Watching Tarkovsky's Stalker was not an enjoyable experience, but it did make something about his achievement much clearer to me. In this film, and in most of his work that I have seen, Tarkovsky tells the viewer nothing: no plot, no characters, no resolution. He sets up an ambience through beautifully textured photography and lighting, stunning command of soundscapes, and a carefully undefined nexus of meaning. Then he allows the viewer to create a meaning. For some it is an overwhelming experience, for others a bore. This is not cinema as we normally know it but much closer to the effect of great poetry. It is sound and setting used as metaphor by means of which we can create what we can. Or not.

Forget the Strugatsky's Roadside Picnic (just as you had to forget Lem's Solaris when watching Tarkovsky's film of the same name). There is something called the Zone, but we don't know what it is, where or why it occurred. For the confused or troubled, something inside the Zone can provide a revelation. What it is or how it works we don't know. It's perimeter is guarded, but we don't know who guards it or why. Three men enter the Zone, we don't really know why, nor who they are. Viewers who claim to know more are reading information from the novel's plot, or quoting other viewers who are.

The Stalker (think of one of Fenimore Cooper's characters like the Deerstalker), the Writer, the Scientist are on a journey like Dante's. They seem confused and inarticulate, but they do know something is wrong, and they hope to remedy it, somehow, within the Zone. The Stalker is as driven as the other two. Tarkovsky suggests what the men are seeking by filming outside the Zone, a sterile no man's land of ruin, in a washed out sepia, and inside the Zone, a lush natural tangle of vegetation, in vibrant colour.

Stalker is about the search for redemption, filmed in such a way the viewer must conduct the search themselves. Unlike Solaris, whose themes of love and memory were presented in the form of a screenplay the viewer could engage with, Stalker is a much more extreme film which approaches the limit of what a film can do. It is a film which can have no clear climax, no rationale, no explanation. The journey is the important part.

I regret the fact my rational self would not let go while watching it, that I thought the lack of proper names risible and just like everybody's first novel, that the contrast between inside and outside the Zone was too obvious. I hated that the film was unnecessarily divided over two disks as it was for VHS release and that the subtitles were sometimes in such bad English they were hard to follow. This time around it wasn't for me. Maybe next time.

The first shot is of a squalid, rotting interior filmed in harsh monochrome, and yet it is utterly beautiful and mysterious. Tarkovsky the cinematic poet was never more eloquent than in this film, conveying an almost unearthly beauty in the most rank and earthy materials, and a primal intensity in seemingly irrelevant interactions. The dreamlike atmosphere is always threatening to plunge into nightmare, creating a tension which is brilliantly maintained. The characters avoid communicating anything real, yet the sense of impending personal catastrophe is overwhelming. Few artists are able to create new myths, not least in cinema, but here Tarkovsky has made a perfect and stunningly resonant fable for our time.

Bought this with an open mind, watched the entire film 3 times & have completely changed my opinion to not liking this film to loving it.
This is a very subtle gritty film. Consider this a paradox on celluloid.
Atmosphere is created in a very unique way using, silence, imagery & character interaction.
Subtitles give this something extra & I'm glad films keep their original language.
When viewing this film. Open you mind as well as your eyes.

This is an amazing film which defies labelling. It is certainly not sci-fi, but is set in an imaginary landscape of industrial ruins, empty of people and permeated by a mysterious force of nature which is threatening even as it preserves.

There is a storyline - see other reviews - but the film is essentially about human integrity and the failed quest by some conventional 'heroic' figures from the Soviet Union - the writer, the scientist, the engineer etc - to find meaning in a specific, material spot.

The pot-holed, jagged and overgrown territory of 'the zone' is the true hero of the film - along with the nervous, faithful, uninspiring but true person of the 'stalker', the man who knows how to get into the zone and how to find the dripping cellar where reality exists.This is a poetic film to be savoured with a soul-mate or two and demands rapt attention.

This DVD from AE has a good transfer, and also two soundtracks (original mono and new 5.1). Tarkovskij fans usually seems to prefer the original soundtrack (and dislike the new) so this is probably important. The film itself should be seen, not discussed in advance, as it opens up for different interpretations.
The only little minus about this DVD is the film being split up on two different discs. It is not that long (2.5 hrs). Ok, the movie is in two "parts" originally, but why split it so you have to insert the new disc, and re-watch the logotypes and menus? This detracts a little because Stalker demands concentration and immersion and builds up a lot of atmosphere. The extras are a little short (considering the two discs) but worth watching. For about 10GBP this is good value for money. (Watch out for the other Tarkovskij DVDs from AE though, as some of them have flawed transfers.) Highly recommended!