This is the unexpurgated text of an email I wrote to a friend in response to two DVDs he’d lent me. Both DVDs were of movies called Solaris, both based on the excellent novel by Stanislaw Lem. The older movie is Russian, the newer one is American. The newer one stars George Clooney. Perhaps you have seen it?

Anyway, this is what I though after watching both movies. I’m sure a more detailed analysis could be made, but this should be enough for any casual interest.

Wow -

We checked out the Russian version a few weeks ago.

It’s about the slowest-paced movie I’ve ever seen! Even slower than Fitzcorraldo! Slower than The Shining! Amazing - like watching a painting. Very strange, but I enjoyed it a LOT. The use of rain in the beginning reminds me of the Japanese director who made Rashomon and The Seven Samurai. The whole look and feel of it - I wonder how much was deliberate and how much was budget or technology available at the time? It says in the notes it was the Russian director’s break-out success film, which makes me really wonder about his OTHER ones!

I also saw that Lem didn’t feel like the director quite got it - like, what Lem intended with the book is not what finally made it to the screen. I think this is probably true. As I recall, the book is more idea-driven than plot-driven, and the ideas have much to do with the problem of communication with a vastly alien being - ie, the Ocean of Solaris.

Now, Clooney bugs me anyway. He was good in Syriana, and the Coen Bros know how to use him effectively (he’s GREAT in Burn After Reading), but otherwise I have little use for him and this was no exception, he just doesn’t act. The characterizations were good, but generally not well acted on everyone’s part (I’m such a wet blanket!) … The script was alright, but I didn’t feel like the moviemakers knew what they were trying to do - like, no real sense of form, no real sense of underlying philosophy - I had the feeling they used a few imageries as a kind of homage to the first movie (the spaceship docking when Clooney lands on Solaris), and there was a kind of PhilDick-ness to the plot - the way it was hard to tell what was real and what was not - but it lacked Philip Dick’s sense of structure. We both (Zinnia and I) thought we would have been very confused if we hadn’t sort of known what was going on already from the other movie.

That said, it LOOKED really good, it was paced very well, it was moody without being cumbersome… Just poorly acted and nonsensical. Sad, because I think a movie of Solaris could be made that would attend properly to all these things. Interspecies communication is one of my interests, so I’d like to see that happen.

Thanks so much for lending these! I’ve been wanting to see them both for years (tho clearly not badly enough to go and get them myself). I’ll return them to you shortly.

thanks and good luck
5