A big collection of films that might be considered as strange, mindfucking, surreal and weird. Sorted by year. Suggestions are…
How far will you go for a second chance?
Upon arrival at the space station orbiting an ocean world called Solaris a psychologist discovers that the commander of an expedition to the planet has died mysteriously. Other strange events soon start happening as well, such as the appearance of old acquaintances of the crew, including some who are dead.
An alien of unknowable intention, indefensible power, and indefinable reach. An invasion story without a single Stan Winston creature, annihilated city-center, or large-caliber gun. I'd happily place Lem's tale up there with Odyssey and Alien as top-tier sci-fi stories, without even having read the source material and based only on the adaptations. Solaris is one of the few examples of truly 'alien' aliens I can think of, and as stated previously, any depiction of intelligent life which eschews an anthropic bias is more than OK as a jumping off point in my book.
Tale of the tape, at least for me - Clooney does space madness better than Banionis, Soderbergh's efficiency and visuals make his take more palatable for spur-of-the-moment…
I don't really know if I should call this a remake from Andrei Tarkovsky's Solaris (1972), or just another adaptation from Stanislaw Lem's acclaimed novel, so I am just going to call it a remake to simplify my writing. What I am going to do will be more a comparison between the two Solaris (Tarkovky's and Soderbergh's) than a review over the 2002 film. The plot of this movie may already be well known among moviegoers, but I'll still expose it. A psychiatrist is called to a space station orbiting an oceanic world called Solaris, and is surprised by the death of the expedition's commander. As other events begin to occur they start suspecting that the cause of these events…
With a much faster pace, only half the original's runtime, and released 30 years apart, Steven Soderbergh's Solaris is just as excellent as Andrei Tarkovsky's Solyaris. Or dare I say, the remake is actually an improvement.
That's what I think, at least. Just hear me out.
Solyaris is a great, great film, notice I used great twice because that's just how great the film is. But I won't go as far as to say that the film is impossible to be duplicated. There is a flaw, and that would be its unusually slow pace. Now I'm not complaining, I enjoyed every minute of it. (though my mind did wander off a bit during the car scene) It's just that, if…
Clooney looks as gorgeous as ever and the cinematography is beautifully composed. In fact, everything looks immaculate to the point of sterilisation. Which may be a perfect recreation of zero atmosphere in space but in cinematic terms it becomes a draining chore to sit through. The film has too much time on its hands and a painfully slow way of expressing its point.
This second adaptation of Stanislaw Lem's novel is a strange choice for Soderbergh. Praise for Tarkovsky's version typically hails the faithfulness to the source material, the metaphysical and intellectually blurred lines between reality and the subconscious. This version doesn't go all in to explore similar themes so its purpose is something of a mystery, delivering none of…
"There are no answers, only choices." ~ Gibarian
Director Steven Soderbergh would insist that this NOT a remake of Andrei Tarkovsky's 1972 Russian version of "Solaris." Instead, it is a new adaptation of the original 1961 book by Polish novelist Stanislaw Lem, upon which both films are based. I think I have to agree with that interpretation. Apart from the updating of the language, social norms and special effects, this telling emphasizes some very different themes, but it still misses the point that Lem wanted to drive home in his writing about the moral dilemmas raised by "first contact" with non-Earthly sentience. In fact, I think Tarkovsky did a better job in that regard, even if Lem might not agree.…
Why I watched this one? I had tried a few times to make it through this movie the entire way....but I never finished watching it. Well I was determined to finally watch this movie from beginning to end.
What is this one about? George Clooney plays a troubled psychologist is sent to investigate the crew of an isolated research station orbiting a bizarre planet.
My thoughts on this one? This is one confusing movie. It is based on a book....and is actually the second movie to take on that book. Like Kubrick's 2001 A Space Odyssey this one seems to ask more questions than it answers. The special effects are believable....the actors are fine....but I am sure many will ask…
Hadn't seen this one since 2002. I know Tarkovsky directed the masterpiece, but is it a crime that I would rather watch this version instead? Soderbergh beautifully gets accross the same themes in roughly half the time.
Viewed w/commentary by Steven Soderbergh & James Cameron
Great performances from most of the cast. Viola Davis and George Clooney are really excellent in this film. Their scenes together are fantastic. Soderbergs cinematography is truly incredible. He shows images that are beautiful and nuanced. The film slightly falters when it focuses on Chris and Rhaya's back story. I still found the film engrossing, but not as much as what comes before and after those scenes. The themes and ideas presented in this are thought provoking and deeply interesting.
I love this movie. It's tragic and heartbreaking, yet beautiful and smart at the same time. It raises a lot of interesting and moral questions that I found fascinating. What would you do if you got a second chance with a loved one? Even if it was just a manifestation and not a real person?
Riddled with guilt and heartbreak, Chris Kelvin struggles with those questions as a lot of us would. The exploration of those ideas may seem mundane and tedious to some but I was engrossed by it. Similar to It Follows earlier this year, it's an interesting conversation to consider how you would handle the situation.
I know this is a remake and I haven't seen the…
Muy buena, la rusa se debe ir a la mierda (todavia la tengo q ver), pero esta va bien, bastante bien.
An amazing and terribly underseen Steven Soderbergh film. George Clooney and Natascha McElhone give great performances.
Side-note: this movie was the first to get an F from Cinemascore. Considering some of the other movies that an F (Wolf Creek, Bug, The Box, and Killing Them Softly) and some of the one that got an A+ (Driving Miss Daisy), I think you can guess how I feel about them.
Steven Soderbergh directs this sci-fi drama about a psychologist who visits a space station orbiting a planet called Solaris in an attempt to rescue the crew. Clooney carries the film well in one of his most challenging roles, and is ably supported by Natascha McElhone, Jeremy Davies and Viola Davis. Soderbergh paints with a sombre palette; there is a lot of grey and rain and sobering camera shots. The relationship between Clooney and his 'dead' wife is the central theme and most interesting aspect of Solaris, flitting between past and present, and dealing with the questions of what it is to be human and what to do with a second chance, even if it has moral grey areas. It's an interesting film and I enjoyed it more than the Russian original.
Still one of the most hauntingly beautiful movies I've ever seen. My wife had never seen this before (which goes for about 97% of the movies I've seen. And while I won't begrudge her for not watching things like Death Row Game Show and C.H.U.D. II: Bud the C.H.U.D., movies like this are something I know she'd at least appreciate), and I've tried to keep a mental list of movies that she needs to see. We can now cross this one off.
If you haven't seen this (and judging by the box office revenue, you haven't), it's about a psychologist who ends up on a space station to try and get to the bottom of some strange occurrences. It has…
I'm posting this list earlier than normal as I'm not sure I'll be around much next week.
For the purposes…