Thoughts About Stalker

So, I've finally been able to finish Stalker in it's entirety. What an impressive film if not philosophically, than certainly visually. Besides containing some pretty striking imagery, Tarkovsky manages to move the camera and frame his characters in really exciting ways. Watching this reminded me of how formulaic and predictable modern cinema (especially American) has become. Stalker not only made me actively engage with it, it forced me to think about what was going on. Perhaps this is part of the reason why some people cannot make it through the film. It certainly plods along at certain times and the pacing is generally slow, but the reward is that we're presented with a rich philosophical puzzle at the end that begs probing. Not to be of the analytic puzzle film tradition, but this certainly lends itself to inspection.

We discussed many of the things that others see in Stalker. How the characters represent stark archetypes of Soviet life. The writer as the positivistic entity. The scientist as the mystic and superstitious one. What I think really stands out as the hallmark feature of the film is the religious motifs. At the very end when they reach the thresh hold of the room, the writer briefly dons a crown of thorns, perhaps suggesting that his immanent crucifixion is upon him. What is he being punished for? His lack of faith in the zone? It seems to me that the Stalker himself would be a better fit for the crown. He is very much like the Jesus figure in the story, leading his disciples through the zone and ultimately failing to deliver them into hopefulness. At the end, he curses his life's quest that he continues to take people into the zone. He declares that everyone, writers and scientists, have lost their faith and refuse to indulge in hope. They don't need the zone because they can live and continue to exist despite their wretched conditions. Is the Stalker the Zarathustra of the story? You may recall how Nietzsche's titular character takes a certain affinity to animals. The dog follows the Stalker out of the zone and intends to stay with him, being taken in to the home. It features prominently in many of the shots of the movie. But what to make of it?

The theme of the time image plays a large part in this film. During the ending sequence when the three men sit outside the thresh hold and watch the rain falling, the camera remains still, focusing on them for nearly a minute or two. Having now seen the film, I can agree that Deleuze's intentions become much better understood through Tarkovsky. What is the memory or recollection that is linked to this time image? What are the planes of existence that it passes through?

Finally, what to make of the psychokinetic girl at the end? She pushes off the only glass that isn't full with something and it doesn't break at the bottom. Also, she's framed in color in contrast to the black and white scenes immediately preceding. She is supposedly a mutant, linked with the zone in someway, thus the color could perhaps be an allusion to her ailment. Unlike Cavell, I'm going to have to watch this one again to discern a more contestable interpretation....