Where do I start with Tarkovsky?
where the fricking frick do i start with this director who has like 10 movies and all of them were critically acclaimed and are 2-3 hours long? i need to know how to frickity frick watch them!
>>220356809You don't start with Tarkovsky, Tarkovsky starts with you. You not ready, better luck next time, Kid.
>>220356809I started with picrel and enjoyed it thoroughly.At the time I didn't know it was by Tarkovsky nor did I know anything at all of or about Tarkovsky.Afterwards, I read the book.The two are completely distinct, and with that in mind I think the movie is best experienced BEFORE reading the book. Again, they're quite distinct from each other, in my eyes at least.
>>220356809having insomnia helps
>>220356809Samurai Jack
If you don't know then you aren't ready.
>>220357451It was so overhyped and watched it and thought it was boringI like art house films, but this one seemed pointless, not particularly well shot, and not interesting. what did i miss
>>220356809I tried to watch Solaris and it was boring as shit. Stalker is decent tho if you like the games or the book.
>>220356809I wouldn't start anywhere with him. I'd listen, and that's what no one did.
>>220359261im on the exact same boat. Maybe the book would be better. But expecting sights of pure wonder and irrationality seeing the same silent hill soviet factory got boring very fast. It's like they blew their money on the sand room lol.
>>220358838I smiled
>>220356809Are you retarded?
>>220359261>>220359510>what did i missThat criticism has nothing to do with the movie. Being disappointed relative to expectations is 100% your problem.
>>220359560>That criticism has nothing to do with the movie.yes. it looked like shit. the zone was not beautiful and wonderful. I appreciate its message but the film was a slog to look at when they thought it's pictures were its strengths.>boris just dump lightbulbs into the flooded factory lol
>>220359611who told you it was going to be beautiful and wonderful? Who told you it was going to be "well shot" like Attack of the Clones? These are just childish imaginings.
>>220359629>“The Zone’s mystery, beauty, and wonder compared to the outside world’s industrial wasteland.”From the film>"How quiet it is… it’s the most peaceful place in the world.”It's not far fetched to believe something thats ltierally described as a literal WONDER to not be beautiful especially when they go out of their way to describe the contrast of bleak russia.it just ended up being bleak in the movie too lol sorry I dont care about flooded abandoned power plants.
>>220359799so you already saw what the film looked like and still crashed out, yeah I'm thinking it's your problem. I'm surprised you haven't complained that the first part is black and white yet.
>>220359819yea bro I'm crashing out this movie looked like shit lol. I'll make a movie with a cardboard box and call it the zone. buy tickets, cause its gonna be DEEP.
>>220359875It's because you aren't part of something great. Same reason every great movie makes some people seethe.
Stalker is great. You have to pay attention because several strange things happen in the zone like the scene by the creek where they all get turned around. I won't deny that I expected one final room and they sorta skipped out on that
>>220356809Solaris or stalker seem to be the starting point for most people
Soviets made a system where sad hacks could become legends, because they where the only ones with commitment enough to keep on producing. Meanwhile the rest of the job market was too busy with kids, whoring, or alcohol to have any real aim or ambition.
>>220359460>Stalker is decent tho if you like the games or the book.lol? its a travesty if youre at all familiar with either great advice if you want to start by throwing the rest of his work in the trash
>>220359904It's always funny seeing you neckbeards get indignant when someone doesn't like what you like. A movie from 1927 was more visually engaging than a film's whos purpose was supposed to be a captivating environment.You're punching the air right now.
>>220360036>>220359460all his movies are snoozefests
>>220360036filtered
>>220360385>t. the connoisseur clapping at the antique pot
>>220360083And who told you old movies are bad?
>>220356809good>ivan's childhood>mirror>nostalghiaok>andrei rublevbad>stalker>solaris>the sacrifice
>shoot your film around an abandoned industrial site in Estonia >film a bunch of scenes in water water >crew gets cancer and dies>...>profit?avant garde
>>220360440This, except I would file Stalker under ok.
>>220360515lmao
>>220360578
>>220360476Tarkovsky is sorta self indulgent so they were basically laying in toxic waste for hours on end over a period of months. Course you could argue he only filmed in Estonia because he was basically shadow banned by the Russian ministry. they didn't like him.
>>220356809just leave The Sacrifice for the last and you're all setAndrei Rublev and Mirror are his masterpieces imo, but many others are more partial towards Solaris and Stalker.
>>220360440havent seen the top 3 so i'm tempted to give them a view but then again your simple "good" aswell as putting stalker under bad tells me you're likely an insincere soul lacking individual
>>220356809Nostalghia is one of my top 10 films of all time
>>220360476if so how come no one likes that John Wayne movie?
>>220357451>>220359261I watched it only knowing about the book and being a filmbro tarantinofag, I was legit scared everytime he threw the nut
>>220362551*only knowing about the games not book
