Stalking Dorothy: exploring and comparing Tarkovsky’s Stalker and The Wizard of Oz

In this article I will explore and compare the Russian science fiction film Stalker by Andrei Tarkovsky with the classic American film The Wizard of Oz. It will primarily concentrate on looking at the similarities and differences in both the respective films narrative structure, themes and also their aesthetic elements.

The attraction and interest in comparing these two films lays in how radically different they are culturally and artistically, yet how surprisingly they share many similarities. Stalker is considered to be a complex, poetic and intellectual film in stark contrast to the Wizard of Oz, which is a ‘classic Hollywood’ film that focuses on escapism, excitement and adventure. Arguably, the most noticeable similarity the films share is that they are about a set of character’s that journey into a fantastical space and then return back to the place where they began. Aside from this though it is interesting to observe that both films explore the theme of desire, and although they both explore and portray this in contrasting ways the end results in each story are not too dissimilar; with both Stalkers and Dorothy’s accomplices not having any wishes granted upon them and the question of whether or not the possibility of the wishes being granted in the first place being called in to question. Also in both respective films fantastical environments the reality of the peril, which the characters must face, is quite possibly an illusion. Arguably both films are allegorical in their nature, with both emphasising that the ‘journey’ each takes (internally rather than externally) is the key aspect of their narrative, although Stalker takes a more spiritual and philosophical approach than the simplistic ideology used in The Wizard of Oz.

Both films share narratives that are of a quest driven nature, Flanagan defines this type of narrative as;

…an adventurous journey undergone by the main character or protagonist of a story. The protagonist usually meets with and overcomes a series of obstacles, returning in the end with the benefits of knowledge and experience (Flanagan, 2012)

This type of narrative is found commonly in folklore, fairy tales and adventure stories such as King Arthurs quest for the Holy Grail. Indeed Martin observes that Stalker’s ‘‘basic narrative structure could be compared with the narrative of the grail quest’’ (Martin, 2007 P143,). The same can be said for The Wizard of Oz in which the audience follows a young girl named Dorothy who at first lives in a grey and dull farmland but then ends up in a strange and fantastical world that she will journey through. Three characters: a Scarecrow, a Tin Man and a Lion, accompany her on this journey. These characters are trying to reach a mysterious man named Oz who is alleged to be able to fulfil their individual wishes. In Stalker the character named Stalker also lives in a grey and miserable looking place, he leads two men called Writer and Professor to a strange and alien like place called the Zone where there is allegedly a room in which each persons inner most wish can be granted. In both respective films the audience ends up back where they begun and both transition from a colourless and depressing place to a colourful fantastical environment where time and reality are called into question. While the basic quest driven plots in both stories are similar, the way in which each respective film explores and the techniques it uses to get across its story are very different. The Wizard of Oz follows a classical narrative approach, conventional and purposefully easy to follow for its intended audience. Stalker however does not; Redwood writes

it is a radically disparate narrative film, one that exhibits almost no narrative coherence whatsoever when approached in a conventional manner by the spectator (Redwood, 2010 p138).

Despite the complexities found in it’s narrative Tarkovsky still wanted to ‘’observe the three classical unities of space, time and action’’ (Martin, 2007 P141). Years after the film was completed Tarkovsky revealed that with Stalker

I wanted there to be no time lapse between the shots. I wanted time and its passing to be revealed, to have their existence, within each frame … I wanted it to be as if the whole film was made in a single shot (Tarkovsky, 1989 p143–144).

Like most modern cinema the Aristotelian virtues Tarkovsky mentioned were not followed, in the case of Stalker it could be argued they were even subverted. Indeed although it can be said the passage of time is revealed during the film it is not however shown in a linear or straight forward way in which Tarkovsky claims he intended. This is in part due to the spatial and environmental factors of the Zone, which shall be discussed in more depth later. In contrast to The Wizard of Oz’s running time of one hundred and three minutes Stalker is a long film, lasting one hour longer at hundred and sixty three minutes. This in itself makes the passage of time a more demanding task for some viewers. Tarkovsky admits ‘’I like making long films, films which utterly destroy the spectator in a physical manner’’ (Bird, 2007 p162). Within the long running time of Stalker Tarkovsky employs many long shots, for hundred and forty two in total (Johnson, 1994 p152) making the film hypnotic and interesting or quite possibly slow and boring depending on the individual spectator;

he proposed a cinema based on the rapt observation of the present moment as opposed to a plot-driven preoccupation with what will happen next (Le Cain, 2010)

This approach of making the film with an unconventional running time and slow, patient shots gives Tarkovsky ample time to

employ an extremely complex logic of narrative composition, requiring the spectator’s active perceptual engagement with an array of stylistic devices (Redwood, 2010 P119).

These many stylistic elements employed by Tarkovsky are used to subvert what looks like on paper a conventional quest narrative. These devices or ‘motifs’ throughout the film act to show important advances in its narrative, however these are often used in an often subtle and illusive way for the spectator. It appears that the deceptiveness of these stylistic devices were arguably intentional by Tarkovsky, making for a demanding watch for many. The motifs and devices used to subvert the simple quest or grail like narrative appear to be mainly of an either aural or visual nature, while dialogue has less implication on the overall narrative.
The aural elements that are most obvious to the viewer at first bare relation to the environments that the characters encounter in their journey – the industrial wasteland of Stalker’s home and the Zone itself. These repetitive sounds that coincide with each environment are not unusual, Stalker’s home features industrial sounds such as general clanking and the rumbling of nearby trains, in contrast to the Zone, which features sounds associated with nature such as birds chirping and water running. The deceptive way in which Tarkovsky uses these sounds within the films narrative however proves to be less obvious to the viewer.

In Stalker one of the aural devices employed by Tarkovsky is having pieces of known classical music accompany the rumbling background noise of the train in each different scene it’s featured in throughout. This ‘highlighting’ of certain background noises is used to not only emphasise their importance to the narrative to the viewer but also for general aesthetic value. Redwood writes ‘’…the spectator is cued to recognize a ‘background’ diegetic sound (the train) as an important and deliberately introduced device’’ (Redwood, 2010 p122). Another device Tarkovsky employs is to use background noises to overtake or override character dialogue for narrative purposes. Redwood observes that in one of the earliest scenes where Writer and Professor are having one of their many long intellectual debates that the camera moves to focus to a silent Stalker who hears the background noises of a train, which in turn is a cue to move the characters along with their journey. He writes regarding this scene that ‘’what may have been extraneous in a conventional narrative film here becomes relevant’’ (Redwood, 2010 p123). Arguably the function of Tarkovsky’s aural elements in the films narrative are meant to be deceptive because the other elements such as strong visuals and long complex dialogue purposely get in the way of giving the viewer enough opportunity to recognise how they function.

This deceptive approach also lends itself to many different visual elements found in Stalker. One visual stylistic device Tarkovsky incorporates on many occasions throughout is the use of the set or surroundings to create a window or aperture. In modern conventional mainstream cinema the usual approach to highlight dramatic points in the narrative would be to employ techniques such as a cut to a close up of whatever the director is trying emphasise or perhaps to quickly pan or zoom. Tarkovsky instead uses these aperture framings to make the viewer notice important stylistic visual elements that normally would not be noticed. By using this device through many important scenes in the film where there is complex, long dialogue or little physical action Tarkovsky helps ‘train’ the viewer to (perhaps subconsciously) important elements in the narrative. Redwood writes

particular gestures, objects and other visual elements assume greater prominence…the active spectator will notice the recurrence of certain visual motifs because these aperture framings direct her eyes to appropriate regions of the screen (Redwood, 2010 p128).

While the complexities of Stalker’s narrative functions require the spectator to observe it in an unconventional way to understand it The Wizard Of Oz takes a more conventional and simplistic approach (compared to Stalker especially). It uses both the environments of Kansas and Oz to enable the viewer to understand the narrative by using them to effect how Dorothy is feeling and also push the drama forward in a simple linear direction. The most obvious aspect of this would be how Kansas is like the home of Stalker, a grim and colourless place that shall be discussed in depth later. First though it is important look at other less obvious yet simple approaches used in The Wizard of Oz. Simple yet effective camera techniques are used to give a sense of place and how Dorothy may feel, Sergeant writes;

Kansas is sparse and desolate: the introductory shot of the film displays a long road framed by empty fields and utilises a static camera to give a sense of loneliness to the frame. As the solitary figure of Dorothy travels further away, she seems to strip the frame of all movement and life, and this sense of moribund emptiness continues throughout (Sergeant, 2011 p4)

Once Dorothy enters Oz the audience notices the framing of the screen to be more cluttered which matches her feelings of confusion and excitement having entered a fantastical new world. Shapes and the more obvious aesthetics of where Dorothy is also play an important narrative function; Rushdie observes that

throughout the wizard of Oz, home and safety are represented by geometrical simplicity, whereas danger and evil are invariably twisty, irregular and misshapen (Rushdie, 1992 p21).

This is evident in not only in the environments but also the characters Dorothy encounters. Kansas is empty and almost barren, yet the shapes of the houses and farmland are simple, more or less symmetrical and give a feeling of comfort and safety. Once Dorothy is in Oz she finds that ‘’the yellow brick road is perfectly spiral’’ (Rushdie, 1992 p22). This linear road can be interpreted as safe, while other areas of Oz such as the woods, which are messy and complicated, have a feeling of uncertainty and potential danger about them. If we observe the good witch we can see that she is fair and (supposedly) beautiful and helps Dorothy on her quest, while in contrast the Wicked Witch of the West who is ugly derails and obstructs Dorothy on her journey. From the point of the audience when the narrative moves along in a straight forward linear way they have a feeling much like Dorothy of safety and familiarity. When contrasting this with Stalker the untrained spectator who is used to the more conventional devices used in films that have a quest narrative can feel confused, bored and frustrated because it uses unfamiliar narrative devices. Scenes that consist of long takes filled with philosophical dialogue or more deceptive narrative functions will provoke a negative feeling or reaction in this type of audience, much like Dorothy when the Yellow Brick Road she is following splits into a crossroads along her journey.

Perhaps the most obvious and conventional device The Wizard of Oz employs in its narrative is the use of music and song. The songs featured are of course there to dazzle and entertain its audience but also to spell out in fairly clear terms how the characters are feeling or to describe what is happening for them. Some of the songs featured such as ‘Follow The Yellow Brick Road’, ‘Ding Dong, The Witch Is Dead!’ and ‘We’re Off To See The Wizard’ (Wizard of Oz, 1939) couldn’t be more literal in their message to the audience. Their simplicity and catchiness however is of course what makes them so fondly remembered and shows just how effective they are within the films narrative.

Aesthetically one visual technique that both films share in common is the switch from black and white or monochrome (and should be noted sepia in some scenes of Stalker) at the start into colour. In each respective film this change occurs when the audience leaves the home environments of the main characters, Dorothy Gale (accompanied by Toto) leaving Kansas and entering Oz, while Stalker (along with Writer and Professor) entering the Zone. It is interesting that both films use colours to highlight the differences between their reality and fantasy worlds. With this in mind it’s important to understand that when The Wizard of Oz was released in 1939 that many of its large audience were facing major hardships financially. Potts writes

The lack of color in Kansas represented the difficulties of the Great Depression that was taking place at the time. These relations to the real world drew the audience into the story (Potts, 2011)

Although this element of the film helped The Wizard of Oz’s audience relate to Dorothy perhaps the biggest appeal to them was the use of techincolour, which was a big special effect for its time. Due to colour being relatively new in cinema at the time it appears that the studio that produced the film decided to exploit the special effect as much as possible. Rushdie writes

the Wizard of Oz…goes for bold, expressionist splashes – the yellow of the brick Road, the red of the poppy field, the green of the Emerald city and of the witch’s skin (Rushdie, 1992 p33)

The colour in the film is used to emphasise the fantastical element of the narrative which fits well within the fantasy quest genre it’s a part of, as well highlighting the mysterious and exciting world of Oz itself; upon entering Oz Dorothy delivers the classic line ‘’Toto, I have a feeling we’re not in Kansas anymore’’ (The Wizard of OZ, 1939).

Andrei Tarkovsky said of colour in films

colour I don’t think colour film is anything more than a commercial gimmick. I don’t know a single film that uses colour well. In any colour film the graphics impinge on one’s perception of the events. In everyday life we seldom pay any special attention to colour. When we watch something going on we don’t notice colour (Tarkovsky, 2002 p356)

Despite Tarkovsky’s less than enthusiastic opinion of colour in film he later admitted ‘’since colour has been invented you have to wonder how you can make use of it’’ (Bird, 2007 p154). In Stalker it is one of the most noticeable visual elements featured. After leaving the drab and monochrome home of Stalker and entering the Zone the film switches to full colour. Due to how dark and miserable the monochrome scenes previously were the change is quite a shock to the senses;

the arrival at the Zone becomes genuinely magical, the grass a pulsating green that contrasts with the shabbiness…of the preceding sepia images (Johnson, 1994 p153).

While the sense of wonder of the Zone is reflected in the countryside colours it features, as soon as the three men enter the interiors of the Zone the colour palette Tarkovsky uses becomes more restrictive. The dimly lit blacks and browns of the tunnels the characters venture through reflect their cynicism about the magical qualities of the Zone and also matches the mood of their long pessimistic arguing with each other. One of the most noticeably impressive aspects about the colours used in Stalker is how they bring out the textures of what the spectator is watching. Using the change of colour in an autumn leaf as an example Tarkovsky said ‘’colour directly expresses processes concealed within the texture’’ (Bird, 2007 p156).

When looking at how both films transition from black and white to colour, and more importantly from places that are portrayed as empty or repressive to exciting and mysterious ones the spectator again can observe two different approaches at work. At the start of the sequence In The Wizard of Oz Dorothy (and in turn the audience) is alerted that a tornado is approaching. Rushdie suggests that ‘’the tornado…is the product of the Gale in Dorothy’s name and nature’’ (Rushdie, 1992 p27). Bachelor however looks upon the tornado from a view more interested in the representation of the colours and visuals in the film;

it’s out of this greyness – the gathering, cumulative greyness of that bleak world – that calamity comes. The tornado is the greyness gathered together and whirled about and unleashed, so to speak, against itself (Bachelor, 2007 p73).

Whichever suggestion the spectator finds more preferable Rushdie strongly observes that ‘’in this, the transitional sequence of the movie…the unreal reality of Kansas gives way to the realistic surreality of the world of wizardry’’ (Rushdie, 1992 p27). This sequence occurs after Dorothy is knocked out by a screen door and passes out on her bed. Although this narrative device could be viewed upon as simplistic it is fairly common within the conventional quest narrative and fantasy genre the film fits into. Once she awakes (or does she?) Dorothy finds that the house is flying in the air perhaps trapped in the tornado itself. When she looks out of the window she sees different objects and people flying in the eye of the storm. The last person she is able to see through the window is Miss Gulch riding on her bike who transforms into the Wicked Witch of the West. This obvious spelling out of who the witch is meant to represent in Oz, is one that seems to be trying to ensure that there is no confusion for the intended audience. This movie within a movie was considered a great special effect for its time. It also helps the audience prepare for the shock and wonders that await them in Oz. Rushdie writes ‘the window is a sort of movie – the window acting as a cinema screen, a frame within a frame – which prepares her for the new sort of movie she is about to step into’’ (Rushdie, 1992 p30). When the colour does enter the film it does so at once, flooding the screen, which fits perfectly as it makes Oz look fantastical and unreal as it is supposed to be.

In Stalker once the three characters of Stalker, Writer and Professor are aboard a trolley car we begin a slow, long horizontal journey. The camera stays in a tight close up of the characters heads while the very grey industrial wasteland they travel through remains mainly blurred and out of focus behind them. Tarkovsky matches the rhythmic, hypnotic clanking of the trolley with subtle dark, electronic music. This measured approach from Tarkovsky creates a great sense of anticipation for the spectator, a journey into the unknown. Dyer writes

this long tracking sequence, following a trolley as it clanks and clangs along, is the most straightforward journey imaginable – horizontal, flat, right to left, in a straight line – and full of the promised wonder of cinema (Dyer, 2012, p47)

By making the sequence in the trolley car long it lulls the viewer into a kind of trance and by keeping the camera focused on the back of the heads of the three men and not what they are seeing beyond them Tarkovsky helps keep a sense of mystery about not only what they will encounter next but also about time itself. Dyer suggests that

on this most linear of journeys, we are drifting into non-linear time, are entering dream time, but a dream-time where everything, every treasured detail is anchored firmly in the real and now (Dyer, Zona, p55).

Once the viewer is fully in this hypnotic or trance like state the film suddenly switches to colour with no warning. It’s clear that now the three men have arrived in the Zone. The colours are indeed bright but natural and not artificial or fantastical like Oz. It’s noticeable that the clanging and repetitive industrial noises have now been replaced with recognizable sounds of nature, birds humming and the wind gently blowing. With this serene scene the camera pans out gently so the viewer can take in what the men are also adjusting to, they have time to contemplate what is before them, unlike Dorothy in Oz who has to deal with the hectic, almost neon bright and confusing Munchkinland. It is obvious of course that each of the films transitions into colour and into a mysterious new place are achieved differently in their technical approach, however both achieve the idea of displacement effectively (both externally and internally). Bachelor writes

their terminologies – of dreams, of joys, of uprootings or undoings of self – remain more or less the same. More than that, perhaps, the decent into colour…involves lateral as well as vertical displacement. (Bachelor, 2006 p74).

As previously discussed both films use different approaches and techniques within their quest narrative, however it is also important to explore how each film uses their respective environments to show a journey into a fantastical space and how they each differently come full circle and return to the place where they each began. The different places and environments each set of characters encounter in both respective films have some obvious similarities. Kansas in The Wizard of Oz shares a very grey and gloomy aesthetic just like the home and general surrounding area of the character of Stalker. Also the Land of Oz has a mysterious and fantastical feel to it like the Zone in Stalker. One of the key questions that arise from both the Land of Oz and the Zone in Stalker is whether either is ‘real’ or not (within the films narrative) and also how their aesthetical elements relate to and affect the different themes explored in each film.

The first environment we encounter in Stalker is a dark, decaying looking bar. The practically monochrome look of it along with the sullen look of the barman helps to let the spectator know straight away that this appears to be a very depressing place. The inside of the Stalker’s home also shares the same dank and bleak look. Redwood observes ‘’the sets high thin walls seem to weep and glisten, stained like the inside of a diseased lung’’ (Redwood, 2010 p126). After we leave the bar we notice the homeland of Stalker looks like an industrial wasteland that has possibly torn apart from war.

There’s a bleak, totalitarian aspect to the world we catch glimpses of, with the roaming security guards who randomly shoot off guns to try to cut down infiltrators of the Zone, factories billowing out smoke and grime, and locomotives that thunder past Stalker’s house (Ferdinand, 2011).

When Stalker, Writer and Professor are trying to sneak into the Zone it’s interesting to observe that with it’s armed police and barbed wire it feels and look similar to a Nazi concentration camp, but with the twist that the three characters are trying to break in rather than break out. While they are trying to gain access to the forbidden Zone Stalker mentions that the guards are too afraid to chase them inside, as they believe it to be a dangerous place. This helps increase the sense of wonder and anticipation for the spectator while they watch the three men slowly making their journey there.

Once in the Zone Tarkovsky slows down the action completely, almost to a grinding halt. This enables the spectator to immerse him or herself in the environment just as the three characters are in the film. The poetic beauty of the Zone is marked by it’s natural vs. strange eerie sounds to give it an uneasy and mysterious, alien like quality. Bird writes that

the general state of discomfiture…is maintained mostly by the smoothly floating camera, the alternations in colour, the conspicuous sound effects and their synthesized elaboration (Bird, 2007 p163).

Once Writer and the Professor (and no doubt the viewer) are in the Zone they start to question the legitimacy of its supernatural and alien aspects. When Writer decides to walk in a different direction to the path he was strictly told to walk down by Stalker he finds himself spooked and decides changes his mind, however later when the Professor secretly goes off to retrieve his knapsack nothing actually happens to him, despite Stalker warning that ‘’everything in the Zone depends on us’’ (Stalker, 1979). One of the key aspects to observe here perhaps is that Tarkovsky is simply showing us that Stalker respects and understands the Zone while the Writer and Professor adopt a more cynical view. With this in mind Stalker does appear to be trying to relate to the Writer and the Professor that their subconscious effects the Zone itself, that their minds affect the physical reality when they are in it’s environment. The spectator also finds it difficult to decipher whether or not the Zone has a fantastical aspect to it or not. Tarkovsky himself said that the viewer ‘’should doubt…the existence of the forbidden Zone’’ (Zona, 2012 p91). Despite this the way Tarkovsky places the different camera shots and the deceptive use of space within the Zone creates a confusing sense of time for most viewers, which in turn gives the place a dream like yet potentially dangerous feel;

The Zone retains its threat and mystery even when the Writer and the Scientist and even Stalker himself have done everything to solidify its meaning into coherent boundaries (Ferdinand, 2011)

It could be argued that the Zone itself is almost a fourth character observing the other three and their different behaviours. Dyer writes

to be in the Zone is to be part of the Zone…It may be impossible to tell whether a given action is initiated by people or place but the feeling that the Zone is an active participant in whatever occurs becomes increasingly tangible (Dyer, 2012 p91).

This argument is favourable when observing the three men journeying through the tunnels and interior of the Zone as they near the room that supposedly grants their innermost wishes. The inside of the tunnels and rooms appear to mirror the emotions and external debates the three men are having with each other;

we are clearly now following an interior, spiritual journey in which time and space operate in a oneiric fashion. In this respect the Zone obeys laws of it’s own that differ from those of everyday reality (Johnson, 1994 p152).

There is some room to suggest that Stalker is simply leading the Professor and Writer up the proverbial garden path in regards to the fantastical and supernatural elements of the Zone, and this argument appears stronger when we consider the deceptive use of time and space Tarkovsky uses in the film. However during the near conclusion of the men’s journey in the interior of Zone it appears to rain heavily indoors. This key scene seems to have been missed by many critics in their analysis when arguing that the alien nature of the Zone may possibly be a hoax by the Stalker, it also makes the case for the Zone being strange and fantastical to be highly likely indeed. After this strange indoor downpour of rain the three men sit silently, seemingly exhausted. The camera overlooks two fishes slowly swimming around in a shallow pool of water, slowly oil starts to cloud them and the sound of classical music and a train can be heard. Suddenly we cut to the dark and dank monochrome bar from the very first scene of the film, the Writer and Professor are stood there looking confused as if they are unsure of how they have arrived back where they started. This transition back to the bar gives the illusion that their journey has come full circle, however the narrative devices Tarkovsky has used throughout to confuse the spectators idea of time, space and physical reality calls the legitimacy of this into question.

In the Wizard of Oz we open with a shot of Dorothy’s home of Kansas. The set was constructed in a studio/sound stage and is filmed in black and white although in reality it is so drab looking it looks like many different shades of grey. This look works well in showing that Dorothy lives in poverty and must have a difficult life. Although it is obvious that the sky and backgrounds of Kansas are painted studio walls if the viewer is able to suspend his or her disbelief this actually enhances the empty barren feel and look of the place. This emptiness is used to illustrate and reflect her desire to escape from her poverty and troubles. This becomes more apparent as Dorothy breaks into song for the classic ‘somewhere over the rainbow’ where she wishes for a new place to make a new life for herself. Rushdie writes

over the rainbow is, or ought to be, the anthem of all the worlds migrants, all those who go in search of the place where ‘that dreams that you dare really do come true. It is a celebration of escape (Rushdie, 1992 p23).

It isn’t long in the film before Dorothy makes the transition from Kansas to Oz. The huge contrast between Oz and Kansas is of course illustrated by the difference in visuals but also by the fact Dorothy is now in an environment where she is unsure how the rules, inhabitants and her own safety. She now no longer has her home or family. This gives her journey a sense of danger and vulnerability (and excitement for the audience it should be noted). Although both her home of Kansas and Oz share the fact that they both have large open space Oz is very fantastical and mysterious;

There is no empty space in Oz; everything is colourful, significant and vibrant. Oz is magical and otherworldly (Sargent, 2011 p4)

As soon as she arrives Dorothy encounters a dead witch, a good witch and hundreds of small people called Munchkins. The surreal environment of Oz reinforces that the film is in part about escapism and also that it is very much a fantasy film.
After leaving Munchkinland Dorothy leaves for the Emerald City via the yellow brick road; ‘’she steps along of the road of destiny and heads as Americans must into the west towards the sunset’’ (Rushdie, 1992 p44). Almost all the characters Dorothy encounters in the Land of Oz have parallels to the people she is familiar with in Kansas. This acts as a gentle reminder to the films audience that Dorothy perhaps is not in as much peril as it seems and that the place is quite likely in her imagination. It does appear that Oz is a construct of her own desires and fears. Although Oz is indeed a magical and exciting place the journey through it always has one real purpose – to find the way back home to Kansas.

When Dorothy wakes up back in Kansas her family and friends dismiss the idea of Oz as a real place. Whether Oz is real or not is not particularly important, especially to the narrative of the film. However both Kansas and Oz do need each other to exist within the film at least;

Just as Oz needs Kansas to be so supremely magical, so too has Kansas needed Oz to be infused with the qualities of home (Sergeant, 2011 p10).

Dorothy wanting to return home to Kansas may seem implausible to some and although Kansas may seem grey and repressive, for Dorothy it’s a place where her memories lay, where she feels the most safe. The transition back home for Dorothy is course where her journey was always meant to end up;

The emphasis on home helps to infuse the fantasy with a sense of mortality that gives it vibrancy, allowing a safe and reassuring abandonment of reality within the safe hesitant world of fantastic space (Sergeant, 2011 p11)

This conservative approach to its narrative fits the ideological Hollywood system of its time. In actuality the real farmlands of the great depression were far worse off than the film portrays;

America’s farmers struggled with a severe drought and poor farming conditions brought on by years of over-farming without proper crop rotation. The soil turned to dust and blew around in large dark clouds (Croft, 2009).

So just as Dorothy learns that the characters she encountered in Oz were already in Kansas, the fabrication of how Kansas is shown in the film also shows a parallel with the Land of Oz in that they both appear to be ‘unreal’. This makes both places in the film a spectacle for it’s audience and truly shows the film is of the fantasy genre.

From comparing these two culturally and artistically different films it becomes clear that each shares a narrative that is about an internal quest rather than an external one. Also the allegorical The Wizard of Oz is more concerned with the inner journey of Dorothy and to show that what she was looking for was always with her (the same as her companions) and seeks to reassure it’s prominently mainstream American audience that just like Dorothy while it’s ok to dream of escapism that home is always best; ‘’Its conservative narrative, concerned with a return to home and preservation of the status quo’’ (Sergeant, 2011 p11). Much like the audience attending the cinema to watch the film itself, after the escapism from their everyday life that they, just like the screens heroine can still leave this magical place and feel happy and safe. Even the idea of not returning back to Kansas would be far too radical for Hollywood to contemplate. This is in stark contrast to Stalker of course. Unlike the Wizard of Oz Tarkovsky manages to negate the ideology of his Soviet communist studio by carving out and creating a complex film that leaves many doors of interpretation unlocked for the audience;

the spectator can impose a potentially infinite number of allegorical meanings..(religious, political, existential, extraterrestrial) (Redwood, 2010 p156).

Attempting to decipher which meaning would be the most plausible would perhaps be falling right into Tarkovsky’s trap. However it could be argued that Stalker’s journey is concerned with human faith. Tarkovsky was worried about the human soul, when writing about Stalker he said ‘’it’s about the way that, in our pursuit, of material realization of our life, we lose spirituality’’ (Bird, 2007 p153). After viewing this film the spectator will feel challenged and will have many questions left unanswered. Indeed the film’s complex narrative has been interpreted by critics in many different ways and still provides an interesting source of debate over thirty years since it’s initial release. Despite the differences both films share that they remain celebrated and frequently analysed and will likely be for many years to come. They also are both an interesting example of how a similar, simple quest narratives can be explored, approached and portrayed in two very different yet effective ways within the medium of film.