4 ms·
I didn't read the book, but being boring is Tarkovsky's touch, so it sounds pretty safe to say it comes from him. Also people, please don't downvote parent. It
by oelmekki 9y ago
I didn't read the book, but being boring is Tarkovsky's touch, so it sounds pretty safe to say it comes from him.
Also people, please don't downvote parent. It's very fair to say this movie is boring and confusing, and I think it was the very point. Tarkovsky has this style of filming around supernatural / sf things but never actually showing them. Instead, he prefers to explore the anxiety they cause on humans, anxiety which he often represents through long waiting with deceptive conclusions, so I would say that feeling annoyed is quite what is expected from people watching them. It's art, not entertainment.
- bhangi 9y agoTarkovsky's works are generally demanding works of art. They are definitely slow paced and almost boring, but I've always found myself in a much more thoughtful frame of mind after watching his films. As for Solaris, it is worth reading the book as well as watching both versions of the film -- they ask and explore different questions. The book is about the nature of intelligence and life whereas the films are more about the human part of the equation -- what does it mean to be a human as opposed to be a "replicant"? Tarkovsky is slower paced, but IMHO encourages deep reflection. Soderbergh's version is definitely more watchable and is actually quite thoughtful by Hollywood standards.
- mark_l_watson 9y agoWe all like different things, which is good. Personally, I have watched the US version of Solaris about 6 or 7 times, and the Russian version twice, and read the book. A planet size consciousness, messing with people - great premise for a story.