After reading the original book and watching the film again, I only felt that Tarkovsky rebuilt a dream. He focused the film on people, family relationships related to people, love and self-seeking.
Kelvin's feelings for his mother are never written in the book, but he puts the scene where his mother kisses Kelvin at the end of the credits, and that is the final moment of Kelvin's reconciliation. Looking at Zizek's interpretation of the film, he said that the film embodies the most despicable and arrogant desire of men-to see women as things that exist entirely because of themselves. Compared with the book itself, Tarkovsky seems to be Indeed repeating this, he leads the audience to attribute Kelvin's grief to his longing for his mother. Kelvin carefully observes his mother's every movement, even if she seldom looks at himself, at that moment he is like A child who doesn't get the attention of adults. When the mother kissed his face, Kelvin burst into tears, Hai Ruo was another mother, a cheap substitute that had been obtained. On the island that the ocean had built for him, Kelvin knelt down and embraced his father's leg. Why was he crying?
Is it the indifferent mother who is always separated by a layer of white mist, or Hai Ruo who keeps reappearing like a nightmare, or the self who can never get love?
The themes of the book and the film are completely at odds, but that doesn't detract from the poetry of Tarkovsky's film. It suddenly occurred to me that Kelvin got along with others calmly for the first time after learning that Hai Ruo agreed to be killed, and began to reconcile with himself. It may be that if Hai Ruo leaves, his crimes will not be so straightforward.
I like Stalker more than this movie.
View more about Solaris reviews
