--- product_id: 2292847 title: "Stalker: A Film by Andrei Tarkovsky" price: "€ 190.26" currency: EUR in_stock: true reviews_count: 13 url: https://www.desertcart.be/products/2292847-stalker-a-film-by-andrei-tarkovsky store_origin: BE region: Belgium --- # Stalker: A Film by Andrei Tarkovsky **Price:** € 190.26 **Availability:** ✅ In Stock ## Quick Answers - **What is this?** Stalker: A Film by Andrei Tarkovsky - **How much does it cost?** € 190.26 with free shipping - **Is it available?** Yes, in stock and ready to ship - **Where can I buy it?** [www.desertcart.be](https://www.desertcart.be/products/2292847-stalker-a-film-by-andrei-tarkovsky) ## Best For - Customers looking for quality international products ## Why This Product - Free international shipping included - Worldwide delivery with tracking - 15-day hassle-free returns ## Description Challenging, provocative, and ultimately rewarding, Andrei Tarkovsky's Stalker is a mind-bending experience that defies explanation. Like Tarkovsky's earlier and similarly enigmatic science fiction classic Solaris , this long, slow, meditative masterpiece demands patience and total attention; anyone accustomed to faster pacing is likely to abandon the nearly three-hour film before its first hour is over. On the other hand, those who approach Tarkovsky's work in a properly receptive (and wide awake) frame of mind are likely to appreciate the film's seductive depth of theme and hypnotic imagery. Set in what appears to be a post-apocalyptic future (although the time-frame is never specified), the eerie and unsettling story focuses on the title character, Stalker (Aleksandr Kajdanovsky), who leads characters known only as the Writer (Anatoli Solonitsyn) and the Scientist (or Professor, played by Nikolai Grinko) into a mysterious region called The Zone. Tarkovsky films their journey as a long odyssey, or religious pilgrimage, and center of The Zone--said to be under an alien influence--is where each of these men hopes to find a kind of personal transcendence. Despite obvious parallels to The Wizard of Oz , Tarkovsky's film is devoid of special effects or any fantastical elements typically associated with science fiction or fantasy. Instead, Stalker makes astonishing use of sound and bleak-but-beautiful imagery to envelope the viewer into the eerie atmosphere of The Zone and the dank, colorless landscape that surrounds it. And while the film's glacial pacing may be off-putting to some viewers, there's no denying that Stalker has a mesmerizing power of its own, including a thought-provoking and highly debatable ending that propels the film to a higher level of meaning and significance. --Jeff Shannon Stalker Review: Interesting version. Classic - I enjoyed this new version of Stalker. I did not mind the yellow sepia ish effect. This movie reminds me of 3 guys who are on a hallucinogenic trip outdoors The whole film is like that deep self examination that you go through during a serious psychedelic experience. I love this film. I was a little on the fence about the new transfer but quickly came to love it.There is a divide in the meaning of the film in that there are parts that are clear in relation to the types of questions meant to be addressed. The symbolic meaning of having an artist/writer and a scientist are clear in the argument proposed. Tarkovskey is obviously worried about dehumanization and science becoming too advanced as made claer in Solaris -more specifically the ending. I feel this film is in Tarckovsky's slightly commercial category. What i mean by this is ,like Solaris, i feel he uses a futuristic as well as supernatural element (depending on how you interpret those moments) to capture a larger audience while possibly fooling them into finding out something about themselves as well as their environment. This film has one of those artistic fail safe devices that has multiple meanings and even if you do not grasp all of the meanings it is almost impossible to miss some of the intention.There seems to be a lot of elaborate reviews for this so i will point out a few tidbits of significance. There is a very positive point that is explicitly made in that The artist as well as the Scientist seem to upset the Stalker in the end because he thought by taking 2 people of the mind they would understand the lessons of the Zone. The Stalker is an introverted socially lacking type who we find out is most likely equal if not more academically skilled that the 2 professional due to his extensive library of reading materials shown in his house that is purposely not shown at the beginning (even though we see many good interior shots of the Stalkers home. Tarkovsky is making statements that are not hard to figure out such as the overall theme of having hope in life. There is an agnostic as well as a unified field type of suggestion. I have thought for years that Andrei Rebleiv is my favorite Tarkovsky film and i still hold that opinion because i feel it is the ultimate ode to real artists. I also prefer The Mirror ,Nostalgia,Ivans Childhood and The Sacrifice over Solaris or Stalker. Stalker is a film that is growing on me. It does seem to have a direct message while most of Tarkovskies films leave more to ponder. The mystery element of the film is what exactly is the cosmic-ness of the Zone. I find any comparison to Roadside Picnic completely irrelivent to Tarkovskys film. Often people will jump on a film for not being in sync with the book. This is a common response from closed minded people. There is no rule for interpreting a work of art. You never hear anyone going on and on abut the differences in the Richard 11 films. That is because people who know that material are not pop critics. For someone to compare this film with either a. Chernobyl or b. Roadside Picnic is comparing a non argument and instantly turns into puedo intellectual backwash. There may be loose connections to Chernobyl but that would be too obvious. Look at The Sacrifice or Nostalgia. Those films are the only real Tarkovsky films that have a straight forward meaning. This leaves the viewer to form their own meaning using the loose structure Tarkovsky gives them. Anyone who will completely disregard a film because it does not match with the source novel should not be watching an art film to begin with. One of my favorite criticisms of film versus novels is Vladimir Nabokov's Lolita. Most people do not even realize Nabokov himself wrote the film script, intentionally making it challenging. Challenging in making it able to be a film in the early sixties. Back in the day film studios had legit authors like Capote and Chandler writing film scripts so the Lolita script was actually a great work of art. Hearing Tarintino criticize the script is funny because he is supposed to know so much about films. Back to Stalker, anyone even remotely concerned with the Russian history or book comparison is not only missing the point of the film but also getting stuck in a corner. Each of the characters in the film represent a generalization that could apply to any battle with science, man and nature. I feel this film is very accessible and also the last time Tarkovsky would do that. Calling it a sci-fir film is very non cerebral and again not within the category of films that require a different kind of thinking. Review: 'The Wizard of Oz' crossed with 'The X-Files' - This is my updated review -- for the Criterion Blu-ray edition: The Blu-ray is crystal clear and a huge improvement on the DVD that I bought years ago (by KINO). The sound is also vastly better. It is like seeing the film for the 1st time again. Criterion did an awesome job on this, Thank-You! If you like journeys into abandoned places and landscapes, and also philosophical 'meaning of Life' tales, and a sprinkle of lovely spoken poetry... not to mention fantastic, mesmerizing scenery that lingers in your mind - then this is a film experience that you should enjoy. But it is a slow-paced film (but that is its charm as well, for me). When I watch this, it gives me a 'mind-break vacation' from the daily world of our often crazy reality... 'Stalker' was adapted from the Strugatsky brothers novel ' Roadside Picnic', and is that rare film that takes time to watch and understand the story, but it is well worth the effort. It is a surreal road trip... like 'The Wizard of Oz' crossed with an extended episode of 'The X-Files'! (but in Russian - with English subtitles). And it has humor too. Basically, this is about a 'stalker' - a guide that illegally takes people into a forbidden place called 'The Zone', where it is suggested that something unusual landed years ago, changing the area forever. The Zone is very dangerous and mysterious, and many that go in there never return, but will vanish or die without the stalker. Stalker (a nickname) has an almost spiritual relationship with the Zone. It is like a holy and sacred place for him, even with all its known and hidden dangers. Much of the dialog between him and the two people he guides (Professor and Writer) is a big part of the enjoyment of the story, and all of the visuals and cinematography in many scenes make for some very magical and breathtaking film watching! After 2 viewings I was hooked. This is now one of my favorite films (next to '2001' and 'Blade Runner'). I also read the book this was adapted from, and though there are differences, both are satisfying adventures that should not be missed! Along with 'Solaris' (1972), this is one of my favorite films by Russian director Andrei Tarkovsky. He was a real poet of filmmaking , and this might be his masterpiece - a real 'mind trip' of a movie! Thank-You for reading... but go watch 'Stalker' today! ## Technical Specifications | Specification | Value | |---------------|-------| | Customer Reviews | 4.7 out of 5 stars 1,951 Reviews | ## Images ![Stalker: A Film by Andrei Tarkovsky - Image 1](https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/91QR26GFmaL.jpg) ![Stalker: A Film by Andrei Tarkovsky - Image 2](https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/81ZWjes1YuL.jpg) ![Stalker: A Film by Andrei Tarkovsky - Image 3](https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/81qSGueimFL.jpg) ![Stalker: A Film by Andrei Tarkovsky - Image 4](https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/81Wbi9SeMZL.jpg) ## Customer Reviews ### ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐ Interesting version. Classic *by R***R on January 25, 2018* I enjoyed this new version of Stalker. I did not mind the yellow sepia ish effect. This movie reminds me of 3 guys who are on a hallucinogenic trip outdoors The whole film is like that deep self examination that you go through during a serious psychedelic experience. I love this film. I was a little on the fence about the new transfer but quickly came to love it.There is a divide in the meaning of the film in that there are parts that are clear in relation to the types of questions meant to be addressed. The symbolic meaning of having an artist/writer and a scientist are clear in the argument proposed. Tarkovskey is obviously worried about dehumanization and science becoming too advanced as made claer in Solaris -more specifically the ending. I feel this film is in Tarckovsky's slightly commercial category. What i mean by this is ,like Solaris, i feel he uses a futuristic as well as supernatural element (depending on how you interpret those moments) to capture a larger audience while possibly fooling them into finding out something about themselves as well as their environment. This film has one of those artistic fail safe devices that has multiple meanings and even if you do not grasp all of the meanings it is almost impossible to miss some of the intention.There seems to be a lot of elaborate reviews for this so i will point out a few tidbits of significance. There is a very positive point that is explicitly made in that The artist as well as the Scientist seem to upset the Stalker in the end because he thought by taking 2 people of the mind they would understand the lessons of the Zone. The Stalker is an introverted socially lacking type who we find out is most likely equal if not more academically skilled that the 2 professional due to his extensive library of reading materials shown in his house that is purposely not shown at the beginning (even though we see many good interior shots of the Stalkers home. Tarkovsky is making statements that are not hard to figure out such as the overall theme of having hope in life. There is an agnostic as well as a unified field type of suggestion. I have thought for years that Andrei Rebleiv is my favorite Tarkovsky film and i still hold that opinion because i feel it is the ultimate ode to real artists. I also prefer The Mirror ,Nostalgia,Ivans Childhood and The Sacrifice over Solaris or Stalker. Stalker is a film that is growing on me. It does seem to have a direct message while most of Tarkovskies films leave more to ponder. The mystery element of the film is what exactly is the cosmic-ness of the Zone. I find any comparison to Roadside Picnic completely irrelivent to Tarkovskys film. Often people will jump on a film for not being in sync with the book. This is a common response from closed minded people. There is no rule for interpreting a work of art. You never hear anyone going on and on abut the differences in the Richard 11 films. That is because people who know that material are not pop critics. For someone to compare this film with either a. Chernobyl or b. Roadside Picnic is comparing a non argument and instantly turns into puedo intellectual backwash. There may be loose connections to Chernobyl but that would be too obvious. Look at The Sacrifice or Nostalgia. Those films are the only real Tarkovsky films that have a straight forward meaning. This leaves the viewer to form their own meaning using the loose structure Tarkovsky gives them. Anyone who will completely disregard a film because it does not match with the source novel should not be watching an art film to begin with. One of my favorite criticisms of film versus novels is Vladimir Nabokov's Lolita. Most people do not even realize Nabokov himself wrote the film script, intentionally making it challenging. Challenging in making it able to be a film in the early sixties. Back in the day film studios had legit authors like Capote and Chandler writing film scripts so the Lolita script was actually a great work of art. Hearing Tarintino criticize the script is funny because he is supposed to know so much about films. Back to Stalker, anyone even remotely concerned with the Russian history or book comparison is not only missing the point of the film but also getting stuck in a corner. Each of the characters in the film represent a generalization that could apply to any battle with science, man and nature. I feel this film is very accessible and also the last time Tarkovsky would do that. Calling it a sci-fir film is very non cerebral and again not within the category of films that require a different kind of thinking. ### ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐ 'The Wizard of Oz' crossed with 'The X-Files' *by A***G on July 19, 2015* This is my updated review -- for the Criterion Blu-ray edition: The Blu-ray is crystal clear and a huge improvement on the DVD that I bought years ago (by KINO). The sound is also vastly better. It is like seeing the film for the 1st time again. Criterion did an awesome job on this, Thank-You! If you like journeys into abandoned places and landscapes, and also philosophical 'meaning of Life' tales, and a sprinkle of lovely spoken poetry... not to mention fantastic, mesmerizing scenery that lingers in your mind - then this is a film experience that you should enjoy. But it is a slow-paced film (but that is its charm as well, for me). When I watch this, it gives me a 'mind-break vacation' from the daily world of our often crazy reality... 'Stalker' was adapted from the Strugatsky brothers novel ' Roadside Picnic', and is that rare film that takes time to watch and understand the story, but it is well worth the effort. It is a surreal road trip... like 'The Wizard of Oz' crossed with an extended episode of 'The X-Files'! (but in Russian - with English subtitles). And it has humor too. Basically, this is about a 'stalker' - a guide that illegally takes people into a forbidden place called 'The Zone', where it is suggested that something unusual landed years ago, changing the area forever. The Zone is very dangerous and mysterious, and many that go in there never return, but will vanish or die without the stalker. Stalker (a nickname) has an almost spiritual relationship with the Zone. It is like a holy and sacred place for him, even with all its known and hidden dangers. Much of the dialog between him and the two people he guides (Professor and Writer) is a big part of the enjoyment of the story, and all of the visuals and cinematography in many scenes make for some very magical and breathtaking film watching! After 2 viewings I was hooked. This is now one of my favorite films (next to '2001' and 'Blade Runner'). I also read the book this was adapted from, and though there are differences, both are satisfying adventures that should not be missed! Along with 'Solaris' (1972), this is one of my favorite films by Russian director Andrei Tarkovsky. He was a real poet of filmmaking , and this might be his masterpiece - a real 'mind trip' of a movie! Thank-You for reading... but go watch 'Stalker' today! ### ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐ The Great Existentialist Science Fiction Film *by K***N on September 8, 2012* It'd been many years since I had seen Stalker, Andrei Tarkovsky's excellent science fiction film, and I watched it last night. For a science fiction movie, Stalker is certainly an oddity. Released in 1979, loosely based on the short novel Roadside Picnic by Arkady and Boris Strugatsky, and directed by Tarkovsky, the masterful Russian director who lived too short a life, it tells the tale of a part of Russia that has been visited by an odd event. It may have been a meteorite that fell, or it may have been an alien visitation. But the event created the Zone, a dangerous area which was cordoned off by the police, and where few could go. A Stalker - a sort of guide who takes people through the traps in the Zone - meets up with two men who want to visit the Room, a place where wishes come true. One is a Professor, a man of reason, and the other a writer, a man of inspiration. The Stalker is a man of belief. Very little happens in the movie, which lasts more than 2 1/2 hours, except for their trip to the Room, and their discovery of what they want from it. Stalker is science fiction only in its premise; there are no aliens, no magic, nothing that would be noticed as science fiction. It is a slow movie; very little happens, and some of the shots are several minutes long. It's a science fiction movie as it would have been written by Samuel Beckett. Yet it's a brilliant existential examination of the desires of men and women. At first, the film begins in sepia-toned black-and-white, but once the three characters reach the Zone, the film changes to color. Just as Oz was in color, so was the Zone. The Zone is located outside an industrialized city, and is full of the detritus of modernity. Yet Tarkovsky films these banal, cast-off items with the plastic beauty that he showed in all his films. Some of the shots are breathtakingly haunting, yet there is nothing special in them. In a prescient shot, near the end of the movie, the Stalker can be seen returning to his home with his wife and daughter, and, across the river, a nuclear power plant is seen. The Zone could be the area surrounding Chernobyl. There is no devastation, simply signs of nature taking over some human artefacts. According to an interview with the production designer, the film took two years to shoot. The first year's footage was lost, apparently because it was an experimental film stock that couldn't be developed. (Though that suggests that it was only sent for development after the entire film was shot, which seems at odds with the way movies were created at the time.) Tarkovsky then started over, reshooting the entire movie, over another year. The DVD is decently produced, though the English subtitles are a bit clunky. It contains the original mono soundtrack, and also a recent 5.1 mix, which, in my opinion, ruins the movie. It is merely the mono soundtrack with added environmental sounds, trying to create "atmosphere," yet Tarkovsky used a lot of silence in this film, and the surround mix is never quiet. I first saw Stalker in the early 1980s at a retrospective of movies by Wim Wenders in New York. Wenders had made a selection of films to be shown with his movies, and, preceding his Kings of the Road (In the Course of Time), was Stalker and John Ford's The Searchers. All three of these movies are quests, searches for people or ideas, and the very long program that day (more than 7 hours) was an extraordinary example of three different approaches to the quest movie. Since then, it has been one of my favorite films. It's an odd movie, more like a Beckett play than science fiction, yet it is unforgettable. If you've never seen Stalker, you should by all means watch it. It is a truly unforgettable movie by one of the great directors of the 20th century. His life and career were too short, but his films are all masterpieces. ## Frequently Bought Together - Stalker: A Film by Andrei Tarkovsky - Mirror (The Criterion Collection) [DVD] - Solaris (The Criterion Collection) [DVD] --- ## Why Shop on Desertcart? - 🛒 **Trusted by 1.3+ Million Shoppers** — Serving international shoppers since 2016 - 🌍 **Shop Globally** — Access 737+ million products across 21 categories - 💰 **No Hidden Fees** — All customs, duties, and taxes included in the price - 🔄 **15-Day Free Returns** — Hassle-free returns (30 days for PRO members) - 🔒 **Secure Payments** — Trusted payment options with buyer protection - ⭐ **TrustPilot Rated 4.5/5** — Based on 8,000+ happy customer reviews **Shop now:** [https://www.desertcart.be/products/2292847-stalker-a-film-by-andrei-tarkovsky](https://www.desertcart.be/products/2292847-stalker-a-film-by-andrei-tarkovsky) --- *Product available on Desertcart Belgium* *Store origin: BE* *Last updated: 2026-09-14*