What is your opinion on Tarkovsky?

The Mirror is his best work.

underrated hack

On botched production of Stalker:
>[...] following a violent argument with Rerberg over the state of the film stock, Tarkovsky shut himself up in his production room for nearly an entire day. When he was finally pursued to come out, he unlocked the door and showed his face to reveal a dark crackling bruise over his left eye and a nose still stuck with dry blood. 'Gasps were let out all around, and people rushed to tend to his wounds. [Tarkosvsky] had taken a beating by Rerberg it seemed.' Following this incident, Tarkovsky became despondent, seemingly wishing to completely abandon production of Stalker. Nevertheless, his despondency turned to one of childish sulking. A couple weeks after, he was in spirits enough to venture out to dinner."

"[...] and right in front of the restaurant, he was stopped by a poor beggar girl. She reached out her hand hopefully, but alas she had caught the man at the wrong time and place. He sneered down at her, then brushed her aside without a second thought. He forbade his companions to hand her charity, stating 'The likes of her deserve God's every fury. See her eyes - they're completely sterile; such creatures could never appreciate the feeling of spirituality. I hate [them] with a passion.' Despite it being Christmas, the director's harshness knew no bounds."

Then you're a fucking pleb! Congrats!

Eh, I don't think any low-IQ ADHD retard on Cred Forums would watch Stalker let alone even known it or Tarkovsky exists.

I don't get why people constantly compare the two anyway.

Tarkovsky's kino:
>Existential film that relies heavily on visuals, sound, monologues, etc, has little "plot" but conveys many ideas/emotions
>much of the Zone's dangers are implied. The Zone is a result of alien visitation.
>Having any kind of weapon is dangerous and "angers" the Zone.

Game:
>survival-action-horror surviving in the "Zone", where you get artifacts and you have many gunfights with other bandits and sick mutated creatures. There are all kinds of weapon caches everywhere
>The dangers of the "Zone" are incredibly obvious and immediate
>The "Zone" is the Chernobyl zone with a bullshit convoluted backstory hence why I put it in quotations.

Literally, the only similarity are "stalkers", and area called the "zone". No comparison. Every mention of this film degenerates into Cred Forums shit thanks to that game.

liked Rublev
but his flicks are pretty boring to me overall

...

Andrei is like a Dostoevsky adaptation. The main character is basically how I imagine Alyosha to look like

>tfw born too late to shitpost with tarkovsky

I saw Rublev, Stalker and Solaris 2 times the rest just once. Rublev and Stalker are favourites for now, I like Solaris just for the Earth shots, I have to give Zerkalo few more chances because I was pretty confused

To preface; I like Tarkovsky (maybe his films more than what I can gather of the man himself)

I want to understand his popularization. He has that peculiar kind of niche popularity, where he is not considered part of the mainstream, but is maybe only one step removed from it. Anyone can argue that his contribution to cinema is the source of his ranking as one of the most popular 'art film' directors, but that's never the sole reason, In fact, it's often a retroactive affair, i.e., something more mundane ensures longevity and this is rationalized as a matter of course considering the merit of his work. I really want to know this mundane history that has carved this special place for the reception and remembrance of Tarkovsky.

Anyone have any clues?

this

Pretty underwhelmed by the repetitive "linger on the objects artistically placed on le table" shots.

general consensus on Cred Forums is that he is good
but its no capeshit or game thrones so threads about his work barely scratch 50 replies
shows how crappy this board is. no idea why i still come here

where else would you shipost[/s]?

Easily one of the most overrated directors of all time but that's only cause he's constantly so highly praised. He's very talented and has produced some great films but not all are masterpieces like many say. Ivan's Childhood, Stalker, and The Sacrifice are all worth watching

Same, it sucks to admit you're a pleb, but I honestly didn't get Zerkalo at all. 2deep4me, I guess :^/
Should I try it again or just give up and keep my mind in easy directors?

Yeah, something you steal from your dad

Seen Stalker while coming down off acid twice, Solaris twice (once with an accidental overdose of weed edibles), The Mirror, The Sacrifice (once sober, once post-trip), started Nostalghia but fell asleep about 50 minutes in.

From what I've seen from him I've really enjoyed, The Mirror being the most difficult to enjoy for me. Above all his movies are just a pleasure to watch because they're visual meals that can also stir heavy emotion.

i like that he despises mirth

Meme director

I think Tarkovsky utilized an aesthetic that can be compared to the poetic movement of Imagism. He certainly disliked the semiotic conceptual approach to visual theory, focusing more on the surface itself - a sentiment shared by his idol Bresson. Only the pictures that were captured and projected were the primary means of expression, without any "deeper" meaning attached to them, and they were rendered with painstakingly minimalist techniques. Thus all that remained on screen, be it the shot of the throbbing temple of the soldier-instructor in The Mirror or the mysterious and exhausting pool crossing in Nostalghia, was the image - pure, poetic and transcendentally powerful.

Maybe I'm retarded, but when people talk about >not-getting< his films I'm baffled. They were quite clear in most aspects, except for the Sacrifice.

He said himself that non-Russian would never be able to fully understand his films.

No

ive seen solaris, stalker, the mirror, and ivan's childhood. what should i watch next? solaris was my favorite but it might just be because i liked the book

Probably the rest of his very small filmography?

>but it might just be because i liked the book
What did you think of the fact that Tarkovsky didn't include the tall Nubian goddess apparition in his film?

Tcharkovsky?

Sleeping beuty waltz was his vest peice come at me fags 1812 ain't shit

Oh...yes.

a giant naked jungle nigger in the middle of a spaceship wouldnt translate to film very well. replacing her with a normal looking white girl made a lot more sense imo

>replacing her
Hari was always there, idiot

im not talking about hari. im talking about the girl in the blue dress that leads kelvin to gibarians body in the freezer.

what about the Labyrinth that grants wishes that is literally the only other reference to the movies besides the zone and stalkers.

>tfw you don't get to make a bell

are there any famous directors who have ever publicly hated on tarkovsky?

>Sleeping beuty waltz was his vest peice
thats not swan lake

For people supposedly living in a communist utopia why are soviet films always so grey and gloomy. Both in aesthetics and dialog

I tried to watch Solaris but it just didn't grab me. it felt like a hacky rip off of 2001. the effects were so corny. "that scene" near the end was terrifying though. I'm going good to give it a few more views but I really just was not impressed.

i also have the mirror which I'm going to try.

nothing in common aside from being set in space and its a direct adaptation of a novel that came out 7 years before 2001

>>>/reddit/

I thought Solaris was boring as fuck. Too much religious and philosophical garbage.

solaris is really tark's only bad movie. mirror is truly amazing, really blew me away when I watched it.