После Тарковского - Коллектив авторов
Шрифт:
Интервал:
Закладка:
Tarkovsky After Tarkovsky. (Film After Film)
J. Hoberman is the author, co-author, or editor of 12 books. He was a film critic for the Village Voice for 33 years and currently writes for The New York Times, Artforum and other publications; he has taught cinema history and theory at New York University, Harvard University, and the Cooper Union.
The paper discusses Tarkovsky’s film and theory, his posthumous influence on ambitious non-Russian filmmakers, including Béla Tarr and Lars von Trier, and the relevance of his thought for post-digital cinema.
From Tarkovsky to Nolan via Soderbergh
Vasily Stepanov is a film critic, editor-in-chief of the Séance magazine.
In 2002, Steven Soderbergh’s Solaris was released worldwide. Stanisław Lem asserted that Soderbergh’s film was based not on his novel, but on Tarkovsky’s picture. Film critics agreed with that perception.
Some shots and scenes from Soderbergh’s film allow for a speculation that he creates a dialogue not only with Tarkovsky’s Solaris, but also with Kubrick’s Space Odyssey. It is unknown if Soderbergh had read Martyrolog where Tarkovsky spoke negatively about the film, or if he had managed to discern the trace of Tarkovsky’s struggle with Kubrick in the cinematic structure of his Solaris itself. The making of the novel’s second screen version became a kind of a laboratory work for Stephen Soderbergh-he is not only a director, but also a theorist lately known for his alchemic editing experiments that include cutting Space Odyssey. In his Solaris, he lets Tarkovsky into Kubrick’s space, grafts Tarkovsky on Kubrick; or even puts Tarkovsky in the world of American science fiction film. Perhaps, it is because of Soderbergh that Christopher Nolan’s Interstellar became another recent film that brought Kubrick and Tarkovsky together in their indirect dispute?
Tarkovsky’s Legacy
András Bálint Kovács is a film scholar, founder of the Film Studies Department at the Budapest University. Author of several papers and monographs, including Les mondes d’Andrej Tarkovsky (1987), Screening Modernism (2008), and The Cinema of Béla Tarr: The Circle Closes (2012).
The most important legacy of Tarkovsky’s oeuvre is his technique to invest the physical, mainly natural environment with the power of spiritualizing the dramatic scenes of the narrative. This attitude is originated in the Russian orthodox religious rituals, and the techniques Tarkovsky has developed to represent it has proven the most powerful stylistic solution for many-mainly Russian-filmmakers from the 1990s on. The paper shows how Hungary’s most acclaimed contemporary filmmaker, Béla Tarr made use of Tarkovsky’s legacy.
Von Trier as Tarkovsky’s Heir
Anton Dolin is a film critic, film scholar and journalist. Radio presenter at Mayak and Vesti FM, TV host at Evening Urgant and constant writer for Afisha-Vozduh; author of five books.
When a dedication to Andrei Tarkovsky appeared at the end of Lars von Trier’s Antichrist, the audience at the Cannes premiere reacted with derisive laughter and booing. How could von Trier-a mocker, nihilist, provocateur and ardent post-modernist-be an heir to the irreparably serious Tarkovsky? The paper attempts to answer this question.
The mutations of cinema, philosophy and even literature from the second half of the 20th century to the beginning of the 21st resulted in the fact that the only Tarkovsky possible today is indeed von Trier with his radicalism and intransigence, his hidden pain and metaphysical search. The Russian genius’s heritage is found where no one was looking for it: in a cinematic universe filled with skepticism and vitriol irony, quotes and genre games. Looking at it, we understand that the distance between the two Ts-Tarkovsky and Trier-is not that unbridgeable.
Tarkovsky’s Theatre of Boredom
Nathan Dunne is the editor of Tarkovsky (2008). He also organised The Art of Andrei Tarkovsky, a symposium that took place at Tate Modern. His most recent book is Lichtenstein (2012), a monograph that accompanied the artist’s retrospective in Chicago, London and Paris.
The state of boredom depends on the coexistence of the following components: a state of dissatisfaction and longing, a sense of emptiness, and a distorted sense of time in which time seems to stand still. This paper argues for a definition of boredom in relation to Tarkovsky’s films, particularly Solaris. In particular, the paper focuses on several key scenes within the film, including Burton’s meeting with the Solaris Space Council and the long highway sequence filmed in Tokyo.
Although there are different accounts of what boredom is and does, many thinkers agree that it is inimical to the modern industriousness on which national progress depends. It creates a restlessness or agitation that shifts the focus from the world, either its objects or nature, to the self. In this, we might say that such a focus on the self has the potential to give flight from the dependent mind and to create independence in its wake, where the self is perceptually and psychologically refigured. Tarkovsky’s aesthetic and philosophical sensibility created an alternative theatre for boredom, a space for the ideally «independent» viewer.
«Unplayable»: The Actor’s Living & Presence
Kirill Adibekov is a filmmaker, curator, translator, poet. Winner of the Elephant prize in the Sine Charta category (2013).
When talking about acting in theatre and cinema, Andrei Tarkovsky convinсingly demonstrated that in the former, the actor is largely their own director. Their task is to build and unfold their character in line with the general game. They know (and sometimes choose) what exactly do they play. This has traditionally been a
