Tarkovsky is widely renowned as one of the greatest directors Russia has ever seen, and The Strugatsky brothers are regarded as some of the greatest Science Fiction authors ever. Stalker (1979) is a product of mainly Tarkovsky however, Roadside Picnic, still heavily influenced the plot of Stalker. However as is with many movie adaptations, the book is significantly different from the movie. It is often the opinion that movies that are different from the book’s they are based on, are not good. But this begs the question does differences make a movie worse? What are some criteria for a good piece of Science Fiction and are there different criteria for different forms such as a novel vs. a movie. One criteria that should transcend from the novel to the movie are the themes presented. A movie that can still evoke the deep ideas and thoughts that are attached to a theme is an effective and “good” movie adaptation, despite plot differences. Tarkovsky, in Stalker, effectively …show more content…
For example, Tarkovsky introduces the character of the writer, and a summation of his character can be found in the quote “My conscience wants vegetarianism to win over the world. And my subconscious is yearning for a piece of juicy meat. But what do I want?”. The writer clearly represents the individual’s pursuit of happiness, and later it is revealed that his reason for going into the zone is for inspiration. On the opposite, there is the professor, who brings a nuclear device into the zone so that he can destroy the room, which he believes will be a weapon for those with bad intentions. The professor exemplifies the individual’s sense of duty to their society. He recognizes that there are people out there with cruel intentions, and he feels that it is his responsibility to prevent the room from being used as a weapon if it were to grant the wishes of those with bad