Kidskycom It's funny watching the elements come together in this complicated scam. On one hand, the set-up isn't quite as complex as it seems, but there's an easy sense of fun in every exchange.

Hadrina The movie's neither hopeful in contrived ways, nor hopeless in different contrived ways. Somehow it manages to be wonderful

Janae Milner Easily the biggest piece of Right wing non sense propaganda I ever saw.

Payno I think this is a new genre that they're all sort of working their way through it and haven't got all the kinks worked out yet but it's a genre that works for me.

thomasghancock This is nowhere near the same level as Solaris or even the similarly plodding Stalker. It's pretty much a poster boy for pretentious cinema that your hillbilly friend mocks you for watching. For all that, it's not a total loss.The images are beautiful.But the characters bounce off of each other like pool balls instead of actually interacting. We never learn anything about them past superficiality. She hates him because he's not a real Russian. Or something. The New Age philosophizing would be embarrassed in the Barnes and Noble "New Age" section of books. (The only thing that saves it is the location among the ruins. Otherwise, just lock the loony up; he has nothing to offer.) We are beaten over the head repeatedly with imagery whose "meaning" we figured out 10 minutes in. Etc.I have a high tolerance for modern film; I love the "nothing happening" films of Antonioni, like L'Aventurra. But I have to agree with some others on here who were saying "Only a film student could love this movie," and I'll wager that they are the ones keeping it so highly rated.

t-viktor212 Nostalghia was the first non sci-fi movie I saw from Tarkovskij (I though understanding the audio would make it better), and maybe that was a wrong decision. It would have been better to start with the earlier movies. Now that I saw his last work though, Sacrifice, and understood it as well, I could understand this movie better. Nostalghia has a similar anti-modernism like sacrifice, various themes, and despite it's just two hours long, it's one of the slowest Tarkovskij films. This and Sacrifice represent well the director's last years of filmmaking. Although Nostalghia wasn't my favourite Tarkovskij, I still consider a masterpiece, just as Sacrifice.

TheLittleSongbird While I do rank Andrei Rublev(the greatest Soviet film ever made from personal view), Mirror(Tarkovsky's most personal) and Stalker above it, Nostalgia doesn't disappoint in any way; coming from a director who was one of the few who did not make a bad film, even my least favourite Ivan's Childhood was great and contains one of the best child performances ever.Nostalgia is not for everybody, despite being one of his shortest it is one of Tarkovsky's least accessible along with Solaris. People will be captivated by the photography, the symbolism and direction amongst other things while others will find the slow pacing too much for them, mightn't completely understand what's going on or maybe find it repetitive. As said already, this viewer is one of those people who considers it another Tarkovsky masterpiece. It's not a Tarkovsky film without beautiful visuals and imagery and great directing and Nostalgia absolutely has both. The mix of black and white and colour are truly striking while the photography(the most interesting being the lengthy but hypnotic lighted candle sequence) like all Tarkovsky films is some of the most stunning and arresting seen for any film. Tarkovsky's direction as ever is exemplary even late in his career, despite being his first Non-Soviet film Tarkovsky's unique style is unmistakable. The symbolism is fairly straightforward and still powerful.Nostalgia's music score is hauntingly melancholic and the dialogue is thoughtful and subtle, the desolation of art speech contains some of the most thought-provoking dialogue of any Tarkovsky film. With the story, the slow pacing did not bother me at all. Quite the opposite, because a lot of parts were so dream-like and mystical it was so easy to be captivated by it. The story itself is one of Tarkovsky's most personal(second only to Mirror) and has its fair share of emotional power, if not as much as Andrei Rublev and Solaris. The characters carry the film well and the performances are fine, Oleg Yankovsky is a compelling lead and Erland Josephson is appropriately distinguished and better than he is given credit for here. Overall, not one of Tarkovsky's best but doesn't disappoint at all. 10/10 Bethany Cox

loukosrotten One has to be very careful when reviewing this film. I think it would be arrogant on my behalf to say I have understood in all possible aspects and conceived all the meanings Tarkovsky was trying to deliver. And I really doubt anyone can, unless he's a genius as big as Tarkovsky. This movie talks about love, hate, art, faith, about everything, about life. It softens your heart and sharpens your brain leaving you with a deep sensation of having spent your time well and thinking about it is time well-spent as well. As for the artistic part, the way he chooses to depict his opinion, to pose his questions, to demonstrate his doubt and his emotions of hope or loss(especially his nostalgic feelings of his motherland Russia combined with his love for Italy his exile land) is far more than moving: it's flawless.