Solaris 2002

For a scifi and space explorer junky I must say this movie really had me speechless. I had to watch it back to back three times to fully grasp the story and made sure I didn't miss out on any dialogues. Pretty darn good movie. Seems very unrated if you ask me but I would highly recommend it.

A decent film, but it doesn't rival Tarkovsky's 1972 adaptation.

This version benefits from a much cleaner emotional arc. The characters make more sense, and the relationship between Kelvin and Rheya is much easier to grasp. Emotionally, the story makes more sense and is more rewarding. Still a haunting meditation on memory, grief, and loss.

What it lacks from the 1972 version, though, is this sense of utter alienness and dread. The planet Solaris feels a much smaller concern here, and the world itself is distant, not really a looming presence in the story. That was the one thing that made Tarkovsky's version so powerful, and it was truer to Stanislaw Lem's novel because of it.

Film 70 (Goal: 300) of 2024

I know I'm in the minority here but boy did I dislike this film. I just couldn't get into it from the get go. This remake (though supposedly more accurate to the novel) of Tarkovsky's 1972 film preaches big concepts about life, death, humanity, reality - all commonly explored themes in sci-fi films but it's all beneath a slow, plodding experience. This may be one I make my way back to at another time, but at no point was I hooked. I knew what the film was laying out but I just didn't care for the journey.

Again though - I'm in the minority. Dialogue, score and visuals are all pretty good.

Interesting plot. What the main character's dream of comes to life. I think too weird for the mainstream audience. This movie was well liked but made no money.

"There are no answers. Only choices."

Went in expecting an entertaining sci-fi flick, instead I got an interesting story that makes me contemplate our human existence. A bit slow at times but I'd say Soderbergh did a good job.

There are a lot of archetypes to unpack here. It’s not a film for an audience that is merely looking for entertainment. It is a film that questions existence, human and divine. There are many times you just want to escape the movie and clock off. I give this film a 6 (overladen) out of 10. [Cerebral SciFi]

This bored the shit out of me(twice). I knew what was going on, I just didn't care. Suffering from insomnia? Try watching this.

Call me crazy, but I almost preferred this to Tarkovsky's. I don't know that I think it's better (I think it might as good), but if you were to ask me on a random day which version of Solaris I wanted to watch, I'd probably go with Soderbergh's.

From a filmmaking standpoint, it has always irked me a little bit how not cinematic Tarkovsky's can be. It's also pretty dry. Slimming down the runtime to less than 100 minutes, you get nearly the same impact of Tarkovsky's behemoth and don't lose a whole lot, in my opinion. I'm pretty big on Soderbergh so I might be a bit biased, but the way he frames things captivates me.

Very underrated movie. People have preconceived notions because the 1972 adaptation is considered a classic.

"Most God awful film"? Impatient idiots, don't bother with this film.

Not as good as the original but still a decent movie. Steven Soderbergh has updated this so if almost a 3 hour long russian film is not your particular cup of tea you can still get the story. Also there were enough changes to still make this worth watching if you have seen the original.

I can honestly say this is the most God awful film I have ever seen, and that's a long list.