The first thing I noticed about Stalker was that sound told a separate story. While in modern films sound is mostly used to present realism, cutting-edge technology placing it's audience into visceral environments. Tarkovsky uses it to convey an emotion. Signaling out one specific sound that the audience will remember, or not using any sound at all, to build tension. There's something uniquely terrifying about the way Stalker conjures its mystery through sound, forcing it's audience to be on guard, or they might miss it. Stalker's atmosphere is devious, captivating, and especially gorgeous. Built on long takes that are an average of 88 secs each. Expertly framed and emotionally significant. It's also an incredibly well written script. Characters have long thought-provoking monologues about divinity and truth. Often in response to each others criticisms, or as an observation of the environment - the vividly hypnotic zone, which entraps people inside to keep them from reaching transcendence. In my book, Stalker would be right next to 2001: A Space Odyssey on the list of the most mind-bending works of cinematic history. Kubrick and Tarkovsky are two different sides of the same coin. Both of their films are visually arresting. Though Kubrick's films aren't governed by higher forces. His films all deal with human desire and often frustration with humans. Tarkovsky on the other hand makes movies about spirituality, God, and existentialism. The exact opposite of Kubrick's often cold vision. Stalker excels by being a about an exploration into a place governed by another realm.