What am I supposed to get out of the director filming everything for way longer than needed
Why does the director keep stopping the movie to have interminable dialogue scenes
Why does everyone either pretend this isn't boring or acknowledge it's boring yet praise it ecstatically
>Upon its release the film's reception was less than favorable. Officials at Goskino, a government group otherwise known as the State Committee for Cinematography, were critical of the film. On being told that Stalker should be faster and more dynamic, Tarkovsky replied: The film needs to be slower and duller at the start so that the viewers who walked into the wrong theatre have time to leave before the main action starts.
I quite liked the start lol. I started getting really bored once they reached the zone.
>goskino
>kino
>i saw a word without knowing what it means because i hear other people saying it
>Government owned organisation that controls everything in the movie industry so it fits soviet propaganda narratives
>Kino
Lol commies cant make shit, just as you said, they are controlled by the government.
Its better when corporations do
Yes.
>goskino
Watch Nostalgia's empty pool scene and learn to better focus on visual and sound beauty
Watch it at 2x speed. It's WAY more bearable and interesting
>Why does everyone either pretend this isn't boring
Your age?
There is slow and there is holding the same shot for like five minutes straight
yawn
Go back to your netflix animes.
filtered
Cinematography is my favorite part of a movie. Watch Andrei Rublev if you want a more engaging story.
I said nothing about story or "cinematography" those weren't my issues
>Sad, though, to think that there are people who can't stand a conversation lasting hours.
Sad to think there are people who can't differentiate between film and reality you fricking mong. I don't watch films to listen to conversations, that's not art.
>I said nothing about story
>Why does the director keep stopping the movie to have interminable dialogue scenes
That's the story
>or "cinematography"
>What am I supposed to get out of the director filming everything for way longer than needed
That's the cinematography
Is this bait or do you not understand the English language? I don't know what you're trying to convey.
Story = dialogue? Do we have a Nolan fan in the building?
Yes my issue is with the pacing/shot length not the cinematography, "mise en scene" etc. which I thought was incredible
It's not a silent film. A lot of the story is told through the dialogue.
>A lot of the story is told through the dialogue
As you say, the story – which I had no issue with – is partially told through tedious dialogue – which I had a problem with. Glad we could clarify that.
But the dialogue isn't tedious or interminable. We'll have to agree to disagree. And you should still watch Andrei Rublev. It's Tarkovsky's best.
Not that OP, but I'll help you out because you're clearly moronic. The story is conveyed through dialogue and action. So yes, story = dialogue.
Cinematography is the act of making motion pictures. Pacing is a story thing, but shot length is absolutely part of the cinematography. The dialogue is great and gives you a lot of insight into the characters and their world. I think you'll find the collection of movies known colloquially as the MCU more to your liking. Good day, sir.
>Why does the director keep stopping the movie to have interminable dialogue scenes
Showed your hand here.
Sad, though, to think that there are people who can't stand a conversation lasting hours. I almost pity them, but I know they lack the ability to truly suffer. Little more than plants, that.
>be moron
>lose all footage
>twice
>make boring shitty film with pseud nonsense because you cant even approach the book elements
>midwits praise you
None of them will ever address your points because they can't simply redditsnark their way out of those.
>lost all footage
not his fault. the lab guys had no experience with the new film stock
>twice
it only happened once
>boring shitty film with pseud nonsense
it's actually a very engaging film about faith (a theme Tarkovsky constantly explored throughout his filmography) but unfortunately your brain can't handle anything that requires an attention span of more than 5 seconds
>cant even approach the book elements
much like Solaris, Tarkovsky didn't care about the book
he just liked the setting and utilized it to his own advantage
>much like Solaris, Tarkovsky didn't care about the book he just liked the setting and utilized it to his own advantage
I don't know why people want adaptations to be a scene for scene remake. If you enjoy the book so much, why don't you just read the book? I prefer adaptations that deviate from the source material because it makes them stand on their own. There is no reason to make a movie identical to the book.
That's pretty much how every great director approached books. Besides The Killing, every film Kubrick directed was based on a book but he always made meaningful changes to the material like shifting the focus to Jack in The Shining or adding a narrator to Barry Lyndon
I like the slow train ride scene, sometimes I just put that part on go into a trance
pretty based of the director to insist on 50+ reshoots in the hottest parts of chernobyl despite alright deciding he was only going to use the first takes.
Can't be too safe, anon. Who knows, the 54th shot could turn out to be the best.
Agreed. It was also based of him to force the cast to camp out in hot zones overnight so they could "get to shooting as soon as I arrive in the morning" (noon-2pm)
Letting the cast spend extra time on/near the set when location shooting can have benefits. Allows them to soak in their surroundings, having a better connection with the place.
Definitely, like the high amounts of radiation that possibly led to then dying from cancer related illnesses
Only adds to the authenticity!
>filming everything for way longer than needed
It wasn’t longer than needed
>keep stopping the movie to have interminable dialogue scenes
The movie never stopped, the dialogue scenes weren’t interminable
>everyone either pretend this isn't boring or acknowledge it's boring yet praise it ecstatically
It’s not boring, and I’m not praising it ecstatically. I prefer Mirror and Nostalghia.
Because he's a pseud hack, but since he's Russian (and thus kinda Western, but also kinda exotic) critics proclaim his dumb jerk-off movies to be great.
"Mirror" literally started the "Is this movie good or Soviet?" meme in my country.
>What am I supposed to get
You’re too moronic to get anything apparently. Back to YouTube explanation videos to handhold you through the difficult movie
The most overrated movie ever made. Boring and laughably cheap-looking.
Scenes go on for long because the director is giving you time to contemplate on what just happened and what was done and said by the characters. I think in Tarkovsky's case, he was inspired by the art style of east Asian paintings. There are always empty spaces in those paintings left by the artist so the viewer's imagination can run wild while looking at them.
This also explains why some people like the movie (thinkers) and others don't (NPCs)
>This also explains why some people like the movie (thinkers) and others don't (NPCs)
You're a braindead zoomer with ADHD.
Just take it in dude
>In an interview on the MK2 DVD, the production designer, Rashit Safiullin, recalled that Tarkovsky spent a year shooting all the outdoor scenes. However, when the crew returned toMoscow, they found that the film had been improperly developed and their footage was unusable. The film had been shot on newKodak5247 stock with which Soviet laboratories were not very familiar.
lmfao, slavic morons
I thought it was meh at first but it grew on me. I do skip the train scene.
>I do skip the most memorable and fantastical scene of the film
?t=1783
>soviet arthouse director directs a better action scene than most Hollywood directors now
>this video is not available
?t=1847
how about now?
works ty
That's how you check for mines.
filtered
>I-IS THAT A PUDDLE OF HIGHLY TOXIC SLUDGE???
>GO SWIM IN IT
It's not boring if you have any sort of attention span and don't need constant stimulation of every sense. The long shots increase the tension.
Mutt thread
The "interminable dialogue" and footage of actual core plot development probably adds to like 15 or 20 minutes.
It is, not even being pretentious, an existentialist movie. Its about what its like to be live your life and be alive. The degree to which you're forced to think too much about little things, or observe the weird boringness of another human making their way around an environment in chunks of real time, is making you think about what being in a human body, in an environment really is. Because how people respond to that dull, weird meaninglessness and try and contrive meaning or distraction is the entire point of the whole film. You're stranded, washed up on the shore of sentience, its often quiet, cold, weird, dingy, dull, what are you going to do while you're here.