8 ms·

Tarkovsky Films Free Online (2010)

231 points by nsns 13y ago

Jun8 13y ago
Watching Stalker may forever alter your taste in cinematography, it's so beautiful. Solaris is also good (watching it back to back with the Clooney remake is an interesting experience); Lem pretty much hated all three adaptations (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solaris_(novel) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solaris_(novel)), an adaptation that reflects the alienness that he wanted to underline would be an interesting movie. You might want to think about what repressed personification would confront you if you had traveled to Solaris.
- x0054 13y ago
  Both Tarkovsky and Soderbergh have almost completely missed the point of Solaris, the book. The book is about communication, or failure to do so. It's a great book to read, highly recommend.
  - pavelrub 13y ago
    Tarkovsky made films about what he cared about and what interested him. His Solaris wasn't really meant to be about Lem's book, just as his Stalker isn't about Roadside Picnic. Those books simply offer a setting where he could explore his own ideas.
    - zoul 13y ago
      Exactly. It’s a long time since I have seen Solaris, but I remember it as a film about human deficiencies, and especially the feeling of guilt, greatly amplified by the encounter with some “superior consciousness”. For me that’s a very interesting topic, very good angle, even if very different from what’s in the book.
    - sanoli 13y ago
      I don't know, this might be the actual reason... or it's just that he couldn't really put the book into film. It's very difficult to do so, some may say it's just impossible since the mediums are so different. But your answer has been used before by people defending this or that director, and sometimes it just seems like a cop out, "Oh, he didn't really care about the book". P.S. Sorry if I sound a bit harsh. Not my intention.
      - Jehar 13y ago
        Can I attempt to clarify the perceived intention of Tarkovsky with his novel adaptation? I wouldn't frame the films as evidence that he didn't care about the source material or what it attempted to say. Rather, it seems to me that these films are his responses to the novels, or at least meditations on what the novels said to Tarkovsky. Another factor is that film and literature are very different languages, and aiming for a 1:1 translation can often result in a work that is missing pieces that were only communicable in the original. If we acknowledge that any given novel will have aspects of it that are un-filmable (interior monologue, relative time dilation, for simple examples), then it is the job of the director to re-create the spirit of those aspects while making them work for his media. As a result, the director cannot help but inject his own views and thoughts into the work. Nobody embodies this more strongly to me than Tarkovsky, with Kubrick as a close second. In fact, King's own attempt (shudder) at filming The Shining may prove this point all by itself; it's apparent that King doesn't understand the medium he was attempting to use.
  - marquis 13y ago
    I disagree with you on that. While I haven't seen Soderbergh's version (I am too much in love with T's) I think the idea of communication is deeply embedded: he's saying, we can't communicate with ourselves - how could we possibly communicate with an alien non-humanoid entity? I think he makes that really clear. For anyone who hasn't watched his films: take an afternoon you have nothing to do and slow down. It's not a passive experience and you need to relax to take it all in. Amazing stuff that I can't imagine not having in my life, plus all the great directors he influenced. Him and Bergman == life of film.
- 10098 13y ago
  I watched Stalker years after reading the novel it was based on. It was the first Tarkovsky film I watched and I didn't even know who Tarkovsky was at the time. My thoughts immediately after watching it were "wow, this is bad, the book is so much better", and then I found out that this is actually a critically acclaimed movie. I don't get it.
  - CamperBob2 13y ago
    That's a common reaction among people who see a Kubrick film for the first time as well. The best (only) advice is to watch it again, in context with other films from the same era.
- RuCrazy 13y ago
  thank you
Jd 13y ago
Tarkovsky is my favorite 20th century film director bar none. Here's are some reasons why and why you might also be interested in his films: (1) He described his art as poetry applied to cinema or "sculpting in time," a fundamentally different conceptual idea of the cinematic art that he went to a great length to clarify (in a book of the same name, highly recommended). (2) His use of color is incredible. Some films, especially stalker, are near black and white with incredibly vibrant and poignant uses of green. This is a bit like Bergman at his best, but even better. (3) He was deeply religious in a "mystical" sense, with a lot of respect for past traditions, but not in a dogmatic sense and with appreciation for both Christian and pagan elements (see Andrei Rublev for both aspects) (4) He knew other European traditions extremely well. Ivan's childhood is a meditation on the war with Germany, including shots of Duehrer's prints. Nostalgia involves his time in Italy traditions including Madonna cults and important artwork. Sacrifice has Shakespearean references, Rembrandt, Japanese samurai, and magical traditions. In general, his films are full of long shots of important pieces of Renaissance art with profound meaning. (5) He spent a lot of time thinking about the integration of technology and the rest of life. Solaris is the futuristic spaceship version of this. Stalker is the apocalyptic version of this. I think in a century Tarkovsky will rightly be credited as inventing a whole new type of cinema, his way of approaching it was fundamentally in tune with a "mystical" sense and integrated with other forms of visual art (i.e. the long gaze you have at a painting), and the punctuated, rhythmic reading of poetry.
- kaeluka 13y ago
  "Sculpting in time" -- what a great expression. The lorry scene in stalker is what I think of when I hear that.
- zbyszek 13y ago
  "Sculpting in time" is also the title of Tarkovsky's book which I haven't read, but I now have a new impetus to do so. Interesting about colour - perhaps a "less is more" thing. The end of Andrei Rublev is breathtaking, for instance. I saw Mirror three times at the cinema, and there are not many flicks I can say that about.
- wooptoo 13y ago
update 13y ago
Excerpt [1] Tarkovsky's "Nostalgia"[2]: ‘What are you reading?’ Gorchakov asks, unexpectedly. ‘Tarkovsky ... Poems by Arseny Tarkovsky.’ Eugenia looks a little taken aback, as though caught red-handed. ‘In Russian?’ ‘No, it’s a translation ... A pretty good one ...’ ‘Chuck them out.’ ‘What for? ... Actually, the person who translated them, he’s an amazing poet, in his own right ...’ she says, as though trying to justify herself. ‘Poetry can’t be translated ... Art in general is untranslatable ...’ [1] http://www.stanford.edu/dept/DLCL/cgi-bin/web/files/skakov_the_im-possible_translation_of_nostalgia.pdf http://www.stanford.edu/dept/DLCL/cgi-bin/web/files/skakov_t... [2] http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0086022/ http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0086022/
dharma1 13y ago
still waiting for a high quality HD transfer of Stalker...
- mratzloff 13y ago
  Yes! I'm pretty surprised Criterion hasn't released one. By the way, just a few days ago Kino released a Blu-Ray edition of Nostalghia. http://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/B00GA9F2PI http://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/B00GA9F2PI
  - wahnfrieden 13y ago
    There are also blurays of OFFRET, ZERKALO, RUBLEV, IVAN, SOLYARIS. Wow, only just realized STALKER is the only one missing. Oh, and the fantastic VOYAGE IN TIME! This one is often overlooked, but it's in fact directed by Tarkovsky and has some beautiful shots. It's a documentary of some of the processes in making NOSTALGHIA.
- wahnfrieden 13y ago
  You'll have more luck keeping an eye out for 35mm screenings near you. I saw it on 35mm a few weeks ago, the picture and color was stunning. Much better than any bluray release would be :) I wonder why there's no bluray, it might be caught up in some licensing hell. There's not even a good US domestic DVD.
  - wahnfrieden 13y ago
    More concretely, if you live in/near NYC, follow http://screenslate.com http://screenslate.com - we get a wealth of repertory film screenings all the time. I've managed to see Andrei Rublev, The Mirror, Nostalgia (twice!), and Stalker all in 35mm over the past couple years.
melancholy 13y ago
Apropos of nothing in particular, but just because I love this Akira Kurosawa anecdote -- "Tarkovsky was sitting in the corner of the screening room watching the film with me, but he got up as soon as the film was over, and looked at me with a shy smile. I said to him, ‘It’s very good. It’s a frightening movie.’ He seemed embarrassed, but smiled happily. Then the two of us went to a film union restaurant and toasted with Vodka. Tarkovsky, who does not usually drink, got completely drunk and cut off the speakers at the restaurant, then began singing the theme of Seven Samurai at the top of his lungs. I joined in, eager to keep up. At that moment, I was very happy to be on Earth.” That's wonderful. Stalker changed my life, it's a wonderful film. Do watch it.
Cyph0n 13y ago
I have only watched "Solyaris", but I believe I can say that Tarkovsky is one of the greatest directors who ever lived. I read the novel after watching the film, and while the film missed a few of the core themes of Lem's masterful piece of sci-fi, it still was able to capture the essence of the planetary being that is Solaris. Stalker has been on my watch-list for quite some time now, but I haven't got around to watching it. Maybe tonight?
xefer 13y ago
I can recommend the book: "Zona: A Book About a Film About a Journey to a Room" http://amazon.com/o/asin/0307390314 http://amazon.com/o/asin/0307390314 which is a short, personal appreciation-cum-memoir of Tarkovsky's "Stalker"
avodonosov 13y ago
Bad translation. Some phrases in subtitles have opposite meaning; or another character starts speaking, but subtitles join his words to the sentence said by the previous speaker. E.g. stalker says "идите" (go away), translation says "come with me"
- 10098 13y ago
  The funny thing is "идите" can mean both "go away" and "come with me" depending on the context and intonation. They should've simply translated it as "go!".
  - avodonosov 13y ago
    Without context it is just "go", and that would be an appropriate translation too. He meant "go (away)" and by no means "come with me".
eswat 13y ago
I recommend reading Roadside Picnic[1] if you’ve watched Stalker (movie is based on the book). There is also the S.T.A.L.K.E.R. video game series[2] that’s loosely-based on both. Also recommended if you’re into post-apoc and want a different perspective on it than western video games. [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roadside_Picnic http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roadside_Picnic [2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S.T.A.L.K.E.R._(series) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S.T.A.L.K.E.R._(series)
- mratzloff 13y ago
  Roadside Picnic is one of my favorites. I've been wanting to watch the Tartovsky film (Stalker) but had been waiting for a Blu-ray version. This works, too! (Never touched the game, but the reviews look good. Unfortunately I'm terrible at FPS games, so I doubt I'll ever play this.)
  - ijk 13y ago
    There are a couple of articles you might find interesting, that build on some of the links between the film, the book, and the games: http://www.nybooks.com/blogs/nyrblog/2012/may/01/zone-chernobyl-tarkovsky-video-game/ http://www.nybooks.com/blogs/nyrblog/2012/may/01/zone-cherno... http://bldgblog.blogspot.com/2010/05/ghosts-of-future-borrowing-architecture.html http://bldgblog.blogspot.com/2010/05/ghosts-of-future-borrow...
Cbasedlifeform 13y ago
Nostalghia is one of my favourite films ever. The scene with the shadow of the rain on the villa walls… poetry in motion.
- rdtsc 13y ago
  Give The Mirror a try. It is highly autobiographical so it is probably not his most well known or well liked film but its cinematic techniques are some of the best. Poetry in motion is how I can best describe it as well.
DanBC 13y ago
"This video is only available on WiFi" - wtf YouTube?
udev 13y ago
Watching a Tarkovsky movie is a very interesting experience. People that never did are in for a treat. All you need are good subtitles. One might say that a movie is a movie, a sequence of images, and it can't be that much different. Yet, there is that feeling, that unmistakable sensory discovery that you make, when watching a movie like Stalker, or Mirror. You will find yourself in an unusual, novel, state of mind, and will witness your thoughts wandering on new territory. I have, as many others here, difficulty putting these things into words. But that is for the better, as you should see for yourself.
pipy 13y ago
There are some good Russian movies that are somewhat unknown to the Western public. For example, I wonder if any of you have seen these: Georgiy Daneliya. "Kin-dza-dza!" (1986) [1] Larisa Shepitko. "The Ascent" (1977) [2] Leonid Maryagin. "Public enemy - Bukharin" (1990) [3] Aleksey German. "Twenty Days Without War" (1977) [4] Aleksey German. "Khrustalyov, My Car!" (1998) [5] Stanislav Rostotskiy. "A zori zdes tikhie" (1972) [6] Mikhail Kalatozov. "True Friends" (1954) [7] Mikhail Kozakov. "Pokrov Gates" (1982) [8] Georgiy Daneliya. "Osenniy marafon" (1979) [9] Elem Klimov. "Come and See" (1985) [10] Victor Ginzburg. "Generation П" (2011) [11] Sergei Gerasimov. "The Journalist" (1967) [12] (this one is Polish) Juliusz Machulski. "Sexmission" (1984) [13] (also Polish) Krzysztof Kieslowski. "The Decalogue" (1989) [14] [1] http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0091341/ http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0091341/ [2] http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0075404/ http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0075404/ [3] http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0100891/ http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0100891/ [4] http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0074447/ http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0074447/ [5] http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0156701/ http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0156701/ [6] http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0068161/ http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0068161/ [7] http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0047650/ http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0047650/ [8] http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0083465/ http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0083465/ [9] http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0079679/ http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0079679/ [10] http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0091251/ http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0091251/ [11] http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0459748/ http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0459748/ [12] http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0062524/ http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0062524/ [13] http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0088083/ http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0088083/ [14] http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0092337/ http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0092337/
- wahnfrieden 13y ago
  I just watched German's MY FRIEND, IVAN LAPSHIN a few days ago, it was excellent. Highly anticipating his final one, HARD TO BE A GOD..! I'll have to watch MY CAR soon. Sokurov (mentored by Tarkovsky) can be good, though he's quite mainstream as well. There's actually a STALKER parody by some other Russian, I forget the name.
  - pipy 13y ago
    Thanks for a reply! Aleksey German is a true genius. IMO, one of the greatest directors ever lived. I've watched all of his works. "Khrustalyov, My Car!" is a true masterpiece, a film that is of great depth. But, unlike his other works, with "Khrustalyov, My Car!" you need to know quite a bit about Stalin era to feel it's completeness and integrity. There is nothing random in it. I recommend you to watch "Public enemy - Bukharin" by Leonid Maryagin. It is an amazing film, about the rise of the Stalin's terror. Sadly, it is not widely known. You might want to check out the list of historical personalities mentioned there before watching. There are some truly kafkaesque moments in it. Larisa Shepitko is also a genius. One of my greatest passions is the trilogy by Sergei Gerasimov ("The Journalist"[1], "U ozera"[2], "To Love a Person"[3] ), the ones that he has not only directed, but wrote scripts for. However, I feel that these films might appear cryptic for people that haven't lived in Soviet Union. [1] http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0062524/ http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0062524/ [2] http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0065140/ http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0065140/ [3] http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0171498/ http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0171498/

231 points by nsns 13y ago

Jun8 13y ago

Watching Stalker may forever alter your taste in cinematography, it's so beautiful. Solaris is also good (watching it back to back with the Clooney remake is an interesting experience); Lem pretty much hated all three adaptations (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solaris_(novel) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solaris_(novel)), an adaptation that reflects the alienness that he wanted to underline would be an interesting movie. You might want to think about what repressed personification would confront you if you had traveled to Solaris.

x0054 13y ago
Both Tarkovsky and Soderbergh have almost completely missed the point of Solaris, the book. The book is about communication, or failure to do so. It's a great book to read, highly recommend.
- pavelrub 13y ago
  Tarkovsky made films about what he cared about and what interested him. His Solaris wasn't really meant to be about Lem's book, just as his Stalker isn't about Roadside Picnic. Those books simply offer a setting where he could explore his own ideas.
  - zoul 13y ago
    Exactly. It’s a long time since I have seen Solaris, but I remember it as a film about human deficiencies, and especially the feeling of guilt, greatly amplified by the encounter with some “superior consciousness”. For me that’s a very interesting topic, very good angle, even if very different from what’s in the book.
  - sanoli 13y ago
    I don't know, this might be the actual reason... or it's just that he couldn't really put the book into film. It's very difficult to do so, some may say it's just impossible since the mediums are so different. But your answer has been used before by people defending this or that director, and sometimes it just seems like a cop out, "Oh, he didn't really care about the book". P.S. Sorry if I sound a bit harsh. Not my intention.
    - Jehar 13y ago
      Can I attempt to clarify the perceived intention of Tarkovsky with his novel adaptation? I wouldn't frame the films as evidence that he didn't care about the source material or what it attempted to say. Rather, it seems to me that these films are his responses to the novels, or at least meditations on what the novels said to Tarkovsky. Another factor is that film and literature are very different languages, and aiming for a 1:1 translation can often result in a work that is missing pieces that were only communicable in the original. If we acknowledge that any given novel will have aspects of it that are un-filmable (interior monologue, relative time dilation, for simple examples), then it is the job of the director to re-create the spirit of those aspects while making them work for his media. As a result, the director cannot help but inject his own views and thoughts into the work. Nobody embodies this more strongly to me than Tarkovsky, with Kubrick as a close second. In fact, King's own attempt (shudder) at filming The Shining may prove this point all by itself; it's apparent that King doesn't understand the medium he was attempting to use.
- marquis 13y ago
  I disagree with you on that. While I haven't seen Soderbergh's version (I am too much in love with T's) I think the idea of communication is deeply embedded: he's saying, we can't communicate with ourselves - how could we possibly communicate with an alien non-humanoid entity? I think he makes that really clear. For anyone who hasn't watched his films: take an afternoon you have nothing to do and slow down. It's not a passive experience and you need to relax to take it all in. Amazing stuff that I can't imagine not having in my life, plus all the great directors he influenced. Him and Bergman == life of film.
10098 13y ago
I watched Stalker years after reading the novel it was based on. It was the first Tarkovsky film I watched and I didn't even know who Tarkovsky was at the time. My thoughts immediately after watching it were "wow, this is bad, the book is so much better", and then I found out that this is actually a critically acclaimed movie. I don't get it.
- CamperBob2 13y ago
  That's a common reaction among people who see a Kubrick film for the first time as well. The best (only) advice is to watch it again, in context with other films from the same era.
RuCrazy 13y ago
thank you

Jd 13y ago

Tarkovsky is my favorite 20th century film director bar none. Here's are some reasons why and why you might also be interested in his films: (1) He described his art as poetry applied to cinema or "sculpting in time," a fundamentally different conceptual idea of the cinematic art that he went to a great length to clarify (in a book of the same name, highly recommended). (2) His use of color is incredible. Some films, especially stalker, are near black and white with incredibly vibrant and poignant uses of green. This is a bit like Bergman at his best, but even better. (3) He was deeply religious in a "mystical" sense, with a lot of respect for past traditions, but not in a dogmatic sense and with appreciation for both Christian and pagan elements (see Andrei Rublev for both aspects) (4) He knew other European traditions extremely well. Ivan's childhood is a meditation on the war with Germany, including shots of Duehrer's prints. Nostalgia involves his time in Italy traditions including Madonna cults and important artwork. Sacrifice has Shakespearean references, Rembrandt, Japanese samurai, and magical traditions. In general, his films are full of long shots of important pieces of Renaissance art with profound meaning. (5) He spent a lot of time thinking about the integration of technology and the rest of life. Solaris is the futuristic spaceship version of this. Stalker is the apocalyptic version of this. I think in a century Tarkovsky will rightly be credited as inventing a whole new type of cinema, his way of approaching it was fundamentally in tune with a "mystical" sense and integrated with other forms of visual art (i.e. the long gaze you have at a painting), and the punctuated, rhythmic reading of poetry.

kaeluka 13y ago
"Sculpting in time" -- what a great expression. The lorry scene in stalker is what I think of when I hear that.
zbyszek 13y ago
"Sculpting in time" is also the title of Tarkovsky's book which I haven't read, but I now have a new impetus to do so. Interesting about colour - perhaps a "less is more" thing. The end of Andrei Rublev is breathtaking, for instance. I saw Mirror three times at the cinema, and there are not many flicks I can say that about.
wooptoo 13y ago

update 13y ago

Excerpt [1] Tarkovsky's "Nostalgia"[2]: ‘What are you reading?’ Gorchakov asks, unexpectedly. ‘Tarkovsky ... Poems by Arseny Tarkovsky.’ Eugenia looks a little taken aback, as though caught red-handed. ‘In Russian?’ ‘No, it’s a translation ... A pretty good one ...’ ‘Chuck them out.’ ‘What for? ... Actually, the person who translated them, he’s an amazing poet, in his own right ...’ she says, as though trying to justify herself. ‘Poetry can’t be translated ... Art in general is untranslatable ...’ [1] http://www.stanford.edu/dept/DLCL/cgi-bin/web/files/skakov_the_im-possible_translation_of_nostalgia.pdf http://www.stanford.edu/dept/DLCL/cgi-bin/web/files/skakov_t... [2] http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0086022/ http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0086022/

dharma1 13y ago

still waiting for a high quality HD transfer of Stalker...

mratzloff 13y ago
Yes! I'm pretty surprised Criterion hasn't released one. By the way, just a few days ago Kino released a Blu-Ray edition of Nostalghia. http://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/B00GA9F2PI http://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/B00GA9F2PI
- wahnfrieden 13y ago
  There are also blurays of OFFRET, ZERKALO, RUBLEV, IVAN, SOLYARIS. Wow, only just realized STALKER is the only one missing. Oh, and the fantastic VOYAGE IN TIME! This one is often overlooked, but it's in fact directed by Tarkovsky and has some beautiful shots. It's a documentary of some of the processes in making NOSTALGHIA.
wahnfrieden 13y ago
You'll have more luck keeping an eye out for 35mm screenings near you. I saw it on 35mm a few weeks ago, the picture and color was stunning. Much better than any bluray release would be :) I wonder why there's no bluray, it might be caught up in some licensing hell. There's not even a good US domestic DVD.
- wahnfrieden 13y ago
  More concretely, if you live in/near NYC, follow http://screenslate.com http://screenslate.com - we get a wealth of repertory film screenings all the time. I've managed to see Andrei Rublev, The Mirror, Nostalgia (twice!), and Stalker all in 35mm over the past couple years.

melancholy 13y ago

Apropos of nothing in particular, but just because I love this Akira Kurosawa anecdote -- "Tarkovsky was sitting in the corner of the screening room watching the film with me, but he got up as soon as the film was over, and looked at me with a shy smile. I said to him, ‘It’s very good. It’s a frightening movie.’ He seemed embarrassed, but smiled happily. Then the two of us went to a film union restaurant and toasted with Vodka. Tarkovsky, who does not usually drink, got completely drunk and cut off the speakers at the restaurant, then began singing the theme of Seven Samurai at the top of his lungs. I joined in, eager to keep up. At that moment, I was very happy to be on Earth.” That's wonderful. Stalker changed my life, it's a wonderful film. Do watch it.

Cyph0n 13y ago

I have only watched "Solyaris", but I believe I can say that Tarkovsky is one of the greatest directors who ever lived. I read the novel after watching the film, and while the film missed a few of the core themes of Lem's masterful piece of sci-fi, it still was able to capture the essence of the planetary being that is Solaris. Stalker has been on my watch-list for quite some time now, but I haven't got around to watching it. Maybe tonight?

xefer 13y ago

I can recommend the book: "Zona: A Book About a Film About a Journey to a Room" http://amazon.com/o/asin/0307390314 http://amazon.com/o/asin/0307390314 which is a short, personal appreciation-cum-memoir of Tarkovsky's "Stalker"

avodonosov 13y ago

Bad translation. Some phrases in subtitles have opposite meaning; or another character starts speaking, but subtitles join his words to the sentence said by the previous speaker. E.g. stalker says "идите" (go away), translation says "come with me"

10098 13y ago
The funny thing is "идите" can mean both "go away" and "come with me" depending on the context and intonation. They should've simply translated it as "go!".
- avodonosov 13y ago
  Without context it is just "go", and that would be an appropriate translation too. He meant "go (away)" and by no means "come with me".

eswat 13y ago

I recommend reading Roadside Picnic[1] if you’ve watched Stalker (movie is based on the book). There is also the S.T.A.L.K.E.R. video game series[2] that’s loosely-based on both. Also recommended if you’re into post-apoc and want a different perspective on it than western video games. [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roadside_Picnic http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roadside_Picnic [2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S.T.A.L.K.E.R._(series) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S.T.A.L.K.E.R._(series)

mratzloff 13y ago
Roadside Picnic is one of my favorites. I've been wanting to watch the Tartovsky film (Stalker) but had been waiting for a Blu-ray version. This works, too! (Never touched the game, but the reviews look good. Unfortunately I'm terrible at FPS games, so I doubt I'll ever play this.)
- ijk 13y ago
  There are a couple of articles you might find interesting, that build on some of the links between the film, the book, and the games: http://www.nybooks.com/blogs/nyrblog/2012/may/01/zone-chernobyl-tarkovsky-video-game/ http://www.nybooks.com/blogs/nyrblog/2012/may/01/zone-cherno... http://bldgblog.blogspot.com/2010/05/ghosts-of-future-borrowing-architecture.html http://bldgblog.blogspot.com/2010/05/ghosts-of-future-borrow...

Cbasedlifeform 13y ago

Nostalghia is one of my favourite films ever. The scene with the shadow of the rain on the villa walls… poetry in motion.

rdtsc 13y ago
Give The Mirror a try. It is highly autobiographical so it is probably not his most well known or well liked film but its cinematic techniques are some of the best. Poetry in motion is how I can best describe it as well.

DanBC 13y ago

"This video is only available on WiFi" - wtf YouTube?

udev 13y ago

Watching a Tarkovsky movie is a very interesting experience. People that never did are in for a treat. All you need are good subtitles. One might say that a movie is a movie, a sequence of images, and it can't be that much different. Yet, there is that feeling, that unmistakable sensory discovery that you make, when watching a movie like Stalker, or Mirror. You will find yourself in an unusual, novel, state of mind, and will witness your thoughts wandering on new territory. I have, as many others here, difficulty putting these things into words. But that is for the better, as you should see for yourself.

pipy 13y ago

There are some good Russian movies that are somewhat unknown to the Western public. For example, I wonder if any of you have seen these: Georgiy Daneliya. "Kin-dza-dza!" (1986) [1] Larisa Shepitko. "The Ascent" (1977) [2] Leonid Maryagin. "Public enemy - Bukharin" (1990) [3] Aleksey German. "Twenty Days Without War" (1977) [4] Aleksey German. "Khrustalyov, My Car!" (1998) [5] Stanislav Rostotskiy. "A zori zdes tikhie" (1972) [6] Mikhail Kalatozov. "True Friends" (1954) [7] Mikhail Kozakov. "Pokrov Gates" (1982) [8] Georgiy Daneliya. "Osenniy marafon" (1979) [9] Elem Klimov. "Come and See" (1985) [10] Victor Ginzburg. "Generation П" (2011) [11] Sergei Gerasimov. "The Journalist" (1967) [12] (this one is Polish) Juliusz Machulski. "Sexmission" (1984) [13] (also Polish) Krzysztof Kieslowski. "The Decalogue" (1989) [14] [1] http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0091341/ http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0091341/ [2] http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0075404/ http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0075404/ [3] http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0100891/ http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0100891/ [4] http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0074447/ http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0074447/ [5] http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0156701/ http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0156701/ [6] http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0068161/ http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0068161/ [7] http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0047650/ http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0047650/ [8] http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0083465/ http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0083465/ [9] http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0079679/ http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0079679/ [10] http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0091251/ http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0091251/ [11] http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0459748/ http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0459748/ [12] http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0062524/ http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0062524/ [13] http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0088083/ http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0088083/ [14] http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0092337/ http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0092337/

wahnfrieden 13y ago
I just watched German's MY FRIEND, IVAN LAPSHIN a few days ago, it was excellent. Highly anticipating his final one, HARD TO BE A GOD..! I'll have to watch MY CAR soon. Sokurov (mentored by Tarkovsky) can be good, though he's quite mainstream as well. There's actually a STALKER parody by some other Russian, I forget the name.
- pipy 13y ago
  Thanks for a reply! Aleksey German is a true genius. IMO, one of the greatest directors ever lived. I've watched all of his works. "Khrustalyov, My Car!" is a true masterpiece, a film that is of great depth. But, unlike his other works, with "Khrustalyov, My Car!" you need to know quite a bit about Stalin era to feel it's completeness and integrity. There is nothing random in it. I recommend you to watch "Public enemy - Bukharin" by Leonid Maryagin. It is an amazing film, about the rise of the Stalin's terror. Sadly, it is not widely known. You might want to check out the list of historical personalities mentioned there before watching. There are some truly kafkaesque moments in it. Larisa Shepitko is also a genius. One of my greatest passions is the trilogy by Sergei Gerasimov ("The Journalist"[1], "U ozera"[2], "To Love a Person"[3] ), the ones that he has not only directed, but wrote scripts for. However, I feel that these films might appear cryptic for people that haven't lived in Soviet Union. [1] http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0062524/ http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0062524/ [2] http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0065140/ http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0065140/ [3] http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0171498/ http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0171498/