« Not my kind of town ... | Main | Krzysztof's Balls »
OK, saw Solaris tonight. Good flick. Lots to digest. Honestly, it was better than I expected from Soderbergh, who I wouldn't have guessed had the patience or the art-film chops to pull this off at the level of grace he aspires to and more or less maintains throughout. I'd sure like to see the long version, which a Mobius poster has described, with spoliers, here.
I wouldn't say it reaches the same level as the Tarkovsky version, which is long enough that you tend to lose yourself in it, and creepy enough that some of the scenes that take place on the space station orbiting Solaris play almost like a horror film, but it's quite something on its own terms. I wish we had more expensive Hollywood films along these lines -- it's clearly a labor of love for everyone involved, and the disastrous box-office reception just make the effort a little more poignant. Bet the DVD will find a sizable and appreciative cult audience. A proper review will be forthcoming.
Those of you who've seen Solaris and enjoyed it may be interested in an early version of the screenplay.
And, oh yeah, P.S., the mysterious National Board of Review apparently just released its picks for movies o' the year. Looks like one studio in particular is getting Miramaximum exposure from the ol' NBR this year. That Chicago places so high on the NBR list only gives me the willies about Gangs of New York, about which I am trying to remain highly excited. And the absence of The Two Towers from this list may well be a good sign. IndieWire has the full story, but the top 10 list follows.
1. "The Hours" (Paramount/Miramax)
2. "Chicago" (Miramax)
3. "Gangs of New York" (Miramax)
4. "The Quiet American" (Miramax)
5. "Adaptation" (Sony)
6. "Rabbit-Proof Fence" (Miramax)
7. "The Pianist" (Focus Features)
8. "Far From Heaven" (Focus Features)
9. "13 Conversations About One Thing" (Sony Classics)
10. "Frida" (Miramax)
Comments
The NBR picks are odd indeed, Bryant. But did you know that Redman and Method Man jam like smuckers?
Posted by: Shaun Sages at December 5, 2023 12:02 AM
This was not the film of Solaris that I really wanted to see (some shots of the amazing "morphoids" on the planet surface would have been great) but I could respect it as a more personal view of the events from the book, which itself poses some great big questions. I did not like the ending however -- it not only deviates from the book but tries to put a warm & fuzzy face on a situation which is really kind of creepy, unless taken at face value as a new-age metaphysical bromide, which is instead disgusting.
Posted by: Scott Faulkner at December 5, 2023 01:28 PM
Hey Scott, I'm not sure I see the ending as the warm fuzzy that you do. The expression on Kelvin's face as he embraces "Rheya" looks to be full of doubt and even some queasiness, as he still isn't apparently convinced that this "gift" is all he hoped it would be.
Posted by: Dan Jardine at December 5, 2023 10:08 PM
I thought the ending was wonderful UNTIL Rheya says "EVERYTHING is forgiven" - that was sooooo cheesy to me - I was with the movie up to that point, but that was like they were trying to hit us on the head with the fact that everything was going to be ok, Kelvin made a good choice, Kelvin no longer had to worry about "who" this woman was. I would've loved to see the movie end with Kelvin's incredulous face looking at Rheya, and then a shot of Solaris again. Rheya's monologue was sort of like the studio trying to put a nice big red bow on the film, hoping audiences wouldn't feel quite so mystified. In fact, I've heard talk that the studios made Soderbergh put Rheya's speech in the movie for that very reason.
I for one cannot wait for the director's cut. The set design and the music were fantastic - Soderbergh managed a certain level of creepiness too - Rheya wasn't as creepy as the orginal, but Natascha DID have those freaky big eyes that were making me squirm uneasily at times.
(What's with the National Board of Review picking 13 Conversations About One Thing? - That was the most forgettable movie ever).
Posted by: Sharon at December 7, 2023 05:45 PM
*Exactly*, Sharon. All of a sudden it turned into GHOST or something! I wonder if they'll do the orignal cut on DVD or just include an "alternate ending". I just read the book again and in its conclusion, Kelvin goes down to the planet and is left wondering if humans will ever understand Solaris -- his ultimate fate is uncertain as he watches the ocean.
Posted by: Scott Faulkner at December 10, 2023 05:14 PM
Really Sharon and Scott? I felt that the movie stayed complicated until the very end; just because Rheya says 'everything is forgiven' doesn't mean the film says that by any means -- after all, she is part of the world of Solaris and not at all objective. I thought it was quite an amazing, and quite a complex and smart movie, through and through.
Posted by: Josh Rothman at December 14, 2023 09:23 PM
It's not just Rheya who's part of the world of Solaris -- remember that Kelvin has that funky insta-healing thing going on too in the final scene, and I can't figure out what else that's supposed to signify.
So the difference between the two of them at the end of the film is that "Rheya" is created completely out of the consciousness of another (Kelvin), while "Kelvin" is created completely out of Kelvin's own consciousness. So "Kelvin" may be forever tormented by the knowledge that, like Pinocchio and/or David in A.I., he's not a real boy. But if he can just keep his mouth shut about it, "Rheya" will never know the difference. The implications for his own eternal happiness are among the questions that the ending of Solaris raises.
The more distance I get from the movie theater, the more I like it.
-bf-
Posted by: Bryant at December 14, 2023 09:32 PM
That's what I meant when I said that I thought the ending could be interpreted as pretty creepy, because the Kelvin and Rheya at the end of the film are not the originals but both constructs of Solaris, and so their continued existence is either some kind of ongoing experiment or a kind of afterlife, if you want to get metaphysical about it. This last version of Rheya seems to have knowledge that the others did not and her last line implies that this is afterlife is a kind of heaven - perhaps even a post-purgatory heaven, since Kelvin went through several depressing months on "earth" before discovering that things were not what they seemed. This would be the happier conclusion and one that the studio apparently wanted to have. Another interpretation is that Rheya does not have any special knowledge and Kelvin does and must continue the emotional struggle of dealing with this, perhaps forever, as you say. Again, you can view that as eternal torment or simply a metaphor on relationships in general - that compromise and even a bit of fiction is required to keep two people together, no matter how well they think they know each other. It's an interesting puzzle to work out but I'm still dissapointed because it scales down massively the ideas in the book to an allegorical relationship drama and not much else. I don't demand point-for-point accuracy in adapting a work to film but I do believe you should try to keep the spirit of the original work intact. Soderbergh made some good choices in his adaptation (I liked the twist on the Snow character) but the ending is too oblique - I like it better now than I did at first but I'm afraid too many folks will just shrug and dismiss the film as a whole.
Posted by: Scott Faulkner at December 16, 2023 12:45 PM
I think Dylan Thomas may help us understand the ending--the repeated references to his poem "And Death Shall Have No Dominion" provides a clue as to Soderberg's intentions. The poem is full of typical Thomas flourishes, appearing to say one thing, while slyly implying something quite different. If we take a cursory look, the poem seems to champion the idea that true love (and true lovers) cannot be conquered by death:
And death shall have no dominion.
Dead men naked they shall be one
With the man in the wind and the west moon;
When their bones are picked clean and the clean bones gone,
They shall have stars at elbow and foot;
Though they go mad they shall be sane,
Though they sink through the sea they shall rise again;
Though lovers be lost love shall not;
And death shall have no dominion.
This would seem to give the big thumbs up to the idea that the film's ending is a conventional Hollywood romantic ending. However, a closer look reveals Thomas's tone is much more bitter and angry. Mayhaps he is being sarcastic? Let's see:
And death shall have no dominion.
Under the windings of the sea
They lying long shall not die windily;
Twisting on racks when sinews give way,
Strapped to a wheel, yet they shall not break;
Faith in their hands shall snap in two,
And the unicorn evils run them through;
Split all ends up they shan't crack;
And death shall have no dominion.
Sounds to me like the sorta howling that King Lear did on the heath when his beloved Cordelia died. If this doesn't break your heart, I don't know what will:
And death shall have no dominion.
No more may gulls cry at their ears
Or waves break loud on the seashores;
Where blew a flower may a flower no more
Lift its head to the blows of the rain;
Though they be mad and dead as nails,
Heads of the characters hammer through daisies;
Break in the sun till the sun breaks down,
And death shall have no dominion.
Surely we are meant to see the ending to Solaris as being equally as troubling as this poem's, which has the surface appearance of romanticism, but just beneath that veneer lurks the cruelty and sarcasm of a cynic.
btw, Thomas was 18 years old when he wrote this poem. Scary, hunh?
Posted by: Dan Jardine at December 18, 2023 10:28 PM
First of all I must- say that I haven't read the book. I've watched the movie three times and especially the first time it just completely blew me away. slowly but surely I was drawn into the story just the way Kelvin was drawn into solaris. Only after the third time I feld that I really had understood the ending in it's full complexity. From all the comments on this page I conclude that the book was more sinister and creepy than soderberghs interpretation of it.
I think that most off u, especially the ones who did read the book, are wrong about Soderberghs ''true'' intentions. The fact that he didn't mention the second and thirt (more cynical) parts of the poem in the movie has a very specific reason I think. My interpretation is that at the very end when he is standing in his wifes arms Kelvin finally loses his doubts simply because he accepts the fact that he had ''chosen'' to become part of solaris and that there is indeed essentially no reason to assume that the reality of solaris is any less real that the reality of his previous existence. He now just is were he truely wants to be, looking in his own perfect mirror.
(anyway, it is one of the most brilliant masterpieces I have ever seen, and it would also have been that way if it had had the original, more cynical ending )
Sebastian (holland)
Posted by: Sebastian at December 15, 2023 07:17 PM
If one analyzes other poems by Thomas, one finds not only the theme of religion,as previously hinted at, but also obvious is the need for a maternal figure which often only seems to recur at death, after the years of childhood have passed. In seeing the movie, I noticed that even though Kelvin was surrounded by people of all backgrounds, he was incurably alone. Even in the scenes where he flashes back to moments with his wife, he seems not focused on her, but rather on the situation, on the details defining the moment. It would seem that he too like Dylan Thomas desires a true relationship with a person, not just one defined by the confines of his own mind. Perhaps to further grasp my poorly focused point, read "Poem In October" by Dylan Thomas.
Posted by: john folgenden at April 29, 2024 11:56 AM