I don’t think it’s worth getting into, also sace gave an answer better than I ever could

so? most of our perception of the place comes from what the characters say about it. Whether or not it’s “true” it’s an interesting part of your mind to explore. Paired with visually exploring the environment they’re in, it’s a nice experience for me.

I never doubted any of the characters’ ideas of what the zone could be anyways, I think I assumed they received clarity as they neared the center. why do you think the writer might be wrong?

copped the book last week

pray it gets here soon heard a lot of good about it

The writer might be wrong because there's really no evidence for what he said. The same thing with the stalker. My gripe with the film is I don't know what the zone really is and given there's very very little clues about its nature except what the stalker(who I don't trust) and writer (who just gave an assumption) says, I'm just left with making baseless assumptions about the zone. That's kind of pointless to me

In a way, its kind of like God. I’ve seen no evidence of him and I'm not about to start making assumptions about him based on the words of religious texts when what they say about him really isn't backed up with any evidence

Just ask ChatGPT:

What's so great about Stalker?

Stalker is a 1979 film directed by Andrei Tarkovsky and it is considered one of the greatest films of all time by many critics and filmmakers. Some reasons why Stalker is considered to be such a great film include:

Cinematography: The film features stunning and evocative cinematography that creates a sense of eerie beauty and mystery. Tarkovsky is known for his use of long takes and use of natural light which creates a sense of realism and immersion.

Symbolism and Metaphor: The film is rich in symbolism and metaphor, and it explores themes of hope, despair, and the human condition. The "Zone" in the film is a metaphor for the human mind, and the journey of the characters is interpreted as a journey of the soul.

Ambiguity: The film is open to multiple interpretations, and it does not provide easy answers to the questions it raises, instead it invites the viewer to reflect and ponder about the meaning of the film.

Tarkovsky's Direction: Tarkovsky is considered one of the greatest film directors of all time, and his unique style and vision are evident in the way he brings the story to life. His direction is considered masterful, subtle and evocative.

Soundtrack: The film features a haunting and evocative soundtrack that adds to the atmosphere of the film and the sense of mystery.

It is considered a classic of the world cinema, and it's often studied in film schools and universities.

Just seen it and while the cinematography and atmosphere were enough to keep me intrigue through the long running time, I just don't understand what makes it so "mind blowing" or "life changing". 2 films it reminded me of are Annihlation story wise and Come and See cinematography wise. Both of which I love

It's true that Stalker is a film that can be difficult to understand and may not resonate with everyone in the same way. The film is open to interpretation and some viewers may find that they are not fully able to grasp the deeper meaning of the film. However, it is precisely this ambiguity and open-endedness that makes the film so powerful and thought-provoking.

Many people consider Stalker to be a "mind-blowing" and "life-changing" film because it forces them to think deeply about the human condition and the nature of existence. The film's exploration of hope, despair, and the search for meaning is something that many people can relate to on a personal level.

In addition, the film's evocative cinematography, haunting soundtrack, and masterful direction all contribute to its impact. The film creates a sense of atmosphere and immersion that draws the viewer in and makes it hard to forget.

Regarding the comparison to Annihilation and Come and See, it's true that Stalker shares some similarities with these films, particularly in terms of its exploration of the human psyche and its use of symbolism. But it's also true that Stalker has its own unique style and themes that set it apart from other films. It's a film that can be appreciated for its own sake and for the way it makes the viewer reflect about the world and oneself.

I'm still not convinced, give me a more detailed reason why it's so great.

Stalker is considered a great film by many critics and filmmakers for a variety of reasons, some of which include its exploration of the human condition, its powerful imagery, and its masterful direction.

One of the most striking aspects of Stalker is its exploration of the human condition. The film delves into complex and universal themes of hope, despair, and the search for meaning. The film's protagonist, the Stalker, is a man who has given up on his own life and is driven by the desire to help others find what they are looking for. Through his journey, we are given a glimpse into the human psyche and the struggles that we all face as we try to make sense of the world around us.

Another reason why the film is considered so great is its powerful imagery. The film's use of symbolism and metaphor creates a sense of mystery and intrigue that draws the viewer in and makes it hard to forget. The "Zone" in the film is a metaphor for the human mind, and the journey of the characters is interpreted as a journey of the soul. The film's cinematography is evocative and creates a sense of eerie beauty that adds to the atmosphere of the film.

Finally, the film is considered great because of the masterful direction of Andrei Tarkovsky. Tarkovsky is considered one of the greatest film directors of all time, and his unique style and vision are evident in the way he brings the story to life. His use of long takes and natural light creates a sense of realism and immersion, and his ability to convey deep emotion through subtle gestures and actions is unparalleled.

It's worth noting that Stalker is not a film for everyone, as it's a slow-paced, contemplative, and sometimes abstract film that requires an investment of time and focus. But for those who are willing to engage with it, the film offers a profound and rewarding experience that can stay with them for a long time.

the water and the fog and the landscape

What about the water and the fog and the landscape in Stalker?

The water and the fog, as well as the landscapes in Stalker, play an important role in creating the film's atmosphere and adding to its symbolism.

The water is an important element in the film and it is used to symbolize the uncertainty and unpredictability of life. The Stalker's journey through the "Zone" is often filmed with the water as a backdrop, which creates a sense of unease and danger. The water is also used to reflect the characters and their surroundings, which adds to the film's sense of realism and immersion.

The fog is also an important element in the film, and it is used to create a sense of mystery and uncertainty. The fog obscures the characters' vision, which adds to the sense of danger and the unknown. The fog also adds to the film's sense of realism and creates a sense of atmosphere that is both eerie and beautiful.

The landscapes in Stalker are also an important element in the film and they are used to create a sense of realism and immersion. The film's use of natural light and the long takes create a sense of realism and immersion, as well as emphasizing the sense of isolation and the characters' insignificance in the face of nature.

All of these elements combined, water, fog and landscapes, contribute to the film's sense of atmosphere and create a sense of realism and immersion that draws the viewer in and makes it hard to forget.

it’s interesting you’re already projecting your own religious views onto it.

There are subtle supernatural events that happen on screen, so we know to some extent that the zone can do something.

We have every reason to believe that the stalker has been to the zone before and knows more than us about it. Maybe religious zeal distorts his perceptions about the specifics, but I think he’s telling the truth

The scientist’s fear of the zone implies that the he has heard at least some evidence of the zone’s power, as far as you can trust that a scientist is smart.

The writer I think is meant to be the audience’s pov, not so much a reliable source.

How did you interpret the final scene?

Really hated it on first watch, loved it on second watch. Like some ppl itt said earlier you really have to be in the right mood to like it. I love the atmosphere and the uneasiness of the whole movie, feels kind of like a horror movie but the scary things are your own thoughts. Plus it’s pretty interesting dialogue wise.

Also I like the concept that there are things humans just aren’t able to understand or wrap their head around.

Gotta hit that rewatch, I don’t remember much about this. One of the benefits of having a s*** memory is everything is fresh.

I remember the film was really ambiguous and really simple, which is a recipe for great sci-fi, ala 2001 A Space Odyssey.

Tarkovsky creates space and cinematography that often feels as if it’s blessed by some cursed yet enchanted spirit that’s existed long before us. It has a certain texture to it.

pretentious hipster movie

We get it, you feel insecure

projection

Yeah, I’m insecure about video games. But you don’t see me going into video game threads and s***ting on them, even though I’m insecure that I can’t relate to people over video games.

Yeah I agree about the writer and scientist a***ysis but not about the stalker. I'm not sure I have every reason to believe in what he says. For that to happen I would need some evidence and not just word of mouth that the zone does grant people's desires. Which is actually the stalkers point at the end when he complained about people not believing. I do believe the zone has supernatural powers though, hence the scientists plan to destroy it and the end scene with the daughter. I interprete that end scene as a little hint of the zones true power confirming the rumours that the stalker has a mutant daughter as a result of visiting the zone frequently.

Stalker was a 7/10 and if those 3 other films you mention are better then I'd definitely check them out