3 ms·
I'm with you. It's a serious snoozefest. It is not cinema so I disagree about generational shift*. The problem is foundational. It's a novel, not a film. Interi
by eternalban 4y ago
I'm with you. It's a serious snoozefest. It is not cinema so I disagree about generational shift*. The problem is foundational. It's a novel, not a film. Interior space of man is not very cinematic from the outside. (Yes, I know few giants of film disagree.)
* p.s.: Take The Andromeda Strain (1971)
https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0066769/ https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0066769/
imho, an absolute gem of Sci-Fi that still works. This is also a 'slow pace' film, there is also a great deal of matter happening inside the characters' heads, but it still works as film. (hn bonus: CalTech and JPL are in the credits.)
- AlanYx 4y agoPart of the problem is that there are multiple slow "art sequences" in the film that seem to have no clear purpose and run counter to Tarkovsky's usual dislike of intentional symbolism in film. Some seem like they might have been intended as homages to other sci-fi films, especially Kubrick's 2001.
- eternalban 4y agoApparently he "disliked"* Kubrik's film: https://faroutmagazine.co.uk/andrei-tarkovsky-solaris-artistic-failure/ https://faroutmagazine.co.uk/andrei-tarkovsky-solaris-artist... * "absolutely hated" was also mentioned /g
- cubefox 4y agoWhich "art sequences" do you mean? The zero g part with Bach and Bruegel's "Hunters in the Snow" is one of the most iconic scenes in film history (in my book).