The Tarkovsky thread

[louisak]

The thread on 2001: A Space Odyssey generated a discussion about the work of Andrei Tarkovsky, specifically his film Solaris which has sometimes been called “the Russian 2001”. It looks like the moderator has pruned that thread and removed some posts that were off-topic. It seemed like a good idea to create a new thread for the discussion on Tarkovsky to continue.

Some possible avenues for discussion:

• Discuss Tarkovsky’s science-fiction films Stalker and Solaris in comparison to the books they were based on. Solaris was based on a novel by Stanislaw Lem whose works are readily available in English translation. Stalker was based (very loosely) on “Roadside Picnic” by Boris and Arkady Strugatsky, who are not as well-known in the West, but this book is also available in English. (The Strugatskys are fond of puns, which don’t translate well into other languages, that may be one reason they are not as well known).
• Tarkovsky’s earlier film Andrei Rublev offers interesting points for discussion because of its observations on religion, and the role of art (and of artists) in religion and society. Unfortunately its wide-screen compositions (Sovscope, similar to CinemaScope) make it difficult to enjoy on television, unless you have a big wide-screen TV and a good DVD or Blu-Ray disc. The discs from Criterion collection are the best, FYI.

 

[JurisPrudens]

The thread on 2001: A Space Odyssey generated a discussion about the work of Andrei Tarkovsky, specifically his film Solaris which has sometimes been called “the Russian 2001”. It looks like the moderator has pruned that thread and removed some posts that were off-topic. It seemed like a good idea to create a new thread for the discussion on Tarkovsky to continue.

Some possible avenues for discussion:

• Discuss Tarkovsky’s science-fiction films Stalker and Solaris in comparison to the books they were based on. Solaris was based on a novel by Stanislaw Lem whose works are readily available in English translation. Stalker was based (very loosely) on “Roadside Picnic” by Boris and Arkady Strugatsky, who are not as well-known in the West, but this book is also available in English. (The Strugatskys are fond of puns, which don’t translate well into other languages, that may be one reason they are not as well known).
• Tarkovsky’s earlier film Andrei Rublev offers interesting points for discussion because of its observations on religion, and the role of art (and of artists) in religion and society. Unfortunately its wide-screen compositions (Sovscope, similar to CinemaScope) make it difficult to enjoy on television, unless you have a big wide-screen TV and a good DVD or Blu-Ray disc. The discs from Criterion collection are the best, FYI.

I know that S. Lem did not like any of the movie adaptations of Solaris. He pointed out that his book concentrated on the issues in communicating with an alien intelligence, not on the hard memories and personal lives of the main characters.

 

[Arizona_Mike]

I quite enjoyed STALKER, although the way it played with the passage of time in a filmic sense may not appeal to everyone. The Strugatskys’ novel had quite a different tone and effect, but I liked that as well, particularly the ending.

 

[louisak]

I know that S. Lem did not like any of the movie adaptations of Solaris. He pointed out that his book concentrated on the issues in communicating with an alien intelligence, not on the hard memories and personal lives of the main characters.

Solaris is a great book of its genre, but rather bleak. Its message seems to be that if intelligent life exists anywhere else in the universe, it will be so alien from us that any meaningful communication will be impossible. The mere attempt to study the sentience on Solaris brings the Earth scientists to the point of madness - and they haven’t even tried to do it any harm. It does what it does to them, not with malevolent intent, but just by the fact of being what it is.

Needless to say, a film adaptation could hardly maintain such a pessimistic point of view. The filmmakers would have to give a more positive, humanistic interpretation to the story. Tarkvovsky did this quite deliberately, especially by introducing the long sequence (about 1/3 of the running time) at the beginning of his film, which takes place on Earth (the book has no action on Earth at all) and developing the relationships between the main character Kris and his family members - the book makes no mention of his family at all, the best of my memory. I think Lem found that especially unforgivable. I wonder if, under the laws of Poland and/or the USSR, the filmmakers had to get permission from him to adapt his story. If he did give permission, he obviously must have regretted it.

 

[JurisPrudens]

Solaris is a great book of its genre, but rather bleak. Its message seems to be that if intelligent life exists anywhere else in the universe, it will be so alien from us that any meaningful communication will be impossible. The mere attempt to study the sentience on Solaris brings the Earth scientists to the point of madness - and they haven’t even tried to do it any harm. It does what it does to them, not with malevolent intent, but just by the fact of being what it is.

Needless to say, a film adaptation could hardly maintain such a pessimistic point of view. The filmmakers would have to give a more positive, humanistic interpretation to the story. Tarkvovsky did this quite deliberately, especially by introducing the long sequence (about 1/3 of the running time) at the beginning of his film, which takes place on Earth (the book has no action on Earth at all) and developing the relationships between the main character Kris and his family members - the book makes no mention of his family at all, the best of my memory. I think Lem found that especially unforgivable. I wonder if, under the laws of Poland and/or the USSR, the filmmakers had to get permission from him to adapt his story. If he did give permission, he obviously must have regretted it.

Of course, he had the author’s sanction. And they quarreled a lot over the plot.

 

[StudentMI]

I ‘met’ Tarkovsky when I was still a child. Relentless reading about film and art, I saw his films mentioned continuously. I considered myself an atheist or agnostic (I no longer remember) when I first saw Solaris and Andrei Rublev. I watched them repeatedly, showed them to friends, as I couldn’t understand what I was seeing. After a year of watching all of his films on constant repeat, I regained my faith, slowly but surely. He literally made me open to Christ again, after years of denigrating Him and praising science as the be all end all. God bless his memory.