MovieChat Forums > Solyaris (1972) Discussion > anyone watched the remake THEN the origi...

anyone watched the remake THEN the original

posted 11 years ago by jackluminous1965
19 replies | jump to latest

I thought the 2002 film had great visuals and soundtrack but was basically a ghost story in space (Yeah I know there is a bit more to it than that) and I thought the film was ok better than average but lacking. I found it slow and with no emotional weight and lacked any depth

Having read comments here the original seems more interesting but slower, deeper and colder

Is it worth watching the original when I wasnt that impressed with the new version?

[–] gdifalco 11 years ago

Hi. I, too, watched the remake first. I think you might be somewhat frustrated with the pacing and the open-ended nature of the story if you watched the original. I know I was. On the other hand, I think that was the point--to leave the viewer to ponder existential questions...

[–] skyblazeeterno 11 years ago

I did see the original a few days ago and...it was a bit better than the 2002 version but gets bogged down in heavy discussions near the end, the ending with the island in the ocean was better...but and this is a big BUT I cannot see why this film is regarded as a classic - good but not great IMHO

[–] mrbwiz422 10 years ago

I think it's the russian style which makes these movies regarded as great.

They don't give a *beep* about time. Or real conversations.

It's all about thoughts, ideas, and imagery. Faust and Nietzsche usually get mentioned.

I saw Stalker recently and it was much of the same.

The dialogue isn't super natural, most lines are just there to bring up ideas for you to ponder over.

There are a lot of moments where no one says anything because they're pondering, and it sort of opens you up to ponder as well. There was one moment on Solaris where we just see him walking down the hall after his wife came back, and all I could do was wonder what he was thinking... I know what I would be thinking, "What the hell. What the hell was that. What the hell is going on here?"

And yeah everything's a bit cold. Switches from color to black and white.

I don't think they are the most amazing movies ever made, but they're definitely an experience.... I do not regret having watched them.

[–] palvdb 11 years ago

I justed watched the remake.
And the ending was a really big problem for me. It just seemed to reference to christianity, which makes the philisophy of the movie pretty pointless.
In my opinion the movie should've ended with the dissapearing finger cut, or just seconds later with the main character not leaving the space station.
Is the original one very different in that way, because I'd like to watch it then.

[–] BelleCBelle 11 years ago

YES! I think watching the original of anything is always a good idea, even if only to give yourself a perspective from which to view the remake. I also think that it is a good idea to read the book a film is based on, if there is one, if a particular film really makes an impact on you.

I have seen both versions of Solaris and I think they are very different movies, very different. I enjoyed them both, but it think the 1972 original Solaris is a brilliant film that goes beyond what most people think of as sci-fi, to great sci-fi which poses questions such as what is life and what is reality. Nope, mutant spiders don't qualify!

Human Rights: Know Them, Demand Them, Defend Them

[–] galneon 11 years ago

The 2002 Solaris is not a remake of the 1972 Solaris. It's an entirely separate adaptation of the novel of the same name. The newer adaptation is more true to the novel. The underlying theme of the novel is more intetesting than that of the older film in my eyes. Whichever you prefer, it's hard to argue the 2002 film didn't do a better job of keeping with the spirit of the book.

[–] Edward_de_Vere 11 years ago

I thought the 2002 film had great visuals and soundtrack but was basically a ghost story in space (Yeah I know there is a bit more to it than that) and I thought the film was ok better than average but lacking. I found it slow and with no emotional weight and lacked any depth

More like a bad soap opera in space. Had I seen the remake first, I probably would have been so turned off from the story that I wouldn't have bothered with the original or the novel.

Having read comments here the original seems more interesting but slower, deeper and colder

Is it worth watching the original when I wasnt that impressed with the new version?

I'd suggest both watching the original and reading Lem's novel (which is quite different from both films). Tarkovsky's film has obvious pacing problems and other flaws, but some of the scenes really stick with you. Its "coldness" (as you describe it) reminds me of Kubrick's 2001, which is perfect atmosphere for the bleakness of space. What the 2002 remake of the film by Soderbergh really lacked was atmosphere.

[–] hoganply 11 years ago

Oh, most definitely. Having watched the 2002 remake a while ago and not being overly impressed with it, I got around to watching the original relatively recently and am now absolutely obsessed with it; such a beautiful, intellectually nourishing film. For an addict of the kind of 'boring', languidly paced sci-fi of which this is, to me, the epitome, it's without question superbly made. While it's one of the best films ever made in my opinion, that is, however, what I would preface my recommendation with if anyone hasn't yet seen it - this type of film I speak of must appeal to you to at least some degree in order for you to derive any enjoyment from it.

[–] KaZenPhi 10 years ago

I read the novel first, loved it, then watched the 2002 version, thought it was ok, just watched the 1972 version. My mind kept drifting off and I began to seriously doubt Tarkovski's pedigree as one of the greats. There were some interesting shots and it wasn't wholly inept but it felt like visiting your boring relatives in eastern germany as a child and they put on the recording of a cheap community play from the narcoleptic ward when it's time for you to take a nap.

I like slow films a lot, 2001 is a masterpiece, kwaidan is one of my favourite films of all time and I thoroughly enjoyed every minute of tokyo monogatari although it's just about a normal family farting around for a couple of hours to be blunt - Solaris bored me to tears, although I did like the first 40 minutes or so, that old lady that looked like Roger Waters in drag mesmerized me.

[–] doodleboy 10 years ago

i really like the remake, and just finished the original (Hulu!). the original is much more focused on philosophical debates and Russian ideology. They're both good, but i admit, i reaaaaly wanted to FF during the first and last 1/3rd of the original.

if you know the story, but want more of the 'what should we do?' philosophical debates (and more classical allusions), definitely spend the 2:37 watching the original. it's pretty good. if you just want the plot, the remake is fine. acting is a wash, though, i'll admit, the Russians beat the pants off Jeremy Davies' annoying schtick.

[–] franzkabuki 10 years ago

Russian ideology?

"facts are stupid things" - Ronald Reagan

[–] mrbwiz422 10 years ago

I recall watching the remake awhile back and not liking it.

Just watched the original, and then the remake....

The remake was a lot better this time, knowing what was going on from the start and having things explained. Them adding God into the equation and everything was a bit meh. But overall the movie was a nice addition.