THE SOVIET RESPONSE TO "2001"

When I first watched 'Solaris' (Andrey Tarkovsky, 1972), I would've never compare it to '2001: A Space Odyssey' (Kubrick, 1968), probably because I am so used to science fiction and space-themed films that it didn't cross my mind since they are very different. But like everything in life, to be able to analyze it properly, you have to see it in its context.

The space race between the United States and the Soviet Union is well known, a conflict that took place from the mid-1950s to the end of the 1980s and included events such as the first living being in space, the first space walk or the creation of the first space station among others. But did you know that the space race also reached the theatres and that it gave birth to two of the great masterpieces of science fiction?

Frames from '2001: A Space Odyssey'

From the United States' side we have what is considered a cult science fiction film: '2001: A Space Odyssey', directed by Stanley Kubrick and released in 1968, a year before the first steps on the moon. It was super revolutionary because it deals with topics such as human and technological evolution, the existence of extraterrestrial life and something very actual, artificial intelligence. The plot focuses on a group of astronauts who follow radio signals from a monolith (work of aliens) located on the moon. The references to this film in popular culture are endless and even if you have not seen it, you will have unknowingly seen elements that come from it. One of the most recent references is the parody of his famous opening scene, the monkeys with bones in 'Barbie', which includes the recognisable soundtrack "Also sprach Zarathustra" by Richard Strauss. 

The photography and special effects in '2001' are very beautiful and advanced for their time and have left epic images for posterity. Even so, I have to say that I'm not a big fan of Kubrick. Although I really value the visual factor of his films, it seems to me that in the human factor they fall quite short. I'm not the only one who thinks like that and perhaps it has to do with the director's character. Kubrick was very meticulous and he wasn't exactly known for treating the people he worked with nicely. It would seem like for him, people were instruments to convey his message, which is why he “tortured” the actors during filming until he achieved what he considered technical perfection.

Andrei Tarkovsky, a great Soviet director, thought the same as me (or rather I think the same as him) and described '2001' as cold and sterile. According to him, Kubrick had focused so much on technological advances and aesthetics that he had neglected the characters and that is why the film lacks emotional force. Tarkovsky wanted to explore the hypothesis that science fiction can also dig into emotions and from there the idea of ​​directing 'Solaris' was born, which would be advertised on the posters of the time as "the Soviet response to '2001'."

Frames from 'Solaris'

'Solaris' tells the story of a psychologist who is sent to a space station orbiting the planet Solaris to investigate the death of a doctor and the mental problems suffered by the station workers. Once there, he discovers that the planet's water is a kind of brain that returns repressed memories and obsessions to humans (from which the protagonist himself suffers). In 'Solaris', unlike in '2001', technology is in the background and what is explored the most is the emotional factor. The message that I extract from the film is that the complexity of the human being lies not in our technology but in the fact that we are social beings, and that love is, unlike technological advances, immeasurable and inexplicable and that is why it's much more interesting to explore.

While '2001' reflects on technology, the advances of man's tools and focuses less on the human being, 'Solaris' has a much more emotional point of view and leaves aside technology and its operation, so you could say that they have totally opposite points of view. This is why, although 'Solaris' may be an answer to '2001', for me they are very different films both visually and narratively.