Sep 5, 2007

Taxi Driver: In Depth

Scorsese, 1976



In 1959 director Robert Bresson came out with an eminent character study known as Pickpocket. It was a restrained, tightly controlled look at the psyche of a man who suffered from social disconnect, whose only form of social interaction was picking pockets in the streets of Paris. Soon after Pickpocket made its way to America, a young film student, Paul Schrader, discovered it - and thus the seed for the 1976 masterpiece ‘Taxi Driver’ was sewn. Young filmmakers of the 1970s were heavily influenced by the auteurs of the French New Wave, and since the studio systems in America were falling apart, the executives decided they might as well give these new, young filmmakers a chance to make the pictures they wanted. Bonnie and Clyde, The Graduate and Easy Rider paved the way, and soon young, independent filmmakers were making the films they wanted - with little to no studio involvement. During this time the young Paul Schrader - with almost no previous experience - wrote a script about a lonely man, a taxi driver. Influenced by his own experience with social disillusionment, books such as Nausea and most predominantly the aforementioned film Pickpocket, Schrader produced the script for one of the best character studies ever made in only a matter of weeks. He did not expect anyone to pick it up, but one thing led to another and soon director Martin Scorsese and the new but already famous actor Robert DeNiro were attached to the project. Taxi Driver was given a greenlite - and American cinema was never the same again.

Social Disconnect and Attempted Integration



The film revolves around a lonely man named Tavis Bickle; a Vietnam veteran who ``can't sleep nights,’’ and has absolutely no purpose or drive in life as he drifts aimlessly through New York. He says, ``I ride around most nights - subways, buses,’’ but figures, ``if I'm gonna do that I might as well get paid for it.’’ Thus we first encounter Travis as he tries to get a job as an NY cab driver. “How’s your driving record,’’ asks the cab boss. “Clean. Like my conscious,’’ Travis grins. Right off the bat we can already tell Travis is a bit different. Taxi Driver’s overlying theme is social alienation; Travis realizes that he leads a meaningless existence, floating through New York like he didn`t even exist, disconnected from society. He sits in porno theatres for hours but finds himself completely unstimulated and unaffected by them. He tries to talk to people, but it`s all in vein because he doesn’t actually know what to say or how to communicate. Any attempt to make contact and join with society fails. At one point, as he is entering a porno theatre, he tries to strike up a conversation with one of the female clerks. She doesn`t even look at him as he fumbles about trying to ask for her name. What does Travis think he is doing? He is going into a porn theatre, what sort of chance does he think he has with this girl? Travis’s attempt to ‘make contact’ predictable falls apart. He resigns to buying some popcorn and a chocolate bar.

Travis is an alien creature trying to exist in a human world. He does not know how to interact with people, and the only form of socialization he experiences is through limited ‘social’ activities; riding on a bus or subway or by sitting in porn theatres. Other than that, he is completely alone. He simply does not know how to interact with society. Travis says, “I don't believe that one should devote his life to morbid self-attention, I believe that one should become a person like other people.’’ He believes he should conform with society; blend in - be ‘normal’. But he can’t seem to figure out how. He decides to become a cab driver because he figures if he might as well be paid for drifting around the city. But really it is an attempt at joining ‘society’, because as it is society is a building with a window with him on the outside looking in. Removed, but attempting to find his way in.

The problem is that Travis, in addition to not knowing how to interact with the world, also doesn’t know how to react to it. The images in the theatres are unfocused blurs. He stares into the distance, boring holes through the screen, probably not even aware of what he’s watching. A homicidal maniac (played by Scorsese in a brilliant cameo) has Travis pull the cab over as he explains his wife is cheating on him with a black man, and that he is going to kill her with a .44 magnum. This seems to have absolutely no emotional impact on Travis what so ever. His expression barely changes, and he says nothing in response to the raving maniac. He doesn’t even look at him in the rear view. Nothing seems to ‘register’ with Travis. Throughout the entire film Travis seems distant and removed from his world. When people talk to him they have to repeatedly say his name just to get his attention. “Travis. Travis... Travis!” And even something as simple as a pill dissolving in a glass of water is enough to completely remove him from the conversation. Travis is a man who does not know how to react to his environment, and doesn’t know how to react to other people. Even the violence he sees on the street seems to elicit little emotional response in him, and later in the film after he shoots a robber dead he leaves with the milk still in his arms, unmoved by the fact that he just killed a man.



So Travis does not how to interact with nor does he react to his surroundings. But he also does not understand them or his world. Travis is naive in his perceptions of everything around him. As he begins driving his cab, he begins to see more and more of the underbelly of society - but he begins to think that everywhere is like that. He specifically chooses to drive in those areas because he has become obsessed with them. He hates the filth of the city and wishes a “rain [would] come and wash all this scum off the streets.” But he doesn’t seem to understand that he is focusing all his attention in negative areas and therefore is going to see negative things. “All the animals come out at night - whores, skunk pussies, buggers, queens, fairies, dopers, junkies, sick, venal.” He begins to think that this sort of environment is the world; his vision becomes narrow and obsessive – even pathological. The psyche of Travis, however, does not understand how this could be. His perception of the world has always been that it is a good place; a sort of white washed 50s delusion of sorts. He has little understanding of the real world; he says he ‘doesn’t know much about politics’ or ‘movies’ or ‘music’. He is almost a childlike in his understanding of anything.

That is when he picks her out of the crowd. “She was wearing a white dress. She appeared like an angel. Out of this filthy mess, she is alone. They... cannot... touch... her...,” he narrates while the camera pans across his diary with the same words (a throwback to Pickpocket). For him she is perfect and angelic, the complete opposite of the scum he sees on the street. He’s instantly entranced with her, not because he loves her, but because he sees her as a sort of ‘solution’ to the filth, or at least that she can rescue him from it. But he does not seem to understand that that she is a fantasy, an apparition. He projects onto her what he believes a perfect person should be. At first he parks outside the campaign headquarters for ‘Palantine for President’, which she slavishly volunteers at, and just watches her during his lunch break. He builds an idea in his mind of what she is like, how perfect she is. Eventually he decides to walk in and ask her out. It is a bold move, considering he was basically stalking her. Again, Travis has absolutely no idea how to act in society, and he really sees nothing wrong with his approach. Perhaps out of sheer morbid curiosity, Betsy actually accepts. But Travis was upset about Betsy’s friend Tom who she was laughing with as he came in to meet her. To Travis Tom was a joke - an inconsequential blip on the map. Of course, Travis fails to realize that he is just as small and unimportant as Tom, because he has already begun building himself up as a ‘hero’ who is above everyone else. But that will come into play later.

Travis ends up failing to have any real conversation with Betsy, though. He can only complain about how silly that man she is friends with is. He tries to ask something different (where she is from) but as soon as she’s answered he obsessively goes back to Tom. Travis’ narrow perception of the world makes it impossible for him to accept that the perfect angel he has built Betsy out to be is actually quite dull, boring and ‘ordinary’. They have absolutely nothing in common, but Travis is terrified of loosing what has become his last bastion of hope. He becomes obsessed with Palantine, who she worships and devotes her life to. He has absolutely no conception of what Palantine actually stands for, but because he believes Betsy is ‘perfect’, Palantine therefore “must be good”. But Travis is never able to understand the politics, and like everything else, he remains distant, unable to connect. In a last ditch effort to form some sort of connection with her, he brings her to a porno theatre. It’s the only thing he really knows; the only ‘social’ place he is comfortable with. But Betsy is immediately repulsed and storms out in anger; it is a wonder that Travis expected anything different to have happened, but again he really has no understanding of how other people behiave, and he ends up devastated.

The brilliant Bernard Herrmann score for Taxi Driver perfectly illustrates the duality that Travis created in Betsy. As the film opens you have the beautiful, romantic jazz (which becomes Betsy’s theme), and on the other hand you have the dark, ominous drum beats which seems to perfectly embody the darkness of the film. Both are juxtaposed with each other in the jarring opening sequence, each sharply interrupting the other as if in eternal battle. But later in the film, this sharp distinction can be applied to Travis’ relationship with Betsy. On one hand she is the beautiful, perfect angel that he’s made her to be in his fantasy world, but on the other he begins to realize she is actually like the rest. “Let me tell you something. You're in a hell, and you're gonna die in a hell, just like the rest of 'em!” he yells at her. His world has been shattered. His attempt to interact with society has failed. His attempt to integrate with society has failed. His attempt at understanding the world has failed. And Betsy, the one he saw as coming down to save him from the filth, turned out to be no different than the rest.

Loneliness and Disillusionment


Where's Waldo? Travis is even physically and visually distant from society.

At this point in Taxi Driver, Travis shifts from the social disconnection that he has been trying to deal with to social alienation. During the first act of Taxi Driver Travis, is removed from the world, but he attempts to enter it through Betsy. He attempts to ‘make contact’, so to speak, and integrate himself like everyone else. But he fails; Betsy (i.e. society) reject him. Now, instead of trying to join society, he removes himself from it completely. Society has alienated him and he sees grows to hate it entirely, with no interest in partaking in it any longer. Many people say Taxi Driver is about loneliness, which is true, but for much of the film Travis has imposed loneliness on himself. He now does nothing but roam the streets of New York in a cab by night, and sit in his room by day. He stares blankly into the television, a glaze in his eyes. Once again he has no meaning, purpose, or direction. He is obsessed with his hatred of the outside world, and retreats to the ‘safety’ of his cab and apartment, severed from the world. But then he comes across Iris.

Iris is the opposite of who he made Betsy out to be; Iris is a 12 year old prostitute drug addict runaway. Iris is basically the definition of the scum that Travis hates; she is one of the “animals [that] come out at night.” But in Travis’ fantasy world, 12 year old girls should be playing with dolls and going to school. Granted, they should be, and Taxi Driver certainly isn’t saying 12 year olds should be whores,but we all know that in reality there are child prostitutes. But Travis cannot accept this, and finally he has purpose in life again. Before his goal was Betsy; he wanted her, but could not have her. Now his goal is Iris; he can have her, but does not want her. But he does want to remove her from her environment, somehow saving her and vindicating himself, at least in his conscious mind. Since Travis has entered a state of deep social alienation, he is looking for a way to destroy that which does not accept him. Iris represents a complacent, dark society that he tried but failed to enter. In Travis’ mind, if he removes Iris from her circumstances and changes her, he will have effectively ripped a cosmic hole in the very fabric of society. It could be seen as Travis deciding to do something ‘good’, but I see it as Travis deciding to destroy that which he has grown to hate.

Now Travis has a goal; purpose, drive, motivation. He “gets organized.” “50 push ups every morning...no more destroyers of my body.” In a brilliant montage by Scorsese we see Travis getting into shape, vowing to take complete control over him body. He goes out and buys a series of guns in the now famous scene where he buys four pistols including a .44 magnum (hmm, didn’t we meet someone else who was talking about one of these?) Back at his apartment he shines his boots, creates contraptions for his guns, and prepares the bullets for an inevitable battle he seems to think is coming. He looks at himself in the mirror, talking to invisible people he believes he might get into a confrontation with. “You talkin’ to me? You talkin’ to me?” He is building himself up to be an intimidating individual, at least in his mind, and the way he seems to be putting on a dress rehearsal for violence seem to indicate he thinks of himself as sort of cowboy hero.

Now he believes he is prepared to rescue Iris. He goes to her pimp, played by a startlingly convincing Harvey Keitel, and pays for time with her. Travis is shocked with how promiscuous Iris is, but this only hardens his resolve. He tells her he has gallantly arrived to rescue her, but is surprised that she doesn’t want to be rescued and that she actually looks up to ‘Sport’ the pimp as a sort of father figure. He only leaves after they agree to have breakfast the next day, but he clearly was caught off guard by her demeanour. The next day during breakfast, Iris explains how Sport is there to protect her from herself, and how she doesn’t mind what she does. Travis does not understand, because once again this does not fit into his perceptual box of what a 12 year old should be like. And he also is confused with how she refuses any help. Travis ran in like a knight in shining white armour, but he leaves having accomplished nothing and once again feeling rejected. Betsy rejected Travis and now Iris rejects him, choosing a pimp over him.

Travis spirals into depression once more. He sits in his apartment brandishing his guns, staring endlessly at the nothingness of the television. He puts his foot on the TV stand and ever so slowly pushes it until the TV crashes to the ground and breaks - his last connection with society shattered. He is all alone. He is “God’s lonely man.” But old posters of Palantine still plaster the walls of his apartment; a cold reminder of Betsy and a symbol of a detached, hypocritical society that refuses to accept him. Travis now decides to assassinate Palantine - the father figure of Betsy and a singular personification of a society. Travis shows up at a Palantine rally. The camera focuses on his body but does not reveal his face; Travis opens a pill bottle, spills a few in his hand begins to bring them up to his mouth - the camera rushes up to his head. He now sports a shocking mohawk. He grins ominously from the edge of the crowd, clapping mockingly as he waits for the speech to end.

Destruction



Interestingly, Palantine’s campaign slogan is “we are the people”, yet during all of Palantine’s speeches there are armed police officers and secret service separating the politician from the masses. The way Scorsese shot Taxi Driver really is brilliant because even through the visuals we get a sense of social disconnect, and in addition to a visual distance between Palantine and the crowd, there is a striking visual distance between Travis and the crowd. Travis is out on the fringe, physically distant from everyone else. He wears a beat up army jacket, dark sunglasses and now has a mohawk. When the people clap he waits and joins in several seconds later; but his clap is at a different rhythm, separate from everyone else’s. Everything about Travis now stands out, and he is physically and emotionally independent of the world around him. At first he was rejected, but now he chooses to be alone. He deliberately removes himself – even physically – from society. He doesn’t want to be a part of it any longer. At this point, he wants to destroy it. Travis moves in to pull his gun to kill Palantine – the ultimate act of hate - but he stands out in the crowd much too clearly and the secret service chase him away. His first attempt at physically attacking society has failed.

Travis rushes back to his apartment to collect himself. He failed at destroying one ‘father figure’ representation of society - but quickly moves onto the next. If he can’t destroy Palantine, a phony politician who mirrors Betsy (shiny and perfect on the outside, but rather shallow and fake on the inside) and her rejection, then he will destroy Sport and the other pimps, who represent the underbelly of society which Iris chose over Travis. He speeds over in his cab and walks up to Sport. Travis is so different in his appearance and the way he carries himself that Sport doesn’t even recognize him. “How’s the pimp business?” Travis mocks before shooting Sport in the gut. He moves onto the apartment building where Iris works in and sparks a brief but explosive gun battle. Travis shoots a man’s hand off with the magnum, but Sport is not dead – Travis is shot in the neck, but still stands and finishes Sport off with the rest of his ammunition. Travis moves upstairs and is caught off guard by another gangster. He is shot in the arm, but manages to shoot the man in the face with far more bullets than necessary. “I’ll kill yeah! I’ll kill yeah!” a wounded pimp screams as he tries to attack Travis as Travis limps into the room where Iris is cowering. Travis stabs the pimp in the hand and then shoots him in the head, brains splattering all over the wall. Iris is huddled on the coach, her cries piercing the sounds of violence, Later a strange silence overcomes the building. Travis points a revolver at his head and pulls the trigger. Click, nothing. He takes an automatic. Click, click. Nothing. He slumps on the coach as the police arrive.

The haunting Herrmann creeps in and Travis locks eyes with the camera. He takes his hand which is dripping with blood and points it at his head like a gun. “Peuuuhhh...peuuuhhh...peuuuuhhh...” The brilliant Scorsese cuts to a camera looking down from the ceiling. We slowly begin to crawl away from Travis... across the room, we drift down the hall... Soon we are in the corridor and observe the silent aftermath of all the violence. Now we are outside and the camera cranes higher and higher looking down on the growing crowd of police and onlookers. Travis chose Palantine and Sport as representations of a society that did not accept him as well as a society which he perceives as scum and filth. Saving Iris may have been his way of somehow cleaning up the streets, but I think on a deeper level Travis resented the fact that Iris chose Sport over him, and the final act of violence was actually a selfish act of revenge -not a selfless act of heroism.

None-the-less, Taxi Driver cuts to months or years later and the camera pans over a clipboard filled with newspaper. A voice over recites a letter posted on the board from Iris’ parents, thanking Travis for rescuing her. The various newspaper clip headings reveal that the media made Travis out to be a hero and that he has made a full recovery. Soon we see Travis again, back with his normal haircut and normal clothing, and back to driving a cab. He is chatting with some other cabbies when he realizes he has a fare; he hops in the cab and begins to drive, but realizes his fare is actually Betsy. They have a ‘normal’ conversation with each other - more normal than any they had before. Travis refuses her money and bids her farewell, driving off. Travis seems to be ‘okay’ now. But as he is driving off there is a strange ringing sound and his eyes shoot to the rear view mirror. Nothing. Nothing is there. But apparently Travis is still a disturbed individual. A ticking time bomb of social alienation which could explode at any moment.



Another interesting thing about the epilogue is how the media apparently made him out to be a hero. Taxi Driver questions how easily the media is capable of turning a man into a hero or a villain. After all, was Travis really a hero? No. He shot all those pimps because Iris chose them over him. And had Travis been successful just a couple hours early and killed Palantine, he would have been the villain. It is not a big part of the film because this media exploitation is only explored during the last five minutes, but it defiantly makes you question the way media can so broadly paints people as either heroes or villains. Travis was made into a hero, but he most certainly was not one.

But it seems unfair to have such an expansive review of Travis and the themes of Taxi Driver without mentioning the art of the film. Paul Schrader’s script is obviously a masterpiece, as we have explored, but there is also Scorsese and DeNiro to consider. Scorsese gives such a unique vision to the Schrader script and he shoots in a way that screams of ‘alienation’. Travis walks one way and the camera pans the other way to meet him later instead of tracking with him. Travis speaks on the phone and the camera slowly drifts away, studying an empty corridor. Scorsese gives Taxi Driver a brilliant visual atmosphere which perfectly embodies the themes and character of the film. DeNiro is Travis Bickle. In what is DeNiro’s crowning performance, and what I believe to be one of the best performances of all time, he breathes life into the character like no other actor could have. Every movement, every pause, every blank stare – perfectly timed, perfectly honed. The performance is something you cannot deny having a major impact on acting and cinema. Overall, the Scorsese/DeNiro/Schrader team are an incredible blend of talent. Schrader allows us a startling examination of the psyche of a disturbed man. Scorsese provides a brilliant visual context for Travis to exist in, and his work with the camera, editing and the great Herrmann score allowed for Taxi Driver and Travis to be fully realized. DeNiro took the fascinating character of Travis and blew everyone away with his performance. DeNiro became Travis, and again, the performance is one of the best I’ve ever seen committed to the screen.

But even with all this artistic talent and brilliance, Taxi Driver is still the best character study – and indeed, my favourite film– ever made because of the character of Travis. He is an absolutely fascinating, enigmatic, and intriguing character. Like Pickpocket, I can watch Taxi Driver over and over again because I always find something new while studying the characters of each respective film. In Taxi Driver, the overall theme of social alienation and the three stages Travis goes through (1. social disconnect & attempted integration, 2. loneliness/disillusionment, and 3. destruction) prove to be endlessly compelling subjects. I believe the film is extremely intelligent on a number of levels, and many I did not even touch base on (paranoia or racism, for example). Taxi Driver is made of many layers, and each layer delves deeper and deeper into the world of Travis Bickle; each level saying something different - something insightful and perceptive. I’ve always felt that character studies and films that focus on society and alienation had the most influence on me. In that sense, Taxi Driver is the film that embodies everything I love about the character study and cinema itself. Each time it grows on me a little bit more, and I learn something a little bit different about Travis. It’s a complex labyrinth of themes and subtext, but ultimately Taxi Driver is Travis Bickle... an endlessly fascinating enigma of the human psyche. A puzzle of social alienation and personal exploration. A cinematic, Dostoyevskian masterpiece the likes of which has never been seen, and perhaps, never will be seen again.

Sep 2, 2007

Stalker

Tarkovsky, 1979



Andrei Tarkovsky was more than just a director - Tarkovsky was an artist in that he used a medium of art to express his deepest personal reflections about life and humanity. Anyone can be a director and make a movie, but Tarkovsky transcends as an artist in that his films realize the true voice of cinema, and he uses this voice to speak to his audience in a way that is difficult to describe, and can perhaps only be experienced. In Tarkovsky’s 1979 masterpiece Stalker (Сталкер), he takes the audience on a journey of spirituality. It’s a film of haunting visual beauty, brooding atmosphere and spiritual exploration. Tarkovsky’s Stalker is not so simplistic to cater to the masses though, and it’s a film which can be interpreted in many different ways. But perhaps that is the true beauty of it – like life itself - everyone finds something different in the meaning of Stalker... but everyone does find something.


Tarkovsky’s films are slow and methodical, and Stalker is certainly no exception. Running at nearly three hours and consisting of almost no real plot turns or twists, it would be an epic bore in the hands of most directors. Stalker is set in an unspecified city, though it can be assumed it takes place in an eastern bloc country. Near this city is a mysterious place called “The Zone” which is cordoned off by barbed wire and guarded by soldiers who shoot on sight. Yet as Stalker begins, we learn that three men – ‘Stalker’, ‘Writer’ and ‘Professor’ are planning to travel to ‘the Zone’. As it turns out, there is a mythical room in the middle of the Zone in which your innermost wishes are granted. However, the Zone is a dangerous place which requires the guidance of an experienced ‘stalker’ to navigate. The slightest wrong move and The Zone will snatch your life from you. It is never explained exactly how the Zone came into existence. It is mentioned that a meteorite fell creating it or that celestial beings left it as a gift for humanity. But what is immediate is that it is a supernatural place, one fraught with danger and mysticism.

If this at all sounds like a sci-fi plot to you, you are not mistaken. But unlike most sci-fi films, Stalker has been stripped of all conventions and all that is left is what is the essential core. There are no elaborate sets, there is no CGI. No space battles, and no monster hunting them down. In fact, the film features the three characters dodging death from a place. The ‘monster’ in this ‘sci-fi’ is ‘the Zone’, which is basically a backwater wasteland of overgrown grass and dilapidated wreckage. Yet the brilliant Tarkovsky takes this environment and crafts the thickest of atmospheres; an atmosphere so effective that Tarkovsky is able to frighten the viewer by merely having the wind blow. It is a film that builds and builds with tension but never releases it; there are no ‘scares’ in Stalker. There is only an atmospheric build up of tension, and Tarkovsky was skilled enough to maintain the suspense the entire time without ever having to resort to any ‘payoffs’. Stalker is quite simply one of the most atmospheric films I’ve ever seen. The Zone is nothing but wasteland, yet there is something mysterious and haunting about it – frightening, even. Death seems to loom around every corner, but you can never quite figure out how or why. You just sense it. At one point in the film Writer pulls out a gun to which Stalker exclaims, “who are you going to fire at?!” Indeed, the Zone is everything around you, yet it is ‘nothing’. Tarkovsky realized the potential in this, and that’s how he was able to take such masterful command of the film’s atmosphere and suspense.



Part of the way Tarkovsky turned a simple landscape into such a metaphorical symbol and source of ambience was through the way he shot it. It goes without mentioning that Stalker is quite simply one of the most breathtakingly shot films of all time. And I use the word ‘breathtakingly’ for a reason; there are shots in this film that literally had me letting out a silent gasps of breath. Tarkovsky always had a way with visuals, and Stalker is some of the best evidence of this. Right from the opening shot you find yourself instantly captivated; Tarkovsky’s frames in Stalker are filled with labyrinths of detail and information. Tarkovsky’s patience and discipline are also to be marvelled at and respected; his shots hold for long lengths of time - many times minutes on end - always lingering, allowing you to reflect. He doesn’t cutaway for reaction shots, and I loved how many conversations between characters were shot entirely from the perspective of only one participant. The use of light and shadow is absolutely impeccable, and sequences such as the one in the tunnel are what I consider pinnacle examples of cinematography. The way the landscape in the Zone is photographed is impressive, and the light green vegetation in conjunction with the hazy mist creates a sensation of a naturalistic mysticism. Tarkovsky turns an otherwise ordinary wilderness into its own character, ‘the Zone’. The gorgeous sepia photography is perhaps some of the most impressive in the film, creating an intended atmosphere of disillusion and despair while taking full advantage of light and shadow to craft stark images which remain seared in my mind.

Hand in hand with the striking, unforgettable cinematography is Tarkovsky’s revolutionary treatment of time, for which he was well known. Tarkovsky believed that cinema is simply a matter of sculpting away at ‘time’, taking the parts out which are unnecessary and whittling it all down to an essential core which becomes the heart of the film. The only other art to incorporate time is music, but many directors fail to recognize and take advantage of this; but Tarkovsky based an entire career on time. Stalker, like all of Tarkovsky’s work, is slow and deliberate. You can tell how carefully he constructed every sequence. Shots linger for long periods of time, and the audience finds themselves more often reflecting on shots which otherwise would have been forgotten with a director who would have cut long ago. There are even sequences of the characters simply sleeping, but Tarkovsky knows how to harness ‘time’ and is able to manipulate it to entrance us. It’s a very interesting experience, being in the hands of Tarkovsky, and while his films are long and slow to progress, they are by no means boring because we are in a constant state of captivation. Tarkovsky uses time as a painter uses a brush, and if that doesn’t count for brilliance, I don’t know what does.

But what makes Stalker a film that so profoundly affected me was its spirituality. What films that do have something to do with spirituality usually have an aspect of spirituality to them - but Stalker is spirituality. There really is no other way to describe the journey you partake on in Stalker than to say it’s a spiritual one. It is a fascinating and revelling exploration of humanity. The three main characters, ‘Stalker’, ‘Writer’ and ‘Professor’ are all personifications of our deepest desires. Stalker is on an eternal quest for faith; he wants something to believe in so he can help others through difficult times. Writer is searching for inspiration; he wants what time he has on Earth to say something important and make a difference in people’s lives with something he can reveal to them. Professor is in search of truth; he wants to better understand the world he lives in so he can make it a better place. These are three desires that everyone longs for at some point or another because they bring meaning to an otherwise meaningless existence. Each character is looking for it in a different place, but each is looking for essentially the same thing to fill the same spiritual hole.

The Zone can be seen as a metaphor for a number of things relating to spirituality. For example, I believe it could be seen as representing life itself. The film is long and slow moving, and every step through the Zone feels prolonged and drawn out. ‘The Room’, located at the center of the Zone, can therefore be thought of as that eternal ‘meaning’ or ‘truth’ the everyone seeks. They want to reach it before they die, and therefore do everything in their power to escape death for at least a little while longer. In Stalker, the characters move gradually and deliberately; they are terrified of the Zone (life) snatching their lives from them before they find the Room (representing absolution or truth). But when they finally do come upon the ‘threshold’ of ‘the Room’, they find themselves too terrified of what they’re inner most desire would actually be. Stalker never enters the room because he does not think he needs it; his journey towards truth is supposed to be fulfilled by leading others to faith. The nihilistic Writer hesitates and does not enter because of how terrified he is of what his true innermost wish would be granted. Despite his eternal search for inspiration and ultimately meaning, he finds himself afraid of what he will find. The Professor had ulterior motives the entire journey; he is afraid of this mysterious Zone because he cannot understand it in the context of fact and science. Despite a life searching for truth, he perhaps finds himself more terrified by the faith others seem to find in the inexplicable Zone than not finding it himself. Rather than finding truth, he would rather destroy it because he cannot understand it.



So while the entire concept of ‘the Zone’ may seem simplistic and dull on paper, it is in fact a brilliant metaphor for life, spirituality and the search for truth. Stalker is not a religious film by any means, but instead it explores the spiritual journeys that everyone ventures on during their lives. Tarkovsky was a devout Christian, but this film deals in a broader context than simply 'religion'. Stalker is a faithful man, he believes in something bigger than this dark world – yet he feels unfulfilled because he can’t seem to get others to see what he believes in. In fact, Stalker can almost be seen as a prophet who is sacrificing his well being to helps others. Writer is an agnostic character; he thinks there might be something out there – a God or a profound truth - but is not sure. He wants to find something, but can’t seem to come to grips with how it would change him. Professor is an atheist – he does not believe in what cannot be studied and tested – to him there cannot be a God or a truth that sums up existence - and therefore the very presence of the Zone is threatening to him. But he hesitates in destroying it because he realizes his very existence revolves around looking for truth, and that is what the Zone could help him with, even if he doesn’t understand it.

So in this sense, the Room could be seen as ‘God’. But I feel the spiritual journey in Stalker can be seen in a much broader context than that. The Room doesn’t have to be a ‘god’; for some it is simple ‘meaning’, and others it is ‘purpose’. But I think religion has been with mankind since the dawn of time because we all look for something supernatural or divine – something that would explain why we are here and give us meaning. In that sense, I believe the Room can be seen as a divine, supernatural or otherwise profound ‘truth’ which transcends our understanding. Everyone searches for it, but it takes a different form for everyone. The brilliant thing about Stalker is the Room represents that ‘truth’ everyone hunts, no matter the form it takes. Stalker is transcendent in its spirituality because everyone can relate to it. It is metaphorical and difficult to process at times, but it is a film that begs to be experienced, considered and meditated upon. It’s probably the most spiritual film I’ve ever seen because the entire film is journey through the soul – it is spirituality, and that is something almost no other film ever made can attest to. Of course, there is a lot more going on in the subtext of Stalker, it’s a brilliantly intelligent film, but I believe the heart of the film to be the spiritual journey through ‘the Zone’ in search of ‘the Room’, something that is deeply human and an experience everyone can relate to.

One can only say so much about a Tarkovsky film without writing an entire book, however. Stalker and his other films are so packed with questions and meditations that it can be mind boggling and even intimidating at times. But Tarkovsky said that he found often children best understood his films. Perhaps that is because at the very core of his films are quite simple truths, and we simply get too wrapped up in trying to understand the complex metaphors he uses to explore the essence of humanity. I believe Stalker is a film which demands patience, and it does not ‘pay off’ in the traditional sense of most movies – but it is such a profoundly spiritual, visually beautiful and artistically masterful film that it’s hard not to consider Stalker one of the best examples of what cinema is truly capable of. Tarkovsky is my favourite director because he realized the potential of cinema to explore spirituality and did so in such a beautiful, artistic manner that his films, Stalker being his seminal work, transcend the shackles of what we normally consider to be cinema.