Solaris (2002) | Review & Analysis - Is the Film a Masterpiece or Museum Piece?
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 6 ก.ย. 2024
- Review and analysis of Steven Soderbergh's 2002 adaptation of Stanislaw Lem's sci-fi classic, Solaris. [FYC Podcast Ep85]
Music: "Is That What Everybody Wants" and "Will She Come Back" (Cliff Martinez)
Like us on Facebook: / fycshow
Follow us on Twitter: / fycshow
Join our Patreon at / fycshow
Subscribe for free:
itunes: itunes.apple.c...
stitcher: www.stitcher.co...
official site: fycshow.libsyn.com
Steven Soderbergh's 2002 adaptation of Stanislaw Lem's sci-fi classic, Solaris, gets the roundtable treatment on this week's episode of the podcast. Check out Dustin and Mike's discussion of the film to find out if they grant the film masterpiece status or designate it a museum piece.
![[LIVE] : ONE ลุมพินี 78 | คู่เอก "ปกรณ์ vs ฟาบิโอ"](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/LSOmgl0Th2c/mqdefault.jpg)
There's another possibility: Solaris sent observers (entities who live in Solaris) into the recreated people to both observe through human eyes and directly experience the human condition. There's a scene where Rheya asks Chris where she is and what is outside the window, Kelvin says that's Solaris and Rheya goes from confusion to very knowingly saying "Oh my God, yes."
Which leads me to believe that on the station there were two sentient beings within Rheya's body: one is that of the ressurrected Rheya (the Rheya clone) who has all her memories but only places significance in those memories shared with Kelvin, the other sentient being is some kind of Solaris entity who is there to observe Chris.
On the space station we nearly always see the consciousness of the Rheya clone, a few times there are hints of the Solaris entity. Hints such as Rheya complaining about "strange thoughts" in her head- a sign of her somehow detecting the Solaris entity? Other times Rheya says things in a rather detached way- for instance she tells Chris "I love you so very much" in a very empty way both in the voice and the face. Is that the Solaris entity taking control of Rheya's body and trying to replicate human interaction? Or when Rheya freaks out when Chris says he's going to leave- does the Solaris entity become overwhelmed by Rheya's painful memories of the last time Chris left her (before her suicide)?
The more bizarre sequence is the dream sequence, the one where Chris sees multiple versions of Rheya at one time, but just before then he dreams of Rheya looking at him directly in different environments which were significant to Chris: the subway train, his apartment, the street where she agreed to marry him. Rheya looks at him throughout in a very alien way, is this Chris seeing the Solaris entity?
Perhaps the ending suggests that Chris has left behind his corporeal existance and has taken the essence of the Solaris entities. Perhaps the Solaris entity occupying the Rheya clone fell in love with Chris but could not truly reciprocate in either human form or that of an observor. Perhaps Chris has fallen in love with someone else but needs that someone (the Solaris entity) to take the form of Rheya to understand this love.
There is A LOT more to Solaris than meets the eye.
Woah honestly this is such a good theory. Great job!
Yes! I thought many similar things as your analysis. Great points.
Nice.
Solaris does not need to observe humans, it can see deep into their heads hence the creations that are most important to the analyzed humans, in their sleep.
She might have said: "Oh my God, yes." because she wanted to pretend that she knows what that is. Or she just knows what Solaris is because there is decades on research of it/ part of her memories.
For me the "visitors" are a result of toying around and curiosity. There is no certain purpose. If Solaris had plans and strategies to observe us Solaris would be be like a human, but it is not
You elevate the film and story even higher. Thanks to all of you for the great reads. The film was criticised for concentrating too much on the Chris/Rheya relationship and too little on Solaris but that may have been influenced by box office liking romantic films. If you think into a writers mind who of us could come up with what Solaris is with the exception of some stunning theories? In earlier drafts of the script there was more meat on the bones which was cut but maybe it was needed. The video review above came across as though it was not recorded to be heard; as it is it sounds too loose. For anyone interested there's a few space films on Neflix set on one location/space station that I think are worth watching; one is Stowaway and the other is Life. Stowaway is the more reflective character based one and Life the more suspenseful one. If you're into body language, Stowaway has got to be seen to appreciate Toni Collette's body language speaking volumes throughout! Though like Solaris it too got mixed reviews.
My man spent 20 minutes talking about how the film didn't make him feel anything only to be exposed for texting and missing the most emotional and crucial part of the film.
Yeah. That's the point where I decided I wouldn't bother clicking on any more of their stuff. Movie critics that don't bother watching the movies don't interest me.
There are not enough movies like this one in my opinion. Lets put something out there: what is it that a movie tries to accomplish? Tell a story, convey an ideaology, teach a philisophy, ask questions, convey or invoke certain feelings, make a point, be pointless, be simply entertaining, etc.? It can be many things, yet the motive of why the movie tries to do one of those things is of huge relevance, especially for heavily philisophical movies, which explores certain subjects at hand.
To evaluate Solaris and not be unfair, I would say that are 2 types of movies. The first type is where one does not need any knowledge about the subject whatsoever. Such movies live or die, by the hands of the people involved in making the movie. The second type is where one needs to have background knowledge about the subject, especially if it is a movie like Solaris, where not only philosophical, but also psychological concepts are explored constantly (this also is responsible for its heavily slow paced tone)
So if the viewer does not have the neccesary concepts at hand or at least is aware of them, then this movie might simply become " a-way-to-slow-paced-emotional-bad-gone-scifi-movie", which it is not. Actually each scene is the exploration (and a personal discovery for the character himself) of what identity, conciousness, humanity, diverse concepts of the divine (including concepts like god, love, sacrifice, morality, transcendence...), etc. are.
This movie explores what being a human is or "simply" what our understanding of being is and whether there could be more to it than our capabilities might be able to grasp; so dont expect flashy or casually beautiful scenes nor expect lots of events unfolding within the story - it is not a "what-happened-next-movie". Despite being a heavily slow paced movie, my mind couldn't stop racing.
Same here! My mind was racing with all kinds of ideas & questions the first time, and times since then, that I watched it. It's one of my favorite films.
To me, the scene with Gibarian is the fulcrum of the movie. Gibarian is essentially giving him the inside scoop, and while he is trying to warn Kelvin off, he's also showing him that there is something on the other side. Of course, it could just be a dream.
"What if" in Lem's book is: "What if humanity will make contact with another life form, but can't communicate with it/him". People trying to communicate with Solaris using science and Solaris trying to communicate with them using guests, but they can't understand one another. That's it.
A masterpiece forsure.
I see the mystery! I think the film explores "what is Solaris" etc, it just does so through the emotions & expierences of George's character.
In my mind & my opinion it's a masterpiece that doesn't recieve nearly enough credit. I'm glad y'all covered it! It's absolutely enchanting every time I watch it. It hit me emotionally pretty hard the first time I watched it.
this film made big changes to the book, especially the ending.
They never even showed the ocean and the structures it creates, which featured prominently in the novel.
To me, a mysterious masterpiece. I love the back and forth between you two on this one but Dustin was so frustrating! I read 'Solaris' (like the more recent 'Annihilation') and Tarkovsky's originally titled 'Solyaris' version, as a rumination on life, relationships, regret, loss and the human condition, rather than a straight up sci-fi movie. I think that the planet Solaris is just a plot device to expand this premise. It is like a human brain and any brain that gets near it, recalls the thoughts and memories they don't want to revisit and which they can't get rid of. It is a very subtle, spiritual film to me but I do find it hard to watch from an emotional ("gut punch") standpoint. To me, this is the best acting work George Clooney has ever done. I am a bit disappointed you didn't mention the wonderfully evocative score by Cliff Martinez but hey, there you go. As a last point of note, in the Tarkovsky version at the end, the main character returns to the house he lived in on Earth, which has become a part of Solyaris
I haven't heard this episode in forever and a day but I agree that you should absolutely chide me for not mentioning Martinez' score. We try to mention music every episode, and I've considered doing a Sound Considerations episode on this score, as well, but...yeah...a clear oversight this time around. It's so subdued and evocative. One of my favourites from the last 20 years and the film would definitely be lesser without it.
Thanks for checking the show out and for the comment. And, yeah, Dustin can be pretty frustrating sometimes. 😉
@@FYCShow P. S: You mention 'Primer'. Another head scrambling low budget Sci-fi masterpiece, which I pulled out earlier today to watch again soon. Get it reviewed. I don't see it on any of your playlists
@@FYCShowA 'Sound Considerations' episode on this score, sounds like a great idea 👍🏼
THIS MOVIE JUST SUCKS ME IN AND DEMANDS MY ATTENTION EVERY TIME I WATCH IT. SOME GREAT PERFORMANCES IN MY OPINION. I FIND I CAN ENJOY BOTH VERSIONS BUT I WOULD BE DRAWN TO SODERBERGHS MORE OFTEN. SOLARIS TO ME IS AN UNDERRATED MOVIE , BUT AS OFTEN HAPPENS WITH A CINEMATIC BOMB ,IT IS GATHERING ITS FANS THE LONGER ITS OUT THERE.
ENJOYABLE REVIEW GUYS THANKS
The movie is like a mediation. It's slow but it keeps your attention at all times. It really makes you forget the outside World and focus only on the mystery. It doesn't give you much answers, but more and more questions. It's complicated, confusing but somehow not annoying. And the romantic side of the movie is very moving. It's a story of limits to human understanding, our weaknesses and unreadiness to face the depths of space. I like to watch it from time to time and I recommend it to anyone. I also see it as the superior version of the two adaptations.
good review guys, I agree with a lot of points and enjoyed to hear your genuine opinion..
But you definitely should read the original novel, that's a whole different thing. I think it is very ambitious to make a movie of this because the ideas of the book can hardly be transported in pictures. Saying that I liked the atmosphere of the film but it was not deep enough on a philosophical level given the interesting setting.
Thank you for posting your review and analysis.
33:28 I’ve bailed from this. If you’re wondering whether or not to delve into this review pod after viewing 2002 ‘Solaris’ you’ll be better off with this:
th-cam.com/video/UspfoBWqq7s/w-d-xo.html
the movie removed..where can i get ir
It's wierd. When you kinda break this movie down it's not great.
However, the music by Cliff Martinez is excellent, the CGI is well done, the planet Solaris looks...... amazing. Story - George Clooney a psychologist is sent into space to delve into the problems happening on the spacestation orbiting a planet called Solaris. His friend from Earth is suffering delusions and needs his help. When he gets there his friend has committed suicide and his friends son is on the Station. The people who are left on the station are also trapped in the same delusion of there being people they knew being recreated. When Chris's wife reappears (Clooney), he can't cope and sends her into space on a lifeboat.
After that, things just get more personal and heart felt. An absolutely amazing film.
This one is easy - it's a clone of an older movie.
It's good, but pales in comparison to Tarkovsky's version.
@Mr. Jack M 2002 version more majestic? I will have to hard disagree.
Unprepared , 1 dimensional and shallow review . No wondering why u have so few subscribers. Get a real job
Brutal but the fact one of them missed the most pivotal moment of the movie because he was texting ... my god. Redo the podcast or something. What a waste of time.
@@terribly_vexed the word amateurs do not describe their level.
Hey, here's an hour-long video about an hour and 37 minutes long movie. So dumb.
Yup, an hour-long video on an hour and thirty-seven minute film based on a 1972 film that clocked in at two hours and forty-seven minutes which, itself, was adapted from a book that is roughly 204 pages.
Your point is?
@@FYCShow still named the video 'Solaris 2002", not the "Solarises" or something.
the movie removed..where can i get ir