• ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️



    Film & Television

    Welcome Guest


    ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️
  • ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️
    Forum Rules Film Chit-Chat
    Recently Watched Best Documentaries
    ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️
  • Film & TV Moderators: ghostfreak

Film: Stalker

rate this movie

  • [img]http://i.bluelight.ru/g//543/1star.gif[/img]

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • [img]http://i.bluelight.ru/g//543/2stars.gif[/img]

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • [img]http://i.bluelight.ru/g//543/3stars.gif[/img]

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • [img]http://i.bluelight.ru/g//543/4stars.gif[/img]

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • [img]http://i.bluelight.ru/g//543/5stars.gif[/img]

    Votes: 3 100.0%

  • Total voters
    3

Fausty

Bluelighter
Joined
Dec 3, 2004
Messages
1,369
Referring to Soviet director Tarkovsky's Stalker.

I read a review once that referred to it as "the greatest film ever made by the greatest director ever." It seemed hyperbolic, but now I agree.

It took several revisitations for me to start getting the flow of the movie. Now it is somewhat of a permanent part of my psyche. I think of scenes from it often, during the day. I hear sounds and they remind me of scenes in the movie (the clack-clack-clack of the hand-track seems to haunt the outer edges of my my hearing).

And the landscapes, they haunt not just my daily perceptions but also my dreams at night. It is under my skin in a way only [o]Dead Man[/i] has done before, but in a far more totalistic way.

There's a question of fundamental importance embedded in this film. It was also kicking around inside Solaris, but here Tarkovsky has brought it fully into view and really taken the lid off. And I don't think this question has an answer - to answer it is to step outside of mortality. We can't.

The scene in "the room" was shot, as continuous take, first try. The rain was not added artificially - it was a short squall that arrived during shooting.

Several of the folks involved in making the film - including Tarkovsky himself - contracted strange illnesses as a result of the toxins in the settings they chose for the film. Most were dead within several years. The film carries enormous power.

Peace,

Fausty
 
Nice. I've had a copy of Stalker for about 9 months now and haven't watched it yet. I've seen Solaris and rate it highly. It was my introduction to Tarkovsky, and led me to Stalker. Not really sure why I haven't watched it yet, but i'll try to sometime this week.
 
EJ said:
Nice. I've had a copy of Stalker for about 9 months now and haven't watched it yet. I've seen Solaris and rate it highly. It was my introduction to Tarkovsky, and led me to Stalker. Not really sure why I haven't watched it yet, but i'll try to sometime this week.

It's a challenging movie to watch, at once beautiful and complex. It verges on disjointed, in some of the dialog - critical elements get mentioned only once, and unless your Russian is much better than mine (which consists of a few words :\ ), you'll be dependent on the subtitles to catch these clues or miss entire threads of the movie. It's similar in Solaris, I think - I had to read the original novella and watch the Soderberg version a few times before I finally started to "get" the narrative arc of the Tarkovsky masterpiece. Plus I keep getting hypnotized by the cinematography, and just can't help but fall into the purely visual element of the film.

Oh, and that handsome black GSD is. . . mrrrr. Sorry, sorry - he just brings that extra spice of masculine charisma to the movie that sets every part of me humming in perfectly resonant frequency. And I think he's critical to the deepest levels of meaning in the film, the more I watch it.

In an nutshell, if you liked his Solaris I suspect that your experience with Stalker will be overwhelming. Try to set aside some really quiet, uninterrupted time - it flows in one long arc, and stopping midway made it much harder for me to catch the larger rhythm of the movie.

Having watched it again over the weekend, I've developed awareness of an entirely different, meta-level theme in the movie. In fact, it might be the thing I was "feeling" previously, but couldn't put fingers on. And, like in Solaris, it's a question so fundamental - and so fundamentally un-answerable - that I think it stands entirely separate as a result.

Peace,

Fausty
 
Fausty said:
Try to set aside some really quiet, uninterrupted time - it flows in one long arc, and stopping midway made it much harder for me to catch the larger rhythm of the movie.
That's my biggest problem, especially over the last 6 months. Not only that, but when i'm sitting down to watch a movie that's critically acclaimed, I want to make sure i'm very much emotionally available for it.

I saw Paris, Texas for the first time about a year ago in perfect set and setting and it became one of the best movies i've ever seen after only one viewing. I got similar satisfaction out of The Sweet Hereafter. I tried watching both at a later date when my head wasn't in it, and it was a waste of time. I guess that's why i've been holding off watching Stalker for so long.

I've got tomorrow and Thursday relatively free now, i'll do my best.

EDIT: There's only one movie that's gotten into my psyche similar to the way you've described yourself with Stalker, that's Picnic at Hanging Rock. I won't pretend it's a complex movie, it's far from it. To say nothing of it's plot, it's the atmosphere, mystery, and much ambiguity that do it for me.
 
Last edited:
I've just found out that there's a "bonus material" DVD available for Stalker - it's now on top of my Netflix queue, with high hopes for great stuff.

Would you go into The Room?

Peace,

Fausty
 
A truly amazing film. There are few words to aptly describe it. Stunning.
 
Top