u/Jeef_1st

He would famously spell "you" as "u". But it wasn't just for shortening, as he spelt "I" as "eye". So what was the reasoning behind it?

Relevant quotes:

​"Art is prayer—it speaks for itself. In my view, art has always been a weapon in humanity's struggle against the forces that threaten to devour our spirit."

"Art doesn’t think logically, or formulate a logic of behavior; it expresses its own postulate of faith."

​"An artist who has no faith is like a painter who was born blind."​

"Faith is the only thing that can save man. This is my deepest conviction. The essential purpose of man is to seek truth through the pursuit of spirituality. By spirituality, I mean a person's search for the meaning of life."

​"The aim of art is to prepare a person for death, to plough and harrow his soul, rendering it capable of turning to good."

​​"Art is born and takes hold wherever there is a timeless and insatiable longing for the spiritual."

​"The goal for all art... is to explain to the artist himself and to those around him what man lives for, what is the meaning of his existence."

​​"Art must carry man's craving for the ideal, must be an expression of his reaching out towards it; art must give man hope and faith."

​"The artist is always a servant, and is perpetually trying to pay for the gift that has been given to him as if by miracle. Modern man, however, does not want to make any sacrifice, even though true affirmation of self can only be expressed in sacrifice."

​"For the sake of creating a spiritual bond with others \[art\] can only be an agonising process, one that involves no practical gain: ultimately it is an act of sacrifice."

​"The profound lack of spirituality of those people who see art and condemn it... is like the utterance of a man born blind who is being told about a rainbow. He simply remains deaf to the pain undergone by the artist in order to share with others the truth he has reached."

"Modern mass culture, aimed at the ‘consumer’, the civilization of prosthetics, is crippling people’s souls, setting up barriers between man and the crucial questions of existence, his consciousness of himself as a spiritual being. But the artist cannot be deaf to the call of truth: it alone defines his creative will, organizes it, thus enabling him to pass on his faith to others."

"Art has an important function when it comes to solving the spiritual crisis in today's world. There must be something that stimulates the spiritual progression and develop humanity's own self, something that makes her strive for humanity and individuality. What I myself do in art is based on my belief in the dignity of mankind and of the value of the people that my films are meant for, as well as the value that the maker of them should possess."

Relevant quotes:

​"Art is prayer—it speaks for itself. In my view, art has always been a weapon in humanity's struggle against the forces that threaten to devour our spirit."

"Art doesn’t think logically, or formulate a logic of behavior; it expresses its own postulate of faith."

​"An artist who has no faith is like a painter who was born blind."​

"Faith is the only thing that can save man. This is my deepest conviction. The essential purpose of man is to seek truth through the pursuit of spirituality. By spirituality, I mean a person's search for the meaning of life."

​"The aim of art is to prepare a person for death, to plough and harrow his soul, rendering it capable of turning to good."

​​"Art is born and takes hold wherever there is a timeless and insatiable longing for the spiritual."

​"The goal for all art... is to explain to the artist himself and to those around him what man lives for, what is the meaning of his existence."

​​"Art must carry man's craving for the ideal, must be an expression of his reaching out towards it; art must give man hope and faith."

​"The artist is always a servant, and is perpetually trying to pay for the gift that has been given to him as if by miracle. Modern man, however, does not want to make any sacrifice, even though true affirmation of self can only be expressed in sacrifice."

​"For the sake of creating a spiritual bond with others \[art\] can only be an agonising process, one that involves no practical gain: ultimately it is an act of sacrifice."

​"The profound lack of spirituality of those people who see art and condemn it... is like the utterance of a man born blind who is being told about a rainbow. He simply remains deaf to the pain undergone by the artist in order to share with others the truth he has reached."

"Modern mass culture, aimed at the ‘consumer’, the civilization of prosthetics, is crippling people’s souls, setting up barriers between man and the crucial questions of existence, his consciousness of himself as a spiritual being. But the artist cannot be deaf to the call of truth: it alone defines his creative will, organizes it, thus enabling him to pass on his faith to others."

"Art has an important function when it comes to solving the spiritual crisis in today's world. There must be something that stimulates the spiritual progression and develop humanity's own self, something that makes her strive for humanity and individuality. What I myself do in art is based on my belief in the dignity of mankind and of the value of the people that my films are meant for, as well as the value that the maker of them should possess."

Relevant quotes:

​"Art is prayer—it speaks for itself. In my view, art has always been a weapon in humanity's struggle against the forces that threaten to devour our spirit."

"Art doesn’t think logically, or formulate a logic of behavior; it expresses its own postulate of faith."

​"An artist who has no faith is like a painter who was born blind."​

"Faith is the only thing that can save man. This is my deepest conviction. The essential purpose of man is to seek truth through the pursuit of spirituality. By spirituality, I mean a person's search for the meaning of life."

​"The aim of art is to prepare a person for death, to plough and harrow his soul, rendering it capable of turning to good."

​​"Art is born and takes hold wherever there is a timeless and insatiable longing for the spiritual."

​"The goal for all art... is to explain to the artist himself and to those around him what man lives for, what is the meaning of his existence."

​​"Art must carry man's craving for the ideal, must be an expression of his reaching out towards it; art must give man hope and faith."

​"The artist is always a servant, and is perpetually trying to pay for the gift that has been given to him as if by miracle. Modern man, however, does not want to make any sacrifice, even though true affirmation of self can only be expressed in sacrifice."

​"For the sake of creating a spiritual bond with others [art] can only be an agonising process, one that involves no practical gain: ultimately it is an act of sacrifice."

​"The profound lack of spirituality of those people who see art and condemn it... is like the utterance of a man born blind who is being told about a rainbow. He simply remains deaf to the pain undergone by the artist in order to share with others the truth he has reached."

"Modern mass culture, aimed at the ‘consumer’, the civilization of prosthetics, is crippling people’s souls, setting up barriers between man and the crucial questions of existence, his consciousness of himself as a spiritual being. But the artist cannot be deaf to the call of truth: it alone defines his creative will, organizes it, thus enabling him to pass on his faith to others."

"Art has an important function when it comes to solving the spiritual crisis in today's world. There must be something that stimulates the spiritual progression and develop humanity's own self, something that makes her strive for humanity and individuality. What I myself do in art is based on my belief in the dignity of mankind and of the value of the people that my films are meant for, as well as the value that the maker of them should possess."

Relevant quotes:

​"Art is prayer—it speaks for itself. In my view, art has always been a weapon in humanity's struggle against the forces that threaten to devour our spirit."

"Art doesn’t think logically, or formulate a logic of behavior; it expresses its own postulate of faith."

​"An artist who has no faith is like a painter who was born blind."​

"Faith is the only thing that can save man. This is my deepest conviction. The essential purpose of man is to seek truth through the pursuit of spirituality. By spirituality, I mean a person's search for the meaning of life."

​"The aim of art is to prepare a person for death, to plough and harrow his soul, rendering it capable of turning to good."

​​"Art is born and takes hold wherever there is a timeless and insatiable longing for the spiritual."

​"The goal for all art... is to explain to the artist himself and to those around him what man lives for, what is the meaning of his existence."

​​"Art must carry man's craving for the ideal, must be an expression of his reaching out towards it; art must give man hope and faith."

​"The artist is always a servant, and is perpetually trying to pay for the gift that has been given to him as if by miracle. Modern man, however, does not want to make any sacrifice, even though true affirmation of self can only be expressed in sacrifice."

​"For the sake of creating a spiritual bond with others [art] can only be an agonising process, one that involves no practical gain: ultimately it is an act of sacrifice."

​"The profound lack of spirituality of those people who see art and condemn it... is like the utterance of a man born blind who is being told about a rainbow. He simply remains deaf to the pain undergone by the artist in order to share with others the truth he has reached."

"Modern mass culture, aimed at the ‘consumer’, the civilization of prosthetics, is crippling people’s souls, setting up barriers between man and the crucial questions of existence, his consciousness of himself as a spiritual being. But the artist cannot be deaf to the call of truth: it alone defines his creative will, organizes it, thus enabling him to pass on his faith to others."

"Art has an important function when it comes to solving the spiritual crisis in today's world. There must be something that stimulates the spiritual progression and develop humanity's own self, something that makes her strive for humanity and individuality. What I myself do in art is based on my belief in the dignity of mankind and of the value of the people that my films are meant for, as well as the value that the maker of them should possess."

Steven Soderbergh's Solaris has often been dismissed as a vain copy of Andrei Tarkovsky's 1972 film. But I find it to be equally interesting, and offering a unique view of the story and themes.

Many criticized the 2002 film for not being on the same philosophical level as the 1972 film. But I think they may have missed the point. Soderbergh's film is still very philosophical and does deal with spirituality, it just differs in how it handles this. Critics viewed the film as simply a shallow love story or romance, without the depth of Tarkovsky's version. It is true that Tarkovsky's film is more directly focused on religion and his orthodox beliefs. But Soderbergh's film is also inherently focused on spirituality. If we analyse the 2002 movie this becomes clear:

The focus of the film is the planet Solaris. Solaris is undeniably a godlike organism. Humans try and fail to comprehend the planet's power, and these powers seem mystic and all encompassing. Viola Davis' character, Gordon, rejects the abilities of Solaris because she doesn't want to accept a greater power than humanity. A clear parallel to many religious parables regarding human ego.

The driving force of the film is Rheya and Kris's relationship. But it all stems from Solaris, as it brings the dead Rheya back to life. They are ultimately given a second chance, and can spend eternity together free from suffering. The poem by Dylan Thomas "And death shall have no dominion" is central in the film and their relationship. By leaving earth and entering Solaris, human issues like depression, suffering, and death become irrelevant. Solaris exists as an entity beyond humanity. When Kris crashes into the planet he awakens back in his apartment, and Rheya is there. He is completely absoslved and redeemed, and can spend eternity with her. Essentially a personal heaven.

What I feel is missed by some viewers is that this goes beyond the normal Hollywood romance. It is love conquers all, even death. But also it bridges divine love with romantic love. Both exist simultaneously, and in cooperation with each other.

That is the core idea here. Soderbergh isn't less spiritual than Tarkovsky. He simply offers his own philosophy instead. Tarkovsky was a strict Eastern Orthodox, and that influenced his film. Kris must suffer and face his sins more directly in the 1972 film. He can only be redeemed by surrendering to the holy father. It is more clearly religious because that was Tarkovsky's intent. But Soderbergh's view isn't lacking in this regard, it's simply a different interpretation.

Soderbergh's film has a line spoken by Kris when arguing with Gordon about the motive of the planet. He says "why does it have to want anything". This is a link to the original book the film is based on, which is focused on how humans struggle to understand the universe and god beyond their own limited perspective. But it also shows the inherent difference between Soderbergh's view and Tarkovsky's. There is no need for suffering in the 2002 film. Kris must surrender to love, so both romantic and divine love will be granted to him. Kris is consumed by grief and self-blame, but the solution and grace is easily accessible through acceptance. It's simply a modern, more humanist view of the themes.

Many critics felt the 2002 film also trimmed too much, trying to be a leaner, more accessible film, compared to the nearly 3 hour original. But Soderbergh's film simply didn't need to be as long. It clocks in at 1 hour 39 minutes, and it uses it very effectively. Like I said, if redemption is easily available, you don't need more time. I also think the pacing is great. It's still a wonderful slow burn, but also an easy watch. It occupies a goldilocks zone in terms of time.

Ultimately the film was not as popular as it should have been in my opinion. Critics and cinephiles felt it was a Hollywood bastardization of a Russian classic. While it was too slow for mainstream audiences, who expected an action-orientated sci-fi (which marketing apparently leaned into). But I love this film, and I think Soderbergh simply told the story he wanted to tell.

Steven Soderbergh's Solaris has often been dismissed as a vain copy of Andrei Tarkovsky's 1972 film. But I find it to be equally interesting, and offering a unique view of the story and themes.

Many criticized the 2002 film for not being on the same philosophical level as the 1972 film. But I think they may have missed the point. Soderbergh's film is still very philosophical and does deal with spirituality, it just differs in how it handles this. Critics viewed the film as simply a shallow love story or romance, without the depth of Tarkovsky's version. It is true that Tarkovsky's film is more directly focused on religion and his orthodox beliefs. But Soderbergh's film is also inherently focused on spirituality. If we analyse the 2002 movie this becomes clear:

The focus of the film is the planet Solaris. Solaris is undeniably a godlike organism. Humans try and fail to comprehend the planet's power, and these powers seem mystic and all encompassing. Viola Davis' character, Gordon, rejects the abilities of Solaris because she doesn't want to accept a greater power than humanity. A clear parallel to many religious parables regarding human ego.

The driving force of the film is Rheya and Kris's relationship. But it all stems from Solaris, as it brings the dead Rheya back to life. They are ultimately given a second chance, and can spend eternity together free from suffering. The poem by Dylan Thomas "And death shall have no dominion" is central in the film and their relationship. By leaving earth and entering Solaris, human issues like depression, suffering, and death become irrelevant. Solaris exists as an entity beyond humanity. When Kris crashes into the planet he awakens back in his apartment, and Rheya is there. He is completely absoslved and redeemed, and can spend eternity with her. Essentially a personal heaven.

What I feel is missed by some viewers is that this goes beyond the normal Hollywood romance. It is love conquers all, even death. But also it bridges divine love with romantic love. Both exist simultaneously, and in cooperation with each other.

That is the core idea here. Soderbergh isn't less spiritual than Tarkovsky. He simply offers his own philosophy instead. Tarkovsky was a strict Eastern Orthodox, and that influenced his film. Kris must suffer and face his sins more directly in the 1972 film. He can only be redeemed by surrendering to the holy father. It is more clearly religious because that was Tarkovsky's intent. But Soderbergh's view isn't lacking in this regard, it's simply a different interpretation.

Soderbergh's film has a line spoken by Kris when arguing with Gordon about the motive of the planet. He says "why does it have to want anything". This is a link to the original book the film is based on, which is focused on how humans struggle to understand the universe and god beyond their own limited perspective. But it also shows the inherent difference between Soderbergh's view and Tarkovsky's. There is no need for suffering in the 2002 film. Kris must surrender to love, so both romantic and divine love will be granted to him. Kris is consumed by grief and self-blame, but the solution and grace is easily accessible through acceptance. It's simply a modern, more humanist view of the themes.

Many critics felt the 2002 film also trimmed too much, trying to be a leaner, more accessible film, compared to the nearly 3 hour original. But Soderbergh's film simply didn't need to be as long. It clocks in at 1 hour 39 minutes, and it uses it very effectively. Like I said, if redemption is easily available, you don't need more time. I also think the pacing is great. It's still a wonderful slow burn, but also an easy watch. It occupies a goldilocks zone in terms of time.

Ultimately the film was not as popular as it should have been in my opinion. Critics and cinephiles felt it was a Hollywood bastardization of a Russian classic. While it was too slow for mainstream audiences, who expected an action-orientated sci-fi (which marketing apparently leaned into). But I love this film, and I think Soderbergh simply told the story he wanted to tell.

Steven Soderbergh's Solaris has often been dismissed as a vain copy of Andrei Tarkovsky's 1972 film. But I find it to be equally interesting, and offering a unique view of the story and themes.

Many criticized the 2002 film for not being on the same philosophical level as the 1972 film. But I think they may have missed the point. Soderbergh's film is still very philosophical and does deal with spirituality, it just differs in how it handles this. Critics viewed the film as simply a shallow love story or romance, without the depth of Tarkovsky's version. It is true that Tarkovsky's film is more directly focused on religion and his orthodox beliefs. But Soderbergh's film is also inherently focused on spirituality. If we analyse the 2002 movie this becomes clear:

The focus of the film is the planet Solaris. Solaris is undeniably a godlike organism. Humans try and fail to comprehend the planet's power, and these powers seem mystic and all encompassing. Viola Davis' character, Gordon, rejects the abilities of Solaris because she doesn't want to accept a greater power than humanity. A clear parallel to many religious parables regarding human ego.

The driving force of the film is Rheya and Kris's relationship. But it all stems from Solaris, as it brings the dead Rheya back to life. They are ultimately given a second chance, and can spend eternity together free from suffering. The poem by Dylan Thomas "And death shall have no dominion" is central in the film and their relationship. By leaving earth and entering Solaris, human issues like depression, suffering, and death become irrelevant. Solaris exists as an entity beyond humanity. When Kris crashes into the planet he awakens back in his apartment, and Rheya is there. He is completely absoslved and redeemed, and can spend eternity with her. Essentially a personal heaven.

What I feel is missed by some viewers is that this goes beyond the normal Hollywood romance. It is love conquers all, even death. But also it bridges divine love with romantic love. Both exist simultaneously, and in cooperation with each other.

That is the core idea here. Soderbergh isn't less spiritual than Tarkovsky. He simply offers his own philosophy instead. Tarkovsky was a strict Eastern Orthodox, and that influenced his film. Kris must suffer and face his sins more directly in the 1972 film. He can only be redeemed by surrendering to the holy father. It is more clearly religious because that was Tarkovsky's intent. But Soderbergh's view isn't lacking in this regard, it's simply a different interpretation.

Soderbergh's film has a line spoken by Kris when arguing with Gordon about the motive of the planet. He says "why does it have to want anything". This is a link to the original book the film is based on, which is focused on how humans struggle to understand the universe and god beyond their own limited perspective. But it also shows the inherent difference between Soderbergh's view and Tarkovsky's. There is no need for suffering in the 2002 film. Kris must surrender to love, so both romantic and divine love will be granted to him. Kris is consumed by grief and self-blame, but the solution and grace is easily accessible through acceptance. It's simply a modern, more humanist view of the themes.

Many critics felt the 2002 film also trimmed too much, trying to be a leaner, more accessible film, compared to the nearly 3 hour original. But Soderbergh's film simply didn't need to be as long. It clocks in at 1 hour 39 minutes, and it uses it very effectively. Like I said, if redemption is easily available, you don't need more time. I also think the pacing is great. It's still a wonderful slow burn, but also an easy watch. It occupies a goldilocks zone in terms of time.

Ultimately the film was not as popular as it should have been in my opinion. Critics and cinephiles felt it was a Hollywood bastardization of a Russian classic. While it was too slow for mainstream audiences, who expected an action-orientated sci-fi (which marketing apparently leaned into). But I love this film, and I think Soderbergh simply told the story he wanted to tell.

Steven Soderbergh's Solaris has often been dismissed as a vain copy of Andrei Tarkovsky's 1972 film. But I find it to be equally interesting, and offering a unique view of the story and themes.

Many criticized the 2002 film for not being on the same philosophical level as the 1972 film. But I think they may have missed the point. Soderbergh's film is still very philosophical and does deal with spirituality, it just differs in how it handles this. Critics viewed the film as simply a shallow love story or romance, without the depth of Tarkovsky's version. It is true that Tarkovsky's film is more directly focused on religion and his orthodox beliefs. But Soderbergh's film is also inherently focused on spirituality. If we analyse the 2002 movie this becomes clear:

The focus of the film is the planet Solaris. Solaris is undeniably a godlike organism. Humans try and fail to comprehend the planet's power, and these powers seem mystic and all encompassing. Viola Davis' character, Gordon, rejects the abilities of Solaris because she doesn't want to accept a greater power than humanity. A clear parallel to many religious parables regarding human ego.

The driving force of the film is Rheya and Kris's relationship. But it all stems from Solaris, as it brings the dead Rheya back to life. They are ultimately given a second chance, and can spend eternity together free from suffering. The poem by Dylan Thomas "And death shall have no dominion" is central in the film and their relationship. By leaving earth and entering Solaris, human issues like depression, suffering, and death become irrelevant. Solaris exists as an entity beyond humanity. When Kris crashes into the planet he awakens back in his apartment, and Rheya is there. He is completely absoslved and redeemed, and can spend eternity with her. Essentially a personal heaven.

What I feel is missed by some viewers is that this goes beyond the normal Hollywood romance. It is love conquers all, even death. But also it bridges divine love with romantic love. Both exist simultaneously, and in cooperation with each other.

That is the core idea here. Soderbergh isn't less spiritual than Tarkovsky. He simply offers his own philosophy instead. Tarkovsky was a strict Eastern Orthodox, and that influenced his film. Kris must suffer and face his sins more directly in the 1972 film. He can only be redeemed by surrendering to the holy father. It is more clearly religious because that was Tarkovsky's intent. But Soderbergh's view isn't lacking in this regard, it's simply a different interpretation.

Soderbergh's film has a line spoken by Kris when arguing with Gordon about the motive of the planet. He says "why does it have to want anything". This is a link to the original book the film is based on, which is focused on how humans struggle to understand the universe and god beyond their own limited perspective. But it also shows the inherent difference between Soderbergh's view and Tarkovsky's. There is no need for suffering in the 2002 film. Kris must surrender to love, so both romantic and divine love will be granted to him. Kris is consumed by grief and self-blame, but the solution and grace is easily accessible through acceptance. It's simply a modern, more humanist view of the themes.

Many critics felt the 2002 film also trimmed too much, trying to be a leaner, more accessible film, compared to the nearly 3 hour original. But Soderbergh's film simply didn't need to be as long. It clocks in at 1 hour 39 minutes, and it uses it very effectively. Like I said, if redemption is easily available, you don't need more time. I also think the pacing is great. It's still a wonderful slow burn, but also an easy watch. It occupies a goldilocks zone in terms of time.

Ultimately the film was not as popular as it should have been in my opinion. Critics and cinephiles felt it was a Hollywood bastardization of a Russian classic. While it was too slow for mainstream audiences, who expected an action-orientated sci-fi (which marketing apparently leaned into). But I love this film, and I think Soderbergh simply told the story he wanted to tell.

The song Once in a Lifetime by Talking Heads is very strange and unique. But I feel like there might be a few films similar in themes and tone. I found Mr. Nobody to really remind me of the song. And I also ended up thinking of the film when I was listening to the song. What other films would you say feel similar?