This is such a subjective statement, but I have to agree. It is not just the melody/harmony (not to mention hypnotically beautiful rhythm) of piece itself which makes me agree, more-so how it is incorporated into the narrative, how it captures the somber melancholy of memory and days past. It must be said that Artemiev's additions to Bach's original piece absolutely elevates it in my mind. It feels odd to say that Bach can be improved upon in any way, but I feel this arrangement by Artemiev absolutely supersedes the original. The rining bells, the building strings in the back, they compliment the underlying choral notes so so so well, and truly capture a free-floating, fantastical science-fiction tone which I would want to feel in a sci-fi movie.
Agree. It plumbs the depths and scales the heights and suspends time. Eternity in an art form whose chief characteristic is duration. Paradox. Great art can do the impossible.
No matter how much we try ,our dream just tells us our own perception of them. But in reality they may be completely different. In dream we just want them to be just as ideal. Don't let this inner perception of them consume you. It will only break you . This film really changed my perception of love.
Eduard Artemiev and Andréi Tarkovski, a rich combination of wit and poetry, music and spirit. Tarvovksi had a unique talent in sculpting time and feelings in each of his fims. Simply a precious piece.
This also plays when the home video is played for Hari. The images in that video are mesmerizing and deliberate. Fantastic scene accompanied by an incredible song.
I watched Solaris for the first time yesterday and I can’t get this song out of my mind. The song causes me to stop and reflect on everything that is truly important and forget the meaningless distractions brought on everyday. The use of the synthesizer is especially impactful as a lot of the 70s and 80s television I watched as a kid sounded eerily similar to this. Brilliant
Die Harmonie der Musik und der Bühne war wirklich großartig. Es ist wirklich erstaunlich, dass er Menschen dieses Gefühl vermitteln kann. Tarkovski ist ein außergewöhnlicher Filmemacher.
MetafoR I personally believe it is more than a film, it is a way of life, a religion. I imagine traveling East of Irkutsk on the Trans Siberian or the BAM and entering into an agrarian society in which I like Kris Kelvin burn the remnants of the past. #Соларис
I agree superb works of art. Watch the Soderbergh version, very, very underrated film and very brave of him to give it a go after Tarkovsky. It’s a lovely, intelligent, moving film. Nice music too.
@@wmorris189 Yes I like that version. Ironically, Lem was unhappy with either film -- his book was essentially about hubris -- mankind's inability to understand something incredibly different.
Спасибо большое, кажется никто не сказал, что это музыка Э. Артемьева на основе музыки Баха. Он её дополнил в верхнем и нижнем регистре ... и получилось потрясающе. И в Сталкере тоже.
@@vitalygubin1148 уважаемый Виталий, исправьте пожалуйста, я с трудом понял ваш текст. редактор... основа, да Бах. Но это и другая музыка -- другое впечатление. Не настаиваю.
@@cankalayc Hocam müziğin Bach ın olduğunu biliyorum. Bu parçayı kullanarak felsefik bakmışlar demek istedim zaten. Müziği filmi yapanlar yapmış demedim. Bu müziği filmde güzel kullanmışlar.
Haven't seen the movie, this just popped up in my recommended. I have seen STALKER and do intend to watch this soon, but man, what a somber piece. Masterful.
В КАКОЙ БЫ ИНТЕРПРИТАЦИИ НЕ ЗВУЧАЛА БЫ МУЗЫКА БАХА ВСЕ РАВНО ЭТО ВЕЧНОСТЬ ВОЗВЫШЕННОСТЬ И ВЕЛИКОЛЕПИЕ. Я СЛУШАЛА ЭТУ ПРЕЛЮДИЮ В ИСПОЛЕНИИ ОРГАНА ФА-НО И ГИТАРЫ И ПРОСТО А КАПЕЛЬНО И ВСЕ РАВНО МЕЛОДИЯ ВОСХИЩАЕТ . БАХ БУДЕТ ТАК ЖЕ СИЛЕН И В 35 ИЛИ 89 ВЕКАХ ЕСЛИ КОНЕЧНО ЧЕЛОВЕЧЕСТВО ДОЖИВЕТ ДО ЭТИХ ВЕКОВ.
Is the scene of Gibarian about to drink milk on film so important to the movie that it becomes the soundtrack cover art? The title when listed this way with the letter A raised above the rest of the letters, becomes the Latin sentence Sol-A-Ris, 'The sun is laughing'
ich habe den Film das erste mal mit 12 gesehen.....heute bin ich 57 Jahre alt und die Faszination ist ungebrochen. Ich habe eben das erste mal die russische Fassung geschaut....den Text kannte ich ja....smile... Nebenbei...die Clooney Adaption ist nicht schlecht....
Erstaunlich, ich bin heute auch 57 Jahre alt und habe den Film zum ersten Mal gesehen, als ich noch ein junger Mann war. Bis heute liebe ich diesen Film, ein Meisterwerk. Grüße aus Brasilien.
@@EatmeReadme I can't even define what feelings come out of me when I hear that. It's meditative ... but somehow ... hmm ... sorry, I'm not able to put it into words.
This may not be Artemiev at all. Leonid Roizman is supposed to have played this organ piece by bach on an organ for the film. And Artemiev scored the rest of the film. I began looking into this when I thought that this sounds too much like pipe organ vs. synth.
It's Bach's Choral Prelude No.5, "Ich ruf zu dir Herr Jesu Christ", BWV 639 (transcribed by Feruccio Busoni). This version by Edvard Artemiev for Tarkovsky's Solyaris is just sublime.
@@GrindrProzac This is not Busoni's transcription or Artemiev's version, it's Bach's original organ score until 2:41. It's played by Gari Grodberg IIRC. Busoni's transcription is for the piano.
@@GrindrProzac Ferruccio Busoni transcribed the Bach"s organworks for piano. This choralprelude BWV639 is extracted from orgelbuchlein. It is a prelude composed on lutheran chorale from Joseph Klug 1533 singer melody. I suggest to looking for the organ related work and not the "arranged" version for a correct judgment of these Bach's masterpieces. Only for recognize the Bach genius.
Beautiful images and soundscape. Beautiful concept (at first), that there are radically different and powerful forms of life, perhaps intelligent, waiting for us out in the cosmos. However, Soviet Communism (to say nothing of Lem's Polish culture) was not a disciplined progressive party, and had many inherited ideological problems, cultural artefacts from Narodism and Orthodoxy/feudalism, that predisposed the intelligentsia and proletariat to re-feudalization and nihilist stagnancy, and no filmmaker on Earth was more of a paradigm of this utopian luddite mindset than Andrei Tarkovsky. His least nihilistic film was Andrei Rublev, yet even then he primarily sought to induce the audience to tears at the end by showing even a great artistic achievement to be curtailed by transience and mortality without much universal purpose. We get a striving in the mud, and much doubt. In Solaris, however, we have the fullest expression of reactionary peasant nature-worship and its backward impulse to agrarian re-feudalization and religious thinking: that nature is impenetrable and knowledge is vain, that all scientific endeavors are a lost cause, that humanity is 'a problem' and never the solution. In other words, Solaris is about defeat and looking inward for outward answers. Well, the future should be about success, and there is nothing inward besides ancient childish nightmares and excuses for laziness and cowardice. What matters are all the outward positive things we work hard to construct for each other -- progress. Solaris is the quintessential anti-Americanist film. It's the distilled opposite of the pioneer spirit and colonialism, of westerns and Star Trek, of the cosmopolitan entrepreneurial and mercantile organizations that have uplifted our species out of ignorance and stagnation in such a short period of time, for the first time -- i.e. western modernity. Solaris isn't science fiction about a future worth making, because as the peasant believes religiously, there are only endless cycles without direction for us, and anything else is in God's hands. Let the princes rule! Don't revolt! Don't build, don't change! It is the ideology of self-imposed stagnation and submission to oppression. It is the desiccated culture of the Old World summarized in 2 hours and 47 minutes. It's about a suicidal sour grapes attitude instead of optimism. The peasantry is not a progressive class, and it knows it, so it stubbornly resents and will always react against technological efforts to improve life. Yeah, Solaris is quite the tour de force of depressive, defective, ideology. The only redeeming moment is when Kelvin chooses not to return to Earth, but to step into the unknown, but Tarkovsky even takes that away from the audience by showing a sad man marooned on a world with aliens that cannot fully empathize or communicate with him, accidentally torturing him with his fear of mortality by showing him his elderly father. What pain, yet not at all cathartic. Quite the opposite; it's like turning up a pressure cooker of negative emotions. I'm not sure if Solaris was banned in the Soviet Union, but the free market 'banned' it in America automatically, so hostile is its spirit to everything Americans rightly regard as good and healthy. What a hideous, retrogressive masterpiece of psychological sadism. I love it. But not as much as Andrei Rublev.
We have taken different things from the same book, after reading those same pages, yet it's the fact you gave so much to think on, I really do have to thank you.
I do not remotely understand the sentiments you're expressing in relation to Tarkovsky's Solaris (I haven't read Lem's novel so I can't comment on that). I understand the historical line you trace to justify your reading of Solaris' themes, but the conclusions you draw from the material presented in the film are overblown. Admittedly, in both Solaris, Stalker, and other films, Tarkovsky expressed a markedly anti-futurist sentiment. He is hopelessly humanist, Romantic, caught in the beauty of nature and simple times, childhood, dogs, etc. We all know this. He was a philosopher, his dad was a poet. Keep in mind the reaction of a film like this to the hyper-progressive sentiment which would have pervaded his upbringing. Think of the vestiges of the Russian Futurists, the space race, the premature push for technological and societal development in Soviet Russia. Gone are the days of Dovzhenko's Urga and other peasant idealizing Soviet films. I don't think Solaris is nearly so dogmatic as to reflect an inherently anti-progress or anti-exploration ideology. In fact, the film belies the necessity of ideology in the face of utterly unavoidable human desires for comfort, safety, meaning-finding, connection. Tarkovsky doesn't present these "grounding" aspects of the human condition as ideals to strive towards, but unfortunate conditions of the existence of empathic creatures. Tarkovsky's depiction of the finitude of scientific endeavors feels, to me at least, not so much a movement in any other explicit ideological direction, but a step back from the senseless onward push of humanity, the moore's law of society. His concerns are much more about uncovering hyper-specific emotional scenarios and unearthing character histories than they are about deconstructing ideologies of progress. Even if you take it that these are unconscious elements in Solaris, I don't quite see it. Solaris' set decoration is hopelessly aestheticized, streamlined and styled in such a popular 2001-adjacent, soviet architecture. Even though the station is in disrepair, Tarkovsky never holds back a feast for the eyes, he never strays from the inherent spectacle of space exploration. In my eyes, all of Solaris' push to demonstrate the inability to understand other beings, the necessity of connection, the beauty of the earth and nature, is not so much an anti-exploration sentiment but an acknowledgement and acceptance of the irrevocable characteristics of being human which tie us to where we come from and determine how we move forward. Traits, habits, quirks, desires we can never shed, no matter how far we peer over the horizon. Does this mean that space exploration is, itself, futile? It doesn't seem so from Tarkovsky's view, considering the situation on Solaris progresses toward a definite new understanding between the human characters and the Solaris animas. Your comment is very well-written I will say. If I am missing something please do tell.
@@milestiller665 Well, thanks for the reply, Miles. You said you didn't understand my sentiments, but then you went on to explain them better than I did in my opinion. It's only a matter of degree that I regard Tarkovsky's traditional rural attitudes in poetic form to be essentially proselytized by the Solaris film, which I do consider to be socially harmful and retrogressive from a historical point of view. In short, I don't believe it is possible to move or change or develop and adopt new technologies too quickly, so numerous are the natural causes of severe human suffering that presently obtain, and I attribute all delay as a direct result of class impositions. There is a concerted effort among the poets who glorify the peasantry (without working as peasants themselves) to model a supposed need for God (self-image, or natural order) as a social method for reducing the value of innovation, even to instill psychological guilt in the innovator or supporter thereof. This technique preserves the technological limitations that necessitate the continuation of a concentration of capital to maintain some kind of class dominance -- i.e. ability inequality. This attitude manifests as nature worship, or scientific-technological denigration, in art. Static knowledge instead of revolutionary praxis. From a science fiction point of view, I felt Tarkovsky wanted me -- the audience -- to feel sadness about progress, that it is vain, that failing to find our reflections (that mirror) out in the cosmos, we ought to believe we ought never to have left the traditional safety of our serf comforts on the imperial estates of our terrestrial lords. In my view, humans aren't looking for a mirror at all. We are making them. Our function is to build happiness, not stumble upon its premade causes. We're not looking for God. Healthy-minded people, in fact, build paradise everywhere possible out of chaotic circumstances. Human beings are reshapers of nature, and success in that respect alone is what makes us happy. Those who don't understand these preconditions of thriving must explain it to themselves superstitiously. They always want to passively go back to paradise, never forward to paradise, which would require great effort. An Americanized capitalist version of Solaris would've been about exactly as you described -- Kelvin optimistically makes contact with the planetary intelligence and begins a processes of productive understanding. It would, therefore, presuppose that if a truly alien entity is not quite a mirror at first, we could still transform it into one, and make it of use to our species without qualms. In other words, how can we make use of the Solaris entity's ability to manifest replicants and entire worlds out of particles and memories? How can we make use of their telepathic method of understanding our minds? For the futurist, what we can learn and invent based on any novel experience makes us curious and happy in a context of rational serenity; for the Tarkovsky-type of humanist, novelty is but an opportunity to reflect upon the myriad ways we have diverged from God's traditional ways, which is scary and torturous and should make us feel nostalgic and ashamed, because what is traditional and natural is the only correct way to live, etc, etc.
Америка давно пережила свой яд! Крестьяне, регрессивны? А разве не крестьяне в СССР первыми полетели в космос, совершили прорыв в будущее, посредством совершения революции? США - это культ торгашества, культ докрестьянского отношения с природой, культ зверя-хищника, культ зародыша человека, крестьянин-первая ступень превращения из зверя, в человека... Как Солярис-зародыш Бога, так американский, регрессивный культ,культ предтечи человека, крестьянина...
To be more precise: Most of it, actually the whole "fundament" equals the organ part, is Bach's work. Artemiev added some sound effects and a beautiful additional voice that (at least to me) intensifies the already haunting character of the piece. The additional voice can clearly be heard starting from 3:15 (some kind of chimes as it seems to me).
@@DaniloInderWildi In other words, Bach took a coral's theme and made a variation on it in his prelude. Artemiev took Bach's work and made a variation on Bach's prelude.
I had no idea there was a movie called Solaris. I just found out a couple of weeks ago. Now I know why I got the name Solaris, I am walking in the footsteps of Jesus 😇🙏 2618 thumbs up is Phi² and 135comments is the mirror value to 531, that is an acronym for Jesus fish 153, sum the values you get 135+531=666. JESUS - 45 666
Какая-то душа (возможно) у Вас есть. А вот *разума* нет точно. Когда J.-S.Bach (здесь играет: BWV639 / «Ich ruf’ zu dir, Herr Jesu Christ») стал русским композитором??
One genius from XX century plays music of another genius from XVIII century, all are blessed who listen to that.
In my opinion, this is the greatest use of classical music in any film
This is such a subjective statement, but I have to agree. It is not just the melody/harmony (not to mention hypnotically beautiful rhythm) of piece itself which makes me agree, more-so how it is incorporated into the narrative, how it captures the somber melancholy of memory and days past. It must be said that Artemiev's additions to Bach's original piece absolutely elevates it in my mind. It feels odd to say that Bach can be improved upon in any way, but I feel this arrangement by Artemiev absolutely supersedes the original. The rining bells, the building strings in the back, they compliment the underlying choral notes so so so well, and truly capture a free-floating, fantastical science-fiction tone which I would want to feel in a sci-fi movie.
Agree. It plumbs the depths and scales the heights and suspends time. Eternity in an art form whose chief characteristic is duration. Paradox. Great art can do the impossible.
Could someone let me know which original Bachs’ work is this from?
I think that the best use of classical music is 2001: A Space Odyssey, those long shoots with the music are just amazing
"In my opinion"... The age of self luxuries
RIP, Maestro Artemiev
No matter how much we try ,our dream just tells us our own perception of them. But in reality they may be completely different. In dream we just want them to be just as ideal. Don't let this inner perception of them consume you. It will only break you . This film really changed my perception of love.
Millions of miles in space, looking for the answer, only to find ourselves and our human weakness reflected in a mirror.
The answer he needed! No scientific discoveries just a journey within!
🫶👍
"Man doesn't need other worlds. Man needs a mirror. Man... needs man." - Dr. Snaut
💯
We don’t want to conquer space at all. We want to expand Earth endlessly.
Eduard Artemiev and Andréi Tarkovski, a rich combination of wit and poetry, music and spirit. Tarvovksi had a unique talent in sculpting time and feelings in each of his fims. Simply a precious piece.
Tarkovsky's art is still an exceeded summit not only for movie but for all art fields...
@@metafor2796 I would even go as far as to put him next to other almost holy artists like da Vinci or Bach.
@@tamerov2387 I agree with this claim...
@@tamerov2387 He certainly represents the peak and an ideal within his field. I didn't think about comparing them before but I'm inclined to agree.
А я думал на западе не понимают русскую душу
I just listen to it again and again and again...
Welcome to the club.
This song is playing when he "returns" home and suddenly stops when dog comes and greets him. Amazing!
The Prodigal son...
This also plays when the home video is played for Hari. The images in that video are mesmerizing and deliberate. Fantastic scene accompanied by an incredible song.
I watched Solaris for the first time yesterday and I can’t get this song out of my mind. The song causes me to stop and reflect on everything that is truly important and forget the meaningless distractions brought on everyday. The use of the synthesizer is especially impactful as a lot of the 70s and 80s television I watched as a kid sounded eerily similar to this. Brilliant
The Solaris is last movie with my ex bf at cinema so this awesome soundtrack always cry me 💔
burada da mı kezbanlık abi yetmez mi artık
I could be your new friend and we could watch Tarkovsky happily together and enjoy their beauty to the fullest
@@aniplug3600 edursi
Bach'ın altında kezbanlik yaymak. Neyse
@@aniplug3600 Don't turn a scientific problem into a common love story.
Die Harmonie der Musik und der Bühne war wirklich großartig. Es ist wirklich erstaunlich, dass er Menschen dieses Gefühl vermitteln kann. Tarkovski ist ein außergewöhnlicher Filmemacher.
One of my favorite Andrei Tarkovsky’s masterpieces, which is one of the most unique movies of all time
Literally a masterpiece...
I agree
MetafoR I personally believe it is more than a film, it is a way of life, a religion. I imagine traveling East of Irkutsk on the Trans Siberian or the BAM and entering into an agrarian society in which I like Kris Kelvin burn the remnants of the past. #Соларис
Why is it unique?
Why is it a masterpiece?
@@saxglend9439 Does that even need explanation?
My absolute favourite film and novel, ever. Wonderfully evocative soundtrack.
I agree superb works of art. Watch the Soderbergh version, very, very underrated film and very brave of him to give it a go after Tarkovsky. It’s a lovely, intelligent, moving film. Nice music too.
@@wmorris189 Yes I like that version. Ironically, Lem was unhappy with either film -- his book was essentially about hubris -- mankind's inability to understand something incredibly different.
Шедевр... Музыка сама как космос
Melody that I want my family to play at my funeral.
I wish you a long and healthy life...
“Erbarme dich“ bei mir
Same here bro
@@olgaerler4111 I'll prefer both. BWV 639 for when people are coming in. Erbarme Dich later.
Спасибо большое, кажется никто не сказал, что это музыка Э. Артемьева на основе музыки Баха. Он её дополнил в верхнем и нижнем регистре ... и получилось потрясающе. И в Сталкере тоже.
Вообще-то это музыка Баха, но Бах , думаю, повалил бы Артём Ева за такое прочтение. Удивительно уважительная интерпретация. Редко такое встретишь
@@vitalygubin1148 уважаемый Виталий, исправьте пожалуйста, я с трудом понял ваш текст. редактор... основа, да Бах. Но это и другая музыка -- другое впечатление. Не настаиваю.
Ну конечно "поХвалил"
@@aleAl-ye2jg конечно "поХвалил"
With the film industry in shambles these days, now, more than ever, we need visionaries like Tarkovsky........
Таких больше не будет, кругом расчёт, фальшь и потребление
@@user_52782 У искусства есть способ делать круглые вещи, которые считаются навязчивыми для старых, но новаторскими для новых.
Tarkovsky was a true one-off and not only will there never be another like him, the film industry no longer nurtures artists like him anywhere.
@@childrenofminervaofficial4316 So very true.....
Such a somber piece, beautifully woven into an incredible film.
Исполнение музыки двумя Гениями одновременно великолепность 👍👍👍😇😃😆
Adamlar uzaya bile felsefik bakmışlar. Müziğin kullanımı inanılmaz. Rüya gibi film.
Uzaya felsefi müzik yapmamışlar. Bach'ın ''Ich Ruf Zu Dir Jesu Christ'' parçasını yeniden yorumlamış. Temelde dini- Kilise müziği.
@@cankalayc Hocam müziğin Bach ın olduğunu biliyorum. Bu parçayı kullanarak felsefik bakmışlar demek istedim zaten. Müziği filmi yapanlar yapmış demedim. Bu müziği filmde güzel kullanmışlar.
@@cankalayc Nymphomaniac filminde de kullanılıyor bu müzik. Ama bayağı açık bir filmdir. Uyarayım sizi.
Tarkovsky es un genio tal como lo era Bach en su tiempo.
Блин так плакать хочется,это победная музыка !!
Rest in peace, maestro!
Saw this for the first time yesterday. Beautiful score.
Watch the Movie.
@@behelit1288 He said he saw it
Haven't seen the movie, this just popped up in my recommended. I have seen STALKER and do intend to watch this soon, but man, what a somber piece. Masterful.
You won't be disappointed.
В КАКОЙ БЫ ИНТЕРПРИТАЦИИ НЕ ЗВУЧАЛА БЫ МУЗЫКА БАХА ВСЕ РАВНО ЭТО ВЕЧНОСТЬ ВОЗВЫШЕННОСТЬ И ВЕЛИКОЛЕПИЕ. Я СЛУШАЛА ЭТУ ПРЕЛЮДИЮ В ИСПОЛЕНИИ ОРГАНА ФА-НО И ГИТАРЫ И ПРОСТО А КАПЕЛЬНО И ВСЕ РАВНО МЕЛОДИЯ ВОСХИЩАЕТ . БАХ БУДЕТ ТАК ЖЕ СИЛЕН И В 35 ИЛИ 89 ВЕКАХ ЕСЛИ КОНЕЧНО ЧЕЛОВЕЧЕСТВО ДОЖИВЕТ ДО ЭТИХ ВЕКОВ.
Bach perfectly describes an existential melancholy beyond the boundaries separating countries. A time-independent beauty...
В начале идёт как раз орган Баха, потом уже оптический синтезатор АНС Артемьева
@@Pohervant Это вариации Артемьева на вариации Баха на тему хорала в прелюдии Баха.)))
Не доживет. 17.3.22
@@metafor2796 музыка интернациональна... Особенно музыка сфер
Dos talentos en una gran combinación. Tarkovsky eterno por todo los siglos
Es increible lo poco valorado que es este film
This song also played on a film Nymphomaniac vol 1 dir.Lars Von Trier
Is the scene of Gibarian about to drink milk on film so important to the movie that it becomes the soundtrack cover art? The title when listed this way with the letter A raised above the rest of the letters, becomes the Latin sentence Sol-A-Ris, 'The sun is laughing'
Drinking milk should be the only thing allowed to show on film!^^
ich habe den Film das erste mal mit 12 gesehen.....heute bin ich 57 Jahre alt und die Faszination ist ungebrochen. Ich habe eben das erste mal die russische Fassung geschaut....den Text kannte ich ja....smile... Nebenbei...die Clooney Adaption ist nicht schlecht....
Thanks for comment Guido Stodt...
Erstaunlich, ich bin heute auch 57 Jahre alt und habe den Film zum ersten Mal gesehen, als ich noch ein junger Mann war. Bis heute liebe ich diesen Film, ein Meisterwerk. Grüße aus Brasilien.
nicht schlecht genau, die adaption ist schrecklich im vergleich zu original
Ich auch mit 12.
Masterpiece in a masterpiece
metafisica , esoterica... life...
Впервые слышу. Спасибо.🥰
You're welcome...
?
Расширяет до бесконечности . адвайта ... суть бытия
браво маэстро
Не будет больше таких как Тарковский
brilliance
very relaxing
Thanks for comment Laura, it's a master job...
quite the opposite, to me
@@EatmeReadme I can't even define what feelings come out of me when I hear that. It's meditative ... but somehow ... hmm ... sorry, I'm not able to put it into words.
@@tamerov2387 exactly, I can't put it in words, it's beyond.....
This may not be Artemiev at all. Leonid Roizman is supposed to have played this organ piece by bach on an organ for the film. And Artemiev scored the rest of the film. I began looking into this when I thought that this sounds too much like pipe organ vs. synth.
One of my secret music box!!!!
Thanks for comment Jazmin :)
Outstanding film with such moving message. Unforgetable soundtrack. Thanks for share it.
@@jazminrociobaravalle7193 U're welcome...
Gençliğimi boşa harcadıktan sonra dinlemelik.
Just wonder who them dislikes are, like real people, tell me who and why
They can't be human and not like this organ peace of Bach.They are monkees with a TV brain and a mask on face...Sorry for them..
@@Siberiaeterna feel sorry too
Pero que wena peli ameo
❤🙏
I call to you, Andrei Arsenyevich.
Интересно, если бы Бах услышал свою музыку в интерпретации Артемьева, что бы он ему сказал?
Меня тоже всегда волнует этот вопрос
Andata - async - ryuichi sakamoto
Yeah that piece always reminds me of Bach
i look up to a being in hope for him to hear my whispers of thanks
If anyone knows where I can download this in HD audio please let me know, torrent or paid is fine
Do you know what the original bach's piece called?
It's Bach's Choral Prelude No.5, "Ich ruf zu dir Herr Jesu Christ", BWV 639 (transcribed by Feruccio Busoni). This version by Edvard Artemiev for Tarkovsky's Solyaris is just sublime.
@@GrindrProzac I've been listening to different versions, and the one I love best is Artemiev's
@@GrindrProzac This is not Busoni's transcription or Artemiev's version, it's Bach's original organ score until 2:41. It's played by Gari Grodberg IIRC. Busoni's transcription is for the piano.
@@GrindrProzac Ferruccio Busoni transcribed the Bach"s organworks for piano. This choralprelude BWV639 is extracted from orgelbuchlein. It is a prelude composed on lutheran chorale from Joseph Klug 1533 singer melody.
I suggest to looking for the organ related work and not the "arranged" version for a correct judgment of these Bach's masterpieces. Only for recognize the Bach genius.
@@roxykattx I think the instrument plays a crucial role in this
Beautiful images and soundscape. Beautiful concept (at first), that there are radically different and powerful forms of life, perhaps intelligent, waiting for us out in the cosmos. However, Soviet Communism (to say nothing of Lem's Polish culture) was not a disciplined progressive party, and had many inherited ideological problems, cultural artefacts from Narodism and Orthodoxy/feudalism, that predisposed the intelligentsia and proletariat to re-feudalization and nihilist stagnancy, and no filmmaker on Earth was more of a paradigm of this utopian luddite mindset than Andrei Tarkovsky. His least nihilistic film was Andrei Rublev, yet even then he primarily sought to induce the audience to tears at the end by showing even a great artistic achievement to be curtailed by transience and mortality without much universal purpose. We get a striving in the mud, and much doubt. In Solaris, however, we have the fullest expression of reactionary peasant nature-worship and its backward impulse to agrarian re-feudalization and religious thinking: that nature is impenetrable and knowledge is vain, that all scientific endeavors are a lost cause, that humanity is 'a problem' and never the solution. In other words, Solaris is about defeat and looking inward for outward answers. Well, the future should be about success, and there is nothing inward besides ancient childish nightmares and excuses for laziness and cowardice. What matters are all the outward positive things we work hard to construct for each other -- progress. Solaris is the quintessential anti-Americanist film. It's the distilled opposite of the pioneer spirit and colonialism, of westerns and Star Trek, of the cosmopolitan entrepreneurial and mercantile organizations that have uplifted our species out of ignorance and stagnation in such a short period of time, for the first time -- i.e. western modernity. Solaris isn't science fiction about a future worth making, because as the peasant believes religiously, there are only endless cycles without direction for us, and anything else is in God's hands. Let the princes rule! Don't revolt! Don't build, don't change! It is the ideology of self-imposed stagnation and submission to oppression. It is the desiccated culture of the Old World summarized in 2 hours and 47 minutes. It's about a suicidal sour grapes attitude instead of optimism. The peasantry is not a progressive class, and it knows it, so it stubbornly resents and will always react against technological efforts to improve life. Yeah, Solaris is quite the tour de force of depressive, defective, ideology. The only redeeming moment is when Kelvin chooses not to return to Earth, but to step into the unknown, but Tarkovsky even takes that away from the audience by showing a sad man marooned on a world with aliens that cannot fully empathize or communicate with him, accidentally torturing him with his fear of mortality by showing him his elderly father. What pain, yet not at all cathartic. Quite the opposite; it's like turning up a pressure cooker of negative emotions. I'm not sure if Solaris was banned in the Soviet Union, but the free market 'banned' it in America automatically, so hostile is its spirit to everything Americans rightly regard as good and healthy. What a hideous, retrogressive masterpiece of psychological sadism. I love it. But not as much as Andrei Rublev.
We have taken different things from the same book, after reading those same pages,
yet it's the fact you gave so much to think on, I really do have to thank you.
I do not remotely understand the sentiments you're expressing in relation to Tarkovsky's Solaris (I haven't read Lem's novel so I can't comment on that). I understand the historical line you trace to justify your reading of Solaris' themes, but the conclusions you draw from the material presented in the film are overblown. Admittedly, in both Solaris, Stalker, and other films, Tarkovsky expressed a markedly anti-futurist sentiment. He is hopelessly humanist, Romantic, caught in the beauty of nature and simple times, childhood, dogs, etc. We all know this. He was a philosopher, his dad was a poet. Keep in mind the reaction of a film like this to the hyper-progressive sentiment which would have pervaded his upbringing. Think of the vestiges of the Russian Futurists, the space race, the premature push for technological and societal development in Soviet Russia. Gone are the days of Dovzhenko's Urga and other peasant idealizing Soviet films. I don't think Solaris is nearly so dogmatic as to reflect an inherently anti-progress or anti-exploration ideology. In fact, the film belies the necessity of ideology in the face of utterly unavoidable human desires for comfort, safety, meaning-finding, connection. Tarkovsky doesn't present these "grounding" aspects of the human condition as ideals to strive towards, but unfortunate conditions of the existence of empathic creatures. Tarkovsky's depiction of the finitude of scientific endeavors feels, to me at least, not so much a movement in any other explicit ideological direction, but a step back from the senseless onward push of humanity, the moore's law of society. His concerns are much more about uncovering hyper-specific emotional scenarios and unearthing character histories than they are about deconstructing ideologies of progress. Even if you take it that these are unconscious elements in Solaris, I don't quite see it. Solaris' set decoration is hopelessly aestheticized, streamlined and styled in such a popular 2001-adjacent, soviet architecture. Even though the station is in disrepair, Tarkovsky never holds back a feast for the eyes, he never strays from the inherent spectacle of space exploration. In my eyes, all of Solaris' push to demonstrate the inability to understand other beings, the necessity of connection, the beauty of the earth and nature, is not so much an anti-exploration sentiment but an acknowledgement and acceptance of the irrevocable characteristics of being human which tie us to where we come from and determine how we move forward. Traits, habits, quirks, desires we can never shed, no matter how far we peer over the horizon. Does this mean that space exploration is, itself, futile? It doesn't seem so from Tarkovsky's view, considering the situation on Solaris progresses toward a definite new understanding between the human characters and the Solaris animas. Your comment is very well-written I will say. If I am missing something please do tell.
@@milestiller665 Well, thanks for the reply, Miles. You said you didn't understand my sentiments, but then you went on to explain them better than I did in my opinion. It's only a matter of degree that I regard Tarkovsky's traditional rural attitudes in poetic form to be essentially proselytized by the Solaris film, which I do consider to be socially harmful and retrogressive from a historical point of view. In short, I don't believe it is possible to move or change or develop and adopt new technologies too quickly, so numerous are the natural causes of severe human suffering that presently obtain, and I attribute all delay as a direct result of class impositions. There is a concerted effort among the poets who glorify the peasantry (without working as peasants themselves) to model a supposed need for God (self-image, or natural order) as a social method for reducing the value of innovation, even to instill psychological guilt in the innovator or supporter thereof. This technique preserves the technological limitations that necessitate the continuation of a concentration of capital to maintain some kind of class dominance -- i.e. ability inequality. This attitude manifests as nature worship, or scientific-technological denigration, in art. Static knowledge instead of revolutionary praxis. From a science fiction point of view, I felt Tarkovsky wanted me -- the audience -- to feel sadness about progress, that it is vain, that failing to find our reflections (that mirror) out in the cosmos, we ought to believe we ought never to have left the traditional safety of our serf comforts on the imperial estates of our terrestrial lords. In my view, humans aren't looking for a mirror at all. We are making them. Our function is to build happiness, not stumble upon its premade causes. We're not looking for God. Healthy-minded people, in fact, build paradise everywhere possible out of chaotic circumstances. Human beings are reshapers of nature, and success in that respect alone is what makes us happy. Those who don't understand these preconditions of thriving must explain it to themselves superstitiously. They always want to passively go back to paradise, never forward to paradise, which would require great effort. An Americanized capitalist version of Solaris would've been about exactly as you described -- Kelvin optimistically makes contact with the planetary intelligence and begins a processes of productive understanding. It would, therefore, presuppose that if a truly alien entity is not quite a mirror at first, we could still transform it into one, and make it of use to our species without qualms. In other words, how can we make use of the Solaris entity's ability to manifest replicants and entire worlds out of particles and memories? How can we make use of their telepathic method of understanding our minds? For the futurist, what we can learn and invent based on any novel experience makes us curious and happy in a context of rational serenity; for the Tarkovsky-type of humanist, novelty is but an opportunity to reflect upon the myriad ways we have diverged from God's traditional ways, which is scary and torturous and should make us feel nostalgic and ashamed, because what is traditional and natural is the only correct way to live, etc, etc.
Америка давно пережила свой яд! Крестьяне, регрессивны? А разве не крестьяне в СССР первыми полетели в космос, совершили прорыв в будущее, посредством совершения революции? США - это культ торгашества, культ докрестьянского отношения с природой, культ зверя-хищника, культ зародыша человека, крестьянин-первая ступень превращения из зверя, в человека... Как Солярис-зародыш Бога, так американский, регрессивный культ,культ предтечи человека, крестьянина...
Иоганн, ты просто дуракккк!
🙏🙏🙏
Natalia Tarnovsky!!!!🏃♀️💃💃👱♂️👱♀️👱♀️👱♀️👱♀️🙋♀️🙋♂️☻☻☻
"Где Гибарян?"
_"Гибарян умер не от страха. Он умер от стыда."_
@@Vault130 "Знай, это не безумие. Здесь скорее что-то с совестью"
Крис, я так хотел, чтобы ты поскорее прилетел...
Norilsk come back!
çok iyi
I am confused. Is the main theme composed by edward or was that already existing made by Bach.
Eduard's work, but inspired by Bach ...
Original from Bach. Ich ruf zu dir, Herr Jesu Christ. BWV 639
Thank you for the help.
To be more precise: Most of it, actually the whole "fundament" equals the organ part, is Bach's work. Artemiev added some sound effects and a beautiful additional voice that (at least to me) intensifies the already haunting character of the piece. The additional voice can clearly be heard starting from 3:15 (some kind of chimes as it seems to me).
@@DaniloInderWildi In other words, Bach took a coral's theme and made a variation on it in his prelude. Artemiev took Bach's work and made a variation on Bach's prelude.
хорошо
I had no idea there was a movie called Solaris. I just found out a couple of weeks ago. Now I know why I got the name Solaris, I am walking in the footsteps of Jesus 😇🙏 2618 thumbs up is Phi² and 135comments is the mirror value to 531, that is an acronym for Jesus fish 153, sum the values you get 135+531=666. JESUS - 45 666
666 is the devil's mark. Check the back of your head for mark of devil. You have my Omen (1975) :)
what is name of this song? i will thankful if anyone answer
Eduard Artemiev - Listen to Bach (The Earth)
or
Solaris (Edward Artemiev)
dünya tarkovsky i anlamaya hazır değil
Надо постараться и поймёшь.
Kuantum fiziğini bile anlayamadılar hala.
Denedim ve artık anlıyorum
Which release of the soundtrack is this copied from?
This record has not been released to the market. An error conclusion was in the title of the soundtrack. I changed that. Thank you for the question.
@@metafor2796 www.discogs.com/es/%D0%AD%D0%B4%D1%83%D0%B0%D1%80%D0%B4-%D0%90%D1%80%D1%82%D0%B5%D0%BC%D1%8C%D0%B5%D0%B2-Andrey-Tarkovsky-Vol-3-Solaris-%E6%83%91%E6%98%9F%E3%82%BD%E3%83%A9%E3%83%AA%E3%82%B9/master/315530
Ultrakill
Resurgam!
Сочинил это и заставку бесогона-гений
Qulaq dinci, deyə bir şey var...
Русские - лучшие композиторы, потому что у них есть душа. В отличие от бездушных, математических композиторов на Западе.
Какая-то душа (возможно) у Вас есть. А вот *разума* нет точно.
Когда J.-S.Bach (здесь играет: BWV639 / «Ich ruf’ zu dir, Herr Jesu Christ») стал русским композитором??
Это какая-то глупость.Неможно так говорить.
Это тупой тролль. Не обращайте на него внимание.
@@ТоварищТелкин
Вряд-ли. На такое способна только исконная природная тупость естественного происхождения.
хорошо