A Russian "art" film and therefore enigmatic. Supposed to be a political statement but since I don't suffer under those politics I don't really understand it.

well - favorite movie of all time. I have seen it at least 30 times and each time i like it a little bit more. I'm afraid to continue this , because something weird may occur. Anyway - this film is stunning. Stalker - the post-apocalyptic martyr, leads the Science and the Art to see the FAITH and in the end he dies from their mistrust. Plus this movie has the most beautiful cinematography ever !

Very slow and long. I really had to watch it twice (and that takes a while). I still don't understand it, but I don't think it's supposed to be understandable, so don't get too caught up in the confusion if you watch it. It is visually stunning. Overall, I found the effect to be dream-like.

A mysterious and quiet film, with incredible scenery. The atmosphere in this is remarkable, with some amazing photography and camera work. It's difficult to follow everything that's said in the film, but the emotional impact from the atmosphere made up for this. I'll probably have to watch Stalker a few more times to get a firm understanding, but what I've managed to learn so far was quite enlightening. Stalker has a grand sense of scale to it, but it's the intimacy that remains memorable.

Haunting, atmospheric adaptation of The Strugatsky Brothers' Roadside Picnic. Aliens have visiited and a "stalker" deals on the black-market of strange leftovers from the alien "picnic".

The fourth-greatest science fiction film of all time, after "2001," Tarkovsky's "Solaris," and "Seconds." Perhaps, in a certain frame of mind, I might think it is even better than that. To some degree an abstracted remake of "Solaris."

As an audio-visual experience, it's unparalleled, and its premise is interesting. Its slow, contemplative pace and the visuals and sounds make it an absorbing experience, but at times Stalker lingers on an environment or a concept for too long, breaking the dream-like state it previously induced. Regardless, if you can make it through all 25 hours, Stalker will make an impact on you - if not for its philosophical musings, for the environments it immerses you in.

Thanks Tarkovski for this piece of art. Great film.

It was really good for some parts then dreadfully boring in others. However, I can forgive this when I think of the great cinematography. The best thing about the entire movie is the sound though.

Stalker may have some of the most impressive cinematography that I have ever seen. Quite literally, this is a moving canvas by a phenomenal artist. The story wasn't as jaw dropping as the visuals, but its tough to fault the film for that in this case.

'Stalker' is a very dense film; however, the fantastic camera work and the sets create a unique atmosphere that you won't see anywhere else. But I must admit that as for understanding it, the film passed right above me; but I'm sure there is something very pure in the film, an unrevealed truth that I feel I must know. 'Stalker' is unique in every aspect; it is so unique and captivating - yet, incredibly boring - that you feel like you're watching something out of this world.

This a very interesting film for two reasons: first is the incredible visual atmosphere held for the entire runtime of the film and second is the kind of the questions about faith and hope it asks the viewer. It's a very slow film, but there's never really a time when nothing is happening. I wasn't bored for a second.

Stalker must be one of the most impressive movies I've ever seen, but if you're planning to see it be prepared to engage in a slow, dark and often philosophical movie. Tarkovsky somehow succeeds in keeping your attention with powerfull images while at the same time he refuses to make it easy, constantly deluding you and refusing to bring down the movie to a coherent script. After a first view chances are small you will have the feeling you 'got' the movie but I guess that only adds to the charm.

Excelente fotografia!!!

BEEEE ZARRRRE. Very strange, yet hauntingly beautiful movie. But don't watch if you're impatient.

Even though it is poetic, philosophical and somewhat thought provoking, this was one of the most boring movies that was even considered sci fi. Maybe it was just me, but I could not seem to get into this and this seemed like the kind of movie I would fall in love with. Maybe I need to watch it one more time, but I don't feel like wasting my time.

Haunting and beautiful. Too boring and obscure for me to fully enjoy but not enough to completely hide it's value.

How many roads must a man walk down before you can call him a man. Stalker's been for me always very religious movie. It's highly filosofical and well done in all aspects. But it's also difficult and hard to watch. Much has happened since I saw it for the first time in 1989 - in me, in the way I see movies. BTW, in the original novel an alien lifeform visited on the Earth for a picknick and left a lot debris after them.

Awesome cinematography combined with three characters that are all in search for one thing or another.

Call me shallow, but great cinematography doesn't make up for the fact that the first 30 minutes (which is where I stopped watching) is some of the slowest, most boring, piece of film-making I've ever seen. The abundant praise the movie seems to be getting here somewhat convinces me that I didn't give it enough of a shot; maybe it's today's culture that has wired me into becoming impatient.

A slow and philosophical adaptation of a russian sci-fi novel written by Strugacky brothers (dir. A. Tarkovsky). A stalker (guide) leads a writer and a scientist into a Zone, a place with it's own rules, abandoned area which is a remain of an enigmatic alien visit, seeking a place that is rumored to grant human wishes. Most of scenes are based on examining motives and characters of these three people and meaning of human life. The movie's setting - a dystopical unknown (post)industrial landscape being reclaimed by nature - add a lot to the it's overall impact.

Very strange film but great none the less.