Platicsco Good story, Not enough for a whole film

Nessieldwi Very interesting film. Was caught on the premise when seeing the trailer but unsure as to what the outcome would be for the showing. As it turns out, it was a very good film.

TrueHello Fun premise, good actors, bad writing. This film seemed to have potential at the beginning but it quickly devolves into a trite action film. Ultimately it's very boring.

Keira Brennan The movie is made so realistic it has a lot of that WoW feeling at the right moments and never tooo over the top. the suspense is done so well and the emotion is felt. Very well put together with the music and all.

joeortega-25621 Stanislaw Lem's Solaris is a highly regarded book and Andrei Tarkovsky's film adaption is pretty much spot on, though Tarkovsky being an auteur brings his own touch to the proceedings. The story is about a cosmonaut who is sent to a space station revolving around a mysterious planet in the future. The cinematography and production design are haunting- the spaceship is so different than what we usually see in Hollywood. The acting is restraint and works here. Some people have said there is a sense of pretentiousness and rightfully so as some scenes go on way too long. But hey, this is Tarkovsky we speak of. This is one of the finest hard science fiction films and you should see it at any cost.

EnoVarma It is the view of many, that Solaris needs to be seen at least twice. The same is, by the way, true with every Tarkovski film. I've seen Solaris several times, also on film, and it has always puzzled me to a degree. The first time I hardly understood the story and I didn't get the ending at all, which seems stupid to me, now. And yet, Solaris is very much a straight-forward, chronological film.It just "connects the dots" in a highly evolved way. For example, there is a sequence about 30 minutes in, that has nothing to do with the plot and doesn't really deepen any of the characters. This sequence lasts a full five minutes, has no dialogue whatsoever and is a series of shots from a car driving forward on a highway in urban Tokyo. Couple of times we're shown a secondary character with his son. Audio track is ultra-modern, atonal and expressive. This seemingly inconsequential scene is my favourite in the whole film. Through pure cinema Tarkovski is able to tell the viewer a lot about the nature of the Earth depicted here. We understand better our desire to expand our limits into the spave. Plus, the sequence is utterly hypnotic, enhanced by a sudden cut to an incredibly gorgeous black-and-white shot of a pond with trees hovering over it.And that is the startegy of Tarkovski. He avoids anything familiar and tries to tell and show us something we DON'T know.After repeated viewings, I still feel that with Solaris Tarkovski was only almost completely successful in his pursuits. I have no main criticism to offer, just minor ones.See, there must be a reason why I still feel that the first 45 minutes SPECIFICALLY of Solaris are among the most beautifully realised in Tarkovski's career. This first part largely takes place in a beautiful countryside cottage. Tarkovski is a great depictor of nature (perhaps the greatest), and there is a slight sense of underwhelm during the rest of the film which takes place in a space station, in interiors. In comparison, Stalker, which takes place mostly in exteriors, is also philosophically a richer piece.Interestingly, Solaris, set on a space station, shows practically none of the surrounding space. Again, Tarkovski works against conventions. This and other practices make Solaris an anti-thesis to Kubrick's 2001. Another example: there are few special effects, most of them of the planet Solaris. On the other hand, they are exceptionally beautiful.About the actors: I love them, but this is not a view shared by all. Understandably. Banionis especially is so understated that it's up to you to decide whether he is lacking something. On the other hand, he makes a great pair to Natalya Bondarchuk's more expressive performance.Solaris is a film by a master film maker with only a handful of equals in history. The result is still unique in the realm of science-fiction.

sergelamarche This film is reminiscent of the old Star Trek if the captain was a bit melancholic and targetted by alien intelligence. The theme of the film is as if the planet's intelligence reaches the men on the station to keep them there. It uses love, the rematerialization of loved ones to entrap finally our hero. It's a B movie for us but was an A movie at the time for the Russian empire. Some pretty good effects for the time, looking quite cheap by today's standards. The story moves at snail pace possibly to keep us guessing and show us special effects.

Hitchcoc This is more than a Sci Fi film. It is intelligent, provocative, and extremely well directed. It involves a planet, Solaris, which is a puzzle to astronomers. Astronauts have been there and one, in particular, has been affected by the planet. Of course, he is initially thought to be suffering from some mental imbalance and hallucinations. But as explorations go on, there seems to be something about the oceans on the planet. They seem to be sentient. While this is an incredibly long film, it is a joy to watch. I believe that this is a film that requires a second look, especially if you think you got it. Of course, it's in Russian, and that makes certain demands on English speaking viewers, but many of the events are visual, with fairly long, almost surreal moments. I put this near the top of all the films I have ever seen.