solonitsyu... nice copyediting... so, the article is 6 years old, and i can't seem to find any follow-up info on it, so i'm guessing it was a false lead (or a made-up one)... anyway, just a curiosity...

Question: I'm trying to watch the Mirror right now and noticed that there appears to be some dialog with no subtitles (or sometimes the subtitles don't seem to show up until someone's halfway through talking). There's that part with the guy talking in Spanish where the subtitles were purposefully not shown, but the rest seems like it should have subtitles, it's really distracting. Did I get a shitty copy or is it supposed to be like this?

Also, did anyone notice the microphone in the beginning? That was kinda funny.

You got a shitty copy. Unfortunately no non-shitty copies exist.


(But you can understand the genius of the film anyway)

George where did I learn that Tarkovsky loved to play with water constantly, well into adulthood? Your beautiful album on Facebook reminded me that a few days ago I sat in my bathtub for an hour because I was transfixed by all the different things I could do with droplets of water on my hand, and this reminded me of Tarkovsky (both the anecdote and the use of water in his films).

you learned it from a pm i'd sent you and you were surprised to know that adult tarkovsky was so childlike in many ways. (-:

pnorbie, i just remembered that i had written a reply to your reaction to 'sacrifice' but never posted it, for some reason. i don't feel motivated to write it again now, but i just wanted to let you know your musings on the movie weren't ignored, and i'll keep them in mind next time i rewatch it. (i haven't watched tarkovsky's movies in a few years now, though i don't think a day has passed that i haven't though about them or haven't felt their presence and influence on my life)

i also wanted to say that there is a great deal of interesting literature coming out in russian about tarkovsky's work, the best of which, by far, is that of poet/philosopher nikolay boldyrev. i think that he is to tarkovsky what gould was to bach, if that makes sense, i.e., someone who is able match the original artist/genius both intellectually and spiritually, and, with courage and eloquence, (re)interpret his work with necessary jolt of life and relevance... and is probably genius himself...
all his work is available in text format online, though it is a shame that his books were published in absurdly miniscule numbers, aren't anywhere near as well-known and appreciated as they should be, and have yet to be translated to english or other languages (considering their relative obscurity, that doesn't seem like it will happen any time soon, or ever).
anyway, reading his stuff boggles me. i may try to translate and share some passages once in a while, as i work through them over the following months.

interesting that you say that.... could it possibly have something to do with the pascal reference...? it's also strange that you found it more ineffable than 'mirror', which would be my choice for a work that defies explanation more than any other, whereas i can talk about 'nostalghia' in rather concrete terms and i feel i understand the crux of it is and why i find it so relateable and relevant, at least in my case.

I'm a bit too removed from the direct experience to fully remember and understand its ineffability, but I'm currently working through it shot by shot and closely analyzing it so that the next time I watch it I am fully sensitive to every detail. I think it might have to do with the mild nature of the writer's carrying the candle. The Mirror I can comfortably integrate into my life because it touches on deeply human things I understand. And The Sacrifice I can understand because I have philosophical terms that seem to apply to Alexander's act at the end. But Nostalghia just defies me from the moment I start thinking about it. It's alien (for now).

Just so everyone knows, rips of the Russian Zerkalo BluRay exist on the internets.

Piratebay? Downloaded a version last week, not sure if it's the same one you're talking about.

Just watched it.

You know, there is no greater film than this, and no greater human being than this man. Period.

Correct opinion.

this is mercilessly feitishizing the scene.... but i am still impressed that someone would even conceive of and attempt something like this....

It's a 1966 film, not 1969.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andrei_Rublev_(film)#Distribution

God, I hope this guy isn't the Bruce of the film section.

This Sargent painting always reminds me of the misprint section of The Mirror.