Twentieth Century Fox Film Corporation | Release Date: November 27, 2002
6.8
USER SCORE
Generally favorable reviews based on 111 Ratings
USER RATING DISTRIBUTION
Positive:
70
Mixed:
18
Negative:
23
Watch Now
Stream On
Stream On
Review this movie
VOTE NOW
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Check box if your review contains spoilers 0 characters (5000 max)
10
dpodFeb 3, 2011
Mindblowing emotionally, and stunningly beautiful. This is a really slow movie but if you can just sit back and let the fantastic soundtrack, spectacular visuals and emotion twisting plot slowly wash over you, then this will become your newMindblowing emotionally, and stunningly beautiful. This is a really slow movie but if you can just sit back and let the fantastic soundtrack, spectacular visuals and emotion twisting plot slowly wash over you, then this will become your new favourite movie. Expand
4 of 5 users found this helpful41
All this user's reviews
7
FamousdogDec 14, 2011
A film that ultimately rewards patience and attention - abilities often absent in today's audience. Jeremy Davies' quizzical Snow is a superb creation.
1 of 3 users found this helpful12
All this user's reviews
9
TokyochuchuOct 24, 2012
Solaris is one of the most original, unique and intriguing science fiction films ever made. Steven Soderbergh takes cues from 2001: A Space Odyssey and runs with them into the modern age. The film also sees a true powerhouse performance fromSolaris is one of the most original, unique and intriguing science fiction films ever made. Steven Soderbergh takes cues from 2001: A Space Odyssey and runs with them into the modern age. The film also sees a true powerhouse performance from George Clooney. Solaris has mystery, beauty and emotion sown into every frame. Phenomenal stuff! Expand
1 of 3 users found this helpful12
All this user's reviews
7
LolasaurusOct 13, 2011
Not nearly as bad as most people make it out to be. I don't see how people would fault this American version for being different from the Russian, since neither captures even half of the thematic focus of the novel, which undoubtably isNot nearly as bad as most people make it out to be. I don't see how people would fault this American version for being different from the Russian, since neither captures even half of the thematic focus of the novel, which undoubtably is infinitely better than any other form of the story. The novel manages to study the relationship between parallel topics of an introspective, psychological love story and a philosophical exploration on the limits of scientific understanding, subjectivity, practical implications of religion, etc. (the whole boat-load). The Russian film focused on the latter, while, as might be expected, the American went for the former. So I can't really see how anyone says they appreciate the book in its entirety, praise the 1972 film but dismiss the 2002 one. So all that aside, this film does its niche fairly well. The cinematography, soundtrack, acting, writing are all fairly above par if not spell-binding (the acting is really far more compelling here than in the Russian; those who say otherwise are just being stubborn). The pace is slow which can definitely turn off a lot of people, but it provides a dream-like, Lynchian trance for those who sit the whole thing out. Expand
0 of 2 users found this helpful02
All this user's reviews
9
KakapoApr 6, 2012
A beautiful, romantic and thought-provoking film. A slow and introspective journey into the nature of lost love. Definitely not for the unwashed masses (it's measured, complex and open ended - nothing gets blown up and there's not a singleA beautiful, romantic and thought-provoking film. A slow and introspective journey into the nature of lost love. Definitely not for the unwashed masses (it's measured, complex and open ended - nothing gets blown up and there's not a single car race), but worthwhile if you love cinema and appreciate a good story. Expand
0 of 2 users found this helpful02
All this user's reviews
9
SpangleAug 20, 2014
Just wow. On pretty much every front, Solaris is an exceptional film. George Clooney is marvelous here. My main criticism with him, as much as I do like him, is that he frequently seems to just play himself in many films. Here, however, heJust wow. On pretty much every front, Solaris is an exceptional film. George Clooney is marvelous here. My main criticism with him, as much as I do like him, is that he frequently seems to just play himself in many films. Here, however, he does anything but. Steven Soderbergh's direction is great and the visual effects here of space and of the planet Solaris are breathtakingly gorgeous and really something to marvel at. In that way and in terms of what it all means, reminds me a lot of 2001: A Space Odyssey. Very ambigious, confusing, slow, and beautiful, Solaris is really quite brilliant, though a tough nut to crack. Personally, I am still racking my brain over what everything in this one meant and trying to figure out what I am supposed to take away. Ultimately, however, I think this is an orange you can peel in many different ways, which makes it all the more intriguing. Personally, I think there are many plausible explanations, whether they be on reality (what is truly real?), love (and its everlasting nature), and death (where will we reunite, if we ever do? letting go or can you truly ever let go?). It raises many interesting questions and it may not have all the answers and is most certainly very flawed at times and leaves many unanswerable questions (unless "I don't know" is an answer). However, in spite of that, I adored this one. I love films with ambiguity and ones that raise many questions that make it fun to discuss and this is a classic example of that. Now, I would never recommend it to anyone, because if I did, odds are they would come back and call me an idiot since this one is an acquired taste, but I loved it all the same. Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful01
All this user's reviews
7
Compi24Oct 11, 2013
It might not exactly be George Clooney's most riveting outer space adventure, with a whole lot of moral intrigue and a bevy of beautiful images from one of Hollywood's most aesthetic directors, "Solaris" is definitely worth the watch.
0 of 1 users found this helpful01
All this user's reviews
10
ChickenphNov 3, 2014
One of my favorite movies. It jumps between genres, which I think throws people off. Seems like it's going to be a scary movie, but turns into a thoughtful movie about love and loss.
I really don't know why it reviews so poorly, but you
One of my favorite movies. It jumps between genres, which I think throws people off. Seems like it's going to be a scary movie, but turns into a thoughtful movie about love and loss.
I really don't know why it reviews so poorly, but you should give it a chance.
Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful01
All this user's reviews
10
SajuukhaarSep 10, 2016
Mesmerizing, beautiful, intellectual without being pretentious, introspective and immersive...at least for those with patience and intelligence enough to appreciate it. Solaris is film art with a haunting soundtrack, great acting, writing andMesmerizing, beautiful, intellectual without being pretentious, introspective and immersive...at least for those with patience and intelligence enough to appreciate it. Solaris is film art with a haunting soundtrack, great acting, writing and photography and is a decent interpretation of Stanislaw Lem's book. Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful01
All this user's reviews
8
DuaneJ.Dec 6, 2002
I'm with the twist-off-their-heads respondent -- what in g-d's name is wrong with you people? i pretty much despise clooney, think soderbergh's batting .500 in his career (love _schizopolis_, despise _ocean's 11_ with theI'm with the twist-off-their-heads respondent -- what in g-d's name is wrong with you people? i pretty much despise clooney, think soderbergh's batting .500 in his career (love _schizopolis_, despise _ocean's 11_ with the passionate commitment the film itself lacks...) and was, nonetheless, completely unprepared for the haunting tone poem they wrought. what an achievement! now, compared to tarkovsky's version, this is merely a gloss on the themes implied by stanislaw lem's book...but what a gloss! "plodding"? quit quoting owen gleiberman, whose review one can barely be read without being distracted by the ax o.g. is plainly grinding -- never mind about your theories of how soderbergh approaches filmmaking, HOW WAS THE FILM?!? i guess a film that honors silence and a viewer's own capacity for not being led by their nose-rings through a narrative -- for only 96 minutes, you twitchy intellectuals, thank you very much -- could be called "plodding," and those who do so could be called something else. its accomplishment is all the greater for seeming so effortless -- it has social critique, romance, philosophy, humor (i.e. jeremy davies, who, especially after _secretary_, is going through something of a twitchy period himself), conscience-stricken drama and a lovely, brief homage to tarkovsky is the "kelvin's sick" sequence. oh, yeah, and GEORGE CLOONEY'S BEST PERFORMANCE EVER!! maybe the best he'll ever do -- such range and engagement in the character's process, who knew? not you who diss this film, surely. doesn't this little fact count for anything with you numnutzes? i can see a weak box office for such fare, but not $9.5 million weak on a holiday weekend, and definitely not to receive an "f" rating from the similarly disposed nutzes on cinemascore.com. it is not flawless, nor wholly free of pretense, but it's as pretty damned close as a soul could hope for in today's hollywood. bravo, soderbergh, clooney, mcelhone, davies, viola davis, even james cameron, for this gorgeous, provocative reflection on desire and karma. i can't wait for this film to be rehabilitated, as it most certainly shall be, in the years to come. on the subject of nose-rings, i'm convinced half of the dismissive sentiment of "cineastes" is confusion over the unique tone of the film, wedded to witless diatribes that reinforce said lack of understanding. if you'd been told that this was a good film, i firmly believe you'd be leaping to _solaris_' defense. don't believe the negative hype -- see it for yourself. for IQs only slightly higher than today's temperature, i believe this is, among other things, a great date movie... Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
8
JagoffJun 8, 2012
Amazed at the passion the negative reviewers display with their hatred of this movie, and the anger they feel at folks like me who genuinely enjoyed it. When you say they just don't get it, it only makes them angrier and more defensive, so IAmazed at the passion the negative reviewers display with their hatred of this movie, and the anger they feel at folks like me who genuinely enjoyed it. When you say they just don't get it, it only makes them angrier and more defensive, so I will instead say this; if you didn't like the movie, say just that. Don't say it was crap, or stupid or whatever, because there are many people, far more accomplished and thoughtful (not to mention well-spoken) than many of you negative nancies, who put their heart and soul into this movie. Are you saying they are all stupid? Would you say that to their face? Why else do think think people tell you that you just don't get it? Stop being dick-holes and simply acknowledge that it's not your kind of movie. I found it to be intriguingly tense and thought provoking. Does that mean I think you are retarded for not agreeing with me? Well, ...yes, yes it does. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews