Rating: 
Summary: Nothing to say
Review: Like an earlier reviewer, I don't feel that I can critique this film, except to offer what must seem like platitudinous "bravo!"s and whatnot. My descriptions are not sufficient to convey the absolute beauty of the cinematography, depth of imagery and the complexity of the world created, and it is a world colored by grief, anguish and love, and it is a world that is so remarkably (I, like, so wish I could add italics here) human! It would be easy, were it still the linguistic fashion, to watch this film and exclaim, "oh the humanity!" and also mean, "oh! The humanity! The (again with the italics) humanness!"
Rating:
Summary: Nothing to say
Review: Like an earlier reviewer, I don't feel that I can critique this film, except to offer what must seem like platitudinous "bravo!"s and whatnot. My descriptions are not sufficient to convey the absolute beauty of the cinematography, depth of imagery and the complexity of the world created, and it is a world colored by grief, anguish and love, and it is a world that is so remarkably (I, like, so wish I could add italics here) human! It would be easy, were it still the linguistic fashion, to watch this film and exclaim, "oh the humanity!" and also mean, "oh! The humanity! The (again with the italics) humanness!"
Rating:
Summary: Beyond my measure
Review: Much like the literature of James Joyce, the filmmaking of Andery Tarkovsky is in my opinion, beyond measure of good or bad, points or grades.
In truth, I am not the right person to grade this film, deliver it a rightful verdict or call it rewarding or degrading words. I am not a film scholar, and though a great fan of Tarkovsky having seen all his released films, I can not give this film the words I truly deserves.
Holding this in mind, I still proceed.The one thing that troubles me when I observe, view and think about anything that director Tarkovsky produced, is whether or not I should call it film / movie, or art. "The Sacrifice", his last - and most artful - project is, as all film by Tarkovsky, about the slowest and most long drawn one can choose to watch, thus making it a film that is not aimed at a populist audience. This is not a question of plot, it is a question of and cinematography, acting in line and in cohesion with environment, Nykvist's photography (some of the best he ever produced) and individuals, together making, art.
If this scares You, remember what You have read and know that this might not be a film for everyone.
If You know Tarkovsky You know what this "film" is all about, but remember to keep an open mind. It is one of those film that deserves multiple observations before You lay your preliminary verdict. "The Sacrifice" is not among the best films I have seen, but I can assure you that it is one, if not the most, beautiful. It is beyond points and grades, being that one seldom grades pieces of art.
Rating: 
Summary: The Weight of Wind
Review: No director I can think of ever used film to explore the moods and philosophical quandaries Tarkovsky does. For me though, "Solaris" and "Stalker" remain the best expressions of his metaphysical vision. "The Sacrifice" lends some of the most powerful visual effects from these earlier efforts to a gaggle of half-developed characters that never quite convinced me they deserved them. With the wonderful exception of the mysterious postman, Otto, the characters inhabit a muffled, haute-bourgeois world of spiritual angst and existential dread, with servants to clear the tea-things between musings. Maybe Tarkovsky means to critique their privileged lives, but his sympathy for the main character, Alexander, is so clear as to make him seem like a stand-in for Tarkovsky himself. Alexander's laments about our civilization's destructiveness, its violence against nature in search of a bland material comfort may very well be true, but as expressed in Alexander's monologues aren't they just a little . . . banal? What stands out for me most about the movie is the pregnant sense of possibility that Tarkovsky infuses into even the most ordinary scenes. The glacial, almost imperceptible movements of the camera, the wind riffling through grass or shawls or curtains, the haunting vibration of glasses--all insinuate the presence, or maybe just the barest possibility, of something like God. Part of the movie's point seems to be to make you feel the sterility of life without that presence; an 'eternal recurrence' like Otto mentions at the beginning, in which the sense that our routine lives are a waiting for something higher never lifts. Tarkovsky's gift as a director is to communicate visually that this waiting might have a purpose after all. He has an extraordinary ability to turn everyday objects--chairs, eggs, a glass of water, a bare tree--into potential symbols, teetering on the edge of a meaning that never quite resolves into view or, if it does, threatens to pass you by in your impatience for something louder and more conclusive. The hand-washing ritual and 'levitating love scene' with Maria didn't carry the redemptive power for me that Tarkovsky seemed to intend. Instead, what I'll remember most vividly is the long, dreamy black-and-white 'strip' with the crashed car that recurs in Alexander's memory as an image of the concentrated destruction and panic of the whole troubled century. Tarkovsky's Russian sense of salvation is turned up to full wattage here in his last movie: one must be as a child to enter the kingdom, the intellect must learn to bow down to the infant and simple serving-woman, etc.--themes announced clearly in the opening shot of Leonardo's painting. But finally it was the bleakness and monochrome despair that hit me most forcefully. The hope this time felt a little tacked on. Still, this movie is indispensable for an understanding of Tarkovsky. It amplifies the images and ideas in his other movies and reveals them as parts of a haunting, brilliant whole.
Rating:
Summary: A mysterious and alluring final film by Andrei Tarkovsky.
Review: Of all the films of Andrei Tarkovsky (Stalker, Solaris, Mirror, Andrei Rublev, etc.) I always come back to this one. I find it difficult to separate the images from the ideas presented (sometimes the effect lasts for days after viewing). That a man could/would make a Faustian bargain to save his family, the world, from utter destruction and then follow through... is it madness? Is any of it real? A beautiful film that works on many levels simultaneously. Patience is a virtue when viewing... but the rewards are great. Watch carefully... the postman in the film is an homage to filmmaker Jacques Tati (pre-Hulot).
Rating: 
Summary: The emperor is still naked
Review: Oh please, what is all this breathless adulation in these reviews? The ideas expounded by the movie's cardboard cutout cartoon characters are whiny exercises in vapid self-absorption. These people aren't just bored. They're BORING & LOATHSOME.
This is a pretentious exercise in anomie. Thoughtful? Philosophical? Give me a break. Two words it immediately causes to spring to mind are SOPORIFIC & SOPHOMORIC.
Rating:
Summary: Incredible
Review: One of the most beautiful films I have ever seen. Eclipses even Andreii Rublev in Tarkovskii's library. From the opening scenes to the final bonfire, a true masterpiece of film. Prepare to be amazed. Tarkovskii is truely missed.
Rating:
Summary: For the record...
Review: Tarkovsky did NOT know of his illness until late in filming and even that is speculation. I have seen too many reviews stating that he knew of his illness during the filming of Sacrifice.
Rating:
Summary: The best made film I've ever seen.
Review: Tarkovsky knew this to be his last film, and he made it to last a long, long time. There may be better stories, but no film I have ever seen puts story, cinematography, deeply talented actors, subject matter, and scenery in one package as well. For example, the opening scene revolves around a discussion of Nietzshe, has no "cuts" (is unedited) for about 15 minutes, and yet is visually, comedically, and substantively gripping. You can't experience the film's full effect on video (for example, what film/colorization does he move to in the middle, post-war sequence?). But you probably can't enjoy and study this gem over and over any other way. It is a film about reflection, violence, eternity, and life. It both contains and is a miracle.
Rating:
Summary: POOR TRANSFER
Review: The opening scene is an impressively long take.But the film lacks the magic from this director's Russian films. The BIG dissapointment however is the DVD edition.The picture quality is not better than a VHS copy. I would wait for a better edition. Tarkovskij's films deserves no less than the best possible transfers. The film itself is three or four stars, but I give a zero for the transfer
|
