Tarkovsky Films Free Online (2010) • Hacker News Board

Re: Tarkovsky Films Free Online (2010)

#51

Post by wahnfrieden » Sat, Jan 25, 2014, 12:32 AM UTC

pipy wrote: post #46

wahnfrieden wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Anything in particular I can read / read up on to familiarize myself before watching MY CAR? Let's see, I have THE ASCENT but haven't watched it yet. Another promising director is Mikhail Kalatozov, I've been meaning to watch SOY CUBA for ages... Even though I already have an original screenprint poster of it :V Can't find anything available by Maryagin unfortunately. Wonder if there's a different spelling I should u…

Well, I have thought about it and I'm really sorry that I'm unable to recommend you good English sources! As about the ones in Russian, I'd read "Russia: What Happened to it During XX Century" [1] by Yuri Semenov, which is a theoretical text about the structure of the Soviet society. Sadly, it is not available in English. Someday I will probably translate it myself. I've heard that is was translated to Chinese, but I…

Thanks for the wealth of pointers! Really appreciate it, I'll dig in soon. Do you have a Twitter account or something?

Also just remembered another interesting docu I saw recently, Chris Marker's LE TOMBEAU D'ALEXANDRE, about Aleksandr Medvedkin.

Re: Tarkovsky Films Free Online (2010)

#52

Post by pipy » Sat, Jan 25, 2014, 6:27 PM UTC

wahnfrieden wrote: post #51

pipy wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, I have thought about it and I'm really sorry that I'm unable to recommend you good English sources! As about the ones in Russian, I'd read "Russia: What Happened to it During XX Century" [1] by Yuri Semenov, which is a theoretical text about the structure of the Soviet society. Sadly, it is not available in English. Someday I will probably translate it myself. I've heard that is was translated to Chinese, but I…

Thanks for the wealth of pointers! Really appreciate it, I'll dig in soon. Do you have a Twitter account or something? Also just remembered another interesting docu I saw recently, Chris Marker's LE TOMBEAU D'ALEXANDRE, about Aleksandr Medvedkin.

Thanks!

I have to correct myself and say that the family friend didn't exactly get punched in the face, but the point still stands.

Thanks for the suggestion about the movie, I haven't watched it. But probably should have already.

I'm a little bit conservative in regards to internet communications, so I'll drop you an email.

Re: Tarkovsky Films Free Online (2010)

#53

Post by Jehar » Mon, Jan 27, 2014, 8:02 PM UTC

sanoli wrote: post #31

pavelrub wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Tarkovsky made films about what he cared about and what interested him. His Solaris wasn't really meant to be about Lem's book, just as his Stalker isn't about Roadside Picnic. Those books simply offer a setting where he could explore his own ideas.

I don't know, this might be the actual reason... or it's just that he couldn't really put the book into film. It's very difficult to do so, some may say it's just impossible since the mediums are so different. But your answer has been used before by people defending this or that director, and sometimes it just seems like a cop out, "Oh, he didn't really care about the book". P.S. Sorry if I sound a bit harsh. Not my…

Can I attempt to clarify the perceived intention of Tarkovsky with his novel adaptation? I wouldn't frame the films as evidence that he didn't care about the source material or what it attempted to say. Rather, it seems to me that these films are his responses to the novels, or at least meditations on what the novels said to Tarkovsky.

Another factor is that film and literature are very different languages, and aiming for a 1:1 translation can often result in a work that is missing pieces that were only communicable in the original. If we acknowledge that any given novel will have aspects of it that are un-filmable (interior monologue, relative time dilation, for simple examples), then it is the job of the director to re-create the spirit of those aspects while making them work for his media. As a result, the director cannot help but inject his own views and thoughts into the work. Nobody embodies this more strongly to me than Tarkovsky, with Kubrick as a close second. In fact, King's own attempt (shudder) at filming The Shining may prove this point all by itself; it's apparent that King doesn't understand the medium he was attempting to use.