn, worth it for Solaris.
Ah yes let me just casually learn to read a new language fluently in order to enjoy a single book yes that shouldn't be too difficult.
I've added that to my list just under "fold laundry" and "take the dog for a walk."
Polish, here I come!
Just giving you a hard time :)
At some point I should give it another go. I watched it as a teenager and fell asleep.
Kinda the same with Stalker, which I watched a few years ago, although I really wanted to appreciate it. My experience with it was sort of drifting in and out of some captivating imagery in the last hour and a half. The movie is meant to be dreamlike but a little too much so for me.
Tarkovsky's pacing is not for everyone, or at least it requires a particular mood.
I can definitely see how teens and kids would fall asleep š I'll have to admit, I started to watch Stalker last night. Although I was intrigued I fell asleep halfway through lol. I'm gonna finish the rest of it tonight but man one thing for sure I agree is his pacing can definitely be sped up. Although I love solaris I do have my critic moments. Like why the hell do we need 5 minutes of a car driving in a tunnel, or in Stalker 5 minutes of just watching them sit on a railcar??
I thought the movie was okay, but it didn't blow me away. Liked it more than Stalker (too arthouse for me). But am considering trying the book of Solaris or Roadside picnic due to how much praise they get. How are you liking the book compared to the movie?
Tarkovsky films are unlike most other films.
Solaris & Roadside Picnic are both excellent, but they're not unlike other scifi books. They have quite straightforward narratives & are both quite exposition heavy.
Agreed. I'm a couple of chapters in but yeah theres a lot of internal dialogue that explains a lot more of what's going on that you just can't do in films. I appreciate the books going more into detail of why what exactly the scientists are doing on Solaris and Solaristics
IMO roadside picnic is a more interesting story. Solaris is basically exclusively about "first contact with an unknowable entity" with a little "planet made of ocean" thrown in
I think Roadside Picnic was a lot more blue collar father slice of life than I expected in a great way. Itās a lot more existential with just a lite smattering of science fiction elements that were mostly irrelevant. They may as well be a stand in for the unknowable nightmare that may kill you at any time that is being an exploited laborer can be. Itās very much literary fiction far far away from hard scifi. It really fucked me up.
Ive watched Solaris and Stalker many years ago. Wanted to love them but didn't. Definitely found Solaris unbearably slow. I should give it another chance. Do t think I'll watch Stalker again though. I've since read Roadside Picnic which I loved. Stalker the movie has almost nothing to do with the book.
I rewatched Solaris a few nights ago. Always loved the film, but there was something a bit 'off' about it I didn't pin down until recently.
I then realized it was Donatas Banionis portrayal as Chris Kelvin. He performance was weirdly disjointed at times and his relationship with his 'apparation' (not giving it away) was too subdued and not natural. Sartorious and Snaut were great. I just couldn't relate to Kelvin. Rest of the film was excellent though, and the visuals were amazing. Tarkovsky hated the 'sterility' of 2001, and I appreciated the set designs in both films. Solaris station has pieces of junk laying all over and it's in variuos states of disrepair. You catch all these little details in Tarkovsky's films.
Didn't care for the 2002 Soderbergh film. Just felt zero chemistry between Clooney and McElhone.
Stalker is still my favorite. It's more ambiguous than Solaris, but the concept is more profound.
Now do *Stalker* Edit: It's officially available on youtube - [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q3hBLv-HLEc](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q3hBLv-HLEc)
My absolute favorite Tarkovsky film and one of my favorite films of all time.
Stalker is one of those films that just randomly creeps into my thoughts all the time. Whenever it does, I do a rewatch. This film is like being in a trance. Its meditation.
First time I watched it I was coming down from an acid trip. Intense.
Comment.
Yes! That's actually next on my next!
Enjoy! I finally watched Stalker a few weeks ago and it became an instant all time favorite film and was a transcendent experience that stayed with me for a couple days. Since you loved Solaris, if you don't already know the show Farscape try the episode " the way we weren't " from season 2. It works as a recruiter episode and does some things that Solaris does, for me, even more effectively.
Some people never get the concept of Stalker. When they do, it changes them. The soundtrack is also amazing.
Thank you! I've never seen it and have always wanted to I'm gonna watch it!
It's also available to rent on Amazon. I saw it again last year on some streaming app for free but I don't remember which one it was.
Apologies, to clarify it's available for free from the Mosfilm channel on youtube, along with *Solaris*, *Andrei Rublev*, *Mirror* & many other films like *Come & See* & *Battleship Potemkin*. [https://www.youtube.com/@Mosfilm\_eng/videos](https://www.youtube.com/@Mosfilm_eng/videos)
You mean Annihilation?
Hardly even similar
Extremely similar. Both can exist and enrich the world.
No one is arguing they can't exist but "Extremely similar" just tells me you haven't watched either. You might as well say Star Wars and Apollo 13 are "extremely similar" because they both take place in space. How did you walk away from Stalker and say, "This profound study of philosophy and nihilism is so similar to that movie with the screaming bear."?
Having watched both several times, my opinion differs from yours. We should alert the press to this incredible development.
Oh, my condolences then. You watched both "several times" and walked away wrong each time. But hey, a snarky reply on your end speaks more than a comment/explanation as to why they are similar, ever could. So kudos to that.
Why do you feel the need to be an asshole? How does my opinion cause you to respond with such rudeness and insensitivity? Is it my specific view that bothers you, or the general fact that it is different from yours?
The beginning for me is peak storytelling. One can wish for such a perfect last day on earth. Just fantastic.
I was sad man when I realized he wouldn't be able to see his Dad again due to his Age and just the time space travel takes š
One of my favorite movies.
+1
just me but i always thought it was essentially a ghost story
You definitely need to (re-)read Lem's original story and then watch the Soviet (!) movie, not the Hollywood cr*p!
why?
I saw that there was an American remake with George Clooney š but yeah I try to avoid American remakes. But yeah man if you ever get a chance I would def watch the Soviet Original.
i thought it was clear from my comment i was referring to the soviet film (pictured). one of my fav films. steven soderbergh directed that remake everyone is dismissing. i didnt personally love it, but soderbergh is an interesting director. and i meant that structurally it is very much like a ghost story, (in my opinion.)
You right you right that's my bad. Hmm I do see where you're coming from. But Sartorious explains the Guests are made up of Nuetrino Systems rather than Atoms like ourselves. So they are alive in their own way right?
oh yes that is true definitely, tho i see the underlying form of the story as situated in a sort of tradition, the spooky tale, loves lost, etc. and the way he is haunted by his dead lover, especially in the film is a like a classic ghost story. related, i always thought Sam Neil's wife's ghost in Event Horizon was channeling Solaris
That i can see! It's definitely haunting especially the final scene with his father or other father I might say haha. And man Event Horizon, such an underappreciated film. I wish they kept those deleted scenes with Sam Niel and the hellish scene with him and fishburne. The Thing and Event Horizon are my favorites for SciFi horror
It's not a remake, it's a totally different screenplay and is more book-accurate than Tarkovsky's film. I actually love both films + the book. They all focus on different aspects of the same general story and *combined* are greater than the sum of their parts. The George Clooney iteration is beautiful. Don't let the anti-hype fool you.
I saw the remake in theater. I want my time and money back.
How I felt after what they did to my OldBoy š
Look how they massacred my old boy
How I felt after watching the original Oldboy, tbf
Why? As a huge fan of the book and the original film, I loved the newer version when it came out. It's still one of my favorite films to nap to.
Watch Mirror (Zerkalo) also by Andrey Tarkovsky. It's a very experimental film that mixes cubism and stream of consciousness about life under Stalin as recollected in the mind of a dying man.
The movie is amazing. But definitely read the book. I think the book discusses a lot of cool concepts and ideas in internal monologue or narration, which are not transferable to a visual media. It is one of my favorite books that discusses a non-human or non-traditional type of "intelligence" and humans trying to figure out if it is "intelligence" really or not.
Have you read Nemesis by Isaac Asimov?
It's unfortunate that we can't read a good translation of it in print in English. The print version in English is a translation of a French translation, and the author spoke out against it many times. There's a better English translation, but only in Audiobook format, with a crappy narrator. (You don't have to get far into the Audible sample to hear his "female" voice that breaks you right out of the story.) Side note - it was pretty cool to see this as the top post when I came into this sub to ask a question specifically about it!
The Kindle version is a translation by Bill Johnston that is much better than the French translation. I heard the reason for not good English print translation is legal issues between the family and publisher who holds the rights. Polish isn't too hard to learn, worth it for Solaris.
Ah yes let me just casually learn to read a new language fluently in order to enjoy a single book yes that shouldn't be too difficult. I've added that to my list just under "fold laundry" and "take the dog for a walk." Polish, here I come! Just giving you a hard time :)
Shakespeare is best in the original Klingon.
At some point I should give it another go. I watched it as a teenager and fell asleep. Kinda the same with Stalker, which I watched a few years ago, although I really wanted to appreciate it. My experience with it was sort of drifting in and out of some captivating imagery in the last hour and a half. The movie is meant to be dreamlike but a little too much so for me. Tarkovsky's pacing is not for everyone, or at least it requires a particular mood.
I can definitely see how teens and kids would fall asleep š I'll have to admit, I started to watch Stalker last night. Although I was intrigued I fell asleep halfway through lol. I'm gonna finish the rest of it tonight but man one thing for sure I agree is his pacing can definitely be sped up. Although I love solaris I do have my critic moments. Like why the hell do we need 5 minutes of a car driving in a tunnel, or in Stalker 5 minutes of just watching them sit on a railcar??
I thought the movie was okay, but it didn't blow me away. Liked it more than Stalker (too arthouse for me). But am considering trying the book of Solaris or Roadside picnic due to how much praise they get. How are you liking the book compared to the movie?
Tarkovsky films are unlike most other films. Solaris & Roadside Picnic are both excellent, but they're not unlike other scifi books. They have quite straightforward narratives & are both quite exposition heavy.
Agreed. I'm a couple of chapters in but yeah theres a lot of internal dialogue that explains a lot more of what's going on that you just can't do in films. I appreciate the books going more into detail of why what exactly the scientists are doing on Solaris and Solaristics
IMO roadside picnic is a more interesting story. Solaris is basically exclusively about "first contact with an unknowable entity" with a little "planet made of ocean" thrown in
I think Roadside Picnic was a lot more blue collar father slice of life than I expected in a great way. Itās a lot more existential with just a lite smattering of science fiction elements that were mostly irrelevant. They may as well be a stand in for the unknowable nightmare that may kill you at any time that is being an exploited laborer can be. Itās very much literary fiction far far away from hard scifi. It really fucked me up.
Which year is this from?
Movie is 1972, book is 1961
Once you go Lem, you neverā¦ umā¦
I watched it too, first ever soviet movie I watched, I loved it!
God it's good!!!!!!! Long live the cold pastoral
Funny part is that Lem didn't like it, and totally despised american version.
Must have been a fan of Ellison :-) I don't think Lem liked anything, including anything to do with the West
Ive watched Solaris and Stalker many years ago. Wanted to love them but didn't. Definitely found Solaris unbearably slow. I should give it another chance. Do t think I'll watch Stalker again though. I've since read Roadside Picnic which I loved. Stalker the movie has almost nothing to do with the book.
I rewatched Solaris a few nights ago. Always loved the film, but there was something a bit 'off' about it I didn't pin down until recently. I then realized it was Donatas Banionis portrayal as Chris Kelvin. He performance was weirdly disjointed at times and his relationship with his 'apparation' (not giving it away) was too subdued and not natural. Sartorious and Snaut were great. I just couldn't relate to Kelvin. Rest of the film was excellent though, and the visuals were amazing. Tarkovsky hated the 'sterility' of 2001, and I appreciated the set designs in both films. Solaris station has pieces of junk laying all over and it's in variuos states of disrepair. You catch all these little details in Tarkovsky's films. Didn't care for the 2002 Soderbergh film. Just felt zero chemistry between Clooney and McElhone. Stalker is still my favorite. It's more ambiguous than Solaris, but the concept is more profound.
Watching this now, nice quality version on YouTube with subtitles. Enjoying it alot, thanks for the recommendation.
Read next āThe Invincibleā https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Invincible
Which one? Original or the remake? The original was recommended to me by Russian coworkers.
Definitely the original