The Long Dark Marathon of the Soul 2022: Solaris (1972), directed by Andrei Tarkovsky

 

The Trailer

and

The Appropriate Tune: 'Do You Love Me?' by Nick Cave and the Bad Seeds

       We saw Svankmajer, so how about another blast from the past? The last time we saw Andrei Tarkovsky on this list was with his 1979 film Stalker, way back in Marathon ‘16. Stalker was not only one of the best movies I watched that year, it was one of the best movies I’ve seen period, so much so that I think subconsciously avoided doing another of his films for fear that it was a one-time burst of genius and that I would be disappointed. A potent combination of paranoia and pretension, not fit for an unpaid amaetur film review blogger of my station. So let’s return to Tarkovsky, and a film so acclaimed that Hollywood tried to adapt it into a George Clooney vehicle, truly the highest honor one can bestow upon a film. Besides making it a background cameo for Space Jam 2 that is.

       Released in 1972, Solaris was directed by Andrei Tarkovsky, written by Tarkovsky and Fridikh Gorenshtein, and produced by Vyacheslav Tarasov through Mosfilm, based on the novel of the same name by Stanislaw Lem. Donatas Banionis stars as Dr. Kris Kelvin, a psychologist who agrees to undertake a visit to the space station orbiting the planet Solaris, a world of vast oceans and dense fog. Solaris has been something of a black eye for the scientific community over the years; Some have claimed that Solaris is an intelligent, thinking being, but no one has managed to prove it and the project is on its last legs, the station now housing only three scientists from the dozens that once resided in it before, with reports bordering on nonsense. Kelvin’s word could be the make or break moment.

       When Kelvin arrives at the satellite however, he finds a station in disrepair and one of the scientists dead, suicide. The cause? Solaris, in a fashion. It seems that after an experiment using x-rays Solaris suddenly began to react, and the results were ‘the guests’ -- thoughts and memories pulled from the dreams of the scientists and given form. Not hallucinations, but beings with a tangible, physical form. A revelation that throws Kelvin through a loop, especially after he comes face to face with Hari (Natalya Bondarchuk), his wife that had been dead for the past 10 years. Is this a happy reunion, or another tragedy waiting to happen?

       Before watching Solaris I saw a comment that said something to the effect of ‘Tarkovsky looks up at the stars and sees humanity longing for connection’, and there's definitely something to that. Or rather a longing in the face of failure. Mankind tries to connect with Solaris, which leads to the experiments which spawn ‘the guests’. Kelvin longs to reconnect with his wife which leads to Solaris spawning ‘Hari’, a simulacrum based on his memories of her. And what happens when Hari learns of her nature? Is she still Hari or has she become someone else entirely? Is this love, or just a memory of love? Is there a difference? It seems that Kelvin, and by extension the audience, are doomed to stumble around in the dark in regards to that question. 

       You could also pair this up with Stalker, although they’re not quite the same. Stalker dealt in the loss of faith, while Solaris is more the desire for it. Kelvin wants to give himself over to belief, he wants to be absorbed into the fantasy where his life hasn’t taken a downward turn. Whether or not this is a good thing I suppose is debatable; The final scene gives the impression of a sinister turn, but Tarkovsky spent a better part of two hours questioning what being ‘real’ or ‘human’ actually means, so I suppose it’s up to the viewer’s interpretation. More so than Stalker I’d say, with its definitely uplifting ending.

       Visually Solaris shares the most similarities with 2001: A Space Odyssey, although perhaps unsurprisingly Tarkovsky doesn’t really hit the special effects as hard as Kubrick. Then again Solaris doesn’t really need the flash, as the science fiction is more philosophical than theoretical, and it conveys the feeling of a run down space station just fine as it is. I especially like the way Tarkovsky portrays the planet of Solaris. It’s incredibly simple, a color filter and some fog effects, but it captures the feel of an alien world.

       Solaris gets an easy recommendation. Where other science fiction films of the period could be gleefully esoteric and obscurantist in its messaging, Tarkovsky is clear without being blunt and meditative without being pondering. While it didn’t affect me as strongly as Stalker, I’d read Lem’s Solaris back in college so I knew what to expect to some degree and also Stalker was just that powerful of a movie, Solaris is a fantastic film and a must-have for any aspiring cinephile's watch queue. The acting, the atmosphere, the writing, it’s about as good as you can get. Cuddle up with the alien recreation of your dead loved ones this Halloween and enjoy.

The Long Dark Marathon of the Soul 2016 -- Stalker (1979), directed by Andrei Tarkovsky

The Trailer
and
The Appropriate Tune: "The Spirit Was Gone", by Antony and the Johnsons

     I’ve always had kind of a weird relationship with Russia. I’ve never been fond of their government’s dictatorial and imperialistic behavior when dealing with the rest of the world (of course, I feel the same about the U.S.), and I feel like they tend to be rather antiquated when it comes to a couple social issues, but I am completely fascinated by it. The history, the folklore, the architecture, it’s this big unwieldy melting pot of European, Middle Eastern and Asian culture that’s managed to survive hundreds of years thanks to being mostly empty space that’s too much of a hassle to try and take over. It’s been one of the strongest nations in the world and the weakest, it’s been one of the biggest breadbaskets yet suffered some of the worst famines, it’s had some of the most blatant autocratic rulers in history yet was the first major country to attempt Communism on a national scale. At it’s best it’s beautiful chaos, and I hope one day the U.S. and Russia really can become buddies. Not Trump and Putin kind of buddies, actual friends.

     Despite my interest in Russia however, and my interest in film, I haven’t actually seen that many Russian films. Seen plenty of films from countries that used to be part of Russia, but not that many from Mother Bear herself, unfortunately. The McCarthyist in the room might say that, for most of the history of cinema, Russia was not a country that would endorse a popular medium for individual expression and creative freedom like moving pictures. While it’s true Russia did put out plenty of movies that ‘towed the party line’ so to speak, we already know from The Cremator a couple spots back that entertaining and thought-provoking films were indeed made during this time. So for the very last film in this Long Dark Marathon of the Soul, I decided to pick out a movie straight out of the depths of the former Soviet Union. A movie that actually inspired a series of video games back in the day, although what those games had in common with this movie I’m not entirely sure. I’m talking about Andrei Tarkovsky’s 1979 magnum opus Stalker. And no, it isn’t what it sounds like.

     One day, the Zone appeared. No one was quite sure how it originated, although some credited it to a fallen meteorite, but what was certain that anyone who tried to venture into the Zone never returned. Although the government set up guards and barbed wire in an effort to keep people away, still a rumor managed to sneak its way out: That inside the Zone is a room, and when one enters that room, miracles happen. If you are a person of sufficient moral character (it helps if you’re a miserable piece of shit, apparently), and you find a Stalker, or a person with the ability to navigate the traps and bizarre geography of the Zone, then you too could enter the room and have your wish granted. And also suffer a horrible punishment, because sometimes that happens along with your wish. Hey, it’s Russia, what do you expect?

     This time, two men join the Stalker and attempt to make it to the room. One, the Writer, desires the inspiration and motivation to write again, indeed to have no doubts whatsoever about his skills as an artist. The other, the Professor, places knowledge and understanding above all else. Along with the Stalker, a man as wretched as those he helps, they will descend into the depths of the Zone to try and achieve their wildest dreams. What will they see in that outlandish place? And is having your your wishes granted all that it’s cracked up to be? I guess we’ll find out, won’t we?

     If you’re interested in watching Stalker, be warned that it requires a certain level of commitment. Not only of time, because this is a two and a half hour long film, but one of patience and understanding. You see, while Stalker can be classified as a science fiction film, the Russian view, and to a greater extent the European view of sci-fi is not quite the same as it is here in the States. In America we tend to prefer our science fiction hard- space marines, alien marines, space alien marines, that sort of thing. Concrete, realistic, and so on. In Europe, sci-fi tends to be a lot more literary, focusing more on symbolism and philosophy than whether the stuff going on is straight up science. So instead of action and killer robots and whatnot, Stalker is far more interested in exploring character’s psyches and presenting concepts for critical thinking. By which I mean the most action you’re going to see in this entire film are people walking around places and talking to each other and the most sci-fi you’re going to see is vague and unknowable, like a lost Lovecraft manuscript. At least HAL 9000 lauched some fucker into deep space, am I right?

     So what is Stalker about, what are the ideas it’s presenting? Well when you get into more artistic cinema the question of ‘what it’s about’ becomes a little subjective, but there seems to be a couple things running through here. Pragmatism vs. Romanticism, The loss of faith in modern society, the decay of society because of that loss, the need for hope, the torture that is being an artist, and so on. And it isn’t it a little strange, seeing the rusted out tanks and dusty skeletons populating the Zone, and knowing that in about 6 years Russia would have a real-life Zone they kept people out of known as Chernobyl? Plus the fact that the Stalker, a frequent visitor of the Zone, ends up having a child with a serious birth defect. Could that miracle in the room be a metaphor for nuclear power, which as we all know has some hefty punishments related to its use? Possibly, but that’s just one possible answer to a film that doesn’t provide any on its own. It’s up to the viewer to make their own conclusions about what they see.

     The question of the day is thus: Does Stalker make the cut? Well as I said, you’re going to have to devote a decent chunk of time to watch it, and this movie is more about making you think and feel things than it is about entertaining you, so if either of those conditions is a deal-breaker then you’re probably going to look elsewhere. I dunno, even though the runtime was a bit trying, by the end of the film I found myself drawn into this peculiar sepia-tone world, and I found that it echoed some of the thoughts that I had been having myself. Especially the parts dealing with Writer, obviously. So yes, I’d recommend that you check out Stalker whenever you get the chance. It might not be a film you break out during a Halloween party, but if you’re on your own and you’ve got the time, go ahead and pop it in. You might end confronting things about yourself that’s scarier than any monster could be.

HAPPY HALLOWEEN!!!