Stalker - Movie Reviews - Rotten Tomatoes

Stalker Reviews

Page 2 of 76
January 21, 2016
Slow yet very interesting.
½ December 24, 2015
It is a terrible shame that Andrei Tarkovsky died of lung cancer at 56 (in 1986) because he surely would have made more magnificent films (beyond the seven features he did make, including Solaris, The Mirror, and Andrei Rublev). Stalker is a great example - mysterious, portentous, spiritual, yet somehow linked to a generic form (sci-fi) that allows viewers entry into his world. However, this is not an effects-laden picture but instead Tarkovsky works with his low budget to make simple actions carry great weight; we are basically treated only to three individuals (the Writer, the Professor, and the Stalker) crossing through The Zone, an overgrown meadow filled with decaying structures, fetid water, and apparently a lot of invisible traps and an ever-changing force that chooses who will live and who will die. At the center of The Zone is a room that, when reached, allows a person to have their innermost wish granted. So, Tarkovsky has created the opportunity for himself to question, philosophically, the goals of art, science, and then faith -- represented by The Stalker who sees a need for the room, as a way to generate hope (it seems). Of course, Tarkovsky was a famous Christian, not well appreciated by the Soviet authorities, and eventually he defected to the West and made his final films there. His films are famous for showing all four elements (earth, air, fire, and water) in a single shot and the screen in Stalker has an incredible tactile quality that is aided by sepia tones outside The Zone and lush greens and spoiled browns inside The Zone. In the end, there are no answers provided by the film or by Tarkvosky - his films succeed because they are open to interpretation and because they often remain inscrutable, even after numerous viewings. As such, this is a journey I'm happy to take more than once, even though my quest may ultimately be quixotic (although Kierkegaard thinks not).
November 27, 2015
Incredible, just incredible.
½ November 14, 2015
I don't think you can understand the implications behind easily. Anyway Tarkovsky claims that are not much metaphors. So why not taste its beautiful cinematography with stunning snapshots of nature (particularly water)? Don't forget other techniques like colour contrast. But not everyone can stand its slow pace.
November 2, 2015
amazing like a small miracle.
½ October 13, 2015
Hidas kerronta ei ole kaikkien mieleen. Pääosan kuitenkin varastavat upealla tavalla tehdyt lavasteet. Elokuvan maisema ja tunnelma on lumoavan kiehtova.
October 3, 2015
Genius that I might be too innocently dumb to absorb. But nevertheless it was original, cinematography quite astonishing, dynamics of the movie aesthetical and interesting; acting was at times confusing but again - interesting. It seems over-rated, or like - smth is missing; but I give all my respect for this piece of work.

nB: my point is, it stands in greatness in philosophy, and some other deep topics, but is way too hard to grasp. But maybe that's okay. In that case it's meant for the aspiring nutjobs only; or people who are really associative, perceptive, art fanatics, oh yes and I did I say really witty and intelligent?
September 5, 2015
Russian ruin porn, through bleak, abandoned industrial wastelands, sometimes in sepia. A quest to find heaven, and then a debate about whether to destroy it.
September 1, 2015
It was hard work and there were times I didn't know if I'd make it, but I'm glad I own it and I'll watch it more than a few times. I liked Solaris, so I knew I'd like Tarkovsky. I was very impressed with how modern it seemed ... music, palette, actors.
August 23, 2015
Tarkovsky's films have a feel all their own, and Stalker is no exception. Purposeful and slow-paced (Tarkovsky style) while never dulling the senses.
August 8, 2015
I don't see the point in dragging the scenes for too long, the deep philosophical and poetic words make the premise sound pretentious. I wasn't entertained for sure, the dialogue wasn't that of a high level to compensate for the lack of action or interest. It's a different idea but I can sum it up with " a bunch of insecure men walking around bushes and ruins and doing dumb things, they get back home and go to sleep".
July 21, 2015
I did not see the appeal with this movie. It did not entertain me, it was confusing, and it just didn't pull my attention.
July 20, 2015
?? ??? ????? ?????? ????, ??????? ????????, ???????????? ???????????? ?????????? ???, ?????? ?????? ????? ???????, ???????? ???? ?????? , ?? ???????? ?? ??? ????????????? ??? ???????????????, ?????? ??????? ?? ???? ????????????? ?? ?? ????????. ?? ????? ???? ????????? ???????? ?????????????? ???????, ???????? ???????? ???????? ????????? ?????????? ???????, ?????????? ?? ??? ????? ??????, ???? ???????? ???? ??????????? ?? ??????? ????????? ???????? ?? ??????????? ??????? ?????, ????????? ??????? ?????????? ?????????, ?? ???? ?????? ?? ?????? ??? ???????? ?? ????????? ????? ?? ??????? ??? ??????? ?????.
July 15, 2015
There is a before and after in watching "Stalker". It asks little and gives much. To contemplate what might be in our own capacity to desire, or in the words of our illicit guide is the "friction between one's soul and the outside world" is to look at our own experience and very existence and ultimate demise in one glance. One wonders with this film how Tarkovsky himself dragged such thoughts into visual reality. Did he know he, his cast and crew would be dragged into the poison of the set and ultimately die? What magnet? And the film was about an attempt to fix one star in the sky, damning one's own world if need be. The Zone is a place where angels fear to tread and demons are cursed to wander. This is a masterpiece to define masterpieces.
June 28, 2015
How can a movie be more soft and kind and fatherly?!
Tarkovsky is worry about we all, we came down for a reason, but we lost it...
This movie is a poem!
June 21, 2015
A staggering astonishing headlong philisophical dive into the pith of existence. Slow, deliberate, beautiful and a script seemingly written by Socrates.
½ May 31, 2015
Not an easy film, but almost certainly a great one. it starts in flat B&W then goes 2 color about half way thru kinda like 'the wizard of OZ" is a gr8 example of sci-fi on little or no budget. one last comment the title has nothing to do with the modern day meaning of the word but rather like a guide not a creep.
½ May 27, 2015
Wow. From the start you can see what good direction is
May 27, 2015
Another Tarkovsky masterpiece. I had to watch it twice just to let it sink in. He's definitely my favorite director. The whole movie is haunting and mysterious.
May 4, 2015
I've got Solaris on DVD and like to get esoteric with far reaching ideas as much as any cinophile. I did like some of the long uncut scenes, like theater. And some of the imagery/cinematography was memorizing. But it's a shame about what could have been with that story was squandered by Tarkovsky's inability to tell a story. But this movie cracks me up. Not even the movie so much but to read and hear people try to make it so much more than it is. Let's just be honest and say the Emperor has no clothes. Tarkovsky is a horrible story teller. This movie is like staring at clouds, you can see whatever you want to see. And the fun is to watch people go so far out of the way to do so to burnish their cinematic "street creds". There is a story in here, what could have been a fascinating story. But Tarkovsky enjoys making a movie of mere suggestion, metaphors and nonsense. You get figure out what one of those three any minute of any scene may be. And there is no answer. He pulled a great Andy Kaufman with this one. Kudos Andrei, you got the last laugh.
Page 2 of 76