Science Fiction with George Clooney!

I really enjoyed watching that movie long time ago but until today I'm not sure if I like the end of the movie or not

I think it was the lack of clarity about what happens at the end of the film that is the issue.

@Katiedot: the issue? or the point....
the book and both films have a purposeful ambiguity designed to leave the reader/viewer uncomfortable, questioning.

Forgive me if that is what you were saying, Katie. A snotty reply is not my intention!

Soderbergh's Solaris is a wonderful film. Only off notes are down to Clooney, I am afraid.

@Amuserato - I saw "Solaris" again last night and ,again, found it engrossing. I'm curious what you disliked about George's performance?

I can't speak for Amuserato, but for me it was George's occasionally hammy over acting that did it for me. That scene where he wakes up after his first dream/encounter with his ex wife just makes me cringe.

Interesting. It didn't bother me. I actually thought he was pretty good in the part. Viola Davis was the one who got on my nerves because she was so strident throughout the whole movie.

@LizzyNY-- I am glad you found the movie engrossing!  I do still like it-- though I am not 100% convinced Clooney understood the story.  I like to play the soundtrack when I am painting or writing. It isn't often you hear gamelan music.

However, I agree with Katiedot:  Clooney's performance is occasionally cringe-worthy in this film, especially as compared to the stunning performances by others in the cast. Viola Davis' intensity and Jeremey Davies dreamy unhinged personae are perfect foils for each other --opposing poles of emotion reacting to the surreal situation in which they find themselves.  Falling apart pulls them in different directions.  Natascha McElhone is mesmerizing as the both the real Rheya and Solaris Rheyas 1 and 2-- all struggling to understand existence and their place in it, (especially the Solaris Rheyas, who appear on the station fully formed by the entity of the planet from Kelvin's memories like Athena from the head of Zeus, her large eyes so painfully beseeching "who am I" and "what is happening to me?")  In my opinion, Clooney seems to be so consciously ACTING that it jars besides the more nuanced performances of the others and even the subtle dissonance of the score and evolution (or de-evolution) of the planet itself.

I guess I'll have to watch it again with a more critical eye. To me he was everyman at sea in a situation he couldn't comprehend - a representation of all of us in our quest to understand our place in the cosmos. The other characters all had more of a grasp of what was happening - even Rheya - but would not even try to help him understand what little they did know.

I have to disagree with you, though, about Viola Davis' performance. It struck me as too "one note" - too strident from beginning to end. The opposition of reactions between her character and Jeremy Davies could have been shown just as easily with a little less intensity on her part.

Thanks so much for your perspective LizzyNY!  I haven't seen the movie in awhile.  Next time I do, I will keep your feeling about "one note" and Clooney's performance in mind.
 

Amuserato - I'm far from being qualified to be a critic. Reading the analyses you and Katie wrote gave me a lot to think about. Thanks.  

I saw Solaris first in a partly empty cinema and found 
it totally absorbing even though I didn't understand half of what was going on. 
I could feel the guy's pain in many scenes when he was on his own with no dialogue.
I didn't think George was OTT in the "waking up scene"
It seemed a perfectly natural reaction to me, given the circumstances.
I'll have to watch it again soon now !

Yes, Amuserato hit the nail on the head for me! George is just so visibl acting in some scenes that it's jarring.

George was actually filming this movie at the same time he was doing Confessions of a Dangerous Mind, sometimes actually going from one set directly to another. His 'acting' scenes to me look like a lack of focus; I don't think he was fully engaged.

Way2Old - I didn't know that he was filming both at the same time. It couldn't have been easy going from one mindset to another, so maybe that accounts for the problems the others found with his performance. Personally, I liked it, but I'm really not qualified to judge - I'm just a fan.  

Yep. The scenes where he looked tired and sleep-deprived...? Not acting.

There's a story that Soderbergh tells about a scene where George is meant to be sleeping on the space station. He got into his bed, closed his eyes and fell asleep for real, he was that tired!

It's so interesting to watch Solaris, which I liked but agree has some very "ACTING!" moments, and then compare it to his performances in Michael Clayton or Syriana.  That scene in Syriana in the diner with Christopher Plummer, where he's quietly listing exactly how he's going to kill everyone Plummer loves, is AMAZING.  Had he gotten that role ten years earlier, I don't think he would have been able keep himself from BEING INTENSE in that scene, and it's the exact opposite that makes that scene, and his whole performance in that film, so great, IMO.  

Sorry to highjack the thread with another movie!  

I just watched Solaris for the second time and decided to read through the thoughts you guys had.  Lots of different opinions here so I just thought I would add mine.

I didn't think George overacted his part.  I saw him as the one character who was "out of the loop", not understanding what was going on.  Trying to come to terms with seeing his dead wife and what was happening on the ship.  His reactions were reasonable in my mind.  Rhea seemed self-possessed but Kelvin was struggling with what was real and what was fantasy.  He had the most to lose and his emotions reflected that.  I think.

But I will say that George is at his very best when he internalizes his character.  What lies just underneath the surface of the emotions of his character is what George showcases so well.  Missa mentioned Michael Clayton.  By far my fav CLOONEY movie.  He had that character down perfectly.  Syriana is another terrific acting role for him.  And The American was a perfect role for George to flex his best attributes.  His facial expressions and his body language.  Not much dialogue but it works for him because he expresses himself so well.  His eyes say so much.

Oh and by the way his butt and his back were in mighty fine shape.  That scene with Rheya where they are standing together naked and all you see is G's backside.  Mmmmm.  Not overacted in the least!

 you funny !

That backside scene is somewhere on this forum if you want to relive it!

When I think of George "overacting", Solaris is NOT the film that comes to mind (hi, Leatherheads!).  I think he's terrific in this, especially when I'm pretty sure it was his first attempt at playing something other than a version of the handsome charmer.  The scenes about their relationship on Earth are my favorite.  And watching this movie back makes me think how much I'd like to see George and Viola Davis play opposite each other now.

Missa I totally agree with you regarding Leatherheads. Definitely OTT acting. Sorry George . But yes I thought the Earth scenes between George's character and Rheya were really touching and emotional. It's very unusual to find a George movie that explores a relationship as intimate as theirs was.

Still sticking with my original reaction to Clooney's action in this otherwise hypno-trance-like film-- just did not buy the relationship between Clooney and McElhone. Not the supposedly smoldering looks on the subway, and definitely not the poetry reading. But I will say some of the off notes have got to be attributable to the director.  Soderbergh routinely pulls intense, amazing performances from people.  Wonder why he failed here?  Would love to hear some backstory...
Agree with Missa-- would love to see Viola Davis and Clooney in some good roles 

cheers!