Steven Soderbergh’s popularly maligned Solaris is so because, I think, it’s too slow for a mainstream movie. And let this be clear: it is a mainstream movie, one steeped in ambiguity and a weird electronic score – which I love, for the record – so it’s at ends with the audience to which it caters. For my tastes the film is actually too rushed, and no, I’m not saying this because I’ve seen the Tarkovsky version. In his effort to reconstitute what should have been a more indulgent, more oblique art film into a more digestable package, Soderbergh’s managed to temper his aspirations and yet to alienate audiences. But its pretense, to push something more unconventional into the mainstream channel, is bold, and I admire the effort.
by Rumsey Taylor | Source: Fox DVD
27 Dec 2009 12:06 PM | Comments (4)
I really enjoyed the movie even with the slowness. I recognise maybe not every one will like it though. I never thought anyone would say it was not slow enough!
I’ve always felt this film was underrated. Even if Solaris isn’t “arty” enough, Soderbergh made a good effort. Unfortunately, the mainstream audience doesn’t like associating drama within the genre of science fiction. People want their scifi loud and booming. Just look at Avatar.
Who produced Soderbergh’s Solaris? (and did the DVD commentary track with him?)
I loved Soderbergh’s Solaris. I’m not sure what’s so mainstream about it, except that it’s slickly produced. Soderbergh continues to play with editing in an investigation of memory, regret, time, etc, although doesn’t push it to the euphoric heights he reached in The Limey. Check out my movie blog: http://ecstatictext.blogspot.com
Scott
5 January 2010
3:23 PM