Completely agree, definitely needs a second watch to fully digest it
" It seems to make me return to the place, poignantly dear to my heart, where my grandfathers house used to be in which i was born 40 years ago right on the dinner table. Each time i try to enter it, something prevents me from doing that. I see this dream again and again. And when i see those walls made of logs and the dark entrence, even in my dream i become aware that I'm only dreaming it. "
I feel like this movie is comprised of moments, each one of them extraordinarily isolating or horrifying or moving and in a lot of ways, magical and something I don't think i've ever seen before or reacted to in such a way. The scenes and moments don't seem to entirely work next to each other in a way that makes me feel entirely engaged but I do want to see it again because there's something special here.
Definitely understood it far far better the second time around, but there's still something about it that stops me from loving it and I'm not sure why. I love the structure of it and the definitely the visuals but it never really blows me away either emotionally or intellectually like "Solaris" or "Ivan's Childhood" did. Still, I really really like it, just something stopping me from loving it.
A mosaic of memories, of past faces and homes, blurring with those of the present, amongst aged truths and wisdoms (‘always in a hurry…’), while extending to broader canvas of conflict and understanding in the 20th century, of Russia’s place in old and new Europe (over which Stalin, Mao, recurringly loom). Beautifully shot, its oneiric, at times surreal incantation sees apposite placement of the filmmaker’s floating visuals. Some things remain unknown, but not the recognition of Zerkalo as elegiac film poetry in Tarkovsky’s cinema.
It's very interesting. I love it, but some people can think it's boring, but just watch it to see how it was shot. Those scenes at the newspaper... walking down those hallways, it's a real place and so big, and it's incredible. And then when the gusts of wind come on. In terms of the story, you can read some cheat sheets and figure out what happens and how it happens, but in the end, I don't think it matters.
I watched this because of a MUBI post about The Tree of Life as an homage to Tarkovsky. That really increased my enjoyment of The Mirror, although of course this film is excellent in its own right.
"Some people should work, and other people should be afraid." Still others are needed to make transformative art out of our fears, and this Tarkovsky does, his remarkable facility at combining the contemplative chill of abstraction with the highly personal, emotionally potent material of memory reaching its peak in this film, a seance invoking his childhood, his parents, and the dread phantoms of Soviet history.
An impressionistic poem claiming to be a movie. Slow, associative, romantic, sad. But first of all: beautiful.
Tarkovsky's at his best. can't believe i lived 24 years without watching this.
While undoubtedly one of the most beautifully shot films I've ever seen, and Tarkovsky's best shot film I can't say I cared for this as much as Solaris. I had a lot of troubling following what was happening and therefore couldn't connect to any of the characters or ideas he was presenting to me. Beautiful and technically suburb and overall I liked it a lot but it lacked something that Solaris and even Stalker had.
Este es un filme nostálgico, aquí convergen las vivencias que se tienen de niño, la visión lejana de las cosas y el intento por entender la complejidad de la vida. Se comenta que es autobiográfica, pero logra captar una regresión a la niñez del espectador, cuando las cosas tenían otra óptica y los problemas nos parecían tenebrosos. Existe también un miedo infantil y primigenio que logra transmitir de manera efectiva.
God! I've only seen three films by Tarkovsky but after this one I can, for sure, say that the level of perfection in his films is untouchable. He's the only one who can make such films.