solaris

[sheepinavacuum]

Funny how this film is compared to Stanley Kubrick’s 2001: A Space Odyssey when it is far closer to his vision of Stephen King’s The Shining in its atmosphere, direction and themes.

[newguy90]

Tarkovsky believed Solaris was a failure because he felt the sci-fi elements overshadowed the themes he wanted to explore. He didn't set out to make a science fiction movie, he only wanted to use it as a backdrop for his own ideas. He felt he got it right with Stalker.

[rocketman1179]

i haven't seen this one. I saw some comments below, can anyone explain what part of the story was in the old version that is missing from the new one, I would appreciate it.

[Veronikiux]

No se puede comparar la Solaris de Tarkovsky con la versión de Soderbergh. Tarkovsky es un poeta y un innovador. Soderbergh maquila cine y hasta la idea del remake revela la falta de imaginación de Hollywood

[lealtadperonista]

adhiero

[pablo1835rigel]

Me gusta la version solariana del año 2002.

[Eikinkloster]

la version del 2002 es una porqueria quando comparada con la de el gran tarkovsky.

[2Patricia1]

what is this about?

[bennihana123]

I much prefer the 2002's planet and music, but the 1972 version is a better film.

[do1youhaveagrudge]

who's the actor's name?

[daraekhe]

Donatas Banionis

[do1youhaveagrudge]

its better

[jetken11]

tagag feel nyo

[nebby6]

I much prefer this 1972 version to the Soderbergh one. I couldn't believe that the new one omitted perhaps the most important monologue that the story had to offer. That, and the actress in the original was extremely convincing.

[FlavioGirl]

thank you, someone who also likes the original version better. donatas and natalya were excellent in this film. :)

[danpmalmgren]

What was the jist of the monologue that was left out?

[nebby6]

The girl had this wicked speech that did a great job of outlining the thesis for the story. Really moving.

[loopiewho]

glad the steven soderbergh dvd film is out now its wonderful and really does the 1961 book by S Lem credit full makes to all for the 2001 version far as im concerned

sorry Andrei Tarkovsky A+ for trying tho in 1972 cant have been easy with out digi and computers etc so dont beat you self up ok mwah x

[lenesu86]

@loopiewho Your comment is retarded. You must have totally missed the point of Tarkovsky's film.

[sbuffoni]

masterpieceeeeeeee!

[BennyProfane]

No fair, you edited out her boobies in the liquid-oxygen-drinking scene!

[sillstaw]

Yeah, that's the entire reason for the scene. If you want boobs, you should go to a porn site.

[em23]

thank you for posting this.

[yellowsicktoner]

i have heard tarkovsky always depicted this film as his worst, as a terrible failure. i don't know if anybody could understand that. this film depicts love so strongly.

[GoblinGirl]

He didn't think it was a failure, but he was disappointed in it. A lot of it had to do with disagreements with the original novel's author, Stanislaw Lem. Problems with Mosfilm as well. You're right, though, it's an amazing film.