As always with Tarkovsky, this was philosophically and visually rich (the shot of Andrei in the church directly after the raid is particularly beautiful) but unfortunately I felt like it was overlong in parts with a few scenes that just dragged for too long. Overall not as satisfying as the stuff he went on to make in the 70s (not much is) but flawed Tarkovsky is still easily worth 3 hours of your time.
Pure genius or straight manic, I cannot be too sure. The depths that Tarkovsky goes through to fill in the gaps of the life of an iconographic master is painstaking to even think about. To only have this film banned by the USSR soon after release is tragic, but truly apropos considering the context of the comrade politics it was created under - that oddly services Rublev's motif that life without art is dismal.
The greatest epic ever made (I don't think "epic" would be the most appropriate way of describing Sátántangó). A gorgeous, poetic masterpiece. The animal cruelty is quite distressing however.
"Some sort of pressure must exist: the artist exists because the world is not perfect. Art would be useless if the world were perfect, as man wouldn’t look for harmony but would simply live in it. Art is born out of an ill-designed world. This is the issue in ‘Rublev’: the search for harmonic relationships among men, between art and life, between time and history. That’s what my film is all about." - Tarkovsky
The genesis of Tarkovsky’s signature filmmaking, his fluid, expansive takes, while transitioning from Ivan’s sparkling cinematography towards his sensual, spiritual cinema. A portrait of a turbulent Mother Russia of the 15th century, one of rebellion, fear, while equally an allegory for the human condition, transcending history, geography; epic tableau. A sprawling, patient work, one that demands further dissection yet; while influence on Kusturica, Pasolini, Kurosawa, Tarr, can be posited.
Just came on here to post about this...I found the mosfilm version on youtube and was kind of astounded at how much better the print was. It's like a totally different movie...I(although I'm sad it's the 3 hour cut). I had no clue that the Criterion was so far behind...what's weird is that I saw a print of this in NYC and the quality was just as bad as the Criterion, so I'm guessing it was the Janus films print from 15 years ago or whatever.
While the first viewing may feel like an endurance test, it's impossible to ignore the feeling of awe at the remarkable vision of Tarkovsky, culminating in one of the most enlightening portraits of Russian iconography.
Habiéndola visto sólo una vez, no puedo decir mucho más que: es una experiencia épica mucho mayor que cualquier otra; hay muchísimo para indagar en esta obra de arte, desde la estética hasta el entendimiento del pueblo ruso.
Subtle, dense and slow. From the length to the technical mastery, it is a masterpiece. For me, the scenes of deep discussion didn't work as well as those of raw emotion. That is, Andrei and Theophanes talking about human nature is nowhere as strong enough as The Feast or The Raid. But overall it's a great and subtle film that definitely requires more than one viewing, even if at over 3 hours long, it's not that easy.
Andrei Rublev is a film that presents us with raw depictions of creative power. It does this against a backdrop of human experience. As Tarkovsky once wrote, "Andrei is a fighter. His battlefield is the human spirit"-- Though the film contains much Christian imagery, only an atheist fool would be put off. This is a film about creation...
I may have a new favourite movie, at least that's what I feel right after seeing this movie on the big screen. Everything is fantastic from the first scene to the last, sorry for this "kissing ass" review, but I really enjoyed this one
Grand creations can take insane amounts of patience; Russian icons, the making of a leaden clock and watching this film.
There were times in this film where I felt internally a sense of serenity only matched by the dreamlike float of the images on screen. This film has an incredible sense of the sacred even amongst the profane. This film not only deals explicitly with issues of religion and faith but has at its core a sense of deep religious mystery. What sacred art should be.
episodic, epic, and exhilarating on widescreen. The balloon flight is one of the best opening scenes I've ever seen.
Watching this again I just can't get over how brilliant that bell sequence is. My favourite Tarkovsky film always seems to change, but right now I think this really is his best.
The real art is the result of a life living among other people, loving them, being hurt and tortured with them... After watching this, I couldn't walk or sit in one place... Probably the greatest film ever made?
My favorite Tarkovsky film is actually Solaris (since I deeply connect with its emotional story of love lost, memory, and the meaning of home). This is obviously his masterwork, though, and is also in my top 10 of all time. Most spiritual film ever made.
This 15th century russian mosaic, epic in scale and masterful in execution, stands out for its ethereal composition in terms of narrative and photography - the latter by master cinematographer Vadim Yusov, key figure in the works of Tarkovsky-, and also marks the beginning of the director's distinctive style, leaving behind the structure that would now be referred to as "experimentation" in Ivan's Childhood.
Powerful and relective work by Tarkovsky rather obliquley chronicling the artistic life of Andrei Rublev. Through the use of seven 'chapters' a feel for the time period is well captured with many memorable images and scenes. The jester, the pagan ritual, the casting of the bell, etc. Slow moving but very rewarding with exceptional images cast by Tarkovsky and dp Vadim Yusov. A true work of art.
Beautiful and mesmerizing. I applaud the experimentation and narrative ambiguity Tarkovsky uses to tell his story, but I wish he showed the same restraint in the emotional content. Though there is slightly more irony and humor (of a kind) here than in Stalker and The Sacrifice, for example, the repetition and dramatic underscoring of theme does the subtly of the film a disservice. But I'm nitpicking a moving work.
Many years have passed since I first tried to finish this, and now I can say, Yeesteena. I hope to see this again on the big screen. My tiny screen did not do this film justice.
