I have to watch it again. Many times.

Tarkovsky's most baffling film is absolutely brilliant. Most scenes don't even appear to relate to each other, but in terms of these memories and recollected images, Tarkovsky makes sure they make sense. This also has one of the top five best cinematography I've ever seen in a film.

Tarkovsky is like a Russian Terrence Malick. Beautiful cinematography where every shot tells a story. Obviously a personal movie for the director but a very powerful one for everyone else.

The Mirror is clearly good, but I wasn't equipped to fully understand it. I got lost in the non-chronological stuff.

probably the most personal film I've ever saw. you can see everything that Tarkovski is here, in every frame

Slow and boring.

Even though I found this to be the most boring film I'd ever seen, I decided to give it another try. This second time I was prepared with lots of coffee and was really focused. But yet again I failed to really grasp what this film is about. And yes, there are some beautiful tracking shots but, hell, I could think of numerous films that are more beautiful than this one. Tarkovsky's own Andrey Rublyov for one. But well, it's maybe not THE most boring film - but top 3 (bottom 3?) for sure.

Beautiful piece of art. The plot is really difficult to follow but it is rather a complex canvas of human life, love and art than a feature film. Tarkovsky has created something that will remain in the golden history of cinematography forever, but this immense body of work wouldn't have been that bright without one of the greatest operators in the history - Georgiy Rerberg. So talented and so unfairly treated by Tarkovsky.

We are born, we live, and then we die. There's a clear beginning and end of our physical being but throughout our lives our memories, dreams, and perceptions often live simultaneous in the past, present, and future. There is no time except what we perceive as human beings. The film captures this abstraction of the mind and how our memories play a part in how we perceive ourselves and others.

68

I loved Stalker, but absolutely hated this. Maybe it would improve upon a rewatch, but the first viewing left me with such an aversion, I don't foresee that happening any time soon.

Gorgeous.

It's by far his most personal and difficult film, a completely fragmented work which yet connects together immensely, with every piece adding together to create an impressive work which explores memory and dreams with significant depth. It's still a challenge on this viewing but it's an exceptional work nonetheless.

I could try to explain a lot of things about this movie, but I just can think about how beautiful, poetic and deep it is.

Like all Tarkovsky, Mirror's beauty is transcendental, there's the feeling that these images that gorgeously pervade each and every iota of the film was done with a divine hand. Mirror doesn't seem so much to have been "built", rather it is an organic experience that has been "grown". The film appears to be extremely personal - as though molded single-handedly - and yet there's a sense of awe that exists simply at the pure deftness of technique displayed. Beautiful and majestic, definite watch.

"Sometimes as self-indulgent as a Fellini movie, a bit of Bergmanesque introspection, and the symbolism and poetry border on the pretentious, but there's always a magical Tarkovsky meditative atmosphere."

War scenes caught me at most. There was excellent camera using and perfect situation expression in the training scenes. Complex fiction without story and uneven colour of visuals make the film complicated. There was Freud in this film again. It seems that Tarkovskiy had been influenced by Freud much.

Difficult, but rewarding largely autobiographical effort from Tarkovsky. One of his best.

On the one hand I really liked the surreal structure of this film on the other I was bored way too often. Feels like Tarkovsky filmed one of his dreams - usually I love such experiments, but his dreams seem to be so different from mine that I couldn't quite get it. Even though I didn't really like this film I'm still glad I saw it.

So confusing and frustrating in almost every single way. You shouldn't have to read a plot synopsis after you're done watching a film to attempt to understand what you just watched. The voiceover adds to the confusion and it's nearly impossible to follow. Anyone who understood this is either a genius and shouldn't waste time watching films or is straight up lying. Yes, it does look pretty. But there's thousands upon thousands of pretty films so please stop confusing me with your absent plots.

Tarkovsky's non-linear reflection on childhood and memory is one of his liveliest, briskest films, and it may on first viewing seem rather odd to fans of his deliberate style. But let's not overlook how good it is. It's visually extraordinary, showing his brilliant eye for both B&W and color. The performances are strong: Margarita Terekhova is truly luminous. And as a self-examination/semi-autobiography, it's often brilliant. Only major complaint: the use of stock footage is a bit jarring.