Mirror (1975)
8/10
Sort of hermetic container
7 February 2004
I have the same problem with this movie as with Scorsese's 'Raging Bull'. Technically both movies are outstanding: great acting, camera work, direction and dialogue. Artistically speaking, both are also second to none: important themes, original narration (in case of Tarkovsky you can say experimental narration). And both left me with feeling of disappointment, or I should rather say indifference. Of four Tarkovsky's movies that I've seen (Rublev, Solaris, Stalker and this)this one is the only that I didn't find appealing (hell, even Solaris with many of it's flaws seemed great).

I had no doubt that in both cases I'd just had seen amazing achievements in the field of cinematography, but what can I do: they did not speak to me. At least in case of 'The Mirror' I know what the problem is. The story (well it's not really a story) is too hermetic: Tarkovsky provides us with the episodes of his life, and lives of his parents, some light and warm, some tragic and bitter. You cannot relate to them unless you are Tarkovsky, one of his relatives, an artist, or at least Russian or you are nostalgic guy. I loved many parts of this movie, but some of them didn't add anything to the general picture.

Watch it for: a) great music b) young Ignat (or maybe it was Alosha) watching his reflection in the mirror sitting by the fire in silence c) the narrator's mother look into the camera while contemplating the future of her yet unborn child d) the dreams section

strong 7/10

This movie is often referred to as an 'Ulysses' of cinema. Yet again I didn't like Joyce's novel as well. Maybe I am allergic to the stream of consciousness.
6 out of 14 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed