GetToSreppin t1_iybxnf2 wrote on November 30, 2022 at 6:33 AM

Reply to comment by WriterDave in Interesting essay on Steven Soderbergh’s SOLARIS, which is now 20 years old. by Bullingdon1973

But Soderberg didn't miss the point. He was just making a different point than the other versions of the story.

warpus t1_iyc7mnu wrote on November 30, 2022 at 8:48 AM

He basically took Lem’s story, took out most of the elements that Lem was focusing on (alien contact) and shifted the focus on the wife and love angle, which in the novel is not a focus in any way.

Which is fine! He took an existing story and saw something else in it and made it into something different and new, keeping the setting the same. That happens all the time with the creative process, right? No problem there.

This is why the author didn’t like the movie though. From his pov the movie title implies that it’s the same story as the novel, but it’s very different. Whether you hold the same view or not, surely we can appreciate that position. He probably initially thought the movie was going to mirror the book and got disappointed when it became a love story instead and something much simpler. As an artist I can relate to that.

So yeah, Sodenberg made his own point and ran with it and that’s fine. Creative freedom and all that. As long as we acknowledge that the point of the novel was completely different and that the movie is not a faithful adaptation or anything close for that. It’s not meant to be a faithful adaptation though so it doesn’t fail in that regard. but some people trip up here due to the same title and setting, so they assume the book and the movie tell the same story. I think this is also another reason why the author was a bit miffed, being an eccentric creative type

WriterDave t1_iybzomu wrote on November 30, 2022 at 6:58 AM

Not according to the author of the book:

> "...to my best knowledge, the book was not dedicated to erotic problems of people in outer space... As Solaris' author I shall allow myself to repeat that I only wanted to create a vision of a human encounter with something that certainly exists, in a mighty manner perhaps, but cannot be reduced to human concepts, ideas or images. This is why the book was entitled Solaris and not Love in Outer Space."

— Stanislaw Lem, 2002

Point is, if Sodeburgh wanted to make "Love in Outer Space" he shouldn't have called it Solaris.

'Rosencranz and Guildenstern Are Dead' is brilliant... and look -- they didn't call it 'Hamlet.'

GetToSreppin t1_iydenkq wrote on November 30, 2022 at 4:02 PM

I'm not sure if you knew this or not but soderberg didn't write the book. His movie isn't the book and thusly has a different pov and message. This is the core idea of what adaptations can be.