A women lies on the floor, with a wet shirt that clearly show her nipples, and is fairly extensive scene, shown from different angles.
A woman removes her dress (no nudity is shown, she’s wearing a gown as underwear) and climbs into bed with a man. Nothing more happens, just a very brief kiss and they lie together motionless, then the man gets up.
In another non-sexual scene a woman wears a sheer blouse.
A man walks around in a shirt and underwear.


Film review:Translated by www.rabudo-ru.com


I watched Tarkovsky’s Solaris again these two days and looked for Lyme’s original works by the way. I also saw the remake of Soderberg in 2002, but I didn’t discuss anything in depth except tenderness, so my comments are limited to Tarkovsky’s films and Lyme’s novels. Some people praise it as one of the best science fiction films, but I think it may be a very good film, but it may not be the best science fiction film. Although this is a good film and involves standard science fiction themes, such as space stations, spacecraft and unknown planets, a good science fiction film is not a film involving science fiction themes, but a film asking real science fiction questions.

The plot is not complicated. There was an accident at the space station on Solaris. Pilot Chris Kelvin went to find out the reason. When he got there, he found all kinds of strange things. Among the three scientists stationed, gibaryan, who is most familiar with him, has committed suicide, and the other two scientists are talking about what they are tossing about. Kelvin himself encountered all kinds of inexplicable problems, and met his wife who had died for ten years. Later, it was found that other people or other human beings on the space station were experimental objects sent by the ocean of Solaris after scanning their cerebral cortex. Finally, after scanning Kelvin’s brain map and sending it to the ocean, the ocean stopped sending new experimental objects. Lyme’s wife also took action to eliminate her own existence.

In Lyme, the novel is not obscure at all. The first sentence of the wiki is very clear: Solaris discusses the ultimate indequatcy of communication between human and non human species The logic is not complicated. In most of our science fiction movies and works, we imagine that alien life is humanoid and humanoid, or at least has a mind similar to ours, or other visible shapes. But why is alien life like this? In terms of language, the language in jiangted’s the story of your life is complex enough, but it is still understood by us in the end. In Lyme, this kind of agent is directly the ocean, and even life in the sense of earth may not be counted, because it can not copy and reproduce itself, which is beyond the imagination of most science fiction. In the end, we failed to establish any effective way of communication with the ocean. In the novel, a lot of human research on Solaris is described, and Solaris has successfully invented a subject learned by Solaris. People have repeatedly debated this issue for hundreds of years, but in the end, it is just a footnote to the impossibility of communication.

In Tarkovsky, the film is much more complex. In addition to the common Tarkovsky propositions such as human nature and love, the film involves several propositions often involved in science fiction stories, such as the relationship between man and non-human. This is exactly the topic that Philip Dick is very keen on. The silver blade killer discusses this problem from beginning to end, However, in Tarkovsky’s case, it was just a pass, and no more exploration was made. The most fundamental difference is that in the novel, the novel asks about the fundamental limitations of such people:

“If we want to solve the mystery of the universe, we are ready for everything, that is to say, we are ready to endure loneliness, struggle, martyrdom and death. Out of humility, we don’t make a big announcement, but sometimes we do think that we are great. However, this is not the whole truth, and the wishes we show are just bluff 。 We don’t want to conquer the universe at all. We just want to extend the boundaries of the earth to the greatest extent. One planet may be completely desert, just like the Sahara, another planet may be covered with ice and snow, just like the north and south poles, or a tropical scene, just like the virgin forest in Brazil. We are fraternal and noble. We don’t want to conquer other races. We just want to spread our values to them and accept all their heritage in return. We think we have the sacred mission of communication, a kind of chivalry. This is another lie. We are looking for people, not the world outside people. We have no need of the world outside the world. What we need is people’s own mirror. We have no way to look at other worlds and touch the doorway. We come from this world and suffocate in this world. We want to find images idealized according to our style; We look for a planet and a civilization that is more perfect than our planet and our civilization. What we hope to find on other planets is something based on our ignorant past. It may have entered a higher stage of evolution, but it must also be based on the same evolutionary principles as our civilization. But on the other hand, we will fight back against those things we can’t agree with, and finally only the pure virtue of the earth and the merit monument of human heroism that we bring from the earth! We fly here under the guidance of this morality. We come here to achieve this goal, but on the other hand, when the truth is revealed, we have to hide the truth. We can’t stand the truth different from us! ”

In the movie, this passage becomes:

“… in this case, mediocrity and genius are equally worthless. We are not interested in conquering the universe. We want to extend the earth to the boundary of the universe. We don’t know how to deal with other worlds. We don’t need other worlds. We need a mirror. We have been working hard for contact, but we have never been in contact. We fell into a fool Stupid human situation, struggling for a goal he fears, struggling for a world he doesn’t need. Humans need humans. ”

These two tones are completely different. Although they are also spoken from snow, it is a lament of our limitations in Lyme. The end of the novel is also such powerlessness. We can’t understand the mysterious Solaris ocean. In the film, the end of the film is more mysterious. Chris returned to his hometown on the isolated island of the ocean. We can’t even understand whether this is reality or the illusion of the ocean. When Hai Ruo turned to the magnificent hunter in the snow, the tone of the whole film began to turn from the outside to the inside, from our relationship with the other world to our own inner world. This is also another issue involved in stalker, which is slightly sci-fi. It is an issue that Tarkovsky himself is very keen on.

Do we need the outside world when facing the other? It is in this regard that the novel and the film give two completely different answers.

For Tarkovsky, the mysterious Solaris ocean is just a mirror to examine himself. There are not many problems with this. In fact, Tarkovsky is reiterating the old proposition: “man, the yardstick of all things”. I wrote an article “why read science fiction” before. We must recognize this “Anthropocentrism” position, because we are human after all, and we can’t think beyond ourselves. After all, novels have to be written in human language.

However, many excellent science fiction works are always expanding our previous definitions. When facing the other, they are reflecting on our own limitations as human beings. Accordingly, they are also expanding our concept as “human beings” and subverting some of our habitual views step by step. The problem is that Tarkovsky never goes beyond the perspective of the West or even Russia. He did not extend the concept wider, but just deeper. When Hai Ruo gazes at the hunter in the snow for a long time, we think that it is only the product of a specific culture. Other elements include Bach’s music, Bruegel, Durer and Andre rubeliev’s paintings. In other words, Tarkovsky did not try to cover up his own cultural background at all. This is precisely what a science fiction work tries to avoid. Most science fiction works, whether novels or movies, will try to get rid of the characteristics of being an individual and a specific cultural product as much as possible, because science fiction treats people more as a race.

In Tarkovsky’s view, how can we fly into space without even completing our own exploration? Tarkovsky binds us too much here and now. He inherited the reflective tradition of Russian thought. At the same time, he lived in the Cold War era. In his view, the destruction of our civilization is by no means alarmist, so his worries can be considered. But interestingly, the cold war period was also the golden age of science fiction (not the golden age in the history of science fiction). At that time, science fiction writers had amazing vitality and imagination. Later, there were too many science fiction themes with the destruction of civilization as the background, matrix, fallout, base, etc. in these stories, The destruction of our present civilization is by no means the end of the world, or even the basis for the emergence of another new civilization – whether better or worse. Most science fiction have varying degrees of optimism. People will never be timid when exploring. Even if they hit their heads and blood, they will never move forward. I don’t know if this is one of the differences between Russian thought and Western thought.

Tarkovsky’s own comments on the film:

I think the film specifically presents the concept of “consciousness”, which has been well expressed. The problem is that there are too many pseudo scientific tricks in the film. Orbit, space station, equipment, all these make me deeply bored. In my opinion, modern and scientific things symbolize human mistakes. Modern people are too concerned about the material development and the practical side of reality. He is like a carnivore. He only knows to take, which makes human interest in the transcendental world disappear. Today’s human beings are like earthworms: a small pipe swallowing soil, leaving behind small piles of soil. If one day he swallowed the whole earth and made it disappear, we don’t have to be shocked. If flying into the universe takes us away from the primary problem – the harmony between thought and matter, what can this action do?

In fact, Lyme is also extremely dissatisfied with this adaptation of Tarkovsky. Although the two have done a lot of communication in the shooting, they still lack the most fundamental identity. The exploration in the film is almost entirely internal. The coat of science fiction is almost completely unnecessary. This story can be put aside and still hold. The famous weightlessness of 30 seconds may not be more dynamic than the suspension in the mirror. Other recurring intentions, sudden heavy rain, repeatedly appear in the mirror and Andre lubbocov. These images remind us that this is a Tarkovsky film rather than a common science fiction film.

Finally, I always think Kubrick should be the best adaptation of the novel. The magnificent red sunrise and Blue Sunrise described in the novel remind people of the famous sunrise at the beginning of 2001. The unpredictable ocean landscape described in the novel also reminds people of the mysterious passage through the star gate in 2001. I think if anyone can visualize Lyme’s exploration and description, it must be Kubrick. Kubrick lacks neither imagination in images nor real understanding of science fiction. The ultimate theme of the novel is the same as that of the last star child in 2001. Unfortunately, Kubrick seems to be someone who will never set foot in a subject for the second time.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here