MovieChat Forums > Solaris (2002) Discussion > So Unbelievably Underrated....

So Unbelievably Underrated....

posted 15 years ago by snow_crash-3
105 replies | jump to latest

This is one of my favourite films, and it's really shocking to see such a good film be given a 6.2 while films like superbad get a 7.8, and Leon get's a 8.6. Firstly, Solaris isn't a remake of the Tarkovsky classic. But seeming as many people mistake it for a remake (and remakes always cop a lot of flak), they instantly call Solaris garbage. Secondly i think too many people just rate it low because it bears the name Steven Soderberg, whom many think of as being pretentious.
The sci-fi elements in Solaris feel really well done, as it's not fixated on giving you 'cool' technology like flying cars or super advanced computers. It reminded me of 2001 in the way that it almost verges onto Hard Sci-fi.
Solyaris (1972)(which is a also a great film in it's own right) was focused more on philosophical idea's and giving slightly surreal and vivde atmospheres. Solaris (2002) is instead focused on psychology and emotions of the characters and their relationship to the mesmerising planet.
I think this is what Soderberg set out to do and i think he did it perfectly. The characters were actually intersting and we got a chance to delve into their psychological patterns and behaviours. Yes it is fairly slow paced, but to those who say it's boring, go watch Bad Boys 2.
Solaris is a seriously underrated film.

[–] sleepwaking 15 years ago

Yeah absolutely . . . "hidden gems" are rare enough, and nearly non-existent in sci-fi genre. This is completely one of them. Don't forget folks . . . Stanislew Lew is the polish sci-fi writer this film is based on and if you haven't discovered him . . . oh my gosh!

Keep waiting for someone to do "Pirx the Pilot" but .. . . "Solaris" one of my favorites.

-... ..- -.. -.. .... .- -....- -... ..- -.. -.. -.--
Will

[–] desifir667 15 years ago

great

[–] 15 years ago

[deleted]

[–] springleigh 15 years ago

In perfect agreement. The most underrated movie that I have seen thus far.

[–] dzukelica 13 years ago

The movie is great ! Pure gold ! Im at the point where imdb ratings dont affect me at all, altough i take em like a reference what to watch. I allways heard about this movie as a flop. As a non reader, and i havent watch Tarkowsky`s movie, i thought that may be the case. But i have some SF appreciation and decided to give it try. Blown away. Very good movie.

[–] tsode 15 years ago

I totally agree with all of you guys. Solaris is criminally underrated here on IMDB, and really calls into question the sanity of those voting, or whether the film has been negatively vote-bombed by people with misguided expectations of what the film was going to be...

I rated it a 9/10, and perhaps all the enthusiastic support for the recently released film "Moon" might flow back toward some other great hard science fiction films of the past decade. Like this one, and the also-underrated "The Fountain" by Darren Aronofsky.

I guess we have to remember that when 2001: A Space Odyssey and Blade Runner were released, they were not as widely acclaimed as they are now. Blade Runner was largely ignored at the box office. Now they are regularly seen at the top of "Best science fiction films ever" lists.

So while it may seem impossible for that "6.2 rating" to be pushed upward over the coming years, it's not impossible.

Keep supporting Solaris :)

[–] nephihaha 15 years ago

"I guess we have to remember that when 2001: A Space Odyssey and Blade Runner were released, they were not as widely acclaimed as they are now. Blade Runner was largely ignored at the box office. Now they are regularly seen at the top of "Best science fiction films ever" lists."

Neither of them were ill judged remakes though, were they?

(I'll have to justify this as a remake again - if anyone doesn't believe me they should take a look at the book as well.)

[–] LookinGood 15 years ago

I'll just have to ask this question again (just did in another thread):
What makes remakes or even just different versions of films a crime? I just have to assume that people who broadly condemn the fact that a story was filmed a second time, have never been to the theatre (real, on-stage play, I mean). There, you get nothing *but* remakes.

Should we lock up, or better burn, our theatres?

--
"...they've been remaking the plays of Shakespeare for 400 years. No one minds the good ones; the bad ones are quickly forgotten." sfbearcop on the 3:10 to Yuma (2007) board

[–] bureau203 15 years ago

I don't know Lookin. It's academic to me.

"I've seen things that would make you want to write a book on how to puke."

[–] 15 years ago

[deleted]

[–] cmlegend 15 years ago

agree

"Thats a pickle no doubt about it"

[–] bureau203 15 years ago

Uh... if you really think this isn't a remake of Solyaris, then you haven't seen Solyaris. It is definitely a remake. Most of the characters have the same name, the plot is the same, etc.

"I've seen things that would make you want to write a book on how to puke."

[–] Katje1313 15 years ago

Yes, when two film makers adapt the same book, the character names and many events will crop up in both films. That doesn't mean that the second film made is a remake of the first film. Please watch them both (as I have). Both are great films in their own right with a lot to recommend them.

[–] HoldenMorriseyCaulfield 15 years ago

The sound track is golden as well, a great film, greatly misunderstood.

This is my people shooting hat. I shoot people in this hat.

[–] markzipperboy2 14 years ago

THE most BORING movie ive ever seen.

Self indulgent and PRETENTIOUS dont to it justice. Completely devoid of entertainment on any level of the concious and subconcious.

6.2!!!! I cannot believe its this high.

[–] PotassiumMan 14 years ago

Indeed. This movie is very underrated. Perhaps a blessing in disguise. A movie that is widely popular is often trivialized and even gets distorted in the minds of the multitude after some time.

[–] AgainstheNeon 13 years ago

IMDB has become filled with alot of people who like and enjoy bad movies. I've counted at least 25 movies on the TOP 250 list that don't even come close to being there. Good movies some of them, but that top 250 list is filled with movies that were released in the past 10yrs. Most people on IMDB, don't realize what a TRUE 10 star movie is.

This movie is in my top 10 list of sci-fi related movies. If you enjoyed it Great, if you did not, that's ok too.

[–] nek-5 14 years ago

I too am *beep*ing DOUBLED OVER with Leon's astronomically high rating on this site. Honestly, I thought it was so incredibly lame. Maybe if I saw it when it was released or something? Maybe it was really original and fresh back then? To me, its all been there-done-that action stuff, with a way-underage girl thrown in the mix to generate controversy or whatever. But this post is about the movie Solaris, and I too don't get the low low rating. I mean, *beep*, I understand that its not what the book was or whatever, it had a very devoted theme to love and what it means to love someone. People often b*tch that its all philosophical nonsense, but I got hooked on the movie's implications of love and human relationships in general. Do we love someone for who they actually are, or for what we THINK they are? are the loves of our lives only masks of our ideals that we put on them?? *beep*ing deep stuff man, and I love a movie that leaves room fir discussion. I don't blame people for hating it though, I'm not a movie critic or snob or whatever; I don't blame people for *whine* "just not getting it!" because thats a lame, childish and way-overdone rebuttal to movies with deep implications like these. It's not a popular movie, I can deal with that. But it deserves more, man!!

[–] nek-5 14 years ago

oh, and another thing about this movie, that guy from Saving Private Ryan? Upham? (again, I'm not a movie critic or aficionado, I don't know his name and *beep* looking it up for a post on a movie website.) He delivered a super good performance I thought, perfectly unhinged. Watch his sporadic hand movements in this movie, along with just his general mannerisms. I thought it was really *beep*ing good

[–] bureau203 14 years ago

Yeah, now that you mention it I gotta agree with you. He really came off as someone on drugs or just out to lunch. Great performance.

"I've seen things that would make you want to write a book on how to puke."

[–] 14 years ago

[deleted]