Rating: 
Summary: What the heck was this?
Review: Ok, I must admit that I never saw the origial movie, but this one was a turd... it doesn't explain anything, one character is severely agoraphobic for one scene and spends the rest of the movie out and about like nothing is wrong, another character chews his gum so loud that it's actually more interesting than his dialogue and will someone tell me why a psychiatrist/psychologist (a civilian nonetheless) is sent to some mysterious planet.... alone to determine what's wrong on a space ship? I could go on, but I'll sum up... don't buy this, just rent it and you'll see that you've saved yourself some money.
Rating: 
Summary: Hypnotic
Review: This 2002 version of SOLARIS is everything the 1972 Russian version wasn't. Indeed, this latest release resonates with me more and more as I dwell upon it.Chris Kelvin (George Clooney) is a psychiatrist going through the daily motions. Then, he receives a video message from his friend Gibarian (Ulrich Tukur) beseeching his help out on the space research station circling the planet Solaris. Gibarian doesn't specify the problem, but two astronauts have already perished. On his arrival at Solaris, Kelvin discovers that Gibarian has since committed suicide. Only the station's commander, Dr. Helen Gordon (Viola Davis), and Snow (Jeremy Davies) remain alive. Gordon is locked in her cabin, reluctant to come out. Snow seems in a world of his own, curiously semi-detached from reality. Chris is soon confronted with the presence of Visitors, physical manifestations created by the planet Solaris of humans residing within the memories of the space station crew. For example, there's the young "son" of Gibarian, and the "brother" of Snow. We never learn who Gordon's Visitor is. Kelvin awakens one day to his own Visitor, his wife Rheya (Natascha McElhone), who'd previously committed suicide back on Earth after an acrimonious verbal confrontation with her spouse. Chris, who loved her dearly, has been weighed down with her loss. The power of the SOLARIS story lies in the concept of a life form created from the another's psyche. As Rheya puts it to Chris, her existence and essence is solely dependent on his memory of her. The viewer watches as Rheya mentally discovers who she is via Kelvin's memories, fed to her (and the viewer) in flashback form by, presumably, the planet's intelligence. Poignantly, Rheya - a tragic figure - is profoundly saddened that all she'll ever be is determined by Kelvin's recollections, that she'll never know the rest of herself. Chris, on the other hand, mired in the twin emotions of guilt and love, clings to his resurrected "wife". As he admits to her, "I don't know anymore if you're truly Rheya; I only see you." The 2002 version of this film is, mercifully, 70 minutes shorter than the 169-minute 1972 edition, which dragged on interminably. Plus, the planetary special FX are better, and the interior of the space station doesn't look like something clunky out of the Soviet 50s. Clooney, who delivers one of his best performances, benefits from being familiar to American audiences, something Donatas Banionis in the earlier Russian release wasn't. McElhone, a relatively unknown actress, has a stunning, mature beauty worthy of any man's obsession. Davis is powerful as Dr. Gordon, a realist who knows what must be done if the station's survivors are to live. Davies gives a measured and brilliant performance as the detached Snow, who provides a surprise of his own. In the mind of every human being resides the memory of another, who was more dear than life itself, who will perhaps occupy his/her dying thoughts. Who would your Visitor be on the Solaris station? The creators of this unique, love story - for that's what it is - have perhaps distilled for the cinema the essence of the original Stanislaw Lem novel into this question. I like this film more than I can adequately say.
Rating:
Summary: Quite Simply a Masterpeice
Review: See my review of the cinematic presentation. This movie will not disappoint.
Rating: 
Summary: A little slow and confusing
Review: Although I understood and could follow the plot line of the story, it was confusing.. Most of the movie was done in semi darkness so that it was hard to really see what was happening. At times the music drowned out the voices so that you could not hear what was being said. It reminded me of a low budget film.. This is a movie that I would not have purchase if I had known what it was like before hand.
Rating:
Summary: A deliberatley obscure film
Review: I am not one of those people who likes to analyize and nitpick every aspect of a movie. Don't get me wrong, I can certainly do my fair share of interpretation when it's needed, but for the most part I prefer to simply sit back and enjoy a film. Not so for Solaris.
This film is not for those who feel like simply "taking in a show." The film is a deliberatley ambiguous exploration of human malaise and relationships. Like its minimalist script and interesting camera work, this film ultimately conveys more by what it leaves unsaid than anything the characters do or say. In the case of Solaris, the meaning is found through implication rather than much direct association. In this way, the film is able to capture the true complexity of human emotions and relationships. There is no riding off into the sunset, no passionate "I love you's," no traditional 2-dimensional film love. Rather, Solaris shows the audience the subtle and often vague nature of human interaction by focusing on short, simple incidents that make up life. While this necessarily slow pace may unnerve viewers who prefer to have all their conflicts neatly resolved and explained to them by the time the credits roll, Solaris tries to express itself through uncertainty and the opaque. Although some people might certainly find this tedious and boring, those who choose to follow the development of the relationship between Kelvin and his wife will certainly appreceate the degree of interpretation this film allows and the bittersweet feel of the final resolution (or lack thereof).
Rating: 
Summary: Not the usual George
Review: I liked George's performance in this DVD. It's not his typical type of movie. It's like a one-man show - he is the central character and the story basically evolves around him. It's dark (not just the lighting) and very thought provoking. I am a huge George fan and have seen all his films. This is definitely NOT one of my favorites, but I have to praise the complexity of the story line and his ability to play Chris to the letter. As for his rear end, well, what's a space movie without a "moon" shot?? The controversy over it was ridiculous and probably generated by the studio... Anyway, it's a sci-fi must see. Don't expect monsters and aliens to devour the crew, because it's not that kind of movie at all. It will leave you wondering "what was that?" You'll think about it a great deal, for several days before you finally get it. I had to watch it more than once. Each time you unwrap a different layer. George is outstanding in his emotional performance...
Rating:
Summary: Stylish but disappointing.
Review: For sci-fi lovers, this will not make your top 10. What you get with the DVD is the theatrical version, a couple of standard self-promoting featurettes, an early version of the script and a commetary by Soderbergh and Cameron. As the commentary states, this is not a remake of the Tarkovsky version, but a new interpretation. What is clear from the movie and the commentary, is that this film evolved into the "love story" theme from the more philosophical basis of Lem's book. I cannot guess what the reasons for this were, but it shows in the inconsistency of the scenes. An example is a flashback scene where Kelvin and his friends are discussing God and Kelvin declares that God need not exist. Yet because the nature of Solaris is not discussed in this movie, the content of the scene is irrelevant and is left in presumably as it depicts Rheya in one of her "moods". Continuity problems are evident in the editing. The scene where Rheya breaks through a door, as in the Tarkovsky version, is removed, but the destroyed door is not edited out of a dream sequence. The commentary makes light of this, but this hides deeper problems with Soderbergh's script. We know that Rheya is constructed from Kelvin's thoughts, yet she "remembers" her suicide, an event Kelvin did not see. As another reviewer has said, this film is more style than content. And style there is, and it is a treat. The Solaris station/ship is beautifully constructed and the cinematography is excellent. Clooney does a credible job as the wounded Kelvin, although another actor, such as Douglas might have been more believable. Jeremy Davies as Snow is wonderfully expressive. But for me, the movie disappoints. In 90 minutes, we get a jumble of scenes wrapped into a love story, and a "happy ending", yet the real mystery of Solaris is not broached, despite the main characters being scientists. Imagine the Tarkovsky version with every major philosophical dialogue removed and every scene shortened. Because of this, Solaris is not science fiction, but rather a redemption movie in sci-fi trappings. Soderbergh and Cameron have proved, like so many others in Hollywood, that making a science fiction movie without a good script, focussing on sets and CG effects to try to please a mass audience, just doesn't really work. Perhaps Soderbergh could release the "philosophical" version he started to make, then perhaps we could see if he had a better vision for the film he claims to have wanted to make.
Rating:
Summary: Tries but fails
Review: I think this move had great potential. excellent cinematography, stellar ( no pun intended) performances form the cast. It had a very Kubrick feel to it. Parts of it had me transfixed, practically hypnotized, while others parts had me hopelessly frustrated. I agree that this movie is subtle. Sublety can be a great instrument to tell a tale such as this, but this one was a bit too subtle. My main problem with this film was that considering the scenario: people being visited by dead loved ones on a spaceship in orbit around an anomylous planet. Sounds scary to me. Unfortunately the movie built almost no suspense around this. I never felt that Chris was the least bit surprised except during thr initial contact with his dead wife. I don't know about you all but I would have been totally freaked. No ownder the rest of the crew went crazy - unfortunately this was never fully explored. lets delve into the mystery a little and build some suspense. Chris seemed to accept his dead wifes reanimation way too easily. I never felt the fear or the uncertainty radiate from Chris. I don't know, maybe I'm thick, but as hard as I tried I could not connect with the characters. Yes, the acting was all first rate, it is just the script left way too much to the imagination.
I thought this could have been another 2001- A Space Odyssey if only... if only what? I'm not sure, maybe a sense of forboding, of fear of who this "ghost" was and what was her purpose. I have a feeling that the parts that could have made this a better film were left on the cutting room floor.
Rating:
Summary: A (mostly) useless Hollywood remake
Review: Three stars for the follow:
Star 1-George Clooney & Viola Davis do some impressive work.
Star 2-The cinematography is some of the best of the year.
Star 3-The Score for the film is one of the best of the genre, heavily recalling the polish avant-garde at the most minimal & dense (think Ligeti or Lutoslowski <SP>).
Otherwise, this is a forgettable film which hasn't a soul. It's telling that Tarkovsky's version is 3hrs long and this new one 90min but that the new one FEELS longer than the Tarkovsky version. When all is said and done, a film must be ABOUT something, albeit thematically, emotionally, etc. . Tarkovsky's 'SOLARIS' was about many things, all handled with the skill of a master who believed in the mental fortitude of his audience. Soderbergh, however, wants to tease his audience into entering into a labyrinth but then he's not skilled enough to actually say anything once inside. His approach, as it happens, it quite simple-minded: he positions the failed relationship between Kelvin and Rheya as the the singular issue of existence. There's some philosophy 101 tossed in for good measure, but mostly, you don't have to think watching this new 'SOLARIS'. Science-Fiction is a genre of ideas, of complexity, something Soderbergh failed to see. Sure, points go for trying something serious but really, the scope and density of the subject is just beyond him. The film tries to attone in it's climax, a climax where the station plunges into the beautiful ocean of Solaris but even here, the filmmaker doesn't trust the intelligence of the viewer and he insults them by having Kelvin reconcile with Rheya after his faux suicide (his reunion after death is Christian romanticism which would've surely offended Lem and which even Tarkovsky at his most sentimental would've never attempted)... It just doesn't work. Buy the original or read the novel; buy the score to this new 'SOLARIS', otherwise, spend your time elsewhere.
Rating:
Summary: Leaves too many unanswered questions
Review: Generally speaking, I usually enjoy films with open endings that leaves the viewer to come to their own conclusions and interpretations of how the story ended. But, in Solaris, (not comparing it to its previous source materials) the ending just left too many unanswered questions making this movie ultimately a letdown. Many movies that have open endings leave you puzzled but still satisfied with the feature. The way Solaris ended, I kind of felt teased and ripped-off in a way. Besides the way the film ended, I did like Clooney's performance as well as the co-stars' preformance in the movie. The story is pretty dramatic, emotional and intriguing. So overall, the film isn't bad, but just kind of feels like a teaser with the way it ends.
|
