『 幼年時代は常に素晴らしい。 幼年時代を悪く言うことは不可能です。 〜(中略)〜 つまり、私を創造に駆り立てるすべてものは、幼年時代に築かれたと思うのです。』(タルコフスキー)
これは非常に個人的な映画だ。 そしてあくまでタルコフスキーの主観で描かれている。
ここでは少年時代のことと現在のことが区別なく描かれる。 少年時代の自分自身と現在の自分の子供、母と現在の妻が‘融解’していく…。 (妻と母が融解する現象は ‘惑星ソラリス’ でも見られる。 タルコフスキーの女性観の一端なのだろう。)
あるいは父の詩をタルコフスキー自身が頻繁に読み上げることも‘融解’に含まれるかもしれない。
こうして現在、過去に囚われることなくタルコフスキーによぎった思いが映像化されていく…。
『 私のお気に入りの作品は ‘鏡’ だと思われているようです。これは私の好きな作品というより、もっとも身近な映画なのです。』(タルコフスキー)
この作り方は『フェリーニの8/1/2』 に対するタルコフスキー流の回答という気もする。こういった作品は凄まじい才能と技術がなければただの自慰行為になってしまうのだが、フェリーニもタルコフスキーも‘超’が付く一流監督だ。 出来は圧倒的である。
…
この映画、冒頭吃音の青年がスムーズに喋れるようになるシーンから始まる。 喋れなかったのに映画の中で喋れるようになるというモチーフは後の ‘サクリファイス’ に繋がる。 これは、新しい希望、あるいは希望の予感のメタファなのではないだろうか。( ‘サクリファイス’ でもそうだった)
気配、予感、…
そういった、映像で表現しにくい (と思う) ものをタルコフスキーは難なく(?)映像化してみせる。
例えば、本作の冒頭、広い草原の向こうに人影が見える。 徐々に去っていく。 そこへサーっと草原の向こうから一陣の風。なまめかしい不思議な風。 なにかの予感。
あるいは、今までそこに在った(様に感じた)人影がフッと消えたあと、テーブルに僅かに残るグラスのあとがスーッと消える。 なにかがソコに在った気配だけが残る。
言葉だけでも音楽だけでも絵や静止画だけでも表現できないモノ。 まったく実体のない気配、予感。 ‘映像言語’という言葉で表現するしか思いつかない。 ‘映像言語’…陳腐な、それこそ実態のない言葉。 タルコフスキーの表現しているモノを言葉にすることなど無理なのだ。 だが、確実に存在するタルコフスキーならではの表現。
この感覚を共有できた時、タルコフスキーの映画は見事な娯楽となる。 タルコフスキー作品だけでしか味わえないスリル。 それはテンションが高すぎて脳がしびれるような娯楽。 それがタルコフスキー映画の楽しみの一つだと思う。 特に本作では普通の粗筋が見当たらない分、こういった側面が強調される。
表現方法の自由は無限であると本作を観ればよくわかる。 そして、これほど自由な映画が鉄のカーテンの向こうで製作できたことには驚く。 共産圏の映画は社会や労働者の進歩に資することが建前だからこういった個人的な詩的エッセイのような体裁をもつ映画は非常に特殊だっただろう。 本作は、当局からの批判を受け本国ではろくに上映も出来なかったといわれる。
(体制批判ともとれる描写も問題だったようだ。…それでもバラジャーノフのように投獄されなかっただけマシなのかもしれないが…)
さて、このソフトだが、画質はあまりよくない。 ディテールはつぶれ気味だし、色味も退色気味でしかも滲んだ感じがする。 画面のガタツキも散見される。 全体的にいまひとつだ。 (それでも‘デジタル完全復元版’なのだ…旧版にくらべれば改善している‘らしい’のだが…)
さらに音声についても気になる点がある。 タルコフスキーは音楽家になりたかったという。 音楽は翻訳不要の最終的な芸術の形態だ、ともいっている。 タルコフスキーは音に非常に敏感だった。 本作でも、その音声トラックは綿密に計算されていたはずである。 それを、ヘンな5.1chサラウンド化するのはどうだろうか。 一つの解釈なのかもしれないが、とにかく派手でおかしな響き方をしているし、本来と違う音声演出が施されている部分すらある。 やはりオリジナル音声で観るべきだろう。
そんな問題を感じるソフトなのだが、現在はこのソフトすら廃盤である。 再発はどうなるのだろう。つぎはブルーレイとなるのだろうか。
最近IVCも(以前に比べ)意欲的なソフトリリースを続けている。 期待したいところではある。
…だが、このソフト、ロシア映画評議会の原版から起こしたものである。そこが改善されない限り、高画質なソフトが出せるか微妙かもしれない。
(『山猫』で凄まじい修復ぶりを見せつけた、スコセッシのザ・フィルム・ファウンデーションとか綺麗にしてくれないかな。 あのレベルで見たい。 無理かなー)
鏡 DVD HDマスター
フォーマット | 色 |
コントリビュータ | フィリップ・ヤンコフスキ, オレーグ・ヤンコフスキー, マルガリータ・テレホ, アッラ・デミードワ, ニコライ・グリニコ, イグナート・ダニリツェフ, ラリーサ・タルコフスカヤ, アナトーリー・ソロニーツィン, アンドレイ・タルコフスキー 表示を増やす |
言語 | ロシア語 |
稼働時間 | 1 時間 46 分 |
映画『オッペンハイマー』関連作品発売中
第96回アカデミー賞®最多7部門受賞したクリストファー・ノーラン監督最新作 『オッペンハイマー』を記念して、クリストファー・ノーラン 監督作、キリアン・マーフィー 出演作など『オッペンハイマー』関連作品をピックアップ。 詳細はこちら
この商品をチェックした人はこんな商品もチェックしています
ページ 1 以下のうち 1 最初から観るページ 1 以下のうち 1
商品の説明
アンドレイ・タルコフスキー監督の自伝的作品&代表作!
『惑星ソラリス』に並ぶとも劣らぬ傑作がついにHDマスター仕様のDVDでリリース!
タルコフスキーが主人公の一人称(声はタルコフスキー本人)に託して語る自伝的な作品。
40年前に父がいなくなり、深い悲しみにまとわりつかれた母親の手ひとつで育てられた少年時代と、
降りつづく雨の日に髪を洗いつづける母親の思い出。
そして母親に似た妻への愛と別離、
息子をあずかることになった今の自分。
さまざまな記憶の断片をモンタージュして、
自分を心の鏡に映し出す。
詩的な感覚で火と水をモチーフにした独特の映像は見る者を魅了する。
1974年 ソ連作品
監督:アンドレイ・タルコフスキー
脚本:アレクサンドル・ミシャーリン、アンドレイ・タルコフスキー
撮影:ゲオルギー・レルベルグ
音楽:エドゥアルド・アルテミエフ
詩:アルセニー・タルコフスキー/詩朗読:アンドレイ・タルコフスキー
出演:マルガリータ・テレホワ/イグナート・ダニリツェフ/ラリーサ・タルコフスカヤ
アッラ・デミードワ/アナトーリー・ソロニーツィン/ニコライ・グリニコ
オレーグ・ヤンコフスキー/フィリップ・ヤンコフスキ
◆封入特典:四方田犬彦氏(映画史家・比較文学者)による解説文収録リーフレット
登録情報
- メーカーにより製造中止になりました : いいえ
- 言語 : ロシア語
- 製品サイズ : 30 x 10 x 20 cm; 120 g
- EAN : 4933672242477
- 監督 : アンドレイ・タルコフスキー
- メディア形式 : 色
- 時間 : 1 時間 46 分
- 発売日 : 2013/12/20
- 出演 : マルガリータ・テレホ, イグナート・ダニリツェフ, ラリーサ・タルコフスカヤ, アッラ・デミードワ, アナトーリー・ソロニーツィン
- 字幕: : 日本語
- 販売元 : IVC,Ltd.(VC)(D)
- ASIN : B00FLD4GII
- ディスク枚数 : 1
- Amazon 売れ筋ランキング: - 59,646位DVD (DVDの売れ筋ランキングを見る)
- - 5,462位外国のドラマ映画
- カスタマーレビュー:
-
トップレビュー
上位レビュー、対象国: 日本
レビューのフィルタリング中に問題が発生しました。後でもう一度試してください。
2012年7月15日に日本でレビュー済み
Amazonで購入
2018年5月25日に日本でレビュー済み
Amazonで購入
以前から気になっていた商品を廉価で購入出来て嬉しい。商品はほぼ新品同様でディスクの状態はもちろん、解説リーフレットにもシワひとつなかった。
2007年11月4日に日本でレビュー済み
Amazonで購入
以前ivcで販売しているタルコフスキーのDVDを買って
画質の悪さにがっくり来ましたが、
今回デジタルリマスターと銘打っていたので
買ってみました。
画質は、まあギリギリ見れるレベルと言えるでしょうか。
でもかつてあちこちの映画館で再上映されていた映像と比較すると、
年月が経過して段々色彩が劣化しているのは明らかです。
経年劣化は致し方のないこととはいえ、
映像の美しさが身の上のタルコフスキーの映画として考えると、
やはり悲しいことです。
IVCのノスタルジアもそうでしたが、
場面によって遜色の度合いがあるようで、
例えばラストシーンも、多分午後から夕方くらいだとは思うのですが、
空の色を見ると撮影当初より恐らく赤みかかっているのではないでしょうか。
久しぶりにもう一度この映画をみて、
自由度の高さに驚きました。
まったく、いつの時代のどこの国の映画であるかなどと
考える必要は無いように思います。
ボーナストラックのインタビューでヤブリンスキーも言ってますが、
体制が崩壊しても創造的な作品が出てくるということはないわけで、
資本主義国家であっても精神的な面での妥協や才能の上での凡庸さは、
免れることは出来ません。
鏡は、後の作品と較べると、ストップモーションもあり、
頻繁な場面転換ありで、いわゆる長回し多用一辺倒ではないですが、
今改めてみても決して古臭くなく、勢いのようなものがあると思います。
印象的なイメージがたくさん出現するというのに、
タルコフスキーだけがイメージビデオ風の映画にはならないのは、
やはり不思議です。
画質の悪さにがっくり来ましたが、
今回デジタルリマスターと銘打っていたので
買ってみました。
画質は、まあギリギリ見れるレベルと言えるでしょうか。
でもかつてあちこちの映画館で再上映されていた映像と比較すると、
年月が経過して段々色彩が劣化しているのは明らかです。
経年劣化は致し方のないこととはいえ、
映像の美しさが身の上のタルコフスキーの映画として考えると、
やはり悲しいことです。
IVCのノスタルジアもそうでしたが、
場面によって遜色の度合いがあるようで、
例えばラストシーンも、多分午後から夕方くらいだとは思うのですが、
空の色を見ると撮影当初より恐らく赤みかかっているのではないでしょうか。
久しぶりにもう一度この映画をみて、
自由度の高さに驚きました。
まったく、いつの時代のどこの国の映画であるかなどと
考える必要は無いように思います。
ボーナストラックのインタビューでヤブリンスキーも言ってますが、
体制が崩壊しても創造的な作品が出てくるということはないわけで、
資本主義国家であっても精神的な面での妥協や才能の上での凡庸さは、
免れることは出来ません。
鏡は、後の作品と較べると、ストップモーションもあり、
頻繁な場面転換ありで、いわゆる長回し多用一辺倒ではないですが、
今改めてみても決して古臭くなく、勢いのようなものがあると思います。
印象的なイメージがたくさん出現するというのに、
タルコフスキーだけがイメージビデオ風の映画にはならないのは、
やはり不思議です。
2013年10月24日に日本でレビュー済み
Amazonで購入
タルコフスキーといえばノスタルジアとストーカーが有名ですが、鏡の散文的な詩情は素敵ですね。
私は冒頭の草原を吹き来る風が好き。
ザワザワと草の波がおしよせて過ぎてゆき、男が佇み、振り向く。
これだけでこの作品に没入する。
しっとりと髪を洗う女。
やがて目を見張る炎。
モノクロと美しいシークエンスと激しい炎。
もう、こんな監督は出ないんじゃないかと、切なくなる。
Blu-rayで出す、IVC、えらいぞ。
私は冒頭の草原を吹き来る風が好き。
ザワザワと草の波がおしよせて過ぎてゆき、男が佇み、振り向く。
これだけでこの作品に没入する。
しっとりと髪を洗う女。
やがて目を見張る炎。
モノクロと美しいシークエンスと激しい炎。
もう、こんな監督は出ないんじゃないかと、切なくなる。
Blu-rayで出す、IVC、えらいぞ。
2011年4月23日に日本でレビュー済み
Amazonで購入
目を閉じて、ふっと力を抜くと浮かんでくる、幼い頃の記憶。
断片的で、状況も曖昧で、どこか薄ぼんやりとしていて、それで鮮明な美しさを持っている。
きっと誰もが持っている、そういう記憶を結晶化して、繋ぎあわせたかのような映画です。
解説も多く出ていて、分析しようと思えばいろいろな読み解きができる映画ですが、何も知識がない状態で観てよく分からないのに惹きこまれて、最後まで観てしまう、というのが一番正しい見方なのかもしれません。
明確なストーリーがないのであらすじを覚えることはできないのですが、一つ一つのシーンが鮮烈に頭に焼き付きます。普段は忘れてしまうのですが、映画を観返す度にはっと思い出します。それこそ幼い頃の記憶のように。
もう何度も観ていますが、観れば観るほど、美しさの感度が増していくような気がする、不思議な映画です。
映画館で観た頃がないんで、一度でいいから大きなスクリーンで観てみたい。
断片的で、状況も曖昧で、どこか薄ぼんやりとしていて、それで鮮明な美しさを持っている。
きっと誰もが持っている、そういう記憶を結晶化して、繋ぎあわせたかのような映画です。
解説も多く出ていて、分析しようと思えばいろいろな読み解きができる映画ですが、何も知識がない状態で観てよく分からないのに惹きこまれて、最後まで観てしまう、というのが一番正しい見方なのかもしれません。
明確なストーリーがないのであらすじを覚えることはできないのですが、一つ一つのシーンが鮮烈に頭に焼き付きます。普段は忘れてしまうのですが、映画を観返す度にはっと思い出します。それこそ幼い頃の記憶のように。
もう何度も観ていますが、観れば観るほど、美しさの感度が増していくような気がする、不思議な映画です。
映画館で観た頃がないんで、一度でいいから大きなスクリーンで観てみたい。
2022年10月12日に日本でレビュー済み
Amazonで購入
リージョンBプレイヤーソフトなので日本ではリージョンフリーで再生できる機種でないと再生できません。なので自宅のブルーレイプレイヤーでは再生できませんでした。日本のブルーレイはリージョンA。ちゃんと注意書きの記載をして販売して欲しいい。
2016年10月21日に日本でレビュー済み
どう理解していいのか分からない。理解しようとするものではないのかもしれない。タルコフスキー作品の中でも、とりわけそうかもしれない。理解するのではなく感じるものだろうか。まるで夢を理解しようとしても分からないように。
後付けであるが、作品として「惑星ソラリス」と「ストーカー」の間に作られたことがヒントかもしれない。
降りしきる雨、川の流れ、室内の天井から壁を伝い流れる水、膨大な水。「サクリファイス」に通じる燃え上がる家。核爆発の映像もあるが、医師が去る時の二度の突風は二度の核爆発か。毛沢東が意外だが、中国系のおばあさんが出てくる。血筋に中国系が入っているのか。冒頭の吃音の治療は監督自身がそうだったのか。それは父親と別れた母親の複雑な気持ちが影響したからなのか。成立することなく途切れる会話。会話にならない会話。詩の朗読。よくわからない。
後付けであるが、作品として「惑星ソラリス」と「ストーカー」の間に作られたことがヒントかもしれない。
降りしきる雨、川の流れ、室内の天井から壁を伝い流れる水、膨大な水。「サクリファイス」に通じる燃え上がる家。核爆発の映像もあるが、医師が去る時の二度の突風は二度の核爆発か。毛沢東が意外だが、中国系のおばあさんが出てくる。血筋に中国系が入っているのか。冒頭の吃音の治療は監督自身がそうだったのか。それは父親と別れた母親の複雑な気持ちが影響したからなのか。成立することなく途切れる会話。会話にならない会話。詩の朗読。よくわからない。
2022年3月11日に日本でレビュー済み
本作は、監督の母と父にまつわる記憶から話の筋が組み立てられています。
さて、ヴィゴツキーの心理学に関する理論が存在しています。そして、記憶の再構成に関しては、ずいぶんと理解の助けになると思います。けれども、ヴィゴツキーの草稿が発見されたのは、エイゼンシュテインの書斎からでした。こちらは、モンタージュ理論の使い手です。
これは不思議なことです。そう思います。
追伸。記憶も構成することが叶い、象徴表現のリストも揃い、乾坤一擲では な い 試行の行方を探る精神的ロードムービーも作ることが許され、その延長上には、芸術家が渾身の力を込めた成熟の作品ができるはずでした。しかし、晩年の2作品はそうはなりませんでした。いずれ、呪詛のいわれを持つ存在自体が忌まわしい結論を目にすることになります。
さて、ヴィゴツキーの心理学に関する理論が存在しています。そして、記憶の再構成に関しては、ずいぶんと理解の助けになると思います。けれども、ヴィゴツキーの草稿が発見されたのは、エイゼンシュテインの書斎からでした。こちらは、モンタージュ理論の使い手です。
これは不思議なことです。そう思います。
追伸。記憶も構成することが叶い、象徴表現のリストも揃い、乾坤一擲では な い 試行の行方を探る精神的ロードムービーも作ることが許され、その延長上には、芸術家が渾身の力を込めた成熟の作品ができるはずでした。しかし、晩年の2作品はそうはなりませんでした。いずれ、呪詛のいわれを持つ存在自体が忌まわしい結論を目にすることになります。
他の国からのトップレビュー

Nanyang Parkway
5つ星のうち5.0
Dreamlike story by a great filmmaker.
2019年7月14日にオーストラリアでレビュー済みAmazonで購入
One of Tarkovsky's great films.

Oldthinker
5つ星のうち5.0
Do not miss the plot
2009年9月29日に英国でレビュー済みAmazonで購入
The points made by other reviewers about this film's nonlinearity and being much like poetry are, of course, valid. I remember seeing it for the first time back in the 70s and realising that I was in the presence of a radically new kind of art: exciting and powerful but also almost alien, as if the film had been imported from Mars. Then the world cinema started to catch up little by little, but as the 80s turned into the 90s the mainstream went simplistic again, and today's young viewers of the 'Mirror' are, in all likelihood, having the very same thoughts about a film from Mars. We can only guess whether the new language of cinema introduced by Tarkovsky 35 years ago will ever be widely adopted.
However, there is a coherent story there too - and its existence is often missed or even vehemently denied. It is essentially the life story of the narrator, who never appears in the frame as an adult, but through whose eyes many of the scenes are presented. The man has his share of human flaws, yet his perception is particularly sharp, and his mind and spirit are attuned to the history and destiny of his country and to the cultural heritage of the humankind - the latter represented in the film by the music and visual references to famous paintings, which elevate the action and place it in the global context. There are repeated hints in the film that these personal qualities - a mixed blessing to put it mildly - run in the family and hence will go on even though the narrator dies in his 40s. The words of the smoking doctor in the deathbed scene (who is played by the co-author of the screenplay) are mistranslated in the English subtitles, but the key part comes across: the man is dying because there are such things as memory and conscience.
The storyline requires a bit of effort to comprehend - not because it was made obscure by Tarkovsky, but because of the impact of the following factors:
First of all, the action moves backwards and forwards between three time planes: 1930s, 1940s and 1970s. Recognisable time markers are provided most of the time, but it is still possible to get confused, so it is important to pay full attention to what is shown and said. This difficulty is not unlike the one that a reader might have in comprehending the storyline of 'The Sound and the Fury' by Faulkner, who at one stage even contemplated a special edition of the novel with fragments set in different time printed in different colours.
Secondly, what we see in the film is not only the supposed reality but also memories (distorted as they always are), dreams (with their own logic that can never be fully grasped) and prophetic visions (one example: a boy on a snow-covered hillside takes in the view which re-creates the 'Hunters in the Snow' by Bruegel, and sees not only the forthcoming end of the war but also the much later border conflict with China). Again, it is not too difficult to figure out which scene falls into which category.
Thirdly, the same actress plays the narrator's mother and his ex-wife. Similar things have been done in many other films; nevertheless, I heard form several people that this, rather than anything else, was what confused them most in the 'Mirror'. In fact, the two characters look, act and speak considerably differently (a credit to the actress!), and in any case the time plane of any given episode makes it clear which of the two women appears in it: nobody is time-travelling in this film, except for the very last sequence where time is warped or rather absent altogether.
Those factors are vital for the structure of the 'Mirror' and contribute to its outstanding artistic qualities and cult status, but they can also put off viewers who are either unable or unwilling to play by the rules laid down by Tarkovsky. But then again, isn't this problem common to all true art?
However, there is a coherent story there too - and its existence is often missed or even vehemently denied. It is essentially the life story of the narrator, who never appears in the frame as an adult, but through whose eyes many of the scenes are presented. The man has his share of human flaws, yet his perception is particularly sharp, and his mind and spirit are attuned to the history and destiny of his country and to the cultural heritage of the humankind - the latter represented in the film by the music and visual references to famous paintings, which elevate the action and place it in the global context. There are repeated hints in the film that these personal qualities - a mixed blessing to put it mildly - run in the family and hence will go on even though the narrator dies in his 40s. The words of the smoking doctor in the deathbed scene (who is played by the co-author of the screenplay) are mistranslated in the English subtitles, but the key part comes across: the man is dying because there are such things as memory and conscience.
The storyline requires a bit of effort to comprehend - not because it was made obscure by Tarkovsky, but because of the impact of the following factors:
First of all, the action moves backwards and forwards between three time planes: 1930s, 1940s and 1970s. Recognisable time markers are provided most of the time, but it is still possible to get confused, so it is important to pay full attention to what is shown and said. This difficulty is not unlike the one that a reader might have in comprehending the storyline of 'The Sound and the Fury' by Faulkner, who at one stage even contemplated a special edition of the novel with fragments set in different time printed in different colours.
Secondly, what we see in the film is not only the supposed reality but also memories (distorted as they always are), dreams (with their own logic that can never be fully grasped) and prophetic visions (one example: a boy on a snow-covered hillside takes in the view which re-creates the 'Hunters in the Snow' by Bruegel, and sees not only the forthcoming end of the war but also the much later border conflict with China). Again, it is not too difficult to figure out which scene falls into which category.
Thirdly, the same actress plays the narrator's mother and his ex-wife. Similar things have been done in many other films; nevertheless, I heard form several people that this, rather than anything else, was what confused them most in the 'Mirror'. In fact, the two characters look, act and speak considerably differently (a credit to the actress!), and in any case the time plane of any given episode makes it clear which of the two women appears in it: nobody is time-travelling in this film, except for the very last sequence where time is warped or rather absent altogether.
Those factors are vital for the structure of the 'Mirror' and contribute to its outstanding artistic qualities and cult status, but they can also put off viewers who are either unable or unwilling to play by the rules laid down by Tarkovsky. But then again, isn't this problem common to all true art?

Charles
5つ星のうち5.0
"A poet must stir the soul, not nurture idolators."
2016年5月2日にアメリカ合衆国でレビュー済みAmazonで購入
Seldom does poetry make strict literal sense, nor does it intend to. Rather, through a combination of careful word choice and syllabic cadence, a poet can evoke emotions and convey a message just as powerful as any traditional narrative.
Andrei Tarkovsky is often referred to as a visual poet, and Mirror is a film that doesn't just exemplify this style, but sees it realized to its fullest potential. Tarkovsky's images and compositions are the words of this poem, and the manner in which these images are stitched together through the organic movements of his camera is its cadence.
The narrative content of the film essentially involves a narrator reflecting over his childhood, adolescence, and adult life, particularly focusing on his complex relationships with his mother, wife, and son. Instead of telling a linear story, Tarkovsky seamlessly blends the present with the past and dreams with reality. The film continuously and unpredictably pirouettes along the narrator's timeline, highlighting key moments and slowly revealing his current state of mind and outlook on life.
It would be impossible to overstate the visual prowess of this film. Tarkovsky is a true master of visual art, and there is an abundance of searing, unforgettable images in this film that will instantly burn themselves into your brain. The shot composition, lighting, and use of color is immaculate and the way the camera flows freely within the spaces on screen creates an ethereal, other-worldly quality. Given that the vast majority of the film is populated by memories of the narrator, this style works extremely well. The camera seems to act as the mind's eye of the narrator as he journeys through his recollections. At times it hovers over his mother, wife or son, at others it slowly turns away and lingers on the environment as the characters speak off-screen. We as the audience feel like we are directly inside his mind, exploring these memories with him.
And despite the lack of strict narrative structure, plenty of messages and themes bubble to the surface as the film progresses. Having only seen the film once at the time of writing this review, I'm definitely at a disadvantage as this is the kind of movie that needs to be seen many times to fully absorb its story and themes. From what I was able to gather on the first journey through, a big theme of the film is the cyclical nature of life and the ways in which past experiences and traumas impact the present.
In an interesting and decidedly brilliant casting decision, Tarkovsky uses the same actors to play multiple key parts in the film. The same young boy plays both the narrator as a child in his distant memories, and his son in his more recent adult memories. He also uses the same actress to play his mother in his childhood memories, and his wife in his adult memories. This choice emphasizes the similarities between these characters despite their separation in time. There's a great narrated monologue about midway through the film in which the narrator (and Tarkovsky) muse over the "immortality" of life: "Everything's immortal... One table serves both granddad and grandchild... The future is being made right now." These words conjure an image of a continuous thread of life that permeates beyond the individual and through the generations.
And further, as I mentioned previously, Tarkovsky seems to suggest these generations are also cyclical in nature, with individuals that mirror and reflect one another as the title of the film implies. As a boy, our narrator struggles in the absence of his father who is fighting in WW II. He lives with his mother, grandmother, and sister in a remote wooden cottage after fleeing Moscow which had been bombed. Our narrator's mother is not much comfort to him and seems detached, even unhinged as much of the imagery suggests. A telling scene shows the division between mother and son, as the narrator attempts to unsuccessfully open a door and walks away, only to have the door swing open for us to reveal his mother behind it.
In the later memories, these themes recur. The settings have changed, but the characters (and again, the actors themselves) have remained the same. The narrator's son is also isolated and estranged from his distant and troubled mother. The narrator himself seems to fill the role of absent father like his father before, trying to push the boy to live with his mother or suggesting that they enroll him in a military academy. It's interesting as well that the narrator chose to marry a woman so similar to his own mother, as if he is still trying to become close to her even in adulthood.
The implication seems to be that the experiences (positive and negative) of the narrator in his childhood have impacted and shaped his adult life, as they do with us all. The film, then, is essentially the narrator's visualized realization of this as he journeys through his memories. Mirror is a deeply philosophical and visually stunning work that challenges and rewards the engaged viewer. If you love movies, don't miss this one.
Andrei Tarkovsky is often referred to as a visual poet, and Mirror is a film that doesn't just exemplify this style, but sees it realized to its fullest potential. Tarkovsky's images and compositions are the words of this poem, and the manner in which these images are stitched together through the organic movements of his camera is its cadence.
The narrative content of the film essentially involves a narrator reflecting over his childhood, adolescence, and adult life, particularly focusing on his complex relationships with his mother, wife, and son. Instead of telling a linear story, Tarkovsky seamlessly blends the present with the past and dreams with reality. The film continuously and unpredictably pirouettes along the narrator's timeline, highlighting key moments and slowly revealing his current state of mind and outlook on life.
It would be impossible to overstate the visual prowess of this film. Tarkovsky is a true master of visual art, and there is an abundance of searing, unforgettable images in this film that will instantly burn themselves into your brain. The shot composition, lighting, and use of color is immaculate and the way the camera flows freely within the spaces on screen creates an ethereal, other-worldly quality. Given that the vast majority of the film is populated by memories of the narrator, this style works extremely well. The camera seems to act as the mind's eye of the narrator as he journeys through his recollections. At times it hovers over his mother, wife or son, at others it slowly turns away and lingers on the environment as the characters speak off-screen. We as the audience feel like we are directly inside his mind, exploring these memories with him.
And despite the lack of strict narrative structure, plenty of messages and themes bubble to the surface as the film progresses. Having only seen the film once at the time of writing this review, I'm definitely at a disadvantage as this is the kind of movie that needs to be seen many times to fully absorb its story and themes. From what I was able to gather on the first journey through, a big theme of the film is the cyclical nature of life and the ways in which past experiences and traumas impact the present.
In an interesting and decidedly brilliant casting decision, Tarkovsky uses the same actors to play multiple key parts in the film. The same young boy plays both the narrator as a child in his distant memories, and his son in his more recent adult memories. He also uses the same actress to play his mother in his childhood memories, and his wife in his adult memories. This choice emphasizes the similarities between these characters despite their separation in time. There's a great narrated monologue about midway through the film in which the narrator (and Tarkovsky) muse over the "immortality" of life: "Everything's immortal... One table serves both granddad and grandchild... The future is being made right now." These words conjure an image of a continuous thread of life that permeates beyond the individual and through the generations.
And further, as I mentioned previously, Tarkovsky seems to suggest these generations are also cyclical in nature, with individuals that mirror and reflect one another as the title of the film implies. As a boy, our narrator struggles in the absence of his father who is fighting in WW II. He lives with his mother, grandmother, and sister in a remote wooden cottage after fleeing Moscow which had been bombed. Our narrator's mother is not much comfort to him and seems detached, even unhinged as much of the imagery suggests. A telling scene shows the division between mother and son, as the narrator attempts to unsuccessfully open a door and walks away, only to have the door swing open for us to reveal his mother behind it.
In the later memories, these themes recur. The settings have changed, but the characters (and again, the actors themselves) have remained the same. The narrator's son is also isolated and estranged from his distant and troubled mother. The narrator himself seems to fill the role of absent father like his father before, trying to push the boy to live with his mother or suggesting that they enroll him in a military academy. It's interesting as well that the narrator chose to marry a woman so similar to his own mother, as if he is still trying to become close to her even in adulthood.
The implication seems to be that the experiences (positive and negative) of the narrator in his childhood have impacted and shaped his adult life, as they do with us all. The film, then, is essentially the narrator's visualized realization of this as he journeys through his memories. Mirror is a deeply philosophical and visually stunning work that challenges and rewards the engaged viewer. If you love movies, don't miss this one.

Gabriel Rockman
5つ星のうち5.0
A very unique movie, but one of the best movies
2015年1月11日にアメリカ合衆国でレビュー済みAmazonで購入
This is one of my favorite movies, and it is by one of my favorite directors.
Before watching the movie, it is important to know the format of the movie. The movie is not telling a story in a chronological order. The movie is a character study, studying the narrator through his relationship with his mother and his wife. It fluctuates back and forth between past and present quite often, and this transition is made especially confusing by the same actress portraying both his wife and his mother.
So do not watch this movie expecting to see a story. This movie is not a story. This movie is a picture. This movie paints a picture of the narrator, as well as of his wife and his mother through a series of memories. Do not try to get a story line from this movie. Just seek an understanding of the qualities (especially the flaws) of the characters. Think of the movie as being an analog for how we access our memories when creating a picture of a person in our mind. When we think of our mother, we do not follow a chronological path in the order in which memories come to the forefront of our mind. So neither does Tarkovsky follow a chronological path in which the events in this movie are arranged.
When you stop trying to find a story, and just seek an understanding of the characters, that is when the remarkable beauty of this picture unfolds.
While Tarkovsky's movie Andrei Rublev is my favorite movie by him (and possibly my favorite movie by anyone), I think that the tranquil farmhouse scenes in this movie are my favorite scenes from any movie, especially the scene where the family barn burns down.
Before watching the movie, it is important to know the format of the movie. The movie is not telling a story in a chronological order. The movie is a character study, studying the narrator through his relationship with his mother and his wife. It fluctuates back and forth between past and present quite often, and this transition is made especially confusing by the same actress portraying both his wife and his mother.
So do not watch this movie expecting to see a story. This movie is not a story. This movie is a picture. This movie paints a picture of the narrator, as well as of his wife and his mother through a series of memories. Do not try to get a story line from this movie. Just seek an understanding of the qualities (especially the flaws) of the characters. Think of the movie as being an analog for how we access our memories when creating a picture of a person in our mind. When we think of our mother, we do not follow a chronological path in the order in which memories come to the forefront of our mind. So neither does Tarkovsky follow a chronological path in which the events in this movie are arranged.
When you stop trying to find a story, and just seek an understanding of the characters, that is when the remarkable beauty of this picture unfolds.
While Tarkovsky's movie Andrei Rublev is my favorite movie by him (and possibly my favorite movie by anyone), I think that the tranquil farmhouse scenes in this movie are my favorite scenes from any movie, especially the scene where the family barn burns down.

Boydon Boydon
5つ星のうち5.0
In the Darkness Shining ...
2016年7月26日に英国でレビュー済みAmazonで購入
This is the third of Artificial Eye’s complete Tarkovsky feature films on blu-ray for the Region B market (see also my reviews of Ivan’s Childhood & Andrei Rublev).
The now familiar booklet is there, and the extras on a second disc include three interviews and a short film from AE’s original DVD. I think the two interviews with scriptwriter Alexsandr Misharin and composer Eduard Artemyev are gems, and well worth viewing.
The third interview is listed as being with Oleg Yankovskiy, who plays the quite minor role of the father in Mirror (as opposed to the lead in Nostalghia), yet what we get is an appraisal by economist, author and politician Professor Grigory Yavlinsky. Originally included as an introduction to Mirror, I would recommend anyone new to the film to view it as such; Yavlinsky gives a very interesting take on how he (with many other Russians) was affected by Mirror, echoes Tarkovsky’s own comment that the film is quite straightforward, with personal rather than hidden or symbolic meanings, and discusses artistry and political oppression. I am very pleased that this interview has been included, but am puzzled at AE’s mistaken identity.
The short film titled The Last Take, shows Nicolai Grinko (who has a minor role as the printing works manager in Mirror), working on the film Syuzhet Dlya Nebolshogo Rasskaza (1969) with a short colour section showing Mirror cameraman Gregory Rerberg filming Plyumbum, Ili Opasnaya Igra (1987).
Mirror itself appears to be the Mosfilm restoration of 2008 and is bright, sharp, with good colour and contrast and a high bit-rate. Grain is present to remind us that we are watching film. Perhaps some colour levels have been tweaked upwards, but this is merely a subjective impression which only registered once. What really dazzles is the luminosity of some sequences - both in colour and black and white. I often experienced a 3-D effect, and many scenes felt like a first viewing, even though I have seen Mirror many times. I don’t think such detail has been so apparent before, except in the cinema with absolutely ideal projection.
The aspect ratio has a slight increase from the original release from 1.33 to 1.37, so we get an extra sliver on the right and left-hand side of the screen (without any corresponding loss at the top or bottom of the frame). The sound is a clean and solid LPCM 2.0.
Only title, director and two actors are sub-titled at the beginning and, as with Rublev, the restoration crew are similarly unacknowledged at the end. However, I like the translation which seems to be improved from the original DVD, with a less American feel, but I can’t comment on accuracy.
This series is looking so good - minor quibbles apart, all the best interviews are being ported over from the original DVD releases, and we seem to be well on the way towards a definitive collection. I have been particularly waiting for Mirror on blu-ray, so am easily inclined to award another 5 stars for the sheer pleasure of watching this wonderful film at home in glorious HD.
The now familiar booklet is there, and the extras on a second disc include three interviews and a short film from AE’s original DVD. I think the two interviews with scriptwriter Alexsandr Misharin and composer Eduard Artemyev are gems, and well worth viewing.
The third interview is listed as being with Oleg Yankovskiy, who plays the quite minor role of the father in Mirror (as opposed to the lead in Nostalghia), yet what we get is an appraisal by economist, author and politician Professor Grigory Yavlinsky. Originally included as an introduction to Mirror, I would recommend anyone new to the film to view it as such; Yavlinsky gives a very interesting take on how he (with many other Russians) was affected by Mirror, echoes Tarkovsky’s own comment that the film is quite straightforward, with personal rather than hidden or symbolic meanings, and discusses artistry and political oppression. I am very pleased that this interview has been included, but am puzzled at AE’s mistaken identity.
The short film titled The Last Take, shows Nicolai Grinko (who has a minor role as the printing works manager in Mirror), working on the film Syuzhet Dlya Nebolshogo Rasskaza (1969) with a short colour section showing Mirror cameraman Gregory Rerberg filming Plyumbum, Ili Opasnaya Igra (1987).
Mirror itself appears to be the Mosfilm restoration of 2008 and is bright, sharp, with good colour and contrast and a high bit-rate. Grain is present to remind us that we are watching film. Perhaps some colour levels have been tweaked upwards, but this is merely a subjective impression which only registered once. What really dazzles is the luminosity of some sequences - both in colour and black and white. I often experienced a 3-D effect, and many scenes felt like a first viewing, even though I have seen Mirror many times. I don’t think such detail has been so apparent before, except in the cinema with absolutely ideal projection.
The aspect ratio has a slight increase from the original release from 1.33 to 1.37, so we get an extra sliver on the right and left-hand side of the screen (without any corresponding loss at the top or bottom of the frame). The sound is a clean and solid LPCM 2.0.
Only title, director and two actors are sub-titled at the beginning and, as with Rublev, the restoration crew are similarly unacknowledged at the end. However, I like the translation which seems to be improved from the original DVD, with a less American feel, but I can’t comment on accuracy.
This series is looking so good - minor quibbles apart, all the best interviews are being ported over from the original DVD releases, and we seem to be well on the way towards a definitive collection. I have been particularly waiting for Mirror on blu-ray, so am easily inclined to award another 5 stars for the sheer pleasure of watching this wonderful film at home in glorious HD.