Rating: 
Summary: Just like Solaris, Plain and simple : A masterpiece.
Review: One of the best films ever made by one of the greatest directors. Do not check your brain at the door for you will need to use it while watching this movie. Slow paced, moody and deeply philosophical.
Rating:
Summary: Three men and a field = Sci-Fi Masterpiece.
Review: Tarkovsky was filming Stalker for over a year when the film lab reported back that the entire negatives had all been destroyed during processing. Having no insurance Tarkovsky had to re-shoot most of the film again on a remaining shoe-string budget which restricted the production dramatically. He was forced to film Stalker without the vast sets that had since been taken down and headed for the fields in order to concentrate on a character driven science-fiction movie.Stalker is bafflingly simple, but it is the story and characters that take this film to a new level. The premise is quite straightforward - a meteorite has crashed near a small town causing the Russian army to takeover the entire area. During their investigation they discover that the meteorite has caused some form of a psychological disturbance on all who enter The Zone. The Zone is sealed off but our main protagonist, Stalker, has been to The Zone more than once and acts as a tour guide for people who want to visit this strange and dangerous place. The film starts with Stalker disobeying his distraught wife in order to take two men - a writer and a scientist, to The Zone. The rest of the movie concentrates on their journey, spiritually, mentally and physically. There are some surprises in store at the end. Stalker is like the metaphysics of the Matrix multiplied by ten. It is deeply philosophical in nature and haunting. The locations are beautiful and the camera is always where Tarkovsky wants it to be. Stalker can be a bleak film at times with many slow parts but it is still highly engaging and looks terrific. Not many directors can take three men, put them in a field and then using dialogue alone and a few puddles of water, turn it into an absolutely original sci-fi fest.... for that alone the film is a must see and deserves full marks. Film students should definitely study this simple masterpiece. ***As a note the transfer is not the best and MPEG encoding does not work well with still shots. In fact DVD does not do Tarkovsky any justice. The film has also been digitally corrected and the start of the film in the bedroom looks terrible, but it does get a lot better after that. The extra are great!***
Rating: 
Summary: Better to wait for Godot
Review: Tarkovsky's Solaris is one of my five favorite films. Stalker, although interesting, lacks the immediate visual and psychological power of Solaris. It reminds me most of Beckett's Waiting for Godot but it lacks the caliber of dialogue of that play. If Solaris seems ten times slower than any film you've seen before, Stalker seems ten times slower than Solaris. It takes full attention to remain with this film: anything that happens around you while you are watching, whether someone walking by or sneezing or a bird flying by outside, will seem considerably more interesting than the screen if you're not making an effort to stay with this movie. Some men in dark clothes on a dark day walk along a while, looking anguished. They pause and one says something perhaps profound like "Life can be difficult but we somehow survive". Closeup of another man looking down into some muddy water. Walk some more. Stop and one man says something equally profound, something like "Stalking is all I know. I have not been able to stop." Shot of a decripit factory. Walk some more. And so on. That's not just how Stalker goes or what was said but its how it basically felt. After two viewings, The Stalker seems like an interesting experiment but a probably unnecessarily challenging one. I'd expect well under 5% of the public would find it worthwhile. Well-performed but minimalist action, minimalist script, depressing mood. I prefer the ocean of Solaris over the Zone of the Stalker. Delusions don't collapse so easily.
Rating:
Summary: a work of art
Review: What can one say except that Tarkovsky is a poet, and that together with Kurosawa, is surely the greatest director ever. "Andrei Rublev" is terrific and a good introduction to Tarkovsky, though it's not an easy film. The switch from black and white to colour at the end, is a device that Tarkovsky goes on to develop and uses as a means of expressing modalities of thought and emotion.
"Solaris", a personal favourite, examines the nature of man, the universe, spirituality and art in a moving and unforgettable way. The philosophical ideas are taking shape, but they only come to fruition perhaps in "Stalker".
"Stalker" seems to encapsulate all that Tarkovsky had to say in film, it seems. He pulls out the stops...the sepia and colour tone shifts, the music, the lesiurely long takes (that allows the reader to think and explore ideas as the film unfolds).
And the summation of what art and life may mean, and can mean. In his films, there's a transcendent spirituality that's unattainable by man, but can be appreciated through his relations with those closest to him...the limiting factor of mortality.
His works, like many great masterpieces of the last century,
seem to be a dialogue with Dostoevsky. In particular, "Notes from the underground", and the "Grand Inquisitor" section of "Karamazov".
Thank heavens, Tarkovsky lived -- and showed us that art in the electronic age is possible.
Rating:
Summary: ESSENTIAL, VISONARY CINEMA
Review: That being said, I'm so overwhelmed by Tarkovsky's work that I don't really know where to begin - I'm not a cinema expert by any means, but I can't resist weighing in with my opinions here. Rather than re-hash the narrative of the film, I think I'll just stick to some of my impressions... Tarkovsky's use of color is astonishing - he switches from color to black-and-white in several of his films, for emphasis and mood, and very effectively. The black-and-white sections of STALKER are actually sepia-toned - and the use of this device is perfect for underlining the bleakness (both physical and spiritual) of the cityscapes depicted. He also uses it nicely in a dream sequence as the trio is on their way to the Room, journeying through the Zone. The images of Stalker's dream - water flowing over hypodermic needles, religious icons, weapons, and other debris, all drained of color - are incredibly vivid, and symbolize (at least to me) the attempts of humans to numb themselves, to separate themselves from that which really matters - nature and the human spirit. The voice-over - a woman or child - reading from the Book of Revelations is chilling as well. There's a scene in which Stalker leaves his companions for a brief while and makes his way to a well - his soliloquy here can only be termed a prayer, in my opinion - '...Let everything that's been planned come true. Let them believe. And let them have a laugh at their passions - because what they call passion actually is not some emotional energy, but just the friction between their souls and the outside world.' He goes on to speak of the nature of weakness and strength - '...let them be helpless like children, because weakness is a great thing and strength is nothing...Hardness and strength are Death's companions. Pliancy and weakness are expressions of the freshness of being - because what has hardened will never win.' This is, for me, one of the most moving scenes in the film - and one of the greatest expressions of the importance of faith and hope that I've ever seen in a film. Tarkovsky placed great store in hope - it's an idea that surfaces in many of his works. For the viewer unfamiliar with Tarkovsky's work, STALKER might actually be a good place to start - the non-linear method he used in some of his other works might be a little discouraging for some. Once the viewer becomes acquainted with the stylistic genius of this master, however, ALL of his films will offer up revelations and rewards.
Rating:
Summary: Cannot turn subtitles off
Review: This is probably not a big deal for most people, however, this DVD does not provide the option of turning subtitles off. (I wrote an email about this to the company (RUSCICO) that made this DVD and received an email back telling me that it is not possible to turn subtitles off on any of the DVDs they have made of films produced by Mosfilm studios -- i.e., almost all of their DVDs. I was told, vaguely, that this was because of a "licensing issue" -- which also seems odd.) One of the things I like most about this film is the visual beauty of the composition of each scene. This image quality of this DVD is excellent. BUT, if you can understand the Russian, it is annoying and distracting to have the bottom part of the image on screen obscured/covered up with printed words. It is also annoying on a DVD which is priced as highly as this one is that a basic, standard feature -- the option to turn subtitles off -- is missing. Other than this defect (which will only affect people who understand Russian -- probably) -- the DVD is excellent in every other sense. It would be nice though if RUSCICO would re-program their Mosfilm DVDs to allow subtitles to be turned off, or if they would at least put a note on the box to tell potential buyers that subtitles cannot be turned off.
Rating:
Summary: A Modern Revelation
Review: This movie if watched with an open heart can truly 'harrow your soul' as Tarkovsky puts it.
It did so for me and provided a tremendous soul-searching shock that changed the direction of my life. If there has ever been a metanoic religious work of art in cinema this is it.
Rating:
Summary: A look back
Review: I originally reviewed this film on VHS; now that I've seen the DVD version I've got a bit more to work with. First of all, this is the second version of the film; the original footage was ruined by Mosfilm and the whole movie had to be re-shot. In order to retain his funding from the Soviet authorities, Tarkovsky hit on the solution of having "Stalker" re-classified as a two-part film... what eventually made it to the screen is "Stalker Part Two", even though there is no Part One. What a resourceful guy; I love that sort of thing. The DVD version is a great improvement on the VHS version, which was pretty good to begin with; the picture is crisp and clear (the cinematography is beautiful), the title menus are inventive, and there are some nice extras. Some of the additional material gets into the heart-rending fact that many of the main people who worked on this film are no longer with us (they were filming in toxic, hazardous areas and may have suffered the consequences). There is an especially poignant interview with cinematographer Aleksandr Knyazhinsky, who speaks to us while confined to a hospital bed. "On June 14, 1996 Alexander Knyazhinsky was no more"; so says the DVD. And he wasn't the only one. Rest in peace. Another look back (written some time later): a certain amount of mythology has grown up about "Stalker", especially in the former Soviet Union. In particular, "Stalker" is seen as a prediction of Chernobyl; without ruling out the possibility, I would submit that it may have reflected the concerns of many people about what was going on in the various 'kryptogorsks' scattered about the U.S.S.R. No special foresight was needed, just common sense and personal experience. I think some prayers would be appropriate here...
Rating:
Summary: One of my Favorites!
Review: Stalker is poetry. Pure poetry! If you haven't seen this amazing film yet, then stop reading this review and buy it NOW!
Rating:
Summary: letterbox? NO!!!
Review: If ever a movie needed to be letterboxed this is it. A visually beautiful film. Why Creiterion which releases movies in letterbox failed to do so here is tragic. I saw this movie on TCM and it was. I would give the movie 5 stars except for this.
| 
