I didn't ''get'' this movie
There's nothing to get. It's just shallow and empty DUDE EXISTENTIALISM LMAO dreck
You didn't 'get' Reservoir Dogs?
>>62973840
>unironic plebposting
"I" didn't "get" this "movie":
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tFQJhn-RBXo
>>62973840
disgusting
>>62973761
You're not really supposed to "get it" as you are supposed to experience it. There is not really a unifying argument to the film. Rather it is an exploration of the themes (ie faith, ambition etc)
>>62973761
How did it make you feel OP?
>>62973856
underrated
>>62973761
It's really an aesthetic experience. The worldview of it is about industrial society compared to nature which in the zone is a previously industrial area that has been reclaimed by nature.
It's not about plot or grand realizations.
>>62973856
There's nothing to "get". There's no secret message. What you see is what you get.
>not being a russian
>trying to understand russian movies
>>62975582
>You're not really supposed to "get it" as you are supposed to experience i
I didn't "experience" anything.
>>62977458
You can still enjoy movies even if you don't fully "get" them.
it's just a lowkey "be careful what you wish for" flick
>>62973761
ITT: pseudo patricians overestimating a fucking hack
>>62973761
Shit movie, great game.
>>62973856
Shit movie, shit game.
Well there's not so much to get about this movie.
It's unexplained surreal scene queued after unexplained surreal scene.
That seems to be the appeal of it.
Rated it 6/10, like Solaris way more.
>>62973761
I dont pretend to get it either, but I still enjoyed it because I like movies where you dont really have any idea what is going to happen
>>62977504
That's what I mean when I say "didn't get/experience". I didn't get what's enjoyable about it.
>>62977598
>like Solaris way more.
lel another pleb who didn't read the book detected
>>62977679
You mean Roadside Picnic?
I read it and I liked it. But it's completely different from the movie.
>>62977516
here's your (You)
>>62977598
Solaris is his worse film, you just have shit taste
>It's a character describing a scene for 10 minutes instead of actually showing it
I rather watch paint drying on a wall than watch a Tartakovsky joint
>>62977824
>joint
It's called a reefer, my unenlightened fellow.
>>62973761
Oh you didn't GET this movie???
>>62977458
Brush up on your cinematic literacy bub. Ie. Watch more good movies
cant into art huh
stick to watching game of thrones and batman lol
>>62977598
>It's unexplained surreal scene queued after unexplained surreal scene.
Fuck you. Consider learning how to watch a film before rating them. There's a lot of parallels and self-explanatory moments in the film if you look for them. 1+1=1, the story of the maid burning down her employers house so she could return home,Domenico committing suicide is the foreshadowed, Andrei's walk with the candle lining up with Domenico's fate, Andrei's home sickness lining up with Domenico's exile and the maid's same home sickness. I could list off a bunch of shit to corroborate how much of a genius Tarkovsky is and how great Nostalghia is. Tarkovsky uses abstraction to get his points across, he does so fairly concisely, you'll miss out on a lot of his genius if you keep doing that kind of hand waving. All in all the film is fairly autobiographical, in terms of Tarkovsky's exile and his home sickness, but he also throws in his Christian and Taoist themes. Look at the final shot, see how Andrei's homeland and the ruined church have become one? Fuck me that is great. I haven't seen it in months and it's still fresh in my mind.
Worst board on 4chan
Seriously, fucking plebs
Professor = reason, logic
Writer = imagination, fantasy
Stalker = curiosity, bravery
>>62978650
*Stalker = faith
Can someone explain the dog? I watched this like 2 weeks ago and it was so bizarre to me and I feel like most of it went over my head.
Need to watch it again soon.
>>62978428
I've watched all Tarkeksky's works, read all his interviews and his book, read a couple of books on him, watched Bergman, Bresson, Godard, Kurosawa, Ozu, Antonioni. They're all fucking fedora tipping autistic hacks.
There's nothing to get. Tarkovsky is a self-proclaimed hack. You can only enjoy his films emotionally and visually, but delving any deeper is pointless, as there's simply nothing of substance behind Tarkovsky's imagery. He admits this himself in interviews, even going as far as to say he that he doesn't "believe" in symbolism.
>>62978650
P O T T E R Y
>>62978650
And the phone?
>>62978831
Dog was phone
>>62978785
It's because symbolism is stupid.
>>62978785
Fuck off, things should be taken into context
>>62978785
Symbolism is for 4th grade book analysis class.
>>62973761
you don't need to get it, just pretend that you think it's deep and a masterpiece like the plebs on /tv/ then you can fit in with the pseudo patricians here
>>62978685
Go to bed, Eric. The dog doesn't mean anything.
>"People have often asked me what the Zone is, and what it symbolises, and have put forward wild conjectures on the subject. I'm reduce to a state of fury and despair by such questions. The Zone doesn't symbolise anything, any more than anything else does in my films: the zone is a zone, it's life, and as he makes his way across it a man may break down or he may come through. Whether he comes through or not depends on his own self-respect, and his capacity to distinguish between what matters and what is merely passing."
>"I see it as my duty to stimulate reflection on what is essentially human and eternal in each individual soul, and which all too often a person will pass by, even though his fate lies in his hands. He is too busy chasing after phantoms and bowing down to idols. In the end everything can be reduced to the one simple element which is all a person can count upon in his existence: the capacity to love. That element can grow within the soul to become the supreme factor which determines the meaning of a person's life. My function is to make whoever sees my films aware of his need to love and to give his love, and aware that beauty is summoning him."
i prefer da videogame cuz dere wuz GUNZ
>>62978925
>>62979265
This.
Too often everyone watches these and assumes it's trying to be cryptic like a puzzle that's meant to be solved
>>62978925
>"Just turn your brain off." - Tarkovsky in response to criticism and in defence of Transformers 8
>>62978900
>>62979055
Hot opinions, too bad many renowned directors disagree. And it's not that Tarkovsky is outright wrong, just that he refused to even try to add any symbolism whatsoever into his films, and when questioned about it, responded with stuff like this >>62978925
Just cheap and easy.
>>62978925
http://people.ucalgary.ca/~tstronds/nostalghia.com/TheTopics/Symbols.html
Eh, he constantly puts down symbolism.
>>62979314
>hot opinions
>too bad many renowned directors disagree
Oh I wasn't aware your renowned directors OPINIONS were actually not opinions and were objective and universal truths. Thanks senpai.
>>62973856
hahaha
>>62979312
There is a reason Kubrick is being called a pleb on this board.
>>62979265
>In the end everything can be reduced to the one simple element which is all a person can count upon in his existence: the capacity to love
Is Tarkovsky implying, dare I say it, that love is the only thing that can trascend space and time?
>>62979421
>universal truths
Compared to your butthurt baseless spewing, they are.
>>62979448
Why is Kubrick called a pleb on /tv/?
>>62979452
No, because unlike Tarkovsky Nolan has zero understanding of the term love.
>>62973856
Bravo
>>62979531
Only because I defy the opinions you place value on.
>>62978748
Maybe you just aren't wired to appreciate art. Doesn't make you stupid, just not an artist
>>62977700
I think he meant Stanislaw Lem's Solaris... Which is based, but impossible to really directly adapt.
>>62979314
No decent director explains what his movies are about
>>62978785
>implying there's anything possibly deeper than the raw sensory communication of emotion that Tarkovsky uses film to deliver
1:1 symbolism is shallow as hell and always lazy. It limits communication, not enhances it
People aren't allowed to have individual perceptions, society would crumble. Artists are reckless anarchists and should be tried for treason to humanity.
>>62979542
Because he is not very good
>>62978573
...he's talking about Stalker, the film OP is talking about too
>>62979660
Oh so you're just regurgitating stale memes. Got it.
>>62979452
This proves that nolan is tarkovsky tier
>>62979567
FUCK U h8rs,,,,,u can;t be convinced even if we presented u with irrefutable proofs like this>>62979452
>>62978785
Explaining is limiting.
You're a retard.
>>62979757
I'm being honest. I personally don't like his movies, I think BL is his best and it's still just a 7/10
>>62979757
I don't care for his movies all that much either. His best imo is Eyes Wide Shut. All the others I've seen are 6s or 7s.
>>62980170
The Shining is one of the scariest movies though
>>62980316
>the shining
>scary
pick one m7
>>62979312
There is no this, a visual element can mean anything within a determined context or else we wouldn't need academic analysis of such works. There is no such thing as objective truth on art, so every hole of thought can and should be filled with interpretations.
>>62979660
Stop posting any time child.
>>62980392
I'll pick the shining, because it's a scary movie
>>62980170
Babby's first contrarian opinion
You'll grow out of it eventually
>>62980411
"this" as in "I agree" you fucking autist
>>62973761
me "neither"
>>62980027
>>62980170
Alright then. I am legitimately curious what you would consider a 10/10 movie?
>>62978785
Of course he doesn't. If you consciously try to give your work meaning you will fail. It is only unconsciously that you can access the pure esthetic plane to create l'art brut, pleb.
>>62978785
Well of course you don't like him, you are a capeflick pretend moviegoer that embraces cultural catastroph. I am wondering what is going to be next gem of stupidity that will come from this empty head of yours, I think it's time for you to go back to reddit with your anti-intellectual comments.
>>62979265
based andrei
>>62978650
Professor - Man of Science
Writer - Man of Art
Stalker - Man of Faith
>>62979452
Yes: the difference is that Tark understands that time doesn't mean decades and space doesn't mean wormholes
>>62980672
Satantango, In Vanda's Room, Crude Oil or any movie from the João César Monteiro's "João de Deus" trilogy.
And now I get called a pretentious fuck because I have an honest opinion.
>>62980455
>growing out to like Kubrick
Jesus christ. How embarrassing.
>>62973761
is this stalker? I never saw it but looks like a bad movie.
>>62983435
And what does a good movie look like to you?
>>62983457
like this you pretentious douche
>>62977458
You're a big fan of Whedon's deep plots, aren't you anon?
>>62983403
What's embarrassing about liking Kubrick?
>>62982924
pretentious fuck
>>62983571
Every single one of those shots is both poorly composed and poorly lit. Half of their subjects are completely arbitrary.
Can this meme die already
>>62984208
But
>dude high contrast and sharpening lmao
>>62984208
>poorly composed and poorly lit
nice meme
define well composed and well lit
>>62973761
That's because critical thinking is absent in your life, and you also probably didn't expect anything to begin with. It's blatant that your attitude was skeptically curious from the start, which is the wrong frame of mind for Tarkovsky's films.
>>62982924
>7 hour film
Now that IS pretentious
>>62982924
Português?
>>62984580
Nota-se?
>>62984514
Crude Oil is 17h long, still great tho
>>62984846
Pretentious m8. Might be stunning visually or be captivating story wise but there's no need for any film to be that long unless its going for some kind of silly record.
>>62984947
Do you have ADD?
>>62984846
Não deixo de gostar dele, mas tens de admitir que João César Monteiro é um bocado pretensioso.
Em relação ao Tárr, os filmes dele não me dizem muito sinceramente, são demasiado auto-indulgentes.
>>62985078
O JCM é o meu realizador preferido, não discordo necessariamente com o facto de ser pretensioso mas há que perceber que o homem não queria mesmo saber de qualquer efeito que os seus filmes tivessem sob a sua audiência. Eles diz várias vezes que só faz os filmes por dinheiro e não quer saber se são vistos ou não
>>62973856
Legitimately impressive joke.
