This movie is pretty interesting. However, I feel like I would have appreciated it more if I was Russian...

This movie is pretty interesting. However, I feel like I would have appreciated it more if I was Russian. It seemed like Stalker in that it is very specifically about Russia

Do any Russian anons in particular want to weigh in on this film?

Other urls found in this thread:

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roadside_Picnic?wprov=sfla1
twitter.com/SFWRedditVideos

better than Birdman desu

>implying anyone on Sup Forums has seen this

cover makes it look like a shitty disaster movie

10/10 kino except for one scene when they're critiquing some art and you can see the camera man in the reflection

otherwise literally perfect

this one more accurately represents the film

>you can see the camera man in the reflection

Really? When?

forgot image

a technical masterwork

THIS SUMMER
*opening shot with 1800s attired people*
*Seth Rogan voice* "Dude where am I"
*man in black offers him blunt*
"No, WHEN are we?"

So was the protagonist supposed to be some guy who worked at the museum in the present day?

You dont need to be russian to understand it. It's made for the bourgeoisie. I don't appreciate elitist art. Boring af too.

>I don't appreciate elitist art. Boring af too

At least you'll always have capeshit

...

He pops up in a few places, you've got to look really closely at the shadows and reflections. It's pretty minor stuff. For example, you can see the stedicam shadow here:

imagine having a problem with a slight shadow

actually I used to make a big deal over seeing the camera silhouette in Caché.
That shit is spoopy.

You'd have to be looking for that to notice

Yes. I didn't notice anything until the third or fourth viewing, so it's very very minor. Not really a criticism at all.

The movie has 2 cuts, when they go to dark.

This is a hack, fuck you Sokurov.

wtf I hate monolithic technologically groundbreaking historical fantasias now.

Sometimes the stedicam zoom out looks like a cut. IIRC they filmed it a few times but the previous cuts were screwed up because of major problems. they did post-production on it as well to make it look kino too

You watched it 4 times? Why do you like it so much?

because it's good

...

what an argument

It would definitely be better if you knew Russian history. However,if you were Russian, it also might seem more gimmicky. An American version of this would be super silly.

Night at the Museum 1-3

...

i mean the history it deals with is an entirely russian one, so in that regard, if you wanna get the cultural and societal context for it all, it would help if you were russian
having said that, most russians are retarded plebs who dont know shit about their countrys history, so for optimal viewing youd just be a cultured person with an awareness of history

you mean mirror?
stalker's themes are pretty universal

I can see why Sup Forums would recommend this.

most of russians never watched this movie
cuz it pure arthouse

>tour de force

Stalker is based on a book that was specifically written about life in the soviet

It wasn't
It was set in the US and it wasn't even allegorical in that regard
Stop talking out of your ass you faggot

>It was set in the US

False

>The novel is set in and around a specific Zone in Harmont, a fictitious town in Canada, and follows the main protagonist over an eight-year period.

Canada, North America, whatever - same shit

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roadside_Picnic?wprov=sfla1

You're right, the book wasn't; for some reason I thought it was a closer adaptation. Regardless the film is a critique of soviet propaganda.

>Canada, North America, whatever - same shit

Delete this

The film is not a critique of Soviet propaganda
Tarkovsky principally did not delve into political commentary in his films
Read his book and his diaries
Though it's clear to see even without them

stop debating tarkovsky in a sukoruv thread you niggers

Is it that piece of shit that has dude talking simbolist shit non stop for 3 hours?

Fuck that movie

Larisa Shepitko > Tarkovsky

It's 90 minutes and the guy just discusses art and cultural developments through the ages you fucking ADHD spaz

No, that would be Stalker actually

“Birdman” somehow looked like artificial even though it was said to be “One take wander”. The long take in this film is the good example of definite orchestrated plans to do so. Although, each bites appears to be beautiful though.