SOLARIS (2002):
An Explanation

2002, Christian Sauvé

Steven Soderbergh's SOLARIS (2002) is a challenging film. It doesn't repeat its answers time and time again.  It allows you to make up your mind.  It mostly takes place in the characters' heads.

Yes, it's a pretentious artsy film.  It's a gratuitously self-indulgent piece of cinema that's not nearly as profound at it may think it is.  It's under-plotted, bloated and would have made a better 30-minutes TWILIGHT ZONE episode than a feature film.

But wait!  It's also a pretty darn fine true Science Fiction movie. By putting very human characters in extreme situations caused by an unknown, but rational (?) entity, SOLARIS is able to study human emotions.  In an age where cinema-SF has become nearly synonymous with fancy special effects and overblown action sequences, that's rare and maybe even important.

But there's no denying that some hints may be required in order to appreciate the film jut a little bit more. If you can tolerate a few paragraphs of random rambling, keep on reading, because I'll share my own take on the film, and maybe -hopefully!- help you along the way.

 

Oh, yes:  SPOILERS follow.  Do not read if you haven't seen the film.

 

Let's take a look at the story, stripped down to its bare essentials and very roughly re-arranged in chronological order:

[November 2006: Update! An anonymous correspondent writes to suggest...

I don't think you got the ending w/ Chris quite right. He had a realization that there was (in fact) a picture in his house. Reya very clearly mentioned that there were no pictures. This revealed to him the possibility of the nature of the being, Reya. If she was only a creation created from Chris' mind, the memories she had would have to be the same as Chris', but they were not. He had a glimmer of hope that she was indeed more than just a mere memory and stayed on the ship. You can extrapolate considerably from this.

Hmm, promising! I haven't yet had time to verify this interpretation, but this would be a fascinating wrinkle to the ending.]

[January 2007: I still haven't had the time to return to the film, but UK cinephile Dan wrote in to remind me of the thematic links between Chris's favourite poem, Dylan Thomas' "And Death Shall Have no Dominion", and the ending of the film. If nothing else, the link highlights SOLARIS' thematic exploration of love after death. Chris ends up getting what he most clearly wished for, regardless of the other consequences. True love through death, maybe.]

[March 2008: Jessica writes to add "I could be wrong, but I think that you may have misunderstood Phantom-Snow's explanation at the end of the film. My understanding is that Solaris did not actually get physically bigger; it only looked that way because the space station had drifted closer to it. According the Phantom-Snow, because Dr.Gordon's Higgs (Phantom destroying)device used so much power it drained the ship's battery/power cells, and so the ship was unable to resist Solaris' gravitational pull. That is why Gordon has to leave right away; the ship only has enough power to send one of the escape pods back to Earth."]

Despite the jumbled nature of the synopsis, I think that's pretty much it. Keep in mind that this film doesn't have to make perfect sense: It's more of a psychological-experimental fable than a hard-tech story. It's no accident if all we get to see of Earth are a few blurry rainy shots: the impression created stands outside of time and pure realism. Oh, and do remember once again that Soderbergh was in his artsy-trippy mode when he did this film.

 

I'll end up on a note on the book/movie differences: A plot point that got lost in the adaptation is that Solaris, the ocean/planet is intelligent and may in fact try to communicate with the scientists by the use of those "Phantoms". I don't think it adds much, though, to consider this explanation given that SOLARIS (2002) is more or less self-consistent without it.  Be advised that reading the book in order to have the film explained to you may result in even greater confusion.

There are still a lot of plot holes, naturally. (I just thought of a few just writing the above, most notably about Phantom-Snow's incomplete memories and Gordon's reactions.)

There's a wealth of symbolic layering in this film (Is it about religion? What about the lock she was holding? Was it a symbol of a mystery he must unlock? [*] etc.), but that type of thing may be be left to better writers and more patient commentators. In the meantime, I'm sufficiently satisfied by the above. SOLARIS is obviously not an audience-friendly film, but on the other hand, it exemplifies a whole lot of what "real science-fiction" is all about. Please be kind to it.

 

[*]: About the lock: The Soderbergh/Cameron DVD audio commentary is vague about most of the film's plot, but it does clear up the lock "symbolism": Soderbergh needed the actress to hold something in her hands, and the lock was the most intriguing prop they could find. Nothing to see here; all symbolism is viewer-supplied!

 

Was this good enough?  Do you have more questions?  Contact me now!