Scanialara You won't be disappointed!

Vashirdfel Simply A Masterpiece

Executscan Expected more

Brendon Jones It’s fine. It's literally the definition of a fine movie. You’ve seen it before, you know every beat and outcome before the characters even do. Only question is how much escapism you’re looking for.

thedarkknight-99999 When we see a film that leaves an impression in us, we often describe it as a dream-like film. In the case of The Mirror, we can't describe it like this, because it's just about some dreams or rather some memories that might be mere illusions. Although I hadn't known that before I watched this movie, I found that, for the most part, I was invested in the characters and I was caring about them. To my surprise, I was overwhelmed with many emotions, which are very different from each other, emotions of fear, tense, joy, sympathy, etc. In large part, that was due to Tarkovsky's poetic direction; the transition between a scene to another, the color changing according to the feelings not to the time, the harmonious music, and so on. The performances are also great and very realistic, especially from Margarita Terekhova who played two different characters. That being said, there are some subplots, or in this case I should say some memories, that I didn't care for at all, and I was so bored watching the movie at their times. Overall, Zerkalo is a film to experience, and this is my rating for experiencing it for the first time, and I'm sure it will be higher when I watch it again.(8/10)

Ian (Flash Review)This film didn't connect with me. I went into it cold knowing nothing about the plot. I liked Stalker and this was another Tarkovsky film so I gave it a go. Significant portions of the story were told through poetic dialog that I can never fully connect with, which made it challenging to fully grasp the choppy and seemingly unrelated scenes. Scenes which were knitted together to portray a dying man as he reminisces through somber, emotional moments of his past. While some scenes were picturesque, they were less bold, striking or communicative compared with the captivating and cinematography from Stalker for example. I didn't get much from my first viewing. Many reviewers said after a second and third viewing, the film began to click more for them. Perhaps like a fine wine, it'll take a few impressions to get a full impression.

gavin6942 A dying man in his forties remembers his past. His childhood, his mother, the war, personal moments and things that tell of the recent history of all the Russian nation.Tarkovsky is probably the greatest Soviet / Russian director of his generation. Indeed, who else even comes close? If you were to list the top Russian directors of all time, Tarkovsky would be right near the top, perhaps only beaten by Eisenstein.He has a science fiction and fantasy way to look at the world, and even in more realistic films like this one, that sense of wonder comes through. Few other directors would "paint" their scenes like this, out of order and in different colors (or lack of color). He is someone who ought to be studied, and surely is.

Nikonani S "Zerkalo" is, if it were "poetry" as most non-reading reviewers and critics seem to call it (I suppose that watching and talking about films doesn't draw the same intelligence that reading and writing poetry requires, so we're not working with the cream of the crop) -- very beautifully written poetry, but shallow. A ton of rhetoric -- the fire, the water, the mirrors, the bird, the burning house, the soft green/pink childhood scenes...) -- but it ultimately doesn't lead anywhere reflective. Tarkovsky tricks his audience into believing they have seen the memories of a man's life, and that something profound about their own conception of memory might come out of it. This is not the case, and what we get instead are well- composed scenes and maudlin snips of acting that amount to a pseudo-emotional scam.It is hailed for being "personal", but it is simply far too personal. It is a short film of 20 minutes extended almost half a dozen its natural length. It would function beautifully were it completely cut to its memorable scenes -- but as it stands, it is a dramatic failure that rests upon an excuse of being "Proustian". The difference is that Proust was a fantastic writer, and Tarkovsky only a good photographer by this point in his career. The film is an excuse to bring the memorable scenes to life. Tarkovsky could have cared less about the rest -- which is filler narrative.It might prove useful to myself and others interested in the visual art of film composition, but as an experience, it is scruffy around the edges and drunk.