Navigating through the world of motion pictures one step at a time. Works on the channel will revolve around film theory, history, and my interests. Let us learn from one another and better ourselves through understanding others' perspectives.
"The aim of art is to prepare a person for death, to plough and harrow his soul, rendering it capable of turning to good." - Andrei Tarkovsky
Big fan of the Talking Heads and Stop Making Sense. Have you seen Gimme Shelter? It's another great concert film. Since it's by the Maysles it'll more similar to Woodstock, which they also made. You should check it out. ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-x7UsBmavjsE.html&ab_channel=HDRetroTrailers
I know that I am a year behind, but this is another amazing video essay about a wonderful film. I think your essay including the wonderful choice of that ambient music from Jonny Easton hits on all of the points of the film especially the malleability of our memories and how memory isn't a video recorder. I love also the discussion from Tarkovsky's book about memory I think that the film was a moving testament and meditation on the evolution of love between a parent and child. That as a child your love for a parent is often because of your need for them and also that they care about you to provide what you need but also your sources of fun. But you don't really understand yourself when you're younger (one could argue that you may never be able to fully understand your own motivations at any age) so how can you understand your parent as something beyond being a parent? As an adult you realize that you are more alike with your parents then you would like to admit (the shared depression you discuss) and that as your relationship with them evolves, you learn more about them as a person and why they are how they are. But you can never fully understand them because no matter your age they are always your parent. It's a feat we can never quite achieve but the effort to do so continues as a manifestation of unconditional love. Sophie (and Wells by extension) doesn't have the luxury of having her father alive but this film keeps that love going. Such a painfully beautiful film and a wonderful essay.
Ces ordinateurs près programmé ne retransmets pas ce qu' écrit réellement et le texte est complètement plein d'erreurs de nos véritables versions écrites...Faux vraiment tout surveiller...
Pour moi qui regardé plus de 15 fous le film de Ryan O'neal en Anglais et en Français il m'a été difficile de comparer sa performance d' acteur dont je me suis moi même reconnu et retrouvé et par rapport à Ryan Gosling même si c'est un bon acteur il n' aurait jamais dû imiter The Driver après Ryan O'neal car le niveau de différence est criant au bénéfice de Ryan O'neal magnifique et nettement supérieur dans ce rôle du coup je n'ai regardé The Driver avec Ryan Gosling qu'une seule fois loin très loin de Ryan O'Neal. Ryan O'neal n'a jamais danser dans un film comme Ryan Gosling d' où une image de comédie américaine pas sérieuse pour jour The Driver
Apologies for the mistake in the intro - the director of the film is Jeff Nichols, not Mike - my inner Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf appreciation unexpectedly showed up 😳
At the start of the film, Jessica sees a man run scared away from a loud noise on the street, which is likely a bus exhaust backfiring. He is the only one to be startled by it. This mirrors Jessica's journey with her sound. She's unsettled by a sudden, unknown sound which is later revealed to have originated from a (space) vehicle. I guess this might imply that everyone can hear the mysterious sound, but only Jessica is concerned by it.
Thank you for watching the video! Enjoying House of the Dragon a lot, love how the stakes are steadily rising. The trailer looks ambitious, I'm banking on the visual prowess to build upon the last season, fingers crossed 🤞
Thank you for watching the video! I unfortunately haven't found any way to stream it as of now. I'd keep checking the National Theatre Live website, but if I find an alternative I'll let you know!
Well thank you for verifying that the movie and the book are utterly dissimilar. My question would be why does Tarkovsky have to butcher material ? He did the same thing to Solaris. If you hadn't read the book you wouldn't even know it was the same material. Where did the dog come from? What's up with the daughter having telekinetic powers at the end? As far as I'm concerned you just reviewed two works of art that only have two words in similarity.
Thank you for watching the video. I remember reading that Lem thought Tarkovsky's rendition of Solaris was completely different - it's an interesting approach but I understand that it can be alienating to hardcore fans of the book. As for the dog and the daughter, I think they're representatives of anomalies created by human desires gone awry.
@@cinematothemax yes, but inventions of the director. nowhere found in the book. at least he changed the title of this one. i don't want to seem unappreciative of his work but i was fairly disgusted waiting for the completely non sequitur driving sequence to end in Solaris. i loved that book and he turned it into an anti science screed in film. the recent adaptation was a bit better but they turned it into being all about the wife appearing. there was so much more. anyway, it's an interesting analysis of adapting literature to film. cheers!
I don't think the movie is about emotion versus analysis, but more faith versus technology. Tarkovsky has stated repeatedly that what he considered the main crisis of the the 20th century was that the speed of technological advancement was not paired with a spiritual advancement and hence resulted in a crisis of faith. The magical ending of the movie with the daughter sitting at the table with a glass that starts ringing through vibrations that could be caused by a train approaching from which we hear revolutionary music and as it passes we see the girl looking at the glass and then moving by itself. Is it science that caused it or a spiritual force? It is not answered, we have to find our own answer. The materialist scientiest scoffs at faith and merely sees it as a dangerous uncontrollable product of the mind that escapes rational thought and therefor has no value. Indeed the room as the epitomy of faith made manifest is the ultimate threat to this worldview and therefore needs to be destroyed. The writer refuses to go in as, referencing the story of Porcupine, no one can truly know their deepest desires and therefore there is no point in going into the room, so in the end no one goes in as the scientist realizes that the room presents no threat as it never realizes what the people going in think they want. It is the ultimate denouement and when they return from the zone, Stalker is desperate, all hope lost of anyone actually persuing their happiness through the room in the zone, but the last scene with the daughter at least, indeed not shot in colour for nothing (the only scenes in colour are shot in the zone, so apparently the zone is at work here) leaves the possibility of hope, a spark.
Thank you very much for your comment; I completely understand your perspective. I view reason as a precursor to scientific advancement itself, especially in the case of the Zone, with emotion often arising as a barrier that stifles these advancements. (Drawing from your point about the scientist) In reality, emotion/analysis and faith/technology are intertwined; their division is what generates struggle.
@@cinematothemax I always wondered about the significance of the train, happens more than once in the movie and always looked what the music was tgat accompanied its approach, never could find listing of the music. I always considered it a reference to the materialistic world view of communism thundering along, shaping the force of history in Soviet society, but I could be wrong of course. To me Stalker is a thematic twin to Solaris.
Great analysis presented with great articulation. Appreciate you putting it all in context, too - enriched my understanding of the films and filmmakers. Bravo.
Want to watch the originak stalker? Watch the day the earth stood still. Read the book the sphere. The monkeys paw and bedazzled. All made well before the 70's. All american.
How do you even find those things similar? The Day the Earth Stood Still has nothing to do with Stalker. Are you sure you making your arguments in good faith?
Stolen American ideas. When a UFO lands in Washington, D.C., bearing a message for Earth's leaders, all of humanity stands still. Klaatu (Michael Rennie) has come on behalf of alien life who have been watching Cold War-era nuclear proliferation on Earth. But it is Klaatu's soft-spoken robot Gort that presents a more immediate threat to onlookers. A single mother (Patricia Neal) and her son teach the world about peace and tolerance in this moral fable, ousting the tanks and soldiers that greet the alien's arrival.
I just can't find anything positive to say about these. They're literally absolutely 100 percent plagiarized from American older sci Fi stories and movies. This whole zone idea is literally stolen from the day the earth stood still essentially.
Imagine Americans getting excited seeing a Russian film adaptation made out of books that literally absolutely stole American sci Fi ideas and stories.
there's literally nothing American in Strugatsky brothers novels, western sci-fi of the time was focused on space operas, AI and stuff that you would expect to see in a Star Trek episode. Stugatsky brothers started from whimsical scientific optimism and satire and moved towards a moody weird fiction with the focus on human condition later in their careers. Their biggest insperation was Stanisław Lem, a Polish sci-fi writer.
These are both horrible books and movies and the video game stalker sadly enough made both these incoherent ramblings, interesting. The stalker movie was so stupid and slow moving it was a waste of time watching it. Play the video game and get the entire story of both books essentially. But wayyyyyyyyyy better. I give them credit for essentially stealing old American 1940's and 50's and especially 60's sci Fi movie ideas. Must have been cool for Russians to finally get a taste of sci Fi at the year of basically the 1980's.. but for Americans we already had this with the curse of the mummy and all those horror sci Fi movies. We've already seen all this and heard it all before. This was literally basically mixing old American 50's sci Fi with Russian gulags. Literally absolutely stolen from American archives.
Обожаю этот фильм!! Он лучший в 20 веке!!!!! Самые замечательнык актёры в главных ролях: ГРЕГОРИ И ОДРИ!! Лучшая киношная пара, но жаль, что не в жизни........... Любимые актёры миллионов зрителей!!!!😊😊❤❤🫠🫠
What a great essay! I really enjoyed the way you linked the film with previous movies, especially "Wings of Desire". I think that a great part of our difficculty in being humans is finding meaning and significance in little things; and I think this two movies make a really good point on that, althout in really different ways. Thank you for your time and effort in putting this ideias together! :)
Using The Tree of Life footage is such an inspired choice. Interestingly enough, I’d say The Thin Red Line is another great movie that shows the impact of what we consider rational and pragmatic on nature and how alien it is to nature itself.
This was my first film I went to during COVID as well. I was traveling and found myself in Oban, Scotland in a theater with about 20 seats and only two other people. Tripped me out.....I walked out thoroughly confused, but affected. I'm unresolved and resisting Googling explaining it to me....I probably should rewatch it and see if I can decipher it.
I love the Tarkovsky film but Roadside Picinic deserves a more true adaptation. Tarkovsky does a very subtle approach to the concept but I would love to see artifacts and anomalies full depicted.
yes.agreed. that would require some judicial CGI which he would (probably) eschew. he did the best he could in an old soviet era coal power station. filming in toxic coal ashes.. the weird artifacts were half the fun. the pursuit of them the other half.
If you believe that Arthur was created by the Vulture's wish for "perfect children", then you can interpret him to be a human created by the zone, not merely mutated like "monkey" but a person of alien design, and as such, his final wish that Red regurgitates to the golden sphere (giving away his own wish to fulfil Arthur's, in a way) is like the zone asking itself what it thinks humanity wants, or what it wants for humanity in accordance with whatever "perfect" means.
Thank you for this awesome video. The Perfect kiss is an absolute BANGER and tour de force the likes of which we have not really seen since !! I mean ffs this jam contains the best frog solo ever recorded!! Can anyone name a better use of amphibians in a pop masterpiece? No, no you can’t.
Thanks for this nice analysis. Now recent news: "Trump must still cough up at least $90M in E. Jean Carroll verdict". Now it is a long shot, but how many of the (anonymous) jury members might have watched the play? One? All of them? It was in New York, after all. So, technically at least, one woman just could be a game changer. Jodie Comer has become the embodiement of the strong woman, both, in her roles and as a real world person. Most of her roles are about traumatized women, abused women, women facing incredible heartship and seemingly insurmountable obstacles, yet they always prevail or meet their unavoidable fate with eyes wide open. That touches the hearts and minds of countless people around the world -- and not only women and girls!
@@cinematothemax Watched it again, and I was thinking: Jodie C is part of the forces that work to change "the system", slowly chiselling away at it by changing one heart at a time -- or a few hundred. Or a few million...
