Gonna watch tarkovksy's stalker tonight. This is my first tarkovsky. What to expect?

Gonna watch tarkovksy's stalker tonight. This is my first tarkovsky. What to expect?

You making a thread in an hour crying about how you don't like it,

Is this about the game that /k/ circlejerks to?

You're probably going to think it's overrated

>not going with Mirror instead

Don't start with Stalker. Start with Ivan's Childhood.

Really don't start with Stalker.

Yes, it's based on the game

These threads are fucking stupid. "What to expect", what do you fucking think? Go and watch it to find out.

A good nap.

Tarkovsky is a very unique filmmaker with a very unique style. Stalker might not be a good place to start. I suggest starting with Ivan's Childhood. Maybe go to Solaris/Mirror after that. If you liked Solaris then I suggest you watch Stalker, if you liked Mirror I suggest you watch Andrei Rublev.

Don't start with Stalker
Nostalghia is much more approachable

what are you doing you fucking idiot

start with his FIRST film, same as ANY other director

A cinematic awakening if you've never seen a film where the director didn't waste shots.

A long, long ride which moves at a glacial pace, scenes vary between having no dialogue and basically just having the actors read a few pages from a philosophy book. That said it is both a good looking movie and a though provoking one so its probably worth the 3.5 hours

pretty much this Solaris has much more in your face sci-fi elements and a bit more narrative

Not OP, but how will my opinion on this film be improved by watching an unrelated one first? That's like saying you need to watch The Shining before Full Metal Jacket.

>same director
>unrelated

confuzzled_black_man.png

These people are stupid, Stalker was the first Tark movie I watched, and it's been one of my favourites since. Fantastic experience, a true work of art. Be aware it's not an easy movie to get into, though.

You should watch Solaris first.

Skip it if you don't speak Russian, I really laughed about the translation sometimes.
Can't really figure out how anybody who doesn't speak russian can enjoy this. Probably just pretentious people trying to fit in.

It blew me away the first time I saw it, which thinking back was a long, long time ago at this point. It was posted on Google Video if anyone remembers that and I just watched it on a whim without knowing who Tarkovsky was or having ever heard of the film, which in this day in age is very difficult to comprehend because Tarkovsky is everywhere these days, especially among online circles. I'm sure he was then as he is now, but I wasn't in that world, so whatever.

I've cooled on the film since and Tarkovsky in general. But I still like the film a lot. Hopefully it'll be as fulfilling an experience for you as it was for me.

Nice job not reading the next sentence. It's standalone and they're unrelated plot wise, so I shouldn't need to watch the creator's previous work.

there are so many shots and frames in this film that are burned in my retinas now, thanks tartokovsky!

To be honest, every time I see a Tarkovsky film, it's like peeling certain layers off of the guy. With each film you watch of his, you get acquainted with more and more imagery that means more in subsequent rewatches after you had watched more films by him. Stalker is as good a place to start as any, but save The Mirror, Nostalghia, and the Sacrifice for last.

Tarkovsky is a pretty simple filmmaker when you really evaluate it.

He likes long takes (30+ seconds)
He likes using B&W and Color in the same film
And he cares a lot about nature and likes to contrast it with man made industrialized areas.

Overall, you should not be apprehensive about watching tarkovsky unless you have a problem with "boring" movies. All of his movies are slow on purpose and calling them boring or simple is a huge cop-out.

No, the game takes alot of heavy inspiration from the movie.

Thanks

literally a флик

The final scene in Nostalgia is the most tense scene in film history. That said, I found it to be the most challenging of his films.

Every one of his films is a masterpiece and the fact he died so young is probably the greatest tragedy in cinema since Sadao Yamanaka's passing.

stalker is a 30 minute film stretched to 150 minutes, full of deep sounding dialog and long pauses. not to say it is not atmospheric and there is no meaning in what is said, but that is still how i would describe it.

Andrei Rublev is his best, imho.

...

If we separate "best" and "favourite", I'd agree. The scale and ambition of it are some of the best in cinema.

Despite that, my favourite is still Stalker.

One of my favourite speeches in cinema:

>Let everything that's been planned come true. Let them believe. And let them have a laugh at their passions. Because what they call passion actually is not some emotional energy, but just the friction between their souls and the outside world. And most important, let them believe in themselves. Let them be helpless like children, because weakness is a great thing, and strength is nothing. When a man is just born, he is weak and flexible. When he dies, he is hard and insensitive. When a tree is growing, it's tender and pliant. But when it's dry and hard, it dies. Hardness and strength are death's companions. Pliancy and weakness are expressions of the freshness of being. Because what has hardened will never win.

It really spoke to me at such a good time in my life.

Weak must fear the strong

Solaris was better tbqh.

literally his worst movie

isn't that just from the ta te ching?

which i guess doesn't stop it from being amazing

let us know what you Make of it!

Which one would you say is his best?

Andrei Rublev desu, funnily enough it was (along The Sacrifice, but never liked it too much) the one i just couldn't get into among all of Tark's movies, but when it finally clicked it was absolutely phenomenal

I see. I'm still new to Tarkovsky. I'm going to watch The Mirror soon, and then Andrei Rublev. Cheers.

Watch chronologically to see his evolution easier. And the Sacrifice only makes sense if you've seen his earlier work and read his book + seen some Bergman.

>watch Solaris
>aside from excellent soundtrack and that beautiful no-gravity scene it was hands down the most slowest movie I've ever seen

I can see why Tarkovsky is acclaimed and all but goddamn, GODDAMN what a slow movie.

You just called him simple in your first sentence then end the post by saying calling him simple is a cop out.

Typical pretentious fag, enjoy your boring simple movies.

The first 39 minutes of Solaris are 10/10
after which it becomes a bad film

Stalker is far more approachable than many of his other films. It's of the same level as Solaris. Nostalghia is like Mirror.

Ruble is the best, but Mirror probably is the least accessible of his films for someone who's not used to him. Oh OP, better have some goddamn patience, you'll need it

What do you niggers think of Lars von trier? His films very much reminds me of Tarkovsky sometimes

Agreed. I couldn't get past the first 20 minutes. There's no excuse to have shots that long where nothing happens.

>There's no excuse to have shots that long where nothing happens

t. pleb

the director being simple != the director's films being simple

You young shits all have ADHD or clinical anxiety or something, and will never enjoy the great masterpieces of film. Sad.

>What can I say...
>I understand Hitler.

He's hilarious and pretty fucking great. If nothing else his movies are pretty different from every other film makers that I know of. Interesting.

I do not like to use the word bad, but his films do absolutely nothing to me.

Pretentious much? Liking long, boring stretches of film where nothing happens doesn't make you intelligent, it just shows that the filmmaker had nothing to say and you're just too stupid to realize that.
Another example of this kind of pretentious shit movie is 2001.

Kill yourself anti-art faggot

Plenty of movies have long takes that are absolutely stunning. Take the finale of The Good the Bad and the Ugly.

Tarkosky is boring as fuck though.

It's slow cinema, not recommended if you are not into it

I can film hours of myself walking in a jungle, doesn't make it art.
I wish pseudo-intellectuals would realize the fact that they're a waste of air and off themselves.

I'd call what follows after the first 40 minutes of Solaris boring but rest of his filmography is not. You just have bad taste, are a pleb, or shitposting.

You should try to push yourself out of your comfort zones, who knows, maybe you end up finding something you like in the foreign territory.

>calls other people pseudo-intellectuals while spewing this garbage
just off yourself faggot. nobody will miss you here.

Absolutely, but I would say Stalker is somehow dense if its your first Tarkovsky, even more if you are not into slow cinema.

Yes it might be bit too heavy on philosophical meandering where as something like his debut feature film Ivan's Childhood - while still sharing the same stripes - is less so on the slow moving drama movements.

I do prefer Ivan's Childhood over Stalker personally, and like Mirror the most.

It wouldn't be art because what you've described is not art.

Yup, as a Russian I find it quite funny how hyped this film is, it's very very mediocre.

But people seem to have less critical thinking when it comes to non-English film.

Rublev or Stalker, please decide for me what i watch

A madea halloween

boredom

Rublev.

but man, tarkosky is fu**ing good

the fact that you are russian doesn't mean anything, bro

a good sleep

Maybe not, but it's just funny how we view him as a mediocre director, and you people tend to think he is a genius.

I do think this has to do with it being a non-English director, because his work is far below most 'elite' directors. I would say Solaris is his only good film, and that is also only good for superficial reasons.

Please kys.

Reported.

Because you're talking with people who consider themselves the ultimate authority in cinema and that they can see things that nobody else can notice, so they believe that watching movies from a same director will make you appreciate his films more.

Like how noticing that joe pesci played the same character twice in goodfellas and casino

the same guys from Sup Forums who say that albums have to be judged as a whole rather than each song individually

kys

With regards to auteurs, watching their body of work in chronological order will definitely help you to understand them.

Back to whatever garbage thread you crawled out of.,

Heart-pounding fast-paced nonstop action

But seriously,listen to

We have to appreciate these kinda guys because you slav untermenschen are too dumb to do so yourselves

>Sup Forums who say that albums have to be judged as a whole rather than each song individually

we patricians consider both

>tfw love Tarkovsky but don't understand The Mirror at all
I get the loose plot points but I don't understand the poetry and abstract structure of it all

I am actually Italian, so I regularly watch foreign movies.here in Italy we hate several italian directors too but at least we are right to hate them (Benigni for example). Yet Tarkowsky is great

Stream of consciousness and memory in general? It's not complicated. He isn't complicated director trying to obfuscate the truth he seeks. That's just his interpretation of memories.

holy fuck you are intellectually blind

Wtf are you talking about?

The movie is clearly based on the game

this
the mirror is one of the most simple and open films of all time, it just flows like thoughts