Rating: 
Summary: Tarkovsky's greatest sci-fi masterpiece!
Review: From the legendary Russian director Andrei Tarkovsky comes this epic 1971 sci-fi drama based on Stanislaw Lem's novel.A psychologist (Juri Jarvet) who travels to the distant planet Solaris,far away from Earth,who discovers that lifeforms are taking over Solaris' vast ocean where a series of strange happenings occur.He also discovers a deserted spaceship where its interior is being runned-down and finds two scientists (Natalya Bondarchuk,Anatoli Solonitsyn) as they must find out to search what's happening to the dying oceans and human beings.Vastly inspired by Kubrick's "2001",Tarkovsky's "Solaris" is a terrific science fiction film that features great visual effects and cinematography by Vadim Yusov.Despite it being at 2hrs.46 mins in length,it's considered to be one of Tarkovsky's greatest masterpiece since "Andrei Rublev" (1966).Later remade by Steven Soderburgh in 2002 with George Clooney,but that version isn't as good as Tarkovsky's original,better film.
Rating: 
Summary: GREAT DVD of TARKOVSKY 'S MASTERPIECE FILM SOLARIS!
Review: This is a high quality DVD. Criterion does justice to Tarkovsky's great Sci-Fi film 'Solaris". This is not your ordinary Science Fiction story. It a kind of film that Tarkovsky is known for. It delves more into the human side of the story, rather than technology and special effects. It is no "2001: A Space Odyssey". And, for those who are not accustomed to Tarkovsky's slow action, they may not care for it, unless they give it a chance. But if you see it through, you may love this film. If your attention span is short, this is NOT the movie for you! But in fairness to those who are waiting for the action, many American Sci-Fi fans will find that any Soviet science fiction film is not their cup of tea. This film is a thought-provoking sci-fi drama that shows the mysteries of inner space are as awesome as those of outer space. Revered Lithuanian stage actor Donatis Banionis, the lead actor in "Solaris" does an excellent portrayal of the inner mind of the astronaut Kris Kelvin, a psychologist sent to the spaceship orbiting the ocean planet Solaris to find out what happened to the crew.
The original story was by Polish writer Stanislaw Lem, who had some qualms about the way Tarkovsky brought the story to film. The book is a great piece of writing. But the film is well worth seeing. I personally think it is Tarkovsky's best film, though some may not share that opinion.
Included on this DVD are excellent interviews with people involved in the film, including the well-known Russian actress Natalya Bondarchuk, and the director of photography Vadim Yusov. It also has nine deleted and alternate scenes and a documentary excerpt with Solaris author Stanislaw Lem
Tarkovsky has been called one of the greatest directors of all time. This film proves it.
Rating: 
Summary: only movie worse than Tarkovsky's Solaris is Soderbergh's S.
Review: There is only one Solaris. It is a great, timeless book written by S. Lem. The two movie adaptations to date are quite bad. Tarkovsky's Solaris is so far removed from the book that it should say that is it loosely based on it, instead of being claimed as an adaptation.
It is a russian answer to Kubrick's '2001' as much as the terrible Tupolev-144 was a russian answer to the Concorde. Most educated people have heard of '2001' (heard, not necessary liked it), while Tarkovsky's 'Solaris' enjoys well deserved obscurity, not only in the west, but also in Russia, and in Poland (S. Lem's home country).
People who like Tarkovsky's 'Solaris' will continue to like it, I can only hope that people who don't like it won't think that S. Lem's book is as bad as the movie. Because it is so much better.
Rating:
Summary: Solaris
Review: Polish writer Stanislaw Lem is one of the most important science fiction writers of all, but is little known to genre readers. It is in fact the Russian film of Solaris (Mosfilm, 1971) by Andrei Tarkovsky that has made Lem as known as he is, despite a large number of his books available in translation. Solaris the book (Faber & Faber Ltd., 1970) is arguably his masterpiece. The bizarre tale of a haunted space station on a distant planet with a possibly sentient Ocean eschews the usual science fiction obsession with technology for a voyage to Inner Space, a muscular wrestling with the nature of exploration and Man's need to know Himself before He can understand the Other.Solaris is a distant planet whose sole organic inhabitant is a vast colloidal Ocean, an Apollonian monster who creates gigantic, motivationally obscure artifacts whose functions, though often mechanical, are unknown. These creations are maddeningly suggestive of mentation, or psyche, yet they have no facet that could be construed as communicative or even understandable. As the possibility of some Contact between the planetary Goliath and the Earth explorers recedes, the study of Solaris is in steep decline, and so a troubleshooter is sent from the Home Planet to determine if the station should be shut down. Kelvin finds the crew in crisis, with one dead from suicide and the other two battling demons they refuse to describe. The Ocean has begun sending Visitors. As the crew awakens from sleep, they are finding replicas of people from their past who are associated with conscience, painful memory, and repression, and are often long dead. Each crewman's demon is a corporealization of some horrible event in his life that has festered in his Unconscious. The demons are undoubtedly from the Ocean, yet why they are on the station is not known. Are they a test of the Earthers, or a cruel joke, or a gift? What they are to the crew are a painful persistence of memory, shades of past sins or mistakes, which are slowly driving the crew insane. On one level, the Visitors are what Solaris is about, the terrifying power of memories repressed into the Unconscious, the Ocean a potent symbol of the Unconscious, spinning off Jungian mandalas of memory. The Ocean and the crew are in an almost-communication, but the Unconscious is a place we willfully do not understand, so it is not a real Contact. The crew needs answers to save their sanity, but are unsure that answers are even possible. What Solaris is also about is the nature of exploration. Lem's view is that the human exploration of the Cosmos is not so much to discover the New as it is a narcissistic desire to expand the boundaries of Earth to fill the Universe. We are not searching for alien worlds, but merely looking for mirrors of our own, idealized Other Planets based in our own ideas of science and civilization. As with the creations of the Unconscious, an understanding of the truly alien is not possible. We are blinded by our own anthropomorphism and conscious belief structures. The essential problem is that Man attempts to explore and understand the Outer while our Inner reality remains an undiscovered country. It is impossible to understand the alien without understanding the self. Because of this disconnect, Lem sees exploration as Faith disguised as Science, a "liturgy using the language of methodology". The Quest for an impossible Contact is a mysticism that seeks to deny Mysteries which simply are, mysteries that mirror the central Mystery of our own Unconscious. Kelvin finally comes to see the Ocean as an imperfect God, a blind demiurge who creates without reason. The Ocean is a god of limited powers and omniscience, "a sick god whose ambition has exceeded his power". Mirroring the incompleteness of ourselves, the Ocean of Solaris is an incomplete Deity, a workman who has created clocks but not the Time for them to measure. It is a incapable of forseeing the consequences of its creations, a despairing god alone in the Universe. Solaris is heady, intellectual science fiction that raises important issues within a genre framework. It is quite unlike what we Here see in our sci fi, with its obsessions with technology and power. It is gift from the Eastern Bloc writers of the 1960's that is not to be ignored, if the reader is ready to move beyond rockets 'n ray guns. Eastern European writers of the period took their craft very seriously, going places British and American science fiction dared not to tread. Lem, the brothers Strugatsky, Bulychev, Ivan Yefremov and others produced really first-rate stuff, and most of it ended up in English translation. Good news from another shore, indeed.
Rating:
Summary: THIS ISLAND MAN
Review: SCI-FI? Nah! Absolutely nothing to do with that gendre. An experience worth visiting over and over - reminds strongly of the recent "Memento" - also xeroxed as "The Abyss" / "Event Horizon" somewhat smatters of "Sphere" - this one pre-dates all of them. Superlative acting by the Russian cast - very Chekovian, leaning towards Jean-Paul Sartre's "No Exit" - withing the sci-fi framework - an excellent alienation effect [for the thrater buff]. HE: - In an attempt to solve "dark work afoot" on board a space station circling "SOLARIS" an ocean bound megaplanet finds 'the meaning of Life' {maybe} - without the Python team. SHE:- A replicant of his dead wife, created over and over again - a benevolent sphinx with her own set of riddles. [Slight touch of "Blade Runner" here]. Great DVD presentation - pristine widescreen print with lots of necessary extras - well worth visiting over and over again. Minimal but haunting score. An excellent companion to the equally confusing "2001" but not with the unnecessary glitz.
Rating:
Summary: HUIS CLOS ........
Review: SCI-FI? Nah! Absolutely nothing to do with that gendre. An experience worth visiting over and over - reminds strongly of the recent "Memento" - also xeroxed as "The Abyss" / "Event Horizon" / "Contact" - somewhat smatters of "Sphere" - this one pre-dates all of them. Superlative acting by the Russian cast - very Chekovian, leaning towards Jean-Paul Sartre's "No Exit" - within the sci-fi framework - an excellent alienation effect [for the Theatre buff]. HE: - In an attempt to solve "dark work afoot" on board a space station circling "SOLARIS" an ocean bound megaplanet finds 'the meaning of Life' {maybe} - without the Python team. SHE:- A replicant of his dead wife, created over and over again - a benevolent sphinx with her own set of riddles. [Slight touch of "Blade Runner" here]. Great DVD presentation - pristine widescreen print with lots of necessary extras - well worth visiting over and over again. Minimal but haunting score. An excellent companion to the equally confusing "2001" but not with the unnecessary glitz.
Rating:
Summary: A great release for a great film
Review: This DVD is a suitable and fitting release for what is, for me at least, one of the best films ever made. For over 20 years, ever since I first saw it, Solaris has been my favourite film, and I have steadfastly bought each new video and DVD release, and this is definitely the definitive version. Of its many strengths, by far the greatest is that the film is entirely on one disc, unlike the Russian release (that was also released by Artificial Eye in the UK). Another great strength is the inclusion of the 9 deleted and alternate scenes. I was utterly amazed to find that the DVD would contain these, especially as you have this feeling that anything cut on a film of this kind will never be seen or located again. Interestingly, and unlike the typical deleted scenes of Hollywood films, these scenes could easily be reinserted in the film without damaging it or slowing it down at all (my wife would argue that you can't slow this one down!). The interviews are superb, and it is interesting to compare the interview with Natalya Bondarchuk on this release with that on the original Russian DVD. This is so much better and more interesting, a real insight into the film. How amazing to hear her say that she didn't recognise a scene she was in because Tarkovsky and Yusov had rendered so much beauty and physical detail in the shot. Wonderful! It is timely that as Soderbergh's undoubted cop-out is about to hit the screens that this release reminds the public of what film-making is all about. There is a tendency to think that Tarkovsky's films are very intellectual and 'arty', certainly 'Stalker' could be accused of that, although it is undeniably both moving and beautiful. But the strength and the power of Solaris is that it is not intellectual, but emotional. It is a love story, a moving, haunting tale of lost love and longing. If Lem disliked it it is because it replaced his intellectuality with the human element. I for one believe that Tarkovsky was utterly right. This is a beautiful and moving film, and no serious film collection should be without it. Take advantage of Criterion's hard work and buy this DVD. You'll never buy a better one!
Rating: 
Summary: He missed the point
Review: I'm not going to argue whether or not Andrei Tarkovsky is a great filmaker; I believe the point is moot here. Stanislaw Lem himself disapproved of this movie, and for good reason. Mr Tarkovsky seems to have completely missed the point of this story! It is essentially, I believe, about the unkowableness of man. It is not about romance in orbit. It is about the question: How can we come to understand an alien intelligence if we cannot even come to terms with our own? Tarkovsky seems to have focused more on the emotional aspect rather than any of the thought-provoking questions Lem posed in his novel.
I disagree with the notion that a film maker has the right to splatter his psyche all over someone else's ideas. If he wants to say something, it would behoove him to write his own novel/screenplay and mess with that. I'm so tired of creative liberties being taken with any great writers' intentions.
Tarkovsky had stated that 2001: A Space Odyssey was too cold and inhuman, and he wanted to make a more human sci-fi movie. Well, I got news for you: good sci-fi is about the heights that man's intelligence can attain. 2001 was about beauty, and was in fact a very human movie. Solaris seems to enjoy being stuck mucking about in it's own inanities. The human mind is about rising above the banality of the dramas of emotion, not wallowing in them. I don't say that emotions should be ignored; of course they shouldn't. They're a large part of who we are, and are the fuel of our thought processes. But they should not dictate our actions, merely accent them.
Solaris should have expanded our minds, as the ending of 2001 blew all thinkers away, not provided us with yet another excuse to wonder what the hell is the point of going to space if we can't act like adults once we get there!
Rating:
Summary: Just sit back and gape in awe.
Review: Solaris (Andrei Tarkovski, 1972) There is endless debate among film snobs as to which of Andrei Tarkovski's seven feature-length films is the best; for me, there's no comparison. Solaris, Tarkovski's compelling, gorgeous epic retelling of Stanislaw Lem's thin (and somewhat mediocre, unlike most of Lem's work) novel, is first among equals. Clocking in at just under three hours, Solaris is the tale of Kris Kelvin (Donatas Banionis), a psychologist sent to the spaceship orbiting the ocean planet Solaris to find out what happened to the crew. He soon finds that the planet is a sentient being itself, and that it sends visitors to the crew-beings that are for all intents and purposes human, but are constructs from the crew's minds. The one it picks for Kelvin is his late wife Khari (Natalya Bondarchuk), and soon Kelvin finds himself in the same position as the rest of the crew: questioning everything he knows about humanity, existence, and what it all means. This is no new ground for filmmakers, to say the least (though Tarkovski does his best to put a sucker punch into it at the end), and so what separates Tarkovski's telling from the pack is his style. He allows the movie to set itself up at its own pace, giving us enough background to figure out what's going on once we get to Kelvin-in-space (at which point, the dialogue in the film drops to a minimum) and coming up with brilliant, extended symbolic shots that add the perfect touch of foreshadowing to the film. Unfortunately, Tarkovski does drop the ball in a few places, but nothing that makes the film less watchable. The ending is a little less ambiguous than one would normally demand from a movie that is, in essence, an existential work. Ironically, the final scene wants to tie up the loose ends pertaining to the main questions in the film, but leaves a number of other unanswered questions extant (which Soderbergh, in his more recent reworking, attempts to answer, and fails miserably on all counts). But in the end, if you see the movie with the right bunch, those unanswered questions are going to inspire endless debate. Which is what the movie should be doing anyway. It just goes about it in a rather odd, convoluted way.[...]
Rating:
Summary: Metaphor is Mightier than Special Effects
Review: I find it fascinating. Tarkovsky makes you see things beyond the actual images on the screen. There's a five-minute scene filmed on the superhighways of Tokyo circa 1971 in which an ex-astronaut sits in his autopilot car that made me think of the loneliness of space travel (think "Ground control to Major Tom"). It's a meditative series of shots that metaphorically conveys so much more than computer generated sequences. The Tarkovsky scholars on the audio commentary completely misunderstood it, saying it was the weakest portion of the film. Even though "Solaris" was billed as the Soviet "2001: A Space Odyssey," it really doesn't compare either in science or special effects. It's more about conscience and how the past haunts you. The premise has been used by Michael Crichton in "Sphere" and in other similar movies that don't go as deep as Tarkovsky. "Solaris" is too long, though. The first hour and the last half hour are the best (total running time 2 hours 45 minutes). Apparently, Lem hated this filmed version of his book, saying it took too many liberties. Basically Tarkovsky took the characters and situation and made up his own story. The interviews with people involved in the film, including the lead actress and the director of photography, are excellent. Now I want to see his other films "Andrei Rublev" and "Stalker."
|
