Solaris
“Solaris”
is one of those movies that make me feel incredibly stupid. Watching it, I
found it hard to understand what was going on and even harder to understand
what it all means. The extra material includes some analysis, but this I found
even harder to comprehend and left me feeling dumber than ever. I tried reading
up on it from various sources, but to no avail. It is very clear that “Solaris”
is concerned with some fundamental aspects of the human condition and also that
these mean more than the actual narrative, but I am struggling here.
This is
what I got out of it.
We meet
Kris Kelvin (Donatas Banionis) at a countryside house belonging to his parents.
He is about to leave for a space station above a planet called Solaris. Solaris
may be an intelligent planet (?), but years of research have failed to make
contact and the mission controllers are considering shutting the project down.
It is my understanding that Kris has to evaluate the project on the spot in order
to make that decision.
Kris is
visited by a former astronaut, Berton (Vladislav Dvorzhetsky) on the station
who was dismissed in disgrace when, after an accident on the station, he
claimed to have met with a four-meter-tall boy. On Earth he has a normal
version of this boy. Berton wants something from Kris, but I could not work out
what it was. Kris is indifferent and Berton leaves in disgust.
For five
minutes Berton drives around on highways in China…
Kris
arrives on the space station, but there is nobody there to greet him. Dr. Snaut
(Jüri Järvet) asks him to take it easy, Dr. Satorius (Anatoli Solonitsyn) is
outright dismissive and Dr. Gibarian (Sos Sargsyan) has killed himself, but
left a largely incomprehensible video message for Kris. The station is in
disrepair, it is literally falling apart and there is a feeling of lethargy.
Kris wanders around and starts to see people who are not supposed to be there.
It does not seem to concern him too much.
This
changes when Hari (Natalya Bondarchuk) appears. This is Kris’ former wife who
died 10 years earlier after he had left her. Kris sends her away in a rocket,
but a second copy is soon back. Dr. Sartorius explains that they are constructs
the planet creates from their minds, that they are physical enough but
artificial constructs and that they all have these guests. Hari tries to cope
with the fact that she is not the real Hari and is distressed about it while Kris
response is to try to protect her. He is still in love with her and it does not
matter that she is a construct.
Dr. Snaut
wants to send a brain image of Kris to Solaris before they finally kill it (?)
and this has the effect that the guests disappear. Kris is then back at the
country house with his father, only this also just a construct, an island on
the ocean of Solaris.
Sooo…..
Solaris is
apparently compared to Kubrick’s “2001: Space Odyssey” and I can see why. Both
are considered incomprehensible science fiction movies, but where the Space
Odyssey is very sparse in dialogue, the characters in “Solaris” just cannot
stop talking. What they are saying is not outright obscure, just not very
helpful in understanding what is really going on here. I have often complained
about those, often French, movies who sacrifice the narrative in order to
emphasize a symbolic message, and Solaris is flirting with this problem. There
is a point to it all that director Tarkovsky is trying to bring across, but
whatever it is, it is so amorphous and diffuse that it remains outside my
perception and renders the rest, not entirely pointless but incomprehensible.
Long passages looking at old pictures, driving in China, wandering the space
station…
Kris
prefers his dream to reality. Humankind needs other humans. It also fears the
unknown and will rather destroy it than try to comprehend it. The guests are
Solaris’ way of communicating by picking the scientists brains and showing them
what they care for the most, but why? To teach them about themselves? To try to
understand the humans? Is this something about that reality is only a construct
in the first place and that you chose yourself which reality you want to live
in?
Perhaps. As
mentioned I am still wondering what this is actually about and suspect I am
just not mentally equipped to understand “Solaris” and Tarkovsky. I wish I was
though.
Some people
did get it. “Solaris” won the Palme D’Or in Cannes and has fans around the
world. So, I guess it is just me.
Tarkovsky is absolutely an acquired taste. Even with my being a huge fan of his, it can take me making sure I'm in the right mood and mindset to really enjoy one of his films. Stalker from 1979, his other major sci-fi, might be a little less obfuscating (only partially), but heads up on Zerkalo from 74; it is totally a brick wall of a picture. I said in my review of that one that I knew I'd just seen a masterpiece, and now it was left to me to figure out exactly what kind of masterpiece it was over several future viewings.
ReplyDeleteI can agree to Tarkovsky being an acquired taste. Andrei Rublev did not work that well with me an I am still trying to understand Solaris. Those other titles I have not watched, so I cannot say much to that. I do not mind having to think about a movie. I just wonder if I am interested enough in what Tarkovsky wants me to think about.
DeleteWhen you're done with the full list, this is one to come back to. It really is worth it, but it's not a movie to come to without being fully braced for it.
ReplyDeleteThat sounds reasonable enough. I felt I was ready for it and was looking forward to something different. In the end frustrations at not understanding this took over, so I decided to look for a key before watching it again.
DeleteCorrection... The Working Class Goes to Heaven and The Mattei Affair won the Palme d'Or that year. Solaris won the 2nd Place Grand Jury Prize. Tarkovsky isn't an easy filmmaker to divulge into but they actually get better in re-watches.
ReplyDeleteI stand corrected. Solaris won the FIPRESCI price and was nominated for the Palme D'Or. Apologies.
DeleteI will give this another shot at some point.
You are definitely not the only one. For me, the eye candy makes it worth seeing. Also I totally missed out on the part that the father's house is just a construct at the end. Soon will everything be a construct?
ReplyDeleteA final scene will always be important so I have been wondering ever since what this signifies, but I am coming up blank. It seems to be a choice Kris makes. Or is it a choice Solaris makes? Or is it a trap Kris is caught in? Is his entire existence a creation by Solaris? Is Solaris actually divine?
DeleteYeah, still a long way to go.