Bleeding and Talk:Solaris (2002 film): Difference between pages

Revision as of 02:46, 26 February 2007

Revision as of 23:47, 21 July 2007

Line 1:

{{FilmsWikiProject|class=Stub}}

{{otheruses}}

{{Science Fiction Project|class=Stub|type=Article}}

== Edited it ==

Removed this bit(it messed up the format): {Spoiler} The film's ending may be seen as touching on the issue of cloning (in a manner comparable to the 2006 film THE PRESTIGE). The most plausible interpretation of the ending is that Kelvin dies on the space station (having chosen to stay behind when it is abandoned). As he dies he is recreated as a replica within the mind of the Ocean - this replica possesses all his memories and experiences its existence as continuous with that of the original Kelvin - and in this form Kelvin is eternally reunited with his wife, who also exists as a replica within the mind of the Ocean. She tells him, in the last words of the film "We don't have to live that way any more. Everything we have done is forgiven - everything".

If you have this disease please use a bandaid to cover it before you bleed to death!! that could be devastating

:A cynical reading of this scene, which is clearly contrary to the makers' intentions, might suggest that while the Ocean could make a full replica of Kelvin since it came into direct contact with him, it could only recreate Rheya on the basis of Kelvin's memories of her. Such a reading would imply that Kelvin has condemned himself to an eternity with no company other than himself - a form of damnation.

== Remake? ==

I'd like it very much if we could avoid saying that this is a remake, or at least reach consensus so we don't have to go back and forth.

It's a film version of the book. The Soderburgh film differs from the book, but it goes its own way rather than mimicing the choices that Tarkovsky made. As for "distinct facial resemblances," I don't really see it. And that hardly qualifies as "a great debt." Certainly Tarkovsky's film is a classic and undoubtedly influenced Soderburgh - but that doesn't mean it's a remake. [[User:Staecker|Staecker]] 21:02, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

== Great debt? ==

I don't really see the signifigance in this either. It's in this article and in the 1972 version's article. How is questionable facial similarities "a great debt"? and explain how saying it is a great debt is not based on opinion. An opinion on how people look alike could not really be used to justify saying the movie was influenced by the original.--[[User:Skeev|Skeev]] 19:08, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

:I was hoping someone else would have mentioned this. I'm removing the section concerning 'debt' and facial resemblances because it's not very npov --[[User:Artificialard|Artificialard]] 06:39, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

== Soundtrack / Original Score ==

Is there any benefit to adding information on [[Cliff Martinez]]'s acclaimed original [[film score|score]] to the film? I don't want to clutter the article but this could be interesting information. Any comments? [[User:Streltzer|Streltzer]] 21:47, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Yes, I just came here looking for info on it. If anyone has some details...... 5 July 2007

I just came to post that I actually heard the score in a car advert being aired in the UK recently. I'm sure it's aired in the US too due to the high production value. It was very weird hearing it in an advert - took me ages to pin-point where I knew it from when I heard it. Sorry I don't have any more information on the advert, but hopefully this will jog someone's memory so they can provide further information.--[[User:NeF|NeF]] 01:51, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

:The ad is a Volkswagen ad, and has a website [http://www.night-driving.com/ here]. [[User:72.189.244.189|72.189.244.189]] 23:47, 21 July 2007 (UTC)