Rating: 
Summary: Fascinating atmosphere.Listen to Stalker,by Rich & Lustmord
Review: It all began when I first listened to a dark ambient CD called STALKER, by Robert Rich and B. Lustmord. One of the best works on ambient ever! Then I learned that this CD was inspired by Tarkovski's movie. So, when I moved to the US, I was able to rented it. And what a journey! The movie is really an experience of still, solitaire and moody landscapes, a story that should be experienced instead of watched. The cinematography is dull, but fascinating at the same time. The characters are terrific, a bit sinister and captivating. The movie is strange in its own development, of still shots, and lenghtly stop images. It's like a painting... an animated painting on live, faith and god.
Rating: 
Summary: Dark - Mysterious - Suspenseful
Review: This movie, although a bit slow, does an amazing job at keeping the viewer in suspense. It'll definatly be something to contemplate for the next few weeks.
Rating:
Summary: SOUL CANDY
Review: I'm ashamed to admit this, but I bought this film because I thought it would be full of special effects ala THE MATRIX. Wrong. Instead, I was hypnotized by a wondrous film full of the power and frustration of Faith. Filmed in the waning days of the Soviet Union the film seems to exemplify spiritual emptiness and the desperate search for the Divine and Miraculous. The State has built a Wall around "The Zone", as if afraid of what people might find there. The Guide who leads people through the Zone tells tales of its mysterious tendencies and fluctuations...which we never see even though we, like the "pilgrims", desperately want to. So does the guide really believe in the Zone? Or is he the victim, too, of desperation? The Professor tries to "get rid" of the Zone, so as not to be tortured by it anymore. The Writer tried to be glib about the Zone, unconvincingly. And then The Child, at the very end, when no one else is around, neither Politicians or Scientists or Artists or Mystics...is it the vibration of the train or something else? A soulful, even painful, journey into our own Inner Zone where Nothing/Something waits...
Rating:
Summary: See it in a theatre
Review: Have you noticed how these type of films are usually made by Europeans? We're a bloody thoughtful bunch aren't we? I'm a Carlislian by the way.
Rating: 
Summary: really long, really weird X-Files
Review: This movie reminded me of a really long, really weird episode of the X-Files. It combined elements of psychic powers, religious iconography, government conspiracy, and aliens in a stark, post-apocalyptic setting. This is an interesting movie, but its not for everyone. I found myself very concerned about the dog that turns up in the Zone (which I think is some sort of ground zero region from a nuclear explosion) seemingly healthy. I couldn't figure out why it was there and why it seemed fine. I think anyone who sees this movie will interpret the symbols in their own way. Its very allegorical, but its personal. The people I talked to after watching this movie all had different interpretations of it that I did. Very slow, little action, little dialogue (in parts). A good pick for people who like symbolism, and weirdness.
Rating:
Summary: Stalker / Ñòàëêåð
Review: ×åñòíî ãîâîðÿ, ñ ìîåé òî÷êè çðåíèÿ ýòî îäèí èç ëó÷øèõ ôèëüìîâ ÿ êîãäà ëèáî âèäåë. Åäèíñòâåííûé ôèëüì êîòîðûé åù¸ êàê-òî ñìîæåò ñðàâíèòñÿ ïî îáñòàíîâêå è îñòðîòå ñþæåòà ýòî ïîæàëóé Àíäðåé Ðóáëåâ, è õîòÿ ìíîãèå îòçûâàþòñÿ îá Àíäðååå Ðóáëåâå êàê î áîëåå ñëàáîé ïî ñóæåòíîé ëèíèè êàðòèíå, ýòî ïåðâàÿ è íàèáîëåå çàïîìíèâøàÿñÿ ìíå êàðòèíà ýòîãî âåëè÷àèøåãî ðåæèñåðà. Êàê òîëüêî ó ìåíÿ áóäóò äüåíãè ÿ ïðèîáðåòó äâä ýòîé êàðòèíû.
Rating:
Summary: Flawless.The fourth wall falls.
Review: From one of the few artists in history who never produced so much as one poor piece of work came this definitive moment of cinema. No other film has ever captured me in such a way, I quickly become afraid of what I will find in the "zone" and concern for the characters is secondary. "Stalker" is an experience, not a form of entertainment. Much like "Persona" it is very easy to forget that you are watching a film. All of Tarkovsky's films are of an unequalled beauty, Stalker is amongst his most beautiful. To call it "Science Fiction" is a grievous insult, this film is nothing less then poetry. There is no excuse for not having seen this, I feel very sorry for anyone whose preconceptions will not allow them to admire this film, they have been cheated as they maintain, but only by themselves.
Rating:
Summary: Stalker
Review: I didn't like this film at first, and was very dissapointed by the ending, but in retrospect, I think I would like to view it again, as I really enjoyed the mood of the film.The film has an interesting soundtrack.
Rating:
Summary: A terrific film, if you know what you're getting into.
Review: My apologies to Joe, whose review appears below. I'm as fed up with black-clad intellectual geeks as you are, but this is still one of my favorite films. The important thing to understand going into this film is that A) it's primarily a visual poem, rather than a plot-based thriller and B) the dangers of the Zone that the characters enter are metaphysical, not physical. In other words, they are entering a realm that questions their lives, their beliefs, and their choices, not throwing razor blades at them (cf. THE CUBE). STALKER is a strange and beautiful film, but don't expect action or conflict--it functions on a much more quiet and introspective plane.
Rating: 
Summary: A fool and his money
Review: There is but one rule that applies to all art: thou shalt not be boring. Tarkovsky broke this rule in two though you would not know this from the types who normally review these art films. The story revolves around a guide (The Stalker), a writer, and a physicist who scamper around a site of a meteor crash called the Zone (Zona in Russian). The military is trying to seal off the area from the outside world, and the black and white film starts off with the three trying to break into the Zone. After the perilous breakthrough, the film turns to color (a blatant rip-off of The Wizard of Oz), and the Stalker starts acting paranoid. He must bring his chargés to the Room, where all one's dreams will come true. But he cannot take the direct path to the Room, because (we are told) the Zone is a maze that changes shape and a trap for the unwary. There is one suspenseful scene where the physicist leads the others through a storm sewer that leads to the Room. And at the end of the tunnel (which the Stalker described as a slaughterhouse)... nothing happens. That's right: no monster, no evil genius, no disease, no danger at all lurks at the end of the tunnel. The spectator-sucker must endure 3 hours of listening to the actors' whining about their lives and watching them do nothing interesting in the Zone. Who would such a movie appeal to? Reading the reviews, I must conclude that it appeals to people who dress in all-black outfits and affect a bored attitude to life (after watching this film, I now know why they are bored). For these people, Tarkovsky couldn't make a bad film. I must commend Tarkovsky. Only a genius could make a film this wretched and still get people to wait around in the rain to see it. My suspicious mind tells me this was the point of the film -- to expose posers. Andrei smirks upon them. If you do not have a burning need to show off all things you learned in college but can't put to use, if you don't have to act tired with life in front of your friends, and if you're not afraid to enjoy yourself; then ignore the favorable reviews for this film and read the story, "The Emperor's New Clothes" by Hans Christian Andersen -- and watch the posers suffer.
|
