I really liked the feel this film gives you when watched. It's a very cool feeling few brickfilms have done at the level you're at. The world is also very interesting, along with the story, but really, really, under explained. Your animation and the camera was choppy, and there were some shots (as in the long pans of frames to reveal the dog) which I had no idea what was happening. It was also very drawn out and very confusing until the after credits thing.

However, there was lots of stuff I Liked about this film. As mentioned before, the feel is very cool. The idea of the mirror and the area called "The Zone" (which if I remember right was never mentioned in the actual film) was pretty cool and had some neat sets. My personal favorite thing about "the zone," was the idea of the railroad tracks going everywhere. It really appeals to the human side of "the zone," making it not seem like a version of hell or a chunk of land trying to kill people.

All in all, I enjoyed it.

Last edited by Mosh5256 (September 5, 2015 (04:55pm))

I cannot thank you enough for taking all of that time to actually do a such detailed review about this film. I find that really delightful that someone took all of this time to help out with all the ideas of how some scenes could have been better. I certainly will be more careful on these things in my next works.

As I've seen you highlighted some stuff that might not have been understandable in the movie, I got here the answer- though most of the thing revolves around the source material, as you yourself stated, and I chose to skip those things you got right by your deduction.

First of all: The partly-green sunset. I've read in the novel a mention of the sunrise being greenish, so I came up with my personal idea of putting a green coloured sunset. As the Philanthropist and the stalker are still in a place that is close to the zone's border. Therefore, I thought,  if outside the zone you have a normal sunset, and inside the zone a green coloured sunset (and sunrise, as could be seen later in the film), on the border of the zone you might see both.
Next: The screw. Exactly, source-material. But you might have missed that the Stalker mentions right before they enter the cemetery that they don't need there screws anymore. outside the cemetery, they get to use screws again, until they reach the railway, from where they don't need these screws again. This is difficult to deduce, but apparently this confirms that inside the zones there are only certain places where the gravity concentrations, nicknamed "midge-pillars" (my personal rough translation from the hungarian name given in the book, as I've read the book in hungarian) are concentrated only in certain places they need to get through.

So... the burning death. That said, those "Mitchbillers" where the "midge-pillars" mentioned in the sunset scene. Not come kind of creatures, but more likely Phenomenas that can appear anytime, and make the zone a deadly place. That is why they have to pass through the burning death.
Said that, I understand and accept all the issues you brought up about the tecnical side of the scene.

The whispering scripture scene is a complete tribute to a very similar scene in Tarkovskij's movie "Stalker", including the dog and everything else. Also acts as a separation between the night-time part of the film and the daytime part.

The meatgrinder. The meatgrinder, as most of the other things in the zone, is supposed to be something nobody understood what exactly is. Just as the Stalker mentioned, not even by witnessing the death of a man inside the grinder he could understand how exactly he died.
He uses the term "Blade" to identify the phenomenon they can hear the sound of, but is beyond their understanding. Side note: The idea of the stalker making everything up is actually one of the themes in Tarkovskij's original film. If I got in the viewer that idea, then I am glad for it.

The building where they're inside is apparently one of the places they get through inside the city.
I used that scene as an experiment for how to make a certain way of shooting a scene that I am still developing, and to give some kind of terror to the audience. Why is the door closing and opening? Is it the wind... or something else?

Finally, the scene with the helmet in the mirror. I agree that it might give confusion, originally the Stalker was intended to be clad in a full golden armor, to give him a knight-ish look, therefore make understand the audience that actually he's the one who's got a noble soul, opposite to the philanthropist. I also would add that I didn't include the scene he takes off the piece of the mirror because I wanted to give some additional thing that the viewers would try to understand better.

I actually thought most of these would be deductible, but I understand that they're not that easy to notice. Overall: Thanks for taking all this time and certainly giving me the push I might needed to understand what should I change, and how, also bringing up these facts that might other people find difficult to understand. You started with a question: what audience is this directed to?
I thought of this, and ehe answer is: first of all of course to fans of the original works, but this is also meant to get interested in these works those people who might didn't know about them, because I find both the movie directed by Tarkovskij and the novel absolute masterpieces that deserve more attention than what they get.

The Nine Billion Names of God
Kosmos Productions Channel

My pleasure! I like to help out anyone and everyone.
I also missed mentioning this in my original review, but I particularly liked your idea to use the same world and concepts from the film and book but use your own idea of a mirror as an object in the zone that is investigated. Nice touch!

Also, I'm not certain I'm really the best person to review a film like this because my own interest in film is a lot more superficial and entertainment based. I do like visual communication and the mastery of it, but I don't exactly revel in thought-provoking film. Case-in-point, one of my all-time favorite films is "The Lego Movie."

I wanted to make another reply, but it took me a few days before I had time to sit down and type it out. So here I go again!

I understand now what you were trying to do, but the very fact that it was a bit confusing means it wasn't communicated clearly. You were going for something like this but for that to be true, it means that the camera is exactly ON the border between the zone and normality. If you notice, even in the photo the image is disorienting. The only reason we know what we're looking at is because everyone is familiar with the separation between water and air. The separation between normality and the zone is far more abstract. To carry the concept through to the viewer, we as directors have to do the extra leg-work and bridge that gap of understanding. It's a cool concept and if you had had them walk through some barrier/bubble and the sun turns green as they pass through, that would have been REALLY cool! It also would have been difficult to do.

You're right, I did miss his comment. It still feels jarring to me though. He goes from introducing the concept of needing the screw and then we jump to the next scene where he says, "okay we don't need it here". It's a strange and sudden change. I'm guessing that you cut a scene or two (when the screw was being used) before going to the graveyard scene. C'est la vie!

I started watching the original film (trying to find the part where he first introduces the screw) and something that stood out to me is how strong that feeling of skepticism is. I'm convinced that the Stalker is making everything up in order to boost his own self-worth. The zone is a land where he can be king, because he is valueless everywhere else.

I will say I'm intrigued by the movie as a means of philosophical debate. I would liken the film to the dialogues written by Aristotle or Plato. A lot of talk. The dialogue itself is merely a method of conveying those ideas. Of course Aristotle can answer the questions that the student asks in his paper... because Aristotle wrote the question for the answer! Nonetheless it is interesting. What I find captivating in the film is the stillness and pace. Your film is a slice of that feeling, but to truly capture it, it would take a lot more time. The film also carries a strong sense of space. Outside when they first enter the zone by track, the hills around them are wide open. I also like the use of fog as a function of creating a feeling of mystery. Through the meatgrinder and into the space outside the room are all very real in the way they feel.

I think your set building definitely helped to carry that similar sense of place. The nut in the original film is almost a way to explore the place that they are in. Whereas the screw you use in your rendition is more a tool for the story.

I realize that was your goal with the helmet, but being that this is Lego, and the helmet he is wearing is recognized as a viking helmet it carries a very different meaning from my perspective. Vikings in American pop-culture are often presented as violent/malicious folk (regardless of the historical truth that they were simply a society of people like anywhere else) so a viking helmet would almost suggest the opposite of being chivalrous.

In regards to the mirror, after some reflection (pun intended) I realized what bothers me is not so much that we the viewers don't see him take a piece of the mirror, so much as that what he sets on the table is a Lego piece that is very obviously NOT a piece of the mirror. THEN we see from the girl's perspective a piece of the mirror sitting on the table. I think if he set a piece of glass on the table instead of that Lego piece, it would have communicated better.

I think your mission of spreading interest in the original film worked in my case. But it took me quite a bit to get there. And when I first watched your film, the last thing I was interested in doing was watch the original. If I had been given the task of creating a story based within the world of Stalker, I might have focused on very different things than what you chose. It felt like the things you chose were situations and places that would have been very visual for the purpose of making an action film, but the original Stalker is most definitely not an action film. It's like "fitting a square peg into a round hole" as they say.

Your scene in the room with the mirror is probably the most reminiscent of the film Stalker in that it approaches a very existential subject rather than a physical subject. Nice work!

Keep it up, and I look forward to watching more of your films!