Tarkovsky. The soviet’s answer to Kubrick until he defected in 1979 amid controversy surrounding The First Day (an unmade movie with allegories critical of the USSR (apparently more overt than the others throughout his career)). Tarkovsky joins (and perhaps leads) the list of great auteurs to die way too young (54)—maybe from radiation exposure while shooting Stalker. Tarkvosky completed 7 feature fiction films. He went MS, MP, MS, MS, MP, MP, MS so I’m sorry Kubrick, Malick or PT Anderson he has the best per-film average. 3 of those 7 are many intelligent people’s choice for the best film of all time (The Mirror, Stalker, Andrei Rublev) and one of the 4 remaining is the “soviet sci-fi answer to 2001” (Solaris) and yet another has one of the greatest shots and set pieces I’ve ever seen to close a film (The Sacrifice). Tarkovsky had some of Bergman’s theological and philosophical depth but moved the camera like really nobody else in cinema history (certainly Murnau, Tarr, Antonioni’s The Passenger, Kubrick, Ophuls are all close relatives but different in their own way). If you haven’t approached his work yet then prepare yourself to be patient as these aren’t the easiest films or surely most accessible. I’d never recommend any to someone who wasn’t in or attended film school or had an unbelievable appetite for cinema.
Extremely meditative in both style and content. He’s a wonderful director who, like a few others (Malick (ok, not late Malick), Kubrick, Dreyer, Herzog, Coppola (for a while from 1972 until the mid-80’s)), seems like he set out to make the best film of all-time just about every time he made a film.
Best film: Stalker. Whether you call it a sci-fi film, a religious film, parable, allegorical, philosophical, it doesn’t really matter—it’s controlling, potent– and the visual rendering by Tarkovsky is his strongest- which puts it up there with the rest of cinema history as the strongest. The camera is constantly moving- framing with doorways (amongst other things) constantly. Aleksandr Kaydanovskiy gives a tour-de-force lead performance. Tarkovsky is credited with his own art direction production design (only time he did that) here- and it might be the best in cinema history (yes, this is a top 10 of all-time film that I recently moved past The Godfather—every set is meticulously crafted, dirt and decay and detail—it would go on to influence everyone from Jarmusch to Cuaron’s Children of Men—it is damp—broken glass, standing water, dogs, grass, cracked walls). Bela Tarr would essentially make movies very similar to the opening “pre zone” portion of the film his entire career. The “zone” section is a Wizard of Oz-like color reveal—it’s also when the magnetic synthesizer score starts. The tunnel sequence set design is ridiculous—such rigor and then we arrive—and we have a showcase of the ground as mise-en-scene. You can see this in Cuaron’s Roma.
total archiveable films: 7
top 100 films: 2 (Stalker, Nostalghia)
top 500 films: 7 (Stalker, Nostalghia Andrei Rublev, The Sacrifice, Solaris, The Mirror, Ivan’s Childhood)
top 100 films of the decade: 7 (Stalker, Nostalghia Andrei Rublev, The Sacrifice, Solaris, The Mirror, Ivan’s Childhood)
most overrated: The Mirror. If I ever have The Mirror where the TSPDT consensus does Tarkovsky will be in my top 5 directors of all-time. I have it at #237 and they have it at #30 and as Tarkovsky’s #2 (I have it as his #6). There are some gorgeous shots features rain or water dripping- a reoccurring visual trait for Tarkovsky- there’s a stunning one featured here with rain dripping from the roof in the foreground with a log cabin burning in the background. A very personal stream of consciousness film about memory- great imagery, some bold formal elements (blending colors, storytellers, reality/surrealism, time frames)…. and also minutes of them flicking through a book and reading aloud.
most underrated: Nostalghia – TSPDT has it as #367 and the dead last ranking on Tarkovsky’s filmography (think about that- his dead-last film is #367 all-time—- and wrong—haha- wow) and that’s ridiculous. It was hated (hilariously) by Vincent Camby at the Times so maybe that’s why it’s still so underrated (it is also the hardest to find). I have it as #26 overall on my top 500 list. It’s simply, like Stalker, one of the most beautiful films ever made. Much of the film is museum quality photography as art shots (usually with water running somewhere and a German Shepard in the mix). Tarkovsky is constantly moving the camera, often imperceptibly, via tracking shot. Several “oners” – one along a rustic Tuscan rock wall when introducing Erland Josephson. Tarkovsky loves shooting in open hallways with doors open and the wall at the end there is a painting or lighted piece of art. I can see Tarkovsky’s influence on Peter Greenaway with his framing, rigorously mirroring in his images and layered mise-en-scene. The tracking shot lighter carrying shot prior to final image is wonderful as well. Very dramatic and stylistically loud– 9 minute tracking shot ending in a wonderful shot of the flame in hand. Incontestably exquisite camera movements. A rapturous portrait for the ending—truly one of cinema’s great images to close a film
gem I want to spotlight: The Sacrifice. If you haven’t seen anything I’d go in order of my list below but at some point check out The Sacrifice. It’s one of the two films Tarkovsky shot in the west and his dp here is the Bergman/Allen longtime collaborator Sven Nykvist. It has the great final shot/set piece I describe earlier.
stylistic innovations/traits: A Genius of camera movement (Bordwell’s cinematography) and mise-en-scene. The camera movement traces all the way back to Murnau and Tarkvosky is his own production designer, in a top 10 film of all-time (Stalker). Perhaps along with Kubrick and Dreyer he’s one of cinema’s great perfectionists. ASL (Average Shot Length) and duration may be another trait most often associated with Tarkovsky. He made personal and political films at the same time often blending film stock, color with b/w, reading poetry (often of his father’s), dipping into surrealism, the mother Oedipus complex. There’s levitation in his film. There’s a hazy mist/steam/fog in much of his work, trees, and water either on the ground, in the air, or dripping (even sometimes just on the soundtrack). Unlike Fincher or Welles Pakula or Soderbergh who, so fantastically, use the ceiling as mise-en-scene through low-angles, Tarkovsky here uses the ground and all of its design texture as mise-en-scene—it’s so smart- not just having open air as a background. I don’t mind it but there’s an odd bit of unbelievable ego here with Tarkovsky’s work. In Mirror he had a poster of Solaris (if Spielberg did this he’d get crushed for it). In other films there are characters talking about Tarkovsky’s father’s poetry with great reverence. There are fires in his films—the statue ablaze in Nostalghia, the house in The Sacrifice and The Mirror. With the production design we not only get dazzling décor (often run down or dilapidated), never bright (those who think mise-en-scene or production design have to be flashy like Wes Anderson)– Tarkovsky favors washed out colors. We get some great Wellesian foreground/background depth of field work and staging brilliance as well. His films are truly meditations on memory, dreams, and faith.
top 10
- Stalker
- Nostalghia
- Andrei Rublev
- The Sacrifice
- Solaris
- The Mirror
- Ivan’s Childhood
By year and grades
| 1962- Ivan’s Childhood | MS |
| 1966- Andrei Rublev | MP |
| 1972- Solaris | MS |
| 1975- Mirror | MS |
| 1979- Stalker | MP |
| 1983- Nostalghia | MP |
| 1986- Sacrifice | MS |
*MP is Masterpiece- top 1-3 quality of the year film
MS is Must-see- top 5-6 quality of the year film
HR is Highly Recommend- top 10 quality of the year film
R is Recommend- outside the top 10 of the year quality film but still in the archives
Sound like an idiot now and then?
I certainly have.
@RN – okay, got it, yeah you’re right
Also for the record I did not up the grade for Nostalghia (1983) due to some comments here. I respect the opinions of everyone who posts here of course and love the back and forths. I think things over before the final posting so sometimes the grades change a little although not usually that drastically. Like I said I post my honest opinions even if risking sounding like an idiot now and then ha
Doesn’t everyone?
@RW – doesn’t everyone what?
Final Ranking and Grades:
Study Summary:
Andrei Tarkovsky made only 7 full length feature films in his career and yet he’s rightfully in the conversation for greatest director of all time which gives you an idea of just how great those 7 films truly are and while I do not have all 7 as MP it would not be a stretch to argue this
Tarkovsky is not concerned with entertaining his audience but rather inviting them into his world if they are up to it; and not everyone will be. His films simply require incredible patience as they move at a very slow pace. Five of the seven films are over 2 hours and 4 of them are closer to 2.5 hours or longer. I would not recommend any of them to a casual movie watcher, that is not meant to come off as being movie snob, I simply do not think a casual viewer will ever ask me for another recommendation after suggesting a Tarkovsky film. But like anything else challenging, completing a Tarkovsky film feels extremely rewarding
Tarkovsky uses long takes to “absorb” his audience and thus watching his films is more of an experience than anything else. Similar to Werner Herzog, Stanley Kubrick, and Terence Malick, Tarkovsky is incredibly ambitious, and it always seems like he is trying to make a huge Masterpiece every time
The Sacrifice (1986) is a rare film in that Tarkovsky knew he was dying rapidly while making it. Thus, it is knowingly, from his perspective, the final film of his career. It might be the best swan song film of all time other than Leone’s Once Upon a Time in America (1984)
Of the auteurs I have covered so far only Kurosawa and Malick seem as fascinated with nature as Tarkovsky, who incorporates water and fire in particular into almost all of his films. He has some of the best uses of fire in any film. The house/barn burning in Mirror (1975) and the final sequence in The Sacrifice (1986) in which amazingly the camera jammed the first time and the set had to be rebuilt. Water is essential to the plot of Solaris (1972) and is especially noticeable in Stalker (1979) and Nostalghia (1983)
Tarkovsky makes films, some of the most beautiful films I have ever seen. What stands out to me about Tarkovsky though, is that he makes beautiful films in some of the most unlikely locations. Stalker is a visionally stunning film whose primary settings consist of a dilapidated apartment, abandoned military train tracks and a toxic wasteland. Nostalghia (1983) is full of gorgeous shots and even though there are set pieces with historical significance some of the most breathtaking moments take place under unlikely conditions such as characters sitting on the ground surrounded by puddles of water. The beautiful images in Tarkovsky films are quite different from say the gorgeous imagery in say a Malick film
No one uses desaturated colors quite like Tarkovsky, so many of his films use this; Solaris, Mirror, Stalker, Nostalghia, The Sacrifice. Basically, all of his work aside from his first two films which are in black and white with the exception of the epilogue in Andrei Rublev
Characters in Tarkovsky films can get pretty mean and nasty out of nowhere, it’s shocking but also kind of amusing how pleasant conversations can stop on a dime and shift completely for reasons that are not always clear, there is a scene in Mirror that really jumps out at me regarding this but it’s in most of his films to varying degrees, in some cases it is actually quite amusing in others chilling
Regarding the final grades:
I feel confident about Stalker at # 1. It is immaculate in its imagery, art and set design. The pacing is slow by effective in absorbing you with its long takes and haunting score. It is fascinating and gets better with each additional viewing
I feel confident with my # 6 Solaris and # 7 Ivan’s Childhood, I have both ranked as MS and they are impressive films that I would not completely rule out moving up with additional viewings but do feel like they are not at the same level as the others.
Nostalghia (1983), I posted as a MS, although reading through the notes and thoughts section I admit there seems to be somewhat of a disconnect as I admit it sounds closer to an MP. The film is full of amazing set pieces and imagery. I had trouble at times with the narrative at times. It did not feel as cohesive to me as Stalker (1979). I’m posting it as MP/MS leaning MP.
Ranking Andrei Rublev, Mirror, and The Sacrifice was very difficult. All 3 are clear MP for me. I won’t say much more than that right now. I could second guess myself all day here.
Here are my Final Grades and Rankings
MP
# 1 Stalker (1979)
# 2 Andrei Rublev (1966)
# 3 Mirror (1975)
# 4 The Sacrifice (1986)
MP/MS
# 5 Nostalghia (1983)
MS
# 6 Solaris (1972)
# 7 Ivan’s Childhood (1962)
The Sacrifice (1986)
Notes:
Opening credits with literal museum art paintings classical music Johann Sebastian Bach
Starts with gorgeous painterly image of countryside with bright green grass located near water, Erland Josephson plays the film’s protagonist, Alexander. He is planting a tree on his birthday with his young son beside him
5:14 camera always moving at times near imperceptible
6:15 good natured postman friends with Alexander
7:04 “How’s your relationship with God?” “nonexistent”
10 min postman and Alexander talk heavy topics such as eternal reoccurrence
13:18 trees used to create frame
13:50 Alexander’s friends visit him
18:02 camera panning over bright green grass and trees as Alexander goes on monologue on various subjects
19:55 close up on Alexander’s face as he looks around frantically for his son who reappears in collision with his son
20:22 frame abruptly changes to black and white with camera panning over a village in ruins with ominous music in background
21:26 Alexander flipping through artbook he received as birthday gift
22:33 interior of residence, green/blue tint
25:45 beautiful mise en scene with high level of detail in the décor, green and gold dominate
26:28 great blocking with 3 characters in the frame in 3 depths of field
27:23 close up profile shot of Maria who is the maid for Alexander and his wife
29 min beautiful shot of land near house with green and brown colors, postman named Otto who is friends with Alexander arrives riding his bicycle and carrying large photo
32:35 Maria acts strangely, apparently, she comes from Iceland
33:27 Otto’s map, color fits with the rest of the interior of the house
36:10 Otto reveals his unusual hobby of collecting “incidents” or strange situations that defy science, logic, or reasoning
39:23 another great composition and use of blocking
43:05 shot of Maria walking through the field outside house, it is notably foggy with less saturated green compared to earlier in day which had a bright blue sky and clear air
43:23 wine glasses shaking followed by sounds of fighter planes near by
43:54 color is noticeably less saturated
44:09 shot of miniature house/diorama resembling Alexander’s house briefly shown
45:20 Alexander and Maria standing in foreground on left side of frame
47:57 boy sleeping in bed in otherwise empty room, this shot is similar to image from Nostalghia, both in the composition and color
50:32 doorway as frame followed by zoom out, frame in frame with desaturated color
53:20 another strong composition this one in dim lit house with all 5 characters sitting at table but facing away from each other
58 min Adelaide has breakdown
1:02:50 rumbling noise in background
1:07:57 Julia refuses to wake up “little man” who is Alexander’s son
1:10:12 another shot of “little man” in bedroom
1:11:40 Alexander shown in close up surrounded by darkness looks up toward ceiling talks to God asking for his loved ones to be spared
1:13:10 Alexander is clearly speaking of nuclear annihilation which was
1:13:30 Alexander then offers everything he cares about including his family to spare humanity
1:18:28 gorgeous imagery with black and white photography as camera slowly pans
1:19:48 silhouette close up
1:23:43 Otto encouraging Alexander to visit Maria
1:32:42 door frame creating frame in frame
1:34:08 eerie silence as camera pans over dinner party
1:35:40 Alexander riding bike into foreground with slightly high angle shot
1:41:21 close up shot on washing of hands in foreground that would make Bresson proud
1:42:38 Alexander playing piano with slow zoom in
1:44:12 profile shot with color further desaturated
1:48:07 Maria’s face in center of frame with complete darkness surrounding
1:51:28 incredible close up on flowers in small vase on table with sounds from earlier of fighter jets as house shakes and Maria begins her seduction of Alexander
1:52:26 levitation image similar to the one from Mirror
1:52:58 black and white image from earlier of people running in terror through a village
1:54:17 dissolve edit to painting and then image into house using color palette similar to shot around 23 min mark
1:57:57 return to “normal” with color similar to opening and Alexander speaking on telephone
1:59:18 composition includes mirror shot and open doorways as a visibly upset Alexander stands up
2:01:00 camera pans along
2:01:43 great blocking with this two-shot of Victor and Julia
2:08:53 framing using white curtains as Alexander stacks chairs on top of each other
2:10:32 frame in frames
2:13:00 Alexander intentionally sets fire to his house
2:14:35 incredible shot with use of framing
2:15:05 Alexander walking away from his burning house as four others run into frame shocked and confused by the fire
2:16:43 incredible spectacle, house of fire taking up left background of frame
2:18:00 Alexander running back and forth while being chased by confused group including Victor, Otto, and hospital workers who arrive in car with red cross on exterior and drive Alexander away while the others watch the burning house
2:20:10 amazing set piece with the burning house
2:21:14 Alexander’s son “little man” walks carrying bucket of water to tree planted in opening scene and with color palette from opening scene
Film ends with bookend classical music from opening scene
2:25:30 beautiful blue water fills in frame around wooden tree and text indicating Tarkovsky dedicating the film to his son
Thoughts:
I was already impressed by this film from prior viewings but this one took things to a whole other level.
Apparently Tarkovsky was aware he was dying so this was his final artistic statement so to speak. I loved the bookend starting with Alexander planting a tree with his son who was shown pouring water over it at the end without Alexander. The music and beautiful paintings and imagery shown in the bookend is incredible as well
Tarkovsky’s camera never stops moving, its unbelievable the way he slowly shifts frames or zooms imperceptibly throughout pretty much all his work and here is no exception
Early conversation “how’s your relationship with God? “nonexistent” sets up later scene around 93 min mark as Alexander prays and offers everything, he has for the world to not be destroyed. The concept of faith is essential to much of Tarkovsky’s work but also Ingmar Bergman’s. Its hard to watch this film without Bergman in mind given not only the shooting location being in Sweden but also the presence of Erland Josephson and Sven Nykvist
The compositions are so impressive here, especially the framing and blocking in many of the interior shots, beautiful mise en scene with high level of detail in the décor. The shifting color palettes which move between saturated bright green, green/blue/, blue/gray, black and white, and desaturated colors
Shots of otherwise empty rooms with bed and nothing else is common in many of his films and we see it again here. There is also a levitation sequence similar to Mirror.
The impending sense of doom begins around the 42 or 43 min mark giving the film a slightly different vibe in certain areas, almost thriller or probably more like a disaster movie even though it overall still feels and plays out like a Tarkovsky film. Around the 111 minute mark there is an incredible close up on small flower vase that trembles just before hearing sounds of aircrafts or fighter jets
Like other Tarkovsky films there are plenty of philosophy/intelligent conversations. Early on around the 10 min mark Alexander’s friend and postman, Otto, mentions the concept of eternal reoccurrence. According to Nietzsche’s concept of eternal recurrence is the idea of the eternal return which means that people will have to live one’s life over and over which every detail repeated without the possible of change so instead of life that goes on forever, hence eternity, you have a life that repeats forever. There are endless numbers of interpretations to questions posed in Tarkovsky’s work
Apparently when filming the final sequence in which Alexander burns his house down, the camera jammed, and the house burned down without being filmed. About two weeks later they filmed the scene again after quickly rebuilding the house, however, during this second attempt the scene ends abruptly because Tarkovsky used up the entire reel on this one shot
I am going to think things over, this might be the hardest study yet in terms of rankings, but I could see this going anywhere from # 4 to # 2
Verdict: MP
Nostalghia (1983)
Notes:
Starts with beautiful black and white image of a countryside near the top of hill with a fog/mist like substance moving through the frame
5:16 gray/green palette
6:46 nice foreground/background
7:34 camera tracking group of women holding candles at exhibit of an art from known as Fresco by Italian painter Piero della Francesca
13:33 black and white image of The Russian writer Andrei Gorchakov, who plays the protagonist Italy to research the life of 18th-century Russian composer Pavel Sosnovsky, who lived in Italy and committed suicide after his return to Russia. A woman named Eugeni works as an interpreter for Andrei
20:03 pan capturing countryside in black and white including a dog
20:53 symmetry in frame
26:30 museum art quality with this image capturing bedroom with checkered floors, beige and brown with shot desaturated slowly followed by slow zoom and of course a random dog like in Stalker
29:50 close up on woman’s face shown in profile shot
31:04 camera panning down while water dripping sound off screen
32 min slow zoom out of woman in bed in dream like image
32:50 Bergman collaborator Erland Josephson playing Domenico, and of course we’ll be seeing Josephson again soon
34:15 brilliant tracking shot along water with several people in the water but view of them is obscured by a thick fog/mist
36:26 Andrei shown in profile as he walks along water
37:18 mist taking up half the frame
39:48 Antonioni-esque positioning with two characters sharing frame but looking away in opposite directions
47:03 Andrei enters door and frame changes to white and black as camera glides out the window and pans the countryside
49 min slow zoom with Andrei literally backed into a corner as Beethoven plays in background
50:50 strange and eerie shot of doll like figure
53:17 perhaps best image of film so far, Stalker like image under stone structure water falls though and is shown dripping, this all with desaturated gray
55:58 empty green and brown bottles in foreground with rain dripping
1:01:00 frame in frames throughout sequence
1:01:58 camera panning inside stone structure
1:03:28 strange dream like sequence and use of slow motion with Domenico running through a village
1:03:58 spectacular imagery with birds eye view of village that is elevated in the background of frame and a winding road in the foreground
1:05:45 change to black and white
1:06:00 change back to color with Andrei facing and walking away from camera through empty hallway, great use of symmetry and frame in frames
1:07:38 Eugenia talking to herself in front of mirror and then taking her shirt partially off in attempt to seduce an uninterested Andrei
1:11:53 “she’s insane” Andrei to Eugenia after 4 minute rant
1:16:57 black and white image of woman getting out of bed
1:18:13 return to opening shot of hill in countryside surrounded by fog and animals in background
1:20:14 perhaps the best shot of film, breathtaking imagery and immaculate mise en scene; Tarkovsky holds this shot for a minute
1:21:17 close up shot on green algae in clear water
1:25:25 Andrei with monologue that appears to be breaking 4th wall except there is someone revealed to be off screen
1:29:30 burning book in foreground in shallow focus image before transition to Andrei in middle of black and white frame in an empty village street/alley
1:31:50 mirror image shows Andrei looking into mirror and Domenico appears on screen before switching back to Andrei
1:32:25 camera slowly panning inside spectacular structure that is a Monastery which is known as Abbey of San Galgano
1:34:04 Andrei in middle of frame
1:34:20 switch back to color with low angle shot
1:34:50 ariel shot of Tuscany
1:35:50 Andrei as silhouette image walking though hall, perfect symmetry
1:37:12 perfect use of frame and beautiful symmetry
1:41:00 impressive frame in frame in frame
1:43:18 pan across frame with loud voice coming from off screen that is revealed to be Domenico
1:45:50 camera panning at faster pace
1:50:01 Domenico stands on top of statue where he covers himself in lighter fluid
1:51:20 great shot of spectators scattered across large steps
1:52:05 Domenico lights himself on fire as crowd watches on with Beethoven Symphony No. 9 blasting
1:57:00 long tracking shot as Andrei walks back and forth in empty mineral pool in Bagno Vignoni
2:02:54 final shot is slow zoom out in black and white with Andrei and the dog in the middle of Abbey of San Galgano with water dripping in the foreground
Thoughts:
Tarkovsky’s 1st film after leaving The Soviet Union. Similar to Mirror (1975) Tarkovsky’s nationality is a major theme but in a different way. In Mirror, Tarkovsky mixes historical footage and significant Soviet events of the 20th Century with the life of an individual based loosely on Tarkovsky. Nostalghia also uses a Tarkovsky stand in but uses him in a broader way in exploring human desire for a shared sense of identity and connection
Aside from Ivan’s Childhood which I watched for the 1st time during this Study, this was the only Tarkovsky film that I had seen only once and given its reputation on Cinema Archives I was very excited to check it out again. I admit I had some trouble during my first viewing several years ago, but I have learned much about Cinema since then, and yes, huge upgrade from my initial opinion
There are some amazing sequences and images including the final scene with the slow zoom out in Abbey of San Galgano with water dripping in the foreground, Domenico lighting himself on fire on top of statue, and my personal favorite occurring at 1:20:14, shot of a hill of country side from opening scene
The pacing is slow even by Tarkovsky standards with minimal plot even by Tarkovsky standards. It is an excellent film but probably the very last one I would recommend for someone looking to watch Tarkovsky for the first time
Nostalghia has several traits that all Tarkovsky films have but seems especially similar to Stalker although I would argue it is even more abstract
The ever present mist is a strong formal choice matching the films’ despairing atmosphere with characters who seem to free a profound sense of isolation even when in the presence of other people. Some of these sequences reminded of the scene in Red Desert (1964) when a mysterious ship comes into view through a thick layer of fog outside the shack. This film has some common themes with Red Desert, particularly about social isolation albeit under a different context
Perfect symmetry in many of the shots and excellent use of framing, this is something Tarkovsky is great at, and it seem especially dialed in here
This may be a MP, but I am just not quite there yet
Verdict: MS
@James-Crazy rating for a film that is in the all-time top 10
@Malith – yeah, I figured this would get a reaction like this given its lofty reputation. A few points though:
– the consensus has it at # 381 all time and ranks it as Tarkovsky’s # 6. I am not saying that the
consensus is correct as I usually prefer the rankings here
– perhaps I am wrong, it was only my 2nd viewing I already liked it way better than my first viewing. But
I got grade honestly for me even in situations where I may end up looking like an idiot ha
It’s also an exceedingly inaccessible film with almost nothing narrative-wise to really grab onto, meaning it’s the kind of thing which will be quite polarizing. I loved it from first watch and it’s my favourite Tarkovsky film overall, but it’s not too hard to see why many would also have it among the worst.
@ga – I ranked it as MS for now but it should be said that I could easily see going to MP with future viewings where as Solaris and Ivan’s Childhood are far less likely to increase for me though I would not completely rule it out. As I often say great films are far more likely to increase with future viewings.
Its an impressive film and of all of his work seems most similar to Stalker but it did not seem as cohesive as Stalker. Some the sequences with the Erland Josephson character felt like I was in a different film than those with Oleg Yankovsky’s character Andrei. There felt like a disconnect from scene to scene though I admit it is somewhat hard for me to articulate here. I look forward to see how this plays out with future viewings.
@James-It’s incredible the difference, though. You think it is a clear step down from a masterpiece, while here it is ranked in the all-time top 10 among around 300 masterpieces.
@James – this is a top 40 film for me but I think the notes and thoughts are more important than the grade here, I think you’re picking up on the right things to praise.
@Harry – Yeah, that is why I upped it to MP/MS in my final rankings, looking over everything I realized there was somewhat of a disconnect between the thoughts section and the grade. Will be interesting to revisit these films down the line
Stalker (1979)
Notes:
Starts with eerie music and gold color shot of bar
4:26 sepia infused image of open door, camera slow zoom into the room containing a bed with little else
5:36 camera pans over table including glass of water shaking as a train noise in background
6 min slow pan over bed with a man who is referred to as “Stalker”, his wife, and daughter (called Monkey) who looks to be about 12 years old
“Stalker” is played by actor Alexander Kaidanovsky
10:18 unhappy wife confronts
11:36 Stalker was in prison at one point
12:10 frame in frame, perfect symmetry
13:20 thick layer of smoke like substance as Stalker walks through area near train tracks
14 min Anatoly Solonitsyn as “The Writer”
15:26 frame in frame
15:40 “I had a drink, as does half of Civilization” the Writer provides the closest thing to comic relief
16:25 bar from opening shot
17:45 The Professor joins The Writer and Stalker, triangle composition in right side of frame
20 min slow zoom in as the 3 men discuss “The Zone”
21:28 doorway frame
25:45 opening of gates creates frame for train and then the trio traveling on tracks in Jeep
26:54 frame filled with mix of sepia and black similar in opening shot of bar
29:27 bright lights over train tracks in background of frame, the area is a military like facility
31:07 amazing use of lighting
31:24 3 men take incredible risks, being shot at, having to
32:50 reflections in water as gun shots fire at the men
35:07 amazing mise en scene
35:18 close up profile shot of Writer, one of the first close up shots so far
37:20 POV as the trio travels along tracks toward The Zone with a thumping score
38:52 first image of The Zone which is the first shot in color
41 min camera always moving even if barely noticeable
42:48 exposition on the Stalker from conversation between Writer and Professor, we learn Stalker was in prison at one point and his daughter was born with mutations
44:56 Stalker lies down in green field followed by close up on back of his head before he turns over
46:08 great composition with Professor in foreground, Writer in middle ground, and unidentifiable object in background with a gray/blue mist present
51:28 great use of frame followed by slow zoom as trio moves through field
53:06 a rare long shot
59:38 close up tracking shot on back of Writer’s head with shallow focus background
1:04:17 thick layer of smoke/mist in background of frame
1:05:55 the start of Part II
1:06:07 great frame in frame with smoke/mist background
1:06:46 circular body of water, possibly a well, gray/blue color
1:07:50 Stalker narration voice over
1:10:54 close up on faces with water dripping noise in background
1:11:17 pan across screen with waterfall behind stone structure is revealed
1:18:28 sepia color briefly returns
1:20:08 sepia returns briefly again with dog running into foreground of frame
1:24:30 beautiful shot of brown sand swept into air from a strong wind
1:25:55 reflection of tree upside down during pan over water
1:31:33 nice blocking in this frame
1:32:03 shot of tunnel with icicles hanging from the top
1:32:47 nice blocking in this frame
1:38:20 water dripping from ceiling of tunnel, blue and green in mise en scene
1:41:12 stunning shot
1:41:38 silhouette image of Writer in tunnel
1:44:54 shot of sand lumps and birds fly through, shades of green/blue/gray used in scene, this is one of my favorite Tarkovsky shots
1:47:47 museum art imagery
1:49:40 Writer confesses his insecurities
1:50:40 another museum art shot, just this entire sequence
1:54:07 the mysterious dog returns
1:54:34 frame in frame as the trio are finally in the room
1:56:00 bizarre phone conversation with the Professor and unknown person on other end, rare comedic moment, I am not sure what to make of this
2:01:18 Writer placing wood crown on his head
2:09:32 profile shot of Professor confessing his true motive for visiting The Zone, shallow focus
2:12:00 Writer and Stalker fight
2:21:55 trio sitting on ground in silence in background of frame with water dripping in foreground, green/blue/gray color palette
2:24:37 return to sepia with shot of Stalker’s wife and daughter outside
2:25:10 trio back in bar with black dog inside as well and bartender
2:29:15 color briefly returns with Stalker and his wife walking along area with industrial buildings in background before returning to Stalker’s house and sepia
2:36:00 Stalker’s daughter, Monkey uses psychokinesis to move a drinking glass across the kitchen table and one falls off shortly before a train passes by shaking the apartment as it did during the opening
Thoughts:
This was actually the first Tarkovsky film I ever watched. I had never really seen anything like it before, and while the pacing was quite challenging, it was a mind blowing experience. And I think that word, experience, is crucial when talking about Tarkovsky and this film especially. When I watch this film, I almost feel like the 4th member of the group, taking part in this journey; in fact, I am convinced that is the best way to watch this film or at least the best way for myself.
So far this is Tarkovsky’s slowest paced film along with Solaris; there are long takes and very slow zooms starting with opening shot into the Stalker’s bedroom. There are numerous shots in the Zone where the camera lingers for over a minute or even a couple of minutes with little to no movements anywhere in the frame. The narrative moves slowly, and you have a considerable runtime as the film clocks in at 161 minutes. Yet it is so absorbing that it overcomes all of this
There are several of Tarkovsky’s greatest images in this film; the opening shot of the bar that mixes sepia and black throughout the frame, the tunnel scene, the trio sitting on the ground after leaving the room when water starts to drip in the foreground of the frame, and my personal favorite, the lumps of sand with the green/blue/gray color palette
Similar to Malick, there are philosophical musings throughout the film although Malick favors voiceovers while Tarkovsky’s characters have intelligent discussions with each other and in some cases, you really have more of a monologue
Along with Solaris it gets described as “science fiction” though Tarkovsky disputes this label and has shunned this particular genre in general referring to it as made of “comic book trappings and vulgar commercialism” although interestingly enough he was apparently impressed by James Camerons Terminator films
This film is breathtaking beautiful despite the settings consisting a dilapidated apartment, industrial wastelands, and military restricted train tracks
The Writer provides the closest thing you will see to comedic relief in a Tarkovsky film with some funny lines like “Alcohol is the scourge of mankind. Let’s drink beer then.” There are some other funny moments, although not really laugh out loud funny, like the random black dog being in the bar at the end or the Professor answering a phone in the room along with the bizarre and random conversation he has
The score is crucial to the film’s mysterious atmosphere, it is haunting but not sinister. I never really felt like the trio was in any danger from unseen external threats as if I was watching a horror film
Like Mirror there are frequent changes of color using sepia, black and white, color with shades of blue/green/gray
I had no idea what to make of the final scene the 1st time I watched, in this scene you have Stalker’s daughter, referred to as Monkey, who seemingly uses psychokinesis to move a drinking glass across the kitchen table, however a train passes through the area shaking the entire apartment as it did in the opening creates a sense of doubt regarding psychokinesis. The Stalker himself, is comforted by his wife prior to this final scene because people “have no faith” despite his best attempts to inspire faith through Stalking
Verdict: MP
Mirror (1975)
Notes:
Starts in color with man shaking TV and then transitioning to a black and white image of a stuttering teenage boy, Aleksei, standing in front of a class
4:39 student and teacher interaction end and immediately segues into the opening credits
6:25 slow zoom in on attractive woman sitting on fence smoking cigarette, this character is played by actress Margarita Terekhova, and she actually plays two characters in the film, Maria/Masha/Marusya (Aleksei’s mother) and Natalia (Aleksei’s wife). The house is a country house, some might refer to it as a Cottage; for the purpose of consistency, I will refer to it as a Country House
7:40 Anatoly Solonitsyn character carrying suitcase and walking from field
9 min slow panning camera
9:24 fence breaks, rare comedic moment in Tarkovsky film
10:34 doctor philosophizing about nature
15:50 slow pan and doorway as frame with water dripping, while barn is set on fire; this is a stunning image, one of Tarkovsky’s best shots
16:52 Maria in foreground along with water bucket and burning barn in background of frame
17:25 the frame changes from color to a desaturated color that is not quite black and white
18:42 stunning image of
19:13 stunning slow motion image of water dripping in the interior of house that begins falling apart
19:55 camera panning though the interior of the Country House
20:13 incredible zoom in and dissolve
21:25 camera slowly moving through open doors inside house with desaturated colors while a phone call is audible of Alexi and his mother Maria played by Margarita Terekhova
23:30 camera tracks Maria moving through heavy weight into her place of work
28:50 reverse tracking shot
31:10 Maria’s colleague at work insults her for some reason leading to intense back and forth upsetting Maria
31:47 Dostoyevsky reference
33:45 slow motion shot of Maria moving through halls into shower room
35:13 return to color, Margarita Terekhova, is now playing Natalia who is Aleksei’s wife. Aleksei’s voice off screen as Natalia stands in front of mirror
38:17 footage of bull fight
41:14 more historical footage
44:48 Ignat, Aleksei’s son
47:06 pan to characters inside house that have a ghost like presence
47:30 shot of open hallways, brown and gray in mise en scene
48:47 open book in foreground frames the face of woman in background of frame, followed by extremely slow zoom in on woman in background
50:04 profile shot
50:50 Ignat opens door to see random old woman who insists she has wrong door and walks out of frame, there is a haunting tone here
54:10 camera pans over trees for target practice to wintry background
58:50 triangle composition, perfect symmetry in frame
59:40 brief flash back to war with shaky camera
1:00:14 historical footage
1:04:34 footage of atomic bomb
1:04:56 beautiful shot of Aleksei as a child standing on top of a hill near a leafless tree in foreground looking down at wintry landscape covered in snow with people scattered throughout the frame
1:05:18 another series of historical footage
1:08:07 tree used as frame of two children running in woods toward camera
1:08:37 Aleksei being comforted by adult; this is followed with transition to close up on painting followed by desaturated image of Natalia speaking to male voice off screen
1:16:42 frame in frame inside dimly lit section of house
1:17:34 doorframe to frame shot
1:18:24 slow zoom out followed by pan and slow zoom in toward the Country House
1:21:07 shot of Country House with green glare in background behind house
1:22:00 3 characters within doorway frame
1:24:34 dimly lit room with brown dominating mise en scene
1:25:05 mirror used in frame showing Aleksei twice followed by a slow zoom in on the mirror image of Aleksei before changing to zoom in on the “real” Aleksei. There is slight desaturation during this sequence and classical music playing
1:27:05 close up on open palm near fire
1:33:27 close up on Natalia face with left side of frame in dark and right side with light
1:34:00 slow zoom out reveals levitation of Maria above the bed in black and white frame
1:35:05 characters walking in parallel to each other in different depths of field in frame
1:37:47 frame in frame in black and white
1:38:14 camera moving through dimly lit part of Country House and moving outside through open window
1:38:47 magnificent use of framing here, camera held as little boy walks from foreground to background and the woman in background who initially looks like Margarita Terekhova is a revealed to be an older woman when she turns around
1:42:05 brown and green dominate shot of Country House behind a tree line
1:43:05 classical music plays during a final pan across the fields surrounding the country house
Thoughts:
Tarkovsky gives us one of the densest films I have ever seen, it is hard to know what to make of it, so I actually watched it twice in back to back days. It is a stunning film with several of the best images from Tarkovsky’ entire filmography although I will certainly think more about this when I do the summary for the Study but the burning house around the 16 min mark is an awe inspiring image as the one near the 19 min of water falling though the interior of the desaturated house or the incredible levitation image around the 94 min mark amongst others
This is probably Tarkovsky’s most personal film, it’s a memory film told with a stream of conscious narrative that incorporates multiple times lines of the life of Aleksei who is a Tarkovsky stand in. Apparently, Tarkovsky built the House in the film based on his childhood home, a wooden Country House, next to a large field. Tarkovsky layers vignettes related to Aleksei and his family with historical footage related to Russia during various moments of national significance during the 20th Century. That Tarkovsky’s nationality is intertwined with him as an individual is a point he seems to be making here along with his other work, in particular his penultimate film Nostalghia (1983)
Doorways and windows are a frequent motif for Tarkovsky, and this is present in this film especially, the camera moving in and out of the house during various transitions in the film
The use of color is masterful; Tarkovsky uses color in many of the scenes at the Country House including the iconic shot of the house on fire, he also uses black and white, and desaturated colors as well as a light blue palette during memories of Aleksei shooting target practice in the winter
There are several long takes as well as slow zooms and shots where the camera is moving so slowly it is almost imperceptible. But there are also rapid changes where a character appears out of nowhere off screen, several times Ignat turns his head to see someone on screen seemingly out of nowhere; some of these scenes create a haunting atmosphere, even if it is brief
Using Margarita Terekhova to play two roles, Maria and Natalia; respectively Aleksei’s mother and wife can be a little confusing at times, but it was a purposeful choice blurring or collapsing memories that aligns with the stream of conscious narrative not to mention a possible Oedipus Complex interpretation
One criticism I have seen is there are scenes with a character reading through or looking through a book, flipping pages, etc. but overall, this probably aggregates to only a couple of minutes out of the 107 minute runtime
Tarkovsky is masterful at using doorways and windows to frame his shot, at the 1:38:47 mark is a particularly impressive one, this sequence is incredible as the young boy walks into the frame toward Margarita Terekhova character in background, however when he arrives what was initially Margarita Terekhova is a revealed to be an older woman
Verdict: MP
Mirror’s such a fantastic film, seeing such a positive review makes me very happy. Feels like both a deeply personal work but also an incredibly boundary-pushing work of cinema, and it straddles this line brilliantly.
The biggest thing that repeat watches brought into focus for me how it feels like it harnesses almost every potential tool the art form gives you, from editing to colour to shot duration to sound to even which particular actors are on screen. It’s one of the films which essentially NEEDS to be a film to succeed in any conceivable way, which I’ve always thought was fascinating. Beyond that, it’s stunningly evocative and has a tremendous number of images I suspect will stick with me for a very long time. If one was to measure a movie in terms of number of indelible images per minute of runtime, Mirror would have to rank among the very best for me. Highlights include obviously the levitation scene, the hair washing, the burning house, the wind rushing towards the camera, and countless uses of doors as frames.
The reading critique I sort of get, but I don’t think it’s really any worse than what you see in the other best films. Many have somewhat cinematically uninspired conversations that largely just move the story along (not hugely impressive but not superfluous), while Mirror has somewhat cinematically uninspired reading sections that reinforce the themes of memory and life’s journey (not hugely impressive but not superfluous). It’s a pretty minor critique and, as you said, is not a big portion of the runtime at all.
I was thinking of doing a Tarkovsky rewatch myself so my opinions might change soonish. I don’t know if it will beat Nostalgia for me (my current favourite) but it will likely be at least top 4 Tarkovsky for me alongside that one, Stalker, and Sacrifice. I think that his early works are obviously still strong, but he was still growing through those and only really found his poetic, thematic, and avant-garde footing with Mirror.
Either way sorry for big ramble I just adore Mirror and was pleasantly surprised to see the MP.
@ga – ” If one was to measure a movie in terms of number of indelible images per minute of runtime, Mirror would have to rank among the very best for me. Highlights include obviously the levitation scene, the hair washing, the burning house, the wind rushing towards the camera, and countless uses of doors as frames.”
Exactly how I feel, same with your paragraph about the “reading critique” not an unfair criticism but for me its very minor in the overall context of the film.
I am very excited for Nostalghia as I have seen just once before and had some trouble with the narrative but this was awhile back in the early stages of getting dedicated to cinema again. I think it will go much differently this time, I have Stalker (1979) next so that just be interesting to revisit as well.
Solaris (1972)
Notes:
Starts with shot of water with the camera panning over pond/lake with green a green algae
5 min Psychologist named Kris Kelvin walks along his vast property
5:50 long shot with Kris in background of frame
7:43 first dialogue as Kris has visitors
9:52 waterfall starts despite sunny day
12 min a video is played in Kris house, the video with strong blue tint shows a man explaining his bizarre experience on a planet called “Solaris”
16:08 blue silhouette
16:27 Montage depicting Solaris
26:24 slow zoom in on photo of Kris deceased wife
29:49 Hiroshima reference during conversation about science and morality
33:33 car driving on highway from POV of driver blue/purple tint
34:50 blue tint with shot of Burton inside car
35:12 back to driver POV from person inside car
38:06 ariel shot of a scattered system of highway and freeways
38:28 shot of water/lake in blue tint and slow camera panning to the right of Kris property
41:00 shot of landscape from atop a hill
41:23 close up on photo of Kris now deceased wife with slow zoom out
43:56 extreme close up on eyes
44:40 camera slowly zooms in on space station which hovers over large mass of water
46 min Kris arrives at station which seems empty and is kind of a mess
47:20 reverse tracking shot as Kris walks toward camera as he explores the station
48:14 doorway as frame
48:46 bizarre interaction with the 1st person, Snaut, who acts erratically, aside from Kris there are supposed to be 3 other people; Snaut, Dr. Gibarian, and Sartorius
1:00:10 Anatoly Solonitsyn makes 1st appearance as Dr. Sartorius who acts hostile and is dismissive of Kris who is growing more confused by the minute
1:02:30 shot of exterior, beige/orange color palette
1:04:25 Kris walks through tunnel shaped hallways
1:12:11 extreme close up of right side of the frame of Kris deceased wife named Hari (played by actress Natalya Bondarchuk)
1:16:04 fascinating composition with 3 images of Hari; Hari, Hari’s reflection in the mirror, and a photo of Hari that she is holding
1:19:30 Part I ends
1:19:42 Part II begins with high angle shot of Kris inside station with Hari, beige and orange in frame
1:20:48 “Solaris” written on equipment
1:22:05 fire breaks out
1:22:27 circular window as frame with slow zoom out
1:24:50 Snaut explains to Kris that the images of his wife are replicas
1:25:45 Kris in front of circular window, beige/salmon color
1:28:15 sepia colored frame as Kris sleeps in bed with his wife
1:35:40 slightly tilted angle
1:39:30 bird eye view shot of the outside of the space station
1:42:08 nice use of foreground/background
1:43:10 mirror shot
1:43:33 here you have 4 people in frame: Kris, Hari, and their reflections
1:49:49 another mysterious shot of exterior, unknown blue and orange substance
1:51:26 great blocking and framing here
1:52:20 brutal honesty
2:00:00 philosophizing Snaut
2:01:53 Tarkovsky characters have a knack for insulting each other
2:04:17 “I am become a human being”
2:04:46 “I am a human being”
2:05:06 panning of Hari in profile shot
2:06:27 great use of blocking with 3 characters all looking in different directions as if they are all alone
2:09:37 foreground/background work using mirror
2:10:50 panning on painting of winter scape that transitions to shot of kid standing on top of hill during winter looking down at the village
2:13:46 high angle shot of Kris comforted by Hari
2:14:18 substance resembling water
2:17:10 camera lingers on Hari who is “dead”
2:29:47 blue tint from earlier is back
2:36:50 reference to Greek mythology
2:37:15 a great dissolve edit
2:38:00 slow zoom and pan
2:38:50 extreme close up and transition followed by shot of Solaris Ocean Water then clouds
2:41:30 shot of green algae in clear lake/pond water similar to opening of the film
2:44:00 Kris looks through window and sees father in kitchen, but then water dripping into the kitchen
2:45:30 slow zoom out and reveal to end the film, haunting imagery
Thoughts:
Not that Ivan’s Childhood (1962) or Andrei Rublev (1966) should be described as “conventional” but this is where Tarkovsky’s distinct style really has arrived. This is a great film, not at the level of Andrei Rublev but more in line with Tarkovsky’s later works with; long takes, long stretches with little dialogue
Tarkovsky the intellectual here, this film covers a range of subject matter, limitations of human knowledge, communication, Certainly Christopher Nolan’s Interstellar (2014) comes to mind as does Robert Zemeckis Contact (1997) and Wong Kar Wai film 2046 (2004). Of course, Kubrick’s 2001: A Space Odyssey (1968) is probably the one that will enter most people’s minds after watching this. The interior of the space station is much different than 2001 in which the shots inside the spacecraft were pristine; perfectly symmetrical with immaculate décor; the interior of the space station in Solaris is in disarray
Mirror as motif, several great mirror shots, usually of Hari looking into mirror
The highway sequence starting around 38 min is a great transition from earth to Solaris, POV shot is particularly effective putting the viewer in the car. It is impossible not to think of the wormhole sequence in 2001, the scene from Midsommar (2019) comes to mind as well
The orange and beige palette makes noticeable contrast with the blue tint scenes. The interior of the space station is very different from 2001 which had pristine interiors, perfect symmetry and extraordinary beauty while here the space station is a mess
The final zoom out and reveal that Kris is on Solaris is perfect ending, it answers no questions, and if anything, just raises more questions
The pacing is slow similar to other Tarkovsky films although I wonder if it could have trimmed 15-20 min without losing overall impact, a minor complaint though
Verdict: MS
Andrei Rublev (1966)
Notes:
Prologue:
Starts with incredible scene of man moving across landscape in air balloon
4:35 incredible camera movement
5:38 ariel shot from POV of man in balloon, camera pans over the landscape, water, villages
7:32 slow motion of horse
I. The Jester (Summer 1400):
Andrei, Daniil and Kirill are 3 Monks
9:10 window as frame
14:32 slow pan across Monastery
15:14 rainfall creates hazy atmosphere
19:06 beautiful shot with camera stationary as men on horses in background of frame across the water
II. Theophanes the Greek (Summer–Winter–Spring–Summer 1405–1406):
Kirill visits Theophanes
26 min Kirill offers to work for free if someone comes to Monastery and ask Kirill in front of everyone (including Andrei Rublev) that Theophanes has personally requested him
27:42 Rublev is asked over Kirill to shock and dismay of Kirill
30:23 Kirill’s internal narration
37:13 Kirill walking angrily away from everyone until isolated in the frame, stacks of fire in the background of the frame
37:38 Kirill in foreground facing away from camera and towards everyone else at Monastery standing in background of frame
III. The Passion (1406):
Foma joins Andrei Rublev on walk to Theophanes
39:13 snake in frame as Rublev calls out Foma’s dishonesty
46 min nice shot with group carrying a cross walking in background of frame in long shot
IV. The Holiday (1408):
51 min tracking shot with Andrei and Foma carrying wood logs along water
51:40 beautiful shot with fog arising over lake/pond before camera pans clockwise revealing pagans
56:20 Andrei argues against the idea that bestial love aka sex is true love
57:49 haunting imagery of pagans holding sticks on fire
59 min animal noises off screen
59:49 door as frame as camera slowly pans counterclockwise
V. The Last Judgment (Summer 1408):
1:04:28 camera pans as Andrei and Daniil are working on the decoration of a church in Vladimir, walls still are white
1:11:00 white background in close up on Rublev
1:14:00 camera panning inside Church
1:15:30 frame in frame
1:16:08 bird eye view shot in forest
1:19:00 Andrei throws paint at white wall after learning about attack in the woods
1:24:38 great composition inside Church, great blocking
VI. The Raid (Autumn 1408):
1:25:20 shot of village with men on horses in middle ground and background, layer of fog over the water
Tatars on horse raid Vladimir carrying white flag
1:29:39 haunting music foreshadowing carnage
1:37:37 foreground/background work with Tatars breaking into the locked church door
1:41:32 religious iconography with cross in fire
1:44:00 flashback explaining betrayal
1:45:20 bird eye view shot of Church
1:46:26 bird eye view on exterior of Church as it burns, frame is filled to brim
1:47:57 slow motion shot of kid falling to death after shot with arrow
1:48:42 haunting image of Rublev in middle of frame inside Church following the raid, murdered people all around
1:52:08 Andrei recounts the horror of the attack in which the city is burned, the citizens murdered, and women raped and murdered
VII. Silence (Winter 1412):
Opens with shot of village that is eerily quiet, Andrei is no longer speaking
2:07:12 slow fade out
2:07:52 spiked helmet placed on Russian woman, who does not seem to understand what is happening
2:09:40 Tatars ride horses through a gate/tunnel off screen
2:10:20 Kirill reunited by Andrei
VIII. The Bell (Spring–Summer–Winter–Spring 1423–1424):
2:11:43 overhead shot panning over snow
2:14:26 beautiful shot capturing group walking up hill with tree in background
2:15:21 nice blocking with village in background of frame
2:21:45 frame filled with multiple layers of depth
2:25:36 single tree in the background of otherwise empty frame
2:35:00 low angle shot of Rublev watching as people sculp rock around bell
2:37:00 Kirill tries to make peace with Rublev who is still silent
2:40:12 impressive ariel shot panning counterclockwise over the village
2:41:00 ground as ceiling angle
2:45:50 village gathers in shot with frame filled up
2:46:16 tracking shot
2:50:05 slow zoom out as the new Village Bell rings
Epilogue:
2:53:46 for the first time in this film color is visible
2:54:10 intense red and yellow
2:55:00 the last several minutes are a montage of Andrei Rublev’s artwork
Thoughts:
Tarkovsky’s epic is an all timer which manages to hold your attention for 3 hours in the bleakest of worlds and without a conventional plot. The film’s protagonist is a painter, who you never actually see painting or any of his work until the awe inspiring ending montage. It is simply one of the greatest films ever made
According to more than one review I read, it is considered to be one of the most accurate portrayals of the Middle Ages of any film, it is set in Russia in the 1400’s. At the same time, despite the realistic portrayal of the time period, the film does not concern itself with a historically accurate portrayal of the title character who was a real person. This is not a biopic, at least not a traditional one and it’s for the better
Some of the shots reminded me of Seven Samurai (1954) with characters constantly moving in the background of the frame, in particular the raid sequence. Speaking of which, The Raid is one of the most brutal stretches of any film. The violence is utterly relentless yet not exploitative
Several incredible ariel shots in the film, in particular the prologue in which a hot air balloon moves over landscape, water, and village before returning to the ground
Tarkovsky’s camera is always moving, in some cases it’s so subtle that it’s hard to notice at first. In fact, there really are not any significant uncinematic stretches
There are a few long takes, but not nearly as much as some of his later work
Anatoly Solonitsyn is amazing as the title character; I am excited for the rest of his collaborations with Tarkovsky
The final sequence is the first use of color in the film, as well as Tarkovsky’s career, and it is awe inspiring not to mention a rewarding experience after watching 3 hours without a single shot of Andrei Rublev’s art. It is absolutely mesmerizing and almost overwhelming
Verdict: MP
@James – when I watched earlier this year I thought it would be run to rank the segments
My ranking of the episodes, best to worst:
1. The Bell
2. The Raid
3. The Holiday
4. The Jester
5. The Last Judgement
6. The Passion
7. Prologue
8. Theophanes the Greek
@Harry – never crossed my mind to rank, interesting. The episodic structure works well in this film. I think this film stands out even more today given the plethora of historical/period dramas over the last 20-30 years that have become such common end of year releases giving birth to the phenomenon known as “Oscar Bait”. This film is so absorbing that the 3 hours fly by.
Ivan’s Childhood (1962)
Notes:
Starts with boy behind spider web followed by camera panning up
1:04 shaky camera, constantly moving creating disorienting feel
2:03 profile shot of boy
2:08 Kurosawa/Malick sunlight through tree shot
2:45 child awakes from bad dream
3:48 stark imagery, tree with no leaves
4:00 young child in moving through water and shot goes to silhouette
7 min young child named Ivan in camp with Russian soldiers
8:56 nice foreground/background work
13:17 close up on hand drawing, Tarkovsky taking a page from his film hero Robert Bresson
17:07 camera pan up
17:26 two shot with Ivan and his mother looking down into a well
18:28 deep focus low angle shot
18:36 bucket of water in foreground on left side of frame with Ivan’s mother lying after being killed in the middle ground to background on right side of frame
18:58 nice foreground/background work
22:14 impressive framing
22:32 impressive composition and blocking at 3 depths of field
25:03 best shot of film so far with wood house that has been destroyed
28:36 another impressive frame with Ivan in foreground and soldiers in background
32:00 white tree forest
37:16 another beautiful shot of white tree forest
37:50 camera movement with back and forth high angle tracking shot as soldier stalks young girl, Masha
38:14 Soldier holding young girl above hold in the ground
40:04 shaky camera with POV of Masha
47:30 conversations about literature and art
50:50 strong composition, light creating hazy image on left side of frame
58 disorienting sequence bombs going off with camera panning along the ground
59:02 light entering interior from outside a la Bergman’s Winter Light (1963)
59:39 Tarkovsky holds shot of cross at canted angle from night to day
1:01:01 Ivan in foreground, solider in background of frame via mirror reflection
1:05:24 beautiful shot of rainstorm
1:06:20 dream sequence with young boy and young girl in back of carriage, close up of apples as camera pans in circular creating disorienting effect
1:12:05 nice blocking
1:13:36 silhouette image as canoe moves across water
1:14:58 camera holds shot as Canoe moves into background of the frame with gun shots audible
1:16:14 more traditional score to indicate tension
1:17:57 extreme close up with face taking up entire right side of frame
1:18:21 beautiful shot as camera pans over the reflection from water
1:27:13 the end of WW2 as the Nazi’s has been defeated, and Berlin taken over
1:28:42 camera panning over destruction
1:30:48 Ivan’s face followed by intense music
1:33:00 flashback to idyllic life Ivan playing as a child before end of film
Thoughts:
Tarkovsky’s first film is the only one I had not watched prior to this study. It is very impressive work starting with that opening 4-5 minutes which features several fantastic images and unlike his later work does not spend much time getting into the story
Some stunning images throughout the film; the white forest reminds me Jarmusch’s Dead Man (1995); Ivan at the bottom of the well, the shot at the 25 min mark where Ivan is framed within the burned and broken remains of a wooden hut; the silhouette images of Ivan and two adult soldiers moving across the pond/lake in a canoe; the sequence with Ivan and his sister sitting in the back of a truck that is filled with apples
It is probably the most conventional of all his works and much shorter in length, clocking in at just 94 min. Mirror is the only other Tarkovsky work less than 2 hours. It is also the only film of his that uses a child protagonist
The framing and foreground/background work reminds me of Cronenberg’s A Dangerous Method (2011)
The scene with Ivan and 2 soldiers moving across pond with gunshot noises in background, there is a more conventional score indicating trouble, its not necessary a weakness Per se but it stood out to me as unusual for Tarkovsky. None the less it’s a critique it’s a very minor one
This is a really impressive debut film. I don’t have an exact order but I would add it to the list of best debuts along with; Citizen Kane (1941), Maltese Falcon (1941), The Night of the Hunter (1955), 12 Angry Men (1957), The 400 Blows (1959), Breathless (1960), Knife in the Water (1962), Performance (1970), Badlands (1973), Blood Simple (1984), Reservoir Dogs (1992), American Beauty (1999). And a couple of these it is actually debatable
Verdict: MS
When was the last time you caught The Mirror? I too on first watch had a disparity with its critical consensus (often top 3 Tarkovsky at minimum) and I originally had it 5th, yet out of all his films its the one that keeps drawing me back. I’ve now seen it 3 times, whereas the rest I’ve only seen once bar Stalker twice. I think there’s something to its mystical, dreamlike quality that is really rich and rewards repeated viewings. I’ve only bumped it up to 4th now on my Tarkovsky rankings and have it as a MS, as the top 3 (Stalker, Andrei and Nostalghia are pretty impeachable), but it keeps growing in my estimation and I could see it being a MP and in my top 2 Tarkovsky’s in the future.
@Joel – I think all Tarkovsky films reward repeated viewings, I mean this is usually the case for any great auteur but Tarkovsky especially since his films are so dense and poetic in nature. I actually watched Mirror (1975) about a week ago, my 3rd viewing I believe. It has several of my favorite Tarkovsky images including a levitation sequence and a shot where Tarkovsky slowly pans the camera inside a house and uses a door as a frame with water dripping above while a farm house is on fire. Its one of his most iconic images.
The film is extremely personal to Tarkovsky but also contemplative about recent Russian History.
An interesting contrast would be Terence Malick’s The Tree of Life (2011) which juxtaposes the existence of a family in Texas in the 1950s with the entirety of the known Universe resulting in the viewer being overwhelmed or lost within the imperceptible flow of time. I think Mirror (1975) and Tree of Life (2011) make for an interesting pairing.
Mirror (1975) is probably vexing for some, especially those who feel the need to assign not only a particular meaning into every single thing that happens on screen but be able to summarize and write out a clear explanation of what every single thing means like it’s a High School Literature Class (e.g. symbolism!)
On the contrary I found the lack of plot and loose narrative to be quite liberating. Watching Mirror and really all his films (although I still need to see Ivan’s Childhood) is an experience. His films may feel like Jigsaw puzzles but unlike say Kubrick or Nolan, Tarkovsky is less exacting and precise. They are much more free flowing.
@Joel- Good share here Joel- thank you. I revisited both of Tarkovsky’s 1980s films recently- but it has been a minute since the others – 6 years since The Mirror
@Drake – Do you have a go to website or websites for screen grabs?
@James Trapp – if filmgrab https://film-grab.com/ is not on your radar- be prepared to have your world changed
@Drake – It was not on radar, excited to checkout, actually surprised it took me so long to get on this
@James Trapp – I’ve got to be that site’s #1 frequenter
@Drake – r/cineshots is also good
My ranking of Tarkovsky`s films that I`ve seen:
1. Stalker MP
2. Nostalgia MP
3. Andrei Rublev MP
4. The Sacrifice MP
5. Solaris MP
6. Mirror MS/MP
7. Ivan`s Childhood MS
5 Best Performances
1. Solonitsyn- Andrei Rublev
2. Kaydanovskiy- Stalker
3. Josephson- The Sacrifice
4. Solonitsyn- Stalker
5. Banionis- Solaris
@RujK- Loving all of these – thank you for sharing. And feel a certain gratification seeing Nostalgia ahead of Mirror here
@RujK – nice work, I feel like Tarkovsky films are almost like a litmus test being a Cinephile.
I just had a huge revelation re watching The Sacrifice tonight, I think it’s would be fair to call it one of the most beautiful films ever and I have it now virtually tied with Nostalghia high up on my own list.
The interior shots: countless feel like they were taken straight out of Cries and Whispers or Fanny and Alexander but shot with the same colour scheme as Zhang Yimou did for Shadow, trying to make a black and white film in colour. As the nightmarish scenario gets on though they start to look more ruined (many the upstairs and a shot of the corridor), more similar to the hotel in Nostalghia, though the puddle in the very grey corridor feels very much like Stalker.
Also those bold black and white photographed interludes are stunning, something I didn’t really appreciate the first time around.
Tarkovsky makes the best use of the rural Swedish island landscape. Love that after giving us one of the GOAT shots and set pieces the next brings up right back to the opening shot, a stunning variation as we also get to track up the tree but also key to the films form as we are repeating this day at the end,
Couldn’t be happier i rewatched this.
@Harry- Well done – excited to revisit
Ivan’s Childhood MS
Andrei Rublev MP
Solaris MP
Mirror MP
Stalker MP
Nostalgia MP
Sacrifice MS
Nice to see someone else that loved Nostalghia. Surprising to not see Mirror as a “masterpiece”. Good write-up
Drake,
With your upgrade of The Sacrifice to MP what is your current ranking of Tarkovsky’s films?
I’ve seen all but Ivan’s Childhood…thinking about doing a full on study after Polanski
@James Trapp- I haven’t given much thought recently to updating the Tarkovsky page or rankings. When I do it, I want to dedicate some time to it and try to do it right. That sounds great on the full on Tarkovsky study- go for it!
1. Stalker – MP
2. Nostalghia – MP
3. Andrei Rublev – MP
4. The Mirror – MP
5. The Sacrifice – MS/MP (leaning MP)
6. Solaris – MS (leaning MS/MP)
7. Ivan’s Childhood – MS
I would say there is not as large a gap between Nostalghia and Andrei Rublev as you have it. You have them 140 spots apart. For me it’d be more like 10. The Mirror is extremely close as well.
@RK I’ve only seen Ivan’s Childhood. But I think it’s a great place to start. It’s pretty accessible and pretty short.
What’s a good place to start with Tarkovsky? I’m going to be watching all of his films (except Nostalgia which i can’t unfortunately see right now because it isn’t in any streaming service of my country nor can i rent it) soon. Any recommendations where should I start? See them in release order or in some other order? I see you have commented in this page that Mirror is the hardest of his films, but I easily can enjoy a film without getting anything about it’s surreal themes etc, (Inland Empire and Persona for example) so it isn’t a problem for me to start with Mirror. So, any recommendations where I should start? All answers will be highly appreciated!
@RK – others may disagree of course but I think there’s two ways to do it– if you think you’ll only see a few of his films- start with the best on my top 10 and work your way down. If you are going to get to all or almost all of them, my vote is always to do it in release order.
@Drake @MadMike thanks for the replies, highly appreciate it. Propably going to see them in release order.
@RK – I would agree with Drake’s suggestion, I personally watched Stalker first and I think that’ a perfectly good place to start but given that Tarkovsky has only 7 films you really can’t go wrong with just watching them all in chronological order (release date).
Where to start with someone like Bergman, the better approach would probably be to start with a couple of the best films
Thanks for the answer here, highly appreciate it. I kinda disagree with you on Bergman. I started Bergman with Persona, his best film and it was really hard to get into. After I watched Persona I watched Smiles of the Summer Night, followed Sawdust and Tinsel, Winter Light, Fanny and Alexander and The Seventh Seal. After I watched those movies I decided to rewatch Persona, and it was much easier to get into (althrough I didn’t still fully get it). So, I would not recommend starting Bergman with couple of his best films.
Back to your answer about Tarkovsky, was Stalker in your opinion hard to get into? And what was/were his easiest film/films to get into in your opinion? And what was/were the hardest film/films to get into in your opinion?
Great Antonioni-like capture from Andrei Rublev: https://imgur.com/a/olawJkE
@Zane- great share- thank you
I just dived in this morning and watched Andrei Rublev, loved the visuals really, but still found it a tough watch. Will try and catch Ivan’s Childhood next, then something like Mirror or Solaris.
I did see Stalker last year which wasn’t the best starting point but I remember it being very mesmering.
Do you have any tips for approaching Tarkovsky considering how innacesable he can be?
@Harry- Thanks for sharing. Maybe others can contribute and help unlock something for you. I’ll just say that keep at it– watch them, then put them down and go to something else and come back to them later. I believe the least important viewing you’ll have of a film is the first one– you may be surprised how much Tarkovsky’s films stay with you over time or how you feel about them with that second viewing.
@Drake – Thanks for the reply and I think you’re onto something with that last sentence. Initially I still felt underwhelmed by Stalker but over the months I just kept thinking about it and it got better without me even re-visiting it. I hope the same happens with Andrei and I really look forward to when I can fully appreciate all of them, seeing the other 5 shouldn’t take too long now.
Stalker – the only Tarkovsky film I’ve seen up to this point – is probably the only film ever I don’t go a day or two without thinking of at least once, and often multiple times. It’s incredible the staying power that film has even months removed from a viewing.
@Drake I’ve been having a really great time with Tarkovsky lately, trying to finish up his filmography (only have The Sacrifice left to see), Solaris and Nostalgia are easy MPs for me, I just saw Nostalgia and those last 20 minutes are just elite.. and Solaris blew me away even more than that. Ivan’s Childhood is my favourite next to those two, the photography was so beautiful at times. Then Mirror was a challenging but rewarding film, I found a lot to appreciate there as well.
I think just understanding that the film style is what to get out of these movies and to take those in instead of any narrative made them much easier to get into. I might have to rewatch Stalker and Andrei Rublev with this new perspective now.
I’ll post ranking when I watch The Sacrifice soon and complete this study.
@Harry- thrilled to hear all of this- especially the bit about Nostalgia here. Thanks for sharing.
I loved The Sacrifice, I’d put it in my top 3 with Solaris and Nostalghia. So many moments with there’s a perfect image and Tarkovsky elevates it by moving the camera in ways only he could do.
I’ll need to revisit Stalker and Andrei Rublev now that I feel I’ve got a good grasp on his style now (and the rest eventually). Very happy with this study.
@Harry- Love this, Harry. Thank you for sharing. What are watching next?
@Drake I started an Orson Welles study a couple days ago and have been working through those, highly looking forward to The Trial and Touch of Evil and I’m also trying to get through some Altman as well
Don’t miss Chimes at Midnight either; I’d say Drake is around 250 slots lower than he should be on that one.
@Zane I’ll definitely be getting to that too, especially since you and Drake hold it in high regard.
My viewing of Tarkovsky in order has so far been Solaris, Stalker, Ivan’s Childhood, and Andrei Rublev so I can only speak for those. Probably not the order I would have gone looking back. Ivan’s Childhood is the most straightforward and helped me a lot, but Andrei Rublev was the “key” for me in figuring out his other films, maybe because it felt like the most personal expression of his own faith that guides his work. I’m looking forward to seeing Nostalgia next.
@Drake For the first time ever with all of those films? That’s amazing, I love all 3 of them. I’ve had that a few times as well, I saw Videodrome back in May and loved it so much I immediately watched A History of Violence and Eastern Promises later that exact day, 3 wonderful films. Later, a few weeks ago I had an absolutely gigantic day watching The Searchers, Breaking the Waves, Rashomon, and The Seventh Seal all in one day. Pretty crazy stuff.
@Zane- haha yeah wow– those are some incredible lineups. The only thing is it’ll make you take for granted how good they are. I still watch a lot of bad movies (not on purpose– it just happens) — it helps me appreciate just how good a film has to be to be a top 10 of a year quality– let alone top 100 all-time or something. Your Searchers/breaking the waves/rashomon/seventh seal day–haha. I mean I don’t know which one you thought was the worst of the four but that’s hardly fair. haha. I remember thinking Goodfellas was “good, but sort of lightweight” compared to the two very long heavy war films I saw that day. haha.
Well if you held a gun to my head and forced me to answer I’d have to say The Seventh Seal was the worst, or more accurately least good, of the 4. I only mean that in a relative sense however, it was well worth the watch and an incredible masterpiece. Acting, direction, and screenwriting are all on point and I’m always one for strong visuals; the film opens perfectly with that shot of the nebula-like sky and the ending of the group walking up the mountain was wonderful as well. I don’t mind the ending of the actor and his wife walking away but feel the film might have been even better ending with the camera on the Dance of Death as the actors talk in the background, perhaps even with a freeze frame to boot although a fade would’ve worked just fine. Von Sydow and Björnstrand are a perfectly complementing pair of personalities and both gave wonderful performances; I think von Sydow has the more gripping role but Björnstrand’s portrayal of the straight man is very good, the actor character played by Nils Poppe as well is a great third man to judge these two by. They remind me to some extent of the main trio of The Big Lebowski, with Death too reminding me of the Nihilists; this film is much more serious than that film of course. The cinematography is excellent; I’m all about foreground-background work and composition and this film has it in droves. I’m a fan of speaking scenes in movies that are more than just cut-and-cut-again between two people’s faces (though that isn’t always a bad thing, case in point are the conversations between Sheen and Brando in Apocalypse Now) and this film has a lot of long take sequences of characters talking with great dialogue (a great example of this I’ve seen you mention is the dinner scene in Shame), but it’s more than just a well-written film, as I’ve said every frame is spectacular. I’m a huge sucker for movies portraying characters embarking on some great journey much greater in scale than themselves and this film is one of them; other great examples are The Searchers and Apocalypse Now (your 2 favorite movies but the latter is my #1), Children of Men and arguably also Y tu mama tambien, Blue Velvet and A History of Violence and it is my understanding that Stalker and Aguirre, both of which I plan to watch quite soon, have similar structures.
I love all 3 of the movies you watched in your big day, I watched The Deer Hunter the first time last year and loved everything about it; Cimino throws the kitchen sink at that film and it comes together pretty well; very disappointing what happened to him, and I rewatched Apocalypse Now and as I’ve said it’s my #1 film ever so not much needs to be said there, lastly I thought Goodfellas was amazing when I watched it but it was so long ago that it definitely needs a rewatch; it went on Netflix at the beginning of the year so it probably won’t be too long before I do that.
@Zane- haha I love this- the hypothetical “gun to my head” is how I do have the lists on the site.
Cinephiles are very intense people. Who else discusses making decisions with “a gun to their head” as commonly? We are very humorous people as well. On no other website have I seen the word “haha” been used as often.
Anyone who believes all cinephiles to be boring, snobby elitists can easily be countered with this information.
@Graham– haha- well the “gun to my head” thing is really a reaction to a large portion of the critical community that refuses to put any list in order– like they’ll just give us their top 10 but will refuse to put a number by them. That kind of thing always frustrated me.
I agree. Even the best of critics, including Roger Ebert, sometimes seem to have an aversion to list-making and ranking. It frustrates me as much as you. I don’t understand the reason behind such sentiments. No, the point of cinema appreciation is not to decide which film is #8 and which is #9 – it is to admire great artistry – but I find ranking to be a beneficial exercise. We cannot determine what makes cinema great unless we compare one film to another and see which is greater and why.