The whole sphere of cognitive and epistemological considerations was extremely important in my book and it was tightly coupled to the solaristic literature and to the essence of solaristics as such. Unfortunately, the film has been robbed of those qualities rather thoroughly. [...]
About this quote
- What does it mean?
- The author criticizes a film adaptation for removing deep philosophical and epistemological elements central to the original book.
- In plain terms
- The movie left out important thinking parts that were in the book.
- What can you take from it?
- Adaptations often lose the original work's philosophical depth.
Where it applies
Putting it to work
Questions to consider
- What makes an adaptation faithful to its source?
- Can philosophy be conveyed visually?
Another view
Films may need to prioritize visual storytelling over complex ideas.
More from Stanislaw Lem
I have fundamental reservations to this adaptation. First of all I would have liked to see the planet Solaris which the director unfortunately denied me as the…
Permalink to quote #21 My Kelvin decides to stay on the planet without any hope whatsoever while Tarkovsky created an image where some kind of an island appears, and on that island a…
Permalink to quote #23 Cancel me not - for what then shall remain? Abscissas some mantissas, modules, modes, A root or two, a torus and a node: The inverse of my verse, a null domain.
Permalink to quote #20
Related quotes
Without books, God is silent, justice dormant, natural science at a stand, philosophy lame, letters dumb, and all things involved in darkness.
Thomas V. BartholinThomas V. Bartholin quote #1 I can't think of any one film that improved on a good novel, but I can think of many good films that came from very bad novels.
Gabriel Garcia MarquezGabriel Garcia Marquez quote #7 I realized that it was not by wisdom that poets write their poetry, but by a kind of nature or inspiration, such as you find in seers and prophets; for these a…
SocratesSocrates quote #10