• Studio: Magna
  • Release Date: Oct 18, 2002
Metascore
90

Universal acclaim - based on 8 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 8 out of 8
  2. Mixed: 0 out of 8
  3. Negative: 0 out of 8
  1. Stands with the greatest science-fiction movies ever made.
  2. An amazing celluloid poem by a filmmaker whom Ingmar Bergman called "the greatest." He very nearly was. He was also, perhaps, too pure a creator and reckless a citizen to survive unscathed.
  3. 100
    A dazzlingly imaginative work with awesome production values and special effects that bear comparison to those of "2001."
  4. His (Tarkovsky's) pictures, and his sounds -- such as the symphonic drip of raindrops in a wooded pond -- tell more than just the immediate story; they rejuvenate the mind.
  5. Tarkovsky's eerie mystic parable is given substance by the filmmaker's boldly original grasp of film language and the remarkable performances by all the principals.
  6. 88
    Routinely called Tarkovsky's reply to Kubrick's "2001" -- But Kubrick's film is outward, charting man's next step in the universe, while Tarkovsky's is inward, asking about the nature and reality of the human personality.
User Score
8.0

Generally favorable reviews- based on 50 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Positive: 10 out of 11
  2. Negative: 0 out of 11
  1. Aug 27, 2010
    9
    A philosophical sci-film film of the likes of '2001,' but the ideas presented are a little more contained (as in they don't completelyA philosophical sci-film film of the likes of '2001,' but the ideas presented are a little more contained (as in they don't completely question the formation and meaning of life and the universe). There is no doubt that this is a truly gorgeous movie, and anyone who gives a hoot about cinematography will tell you that, but sometimes I feel like Tarkovsky is a little uncompromising in his visual artistry. There's literally a scene that follows a car driving on a stretch of highway for 8 minutes. There's the camera motif of zooming in on random objects for almost every scene in the second half of the movie. I could go on. I guess I just have to say that the only way to enjoy this movie is from a truly philosophical perspective, which is fine because at the end of all things, that's effectively what this movie leaves you thinking about, and as a person heading into a science career, it is especially pertinent to me. Full Review »
  2. Apr 16, 2012
    5
    I wish I could say I liked this film as much as others, but it was simply too slow, too contemplative, and too philosophical for my taste. ItI wish I could say I liked this film as much as others, but it was simply too slow, too contemplative, and too philosophical for my taste. It was even amateurish in parts. There is a scene towards the beginning of the film where it starts raining on a bright sunny day. You can see shadows behind the obvious bad water effect. There is a camera transfixed on a pond for several minutes, a freeway sequence that goes on for about 10 minutes (a bathroom break I guess), and the camera showing close ups of various parts of a painting. There is even one scene where a rocket ship takes off inside a small room, and he stays in the room when it takes off. In real life he would be fried to bits. Here the back of his uniform catches fire and he gets a few blisters. I do think the film set of the inside of the space station looks pretty good, and overall the acting is good, and there are a few good visuals, but it really needed some editing. I say this as someone who loves slow paced films, like the film this one is always compared to, the great "2001 - A Space Odyssey" by Kubrick. Full Review »
  3. davez
    Jul 20, 2007
    10
    I was unemployed the 1st winter after graduating college and decided to watch foreign films to see the difference. The standard by which I I was unemployed the 1st winter after graduating college and decided to watch foreign films to see the difference. The standard by which I rate films is strongly influenced by masterpieces such as "Solaris." Do yourself a favor... don't watch the American remake of this film (it does this film no justice at all... would you watch a remake of star wars by any other director than Lucas?). See the original and let yourself open up to a movie that although slow, is paced for you to contemplate rather than merely watch. Would I watch it again? Only if showing it to someone who has been blinded by the myriad amounts of garbage that is mass produced by Hollywood for the insatiable appetite of American dvd junkies. (sorry, the movie is a little long like my explanation of it). Full Review »