Films/DVD Asylum

Posted by Audiophilander (A) on January 23, 2006 at 11:52:38

In Reply to: A few thoughts on Solaris posted by Victor Khomenko on January 23, 2006 at 06:15:43:

The interminably overindulgent tunnel sequence in Tvarsky's, excuse me, Tarkovsky's version is snore inducing enough (one wonders if the film was originally intended as a travelogue, gone awry). But the remake, in spite of it's shorter comparative length (at least it "feels" shorter, because my wife and I were able to stay awake through it) doesn't accomplish that much more than it's predecessor by eschewing the long contemplative nature shots, tunnels and talking heads sitting around a living room trying to discuss or rather avoid discussing (I couldn't figure out which) the unusual events relating to the space flight.

>>>"Seeing the Tarkovsky's film later did not produce such a consternation - it seemed to retain the general idea, the mood of the book, even though some here would argue it had "distorted" it - I do not recall any such distortion... by heart..." <<<

This isn't to take away from the author's work, but writing is a different medium; sometimes the written word doesn't translate to the film medium unless interpreted in a manner inconsistant with the author's original vision. Then again, some great works may never translate to film well.

>>> "To me the most important element in such things is the mood, which as I said was preserved... the tension, the melancholy, the insightful self-examination... the terrible mental anguish associated with "visitors" and memories... I thought it was all extremely palpable in the first version." <<<

"Mood" is an apt description of both of these Solaris films, ...but I don't mean that in a good way. Mood is all these films have to offer, no involving story per se, no grand revelation, no deep meaning; it's like watching paint dry. One verion, the original, is quite literally sleep inducing; the other, is a claustrophobic hodge-podge of uninvolving pretentiousness (Alpo masquerading as liver pate).

>>> "Would it simply be just another lame sci-fi movie?" <<<

Look, my grey poupon snorting friend, I doubt that you would know great SF fare if it came up and bit you on your Napoleonic arse, but believe me there are plenty of fine science fiction films out there for those who appreciate the genre. OTOH, one might conclude that you are just a lame viewer-reviewer; have you ever considered that, m'bucko?

AuPh