Rating: 
Summary: one of the greatest movies of all time
Review: The greatest movie of all time. Watch it by yourself when you're slightly frustrated with the incompetency of the outside world to fully enjoy this masterpiece. It will leave you feeling vindicated and remorseful simultaneously, and further any pre-existing appreciation for art you may have had into outright gutbursting lust. A must see for any fan of brilliance.
Rating:
Summary: Great movie but not for everyone
Review: The classic movie! But be careful, if you think that "Stalker" is something like "Predator" or "Terminator" you are not right. There is not a lot of action and for some people this movie is boring. Anyway, you have to see it!
Rating: 
Summary: Stalker (DVD)
Review: the 5.1 sound version is terrible
they should not put that version on the disk
original mono version is just fine
Rating:
Summary: Amazing and Breathtaking
Review: The first Tarkovsky movie I ever saw, this left an instantaneous and indelible impression on me. Set in an apparently rather totalitarian, and Sovietly grim future, the film follows two men (a writer and a professor) on their trek, guided by a stalker, into the Zone, at the center of which is said to be a room where one's wishes come true. Anyone familiar with the novella by Boris and Arkady Strugatsky (they wrote the screenplay as well) will be struck by how different the two are.Tarkovsky denies that there is any symbolism in his films. If that is the case, then it is not a subtext of spirituality that I get from this film, but an open announcement of it. Because what most makes this film really not science fiction in the final analysis is its deeply felt spirituality. (Not that science and spirituality are mutually antagonistic, but that's a separate issue.) The stalker, played by Alexander Kaidonovsky, is genuinely heart-breaking in his simplicity and openness, compared to the intellectuality and cynicism of the two men who accompany him. And the speculations the two educated men engage in are more purely philosophical than inherently science fictional in nature. (Not that science fiction and philosophy are mutually antagonistic either.)
What most makes the film, though, is its intense surreality and the cinematography that makes it possible. If you are not already familiar with the achingly slow cinematography Tarkovsky loves to employ, then the sense of suspense that this film can drum up in you will be amazing. Tarkovsky loves to plant the camera on a physical object, and then make you look at it until you have no choice but to decide you're missing something, that more must be there. Thus Tarkovsky inspires you to look at the world in a visionary way so that even the most banal objects start to take on an ominous significance. Elsewhere, Tarkovsky unnerves you by having his characters keep looking over their shoulders while the camera creeps up on them with murderous intent from an off-angle. In the novella, the Zone itself is a place where the laws of physics are broken, bent or simply no longer apply. As such, one cannot approach the Room directly (even though it is just across a field), but must approach with respect by going the long way around. Tarkovsky encodes this "non-Euclidean" reality of the Zone in several ways, but one shot in particular is breathtakingly brilliant and beautiful. The Stalker lies in a stream of water, and the camera then pans in a straight line, treating us to a phenomenally gorgeous still life of submerged objects, when suddenly the stalker comes back into view. Apparently we've somehow gone in a circle, though it seemed the line of vision was constantly straight. The way that this is blatantly startling is matched by innumerable other details throughout the film, as Tarkovsky ruthlessly and subtly tweaks things to keep the suspense constantly high. Tarkovsky will even change grains of film stock in order to unsettle what you are looking at. Certainly one of the most moving and gorgeous "science fiction" movies ever, it is also a meditation on the nature of human responsibility and remorse. Personally, I find the Stalker to be the most affectingly drawn of all of Tarkovsky's protagonists, perhaps because he is the one who most openly gives voice to Tarkovsky's own intense spirituality.
Rating:
Summary: Most Soviet films aren't in widescreen
Review: A number of customer reviews of Russian films on DVD express surprise at the 4:3 full-frame aspect ratios - but you should be aware that the Soviet Union carried on using 4:3 for feature films well into the 1980s, so virtually all Soviet films between the 1950s and 1980s will be either 4:3 (like Stalker and Come and See) or 2.35:1 (like Solaris and Andrei Rublev), with no middle ground. Stalker should definitely be in 4:3 (and I speak as a former repertory cinema manager). Anyone claiming to have seen it in widescreen will have seen it projected incorrectly, possibly at one of the many cinemas that can no longer show this aspect ratio.
Rating:
Summary: Grand philosophical journey
Review: This 1979 Andrei Tarkovsky film, a favorite among his fans, is all philosophy in a story of three men searching for meaning in their lives in a hellish environment. Truth, motive, art, meaning, purpose, reason, selfishness, hope, soul, belief, are all examined here. The story focusses on three men. They are called Stalker, Professor and Writer. The Professor and Writer have hired the Stalker to take them to the guarded Zone, where mysterious hidden forces influence the area. In the heart of the Zone is a room, where any wish will be granted. The three men, have to overcome various physical, mental, and social problems among themselves to reach the room. They discuss, debate, and reflect on their world and situation, and philosophize on the room, and the mysterious forces in the world, and their place in it. What will this journey hold for them, and the room, waiting, offer to them? What do they really wish for, and what will it mean to the rest of mankind? And why does the Stalker bring others to the room, but he does not enter? So many questions are raised in this interesting sci-fi analysis of human existence. The film is long and slow, but nevertheless, the ideas are fascinating, and are a real treat to see laid out masterfully by Tarkovsky, in images, words, and music, within an entertaining story. The film is emotional, and as in other Tarkovsky's films, he creates an experience in you, and warps your views of the world, and offers so much more than mainstream films give after viewing. If you look for films that will offer more than just a two hour cheap thrill ride and then never thought of again; a real beautiful, and meditative journey, that includes you along, and inspires you to look around and beyond life, so memorable, and intelligent then you really should see this film any way you can. Anyone disturbed by high concepts, intelligent scripts, and slow pacing, stay far away, as you will be bored to tears. 5 stars. I loved it.
Rating:
Summary: "Stalker" is not a widescreen film
Review: I have seen "Stalker" projected theatrically four times, and I can guarantee anyone concerned that it is not widescreen to begin with. The aspect ratio is 1.33:1 (Academy ratio) or at most 1.37:1. Evidence for this is supported by the illustrations in Vida T. Johnson and Graham Petrie's book, "The Films of Andrei Tarkovsky: A Visual Fugue," all of which are true frame enlargements, meaning that they preserve the original aspect ratios of each film they represent. The enlargements for "Stalker" in the book are very close to Academy ratio. Moreover, the aesthetic balance of the compositions, especially those of the bar, the "Meat Grinder," and the "Room," befit the smaller, Academy ratio instead of 1.66:1 (European widescreen) or 1.85:1 (American widescreen). I haven't seen the DVD so I make no judgment on how the film looks in that format.
Rating:
Summary: watch this film when you lost all hope in this form of art!
Review: when science and poetry join the common/contemporary man in a quest for the ultimate goal we see 3 different and earthly approaches to the absolute. in the end, each one of these 3 entities, for different reasons, refuses the absolute and so had done several others in the past. whereas science and poetry, as portrayed in this film, show their permanent traits, the common man, in his behavior, is our contemporary--which is the etarnal man minus religion. indeed, religion is the only missing character in this play--alas this is not an exclusive reference to the hommo sovieticus. otherwise, extremely expressive characters, filming, and sound. one may also look at this film as the "film of proverbs" (sic.)
Rating:
Summary: Aspect ratio
Review: Regarding the aspect ratio of this film... according to IMDB, the film was orginally shot in an aspect ratio 1.37 : 1. Although not exactly the same as the 1.33 : 1 ratio that the DVD release has, it's close enough to make whatever you may lose on the edges pretty trivial. Unless IMDB is wrong (who knows), the film was not ever released in a standard 'widescreen' format in theatres. They don't list a ratio for the laserdisc release, so I guess it's possible that the laserdisc version cropped the film to make it appear widescreen.
Rating:
Summary: Accurate and faithful
Review: The other reviews capture the meaning. I want to speak about this disc: It is accurate and faithful. The original film was shot in 1.33 aspect ratio (sometimes called "Academy Ratio", or 4:3, or, even "full frame"). So that is how this disc is presented. There is a re-mixed (for 5.1) soundtrack, but the original mono is the way Tarkovsky intended. Luckily the original is included here. It's not the best transfer possible, though it is the best looking print every copied to video. In particular, the fact that it was mastered in PAL and converted to NTSC is not ideal. But you've never seen Stalker look this good.
|
