Register  |  Sign In
View unanswered posts | View active topics It is currently Tue Apr 23, 2024 3:18 pm



Reply to topic  [ 15 posts ] 
 Solaris (2002) 

What grade would you give this film?
A 25%  25%  [ 1 ]
B 0%  0%  [ 0 ]
C 0%  0%  [ 0 ]
D 25%  25%  [ 1 ]
F 50%  50%  [ 2 ]
Total votes : 4

 Solaris (2002) 
Author Message
College Boy Z

Joined: Mon Oct 11, 2004 8:40 pm
Posts: 36662
Post Solaris (2002)
Solaris

Image

Quote:
Solaris is a 2002 science fiction film directed by Steven Soderbergh and starring George Clooney. It is based on the science fiction novel by Polish writer Stanisław Lem, which also inspired the critically acclaimed 1972 Soviet film of the same name, directed by Andrei Tarkovsky, and a 1968 TV film. Chris Kelvin is played by George Clooney, and Rheya by Natascha McElhone. Borrowing heavily from the Tarkovsky film, this version of Solaris is a meditative psychodrama set almost entirely on a space station orbiting Solaris, adding flashbacks to the previous experiences of its main characters on Earth. Chris struggles with the questions of Solaris' motivation, his beliefs and memories, and reconciling what was lost with an opportunity for a second chance.


Mon Feb 13, 2006 7:36 pm
Profile
Extraordinary

Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2004 1:13 pm
Posts: 15197
Location: Planet Xatar
Post 
YAWN!

Stinkingly bad!

0 out of 5.


Mon Feb 13, 2006 9:27 pm
Profile
You must have big rats
User avatar

Joined: Sat Oct 16, 2004 4:28 pm
Posts: 92093
Location: Bonn, Germany
Post 
D


I am not a big fan of Tarkovsky's original, but at least it presented very original and intriguing ideas, paired with a nice ending, while still being a bad adaptation of its source material. Stanislav Lem's original novel was much more of a sci-fi book than both movies make it seem. This Solaris is just a pure bore. There are nice visuals, especially of Solaris itself, but that is pretty much the only redeeming feature of the whole movie. I don't remember ever looking at my watch as often as I did during this movie.

Terrible.

_________________
The greatest thing on earth is to love and to be loved in return!

Image


Mon Feb 13, 2006 11:51 pm
Profile WWW
loyalfromlondon
User avatar

Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 6:31 pm
Posts: 19697
Location: ville-marie
Post Re: Solaris (2002)
I dunno, I though it was pretty exceptional. It's basically just a streamlined version of Tarkovsky's film, but it retains all of the important themes and ideas while still managing to blaze its own trail. It's not really a sci-fi work - neither was the original - but it still manages to provide some interesting scientific ideas, as well as pure visual eye candy. But, as in the original, this film is almost completely psychological. It really only diverges from Tarkovsky's film near the end, but the themes it brings up in the last twenty minutes or so are devastating and thoughtful. Though I love, love, love the last shot of the original, in some ways the ending here is better. It's more ambiguous, more interesting, and more powerful. It reminded me of the end to 2001 in a lot of ways. I think this film has an unfortunate reputation: sure it's slow, confusing, and - dare I say - boring, but if you watch it carefully, and really think about what it's saying, I don't see how you can't be affected by it. One of the best sci-fi works, remakes, and even films I've ever seen.

_________________
Magic Mike wrote:
zwackerm wrote:
If John Wick 2 even makes 30 million I will eat 1,000 shoes.


Same.


Algren wrote:
I don't think. I predict. ;)


Tue Mar 11, 2008 12:23 am
Profile
Extraordinary

Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2004 1:13 pm
Posts: 15197
Location: Planet Xatar
Post Re: Solaris (2002)
trixster wrote:
One of the best sci-fi works, remakes, and even films I've ever seen.

OMG, trixster - - come back!!! :noway:


Tue Mar 11, 2008 5:19 am
Profile
loyalfromlondon
User avatar

Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 6:31 pm
Posts: 19697
Location: ville-marie
Post Re: Solaris (2002)
Yes, I'm very sorry to have disappointed you Bradford, since you've got such excellent taste in film.

_________________
Magic Mike wrote:
zwackerm wrote:
If John Wick 2 even makes 30 million I will eat 1,000 shoes.


Same.


Algren wrote:
I don't think. I predict. ;)


Tue Mar 11, 2008 10:41 am
Profile
Extraordinary

Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2004 1:13 pm
Posts: 15197
Location: Planet Xatar
Post Re: Solaris (2002)
trixster wrote:
Yes, I'm very sorry to have disappointed you Bradford, since you've got such excellent taste in film.

It's not just me, trixster - - your Solaris review is a stain on the whole of KJ. :(


Wed Mar 12, 2008 5:16 am
Profile
Teenage Dream

Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 12:20 am
Posts: 9247
Post Re: Solaris (2002)
Bradley Witherberry wrote:
trixster wrote:
Yes, I'm very sorry to have disappointed you Bradford, since you've got such excellent taste in film.

It's not just me, trixster - - your Solaris review is a stain on the whole of KJ. :(


You are probably the biggest hypocrite on the whole of the internets. Bravo.

Anyways, trixster is correct. Soderbergh's Solaris is a masterpiece, and it co-exists perfectly with Tarkovsky's film. There is nothing "boring" about it.


Wed Mar 12, 2008 11:12 am
Profile
College Boy T

Joined: Mon Oct 11, 2004 7:52 pm
Posts: 16020
Post Re: Solaris (2002)
You know, I felt the same way when it came out...

There was a serious backlash to this film; I don't remember why - maybe because it bombed, was too heavily marketed for the subject matter, whatever. But, when I saw it, I swear it was my favorite movie of the month. Two of my friends felt the same way. If we we were one of the cliques on that map Janis hands Caty in Mean Girls, we were definitely "Weird kids who liked Solaris."

(Or, at least that's how we wanted to be known, but no one cared besides "Rotten Tomatoes is my bible" hipsters).

I saw it six months later and didn't like it. Partly because I wanted to disassociate myself from my two friends, partly because I was more ADD and Matrix Reloaded was right around the corner, partly because it is, truly, a mess of a movie.

Nonetheless...Solaris builds a connection - in a weird, abstract, almost stream of conscious-like way - with the audience that hasn't been matched by any other Soderbergh film. Its roughness is certainly its strength.


Wed Mar 12, 2008 2:14 pm
Profile
Extraordinary

Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2004 1:13 pm
Posts: 15197
Location: Planet Xatar
Post Re: Solaris (2002)
I saw it at the first screening on opening day and was one of the few people in the theatre who sat throught the entire film - - people were not just walking out, they were loudly cursing as they left.

Still, if some of you managed to get some enjoyment out of this POS, then all power to you - - but "best movie ever" - - C'MON!!!


Wed Mar 12, 2008 3:39 pm
Profile
You must have big rats
User avatar

Joined: Sat Oct 16, 2004 4:28 pm
Posts: 92093
Location: Bonn, Germany
Post Re: Solaris (2002)
I am not big on Tarkovsky's original, but I can understand its intentions and see the art in it.

The remake, however, is just crap.

_________________
The greatest thing on earth is to love and to be loved in return!

Image


Wed Mar 12, 2008 6:02 pm
Profile WWW
Devil's Advocate
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2005 2:30 am
Posts: 37993
Post Re: Solaris (2002)
I guess I need to see this

It'll be a good measure of how much to the darkside I have fallen :unsure:

_________________
Shack’s top 50 tv shows - viewtopic.php?f=8&t=90227


Wed Mar 12, 2008 6:11 pm
Profile
loyalfromlondon
User avatar

Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 6:31 pm
Posts: 19697
Location: ville-marie
Post Re: Solaris (2002)
Bradley Witherberry wrote:
I saw it at the first screening on opening day and was one of the few people in the theatre who sat throught the entire film - - people were not just walking out, they were loudly cursing as they left.

Still, if some of you managed to get some enjoyment out of this POS, then all power to you - - but "best movie ever" - - C'MON!!!

K, first of all, I never said "best movie ever". I said "one of the best films I've seen", which is pretty different.

And I'll just use one of your standardized responses to the number of people who disliked this film - "I know it's popular to hate on it". Do you not realize how hypocritical you're being?

And Shack, you found The Thin Red Line to be unwatchably boring, so you probably won't like this. Just sayin'.

_________________
Magic Mike wrote:
zwackerm wrote:
If John Wick 2 even makes 30 million I will eat 1,000 shoes.


Same.


Algren wrote:
I don't think. I predict. ;)


Wed Mar 12, 2008 9:05 pm
Profile
Devil's Advocate
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2005 2:30 am
Posts: 37993
Post Re: Solaris (2002)
Hard to say, my issue with the Thin Red Line was not that it was arty. It was that the characters and stories were all flat and the narration made it one of the more pretentious movies I've seen. And I generally don't like war movies. I do have love for the Lynch movies I've seen, I'm Not There, etc.

_________________
Shack’s top 50 tv shows - viewtopic.php?f=8&t=90227


Thu Mar 13, 2008 1:21 am
Profile
Extraordinary

Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2004 1:13 pm
Posts: 15197
Location: Planet Xatar
Post Re: Solaris (2002)
trixster wrote:
Bradley Witherberry wrote:
I saw it at the first screening on opening day and was one of the few people in the theatre who sat throught the entire film - - people were not just walking out, they were loudly cursing as they left.

Still, if some of you managed to get some enjoyment out of this POS, then all power to you - - but "best movie ever" - - C'MON!!!

K, first of all, I never said "best movie ever". I said "one of the best films I've seen", which is pretty different.

Glad to see you're coming around.


trixster wrote:
And I'll just use one of your standardized responses to the number of people who disliked this film - "I know it's popular to hate on it". Do you not realize how hypocritical you're being?

Errr... I hate this movie because I watched it - - on opening day ... before reading a review... because I'm a fan of artsy sci-fi - - not because it's "popular" to do so. I reserve my criticism for those who don't give an unpopular movie a chance, and especially for those who don't even bother seeing them before dissing them (hard to believe, but that has happened quite frequently here at KJ)...


Shack wrote:
Hard to say, my issue with the Thin Red Line was not that it was arty. It was that the characters and stories were all flat and the narration made it one of the more pretentious movies I've seen.

Oh, oh... those issues don't bode well for your enjoyment of Solaris (2002) - - but I hope that you do get a chance to see it - - I'd love to hear your review...


Thu Mar 13, 2008 5:31 am
Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Reply to topic   [ 15 posts ] 

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 85 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group.
Designed by STSoftware for PTF.