Andrei Rublev (film)

• Anatoli Solonizyn: Andrei Rublev
• Nikolai Grinko: Daniel Tschornij
• Nikolai Sergeyev: Theophanes, the Greek
• Irma Rausch: fool / moronic girls
• Yuri Nikulin: Patrik
• Yuri Nazarov: the great prince / the moronic Prince
• Ivan Lapikow Kirill
• Nikolai Burljajew: Boriska
• Rolan Bykov: the fool
• Nikolai Grabbe: Stepan
• Mikhail Kononov: Foma
• Stepan Krylov: senior Glockengießer

Andrei Rublev is a film by Andrei Tarkovsky from the year 1969. He is loosely based on the life story of the Russian icon painter Andrei Rublev, who lived from about 1360 to 1430.

Against the background of the Russian Middle Ages Andrei Tarkovsky creates a powerful image composition, the incursions of the Tartars shows as religious sectarianism and the suppression thereof by the authorities. It's about the nature of art and the importance of faith. Shown is an artist who is struggling to find the appropriate answers to the tragedies of his time.

Action ( scenic )

The film begins with scenes showing the preparations for a balloon ride. Finally, a man is getting into the gondola and the balloon floats with it. The man shows himself highly delighted by the sights that present themselves to him, but can not prevent the journey ends in a crash landing.

Danila, Andrei and Kirill are on the move. You have the Andronikow Monastery, where they had lived as a monk for many years, left behind. You are looking for work. You get into a heavy rain and seek refuge in a society that is maintained in a house gathered by a juggler. Some time later, the juggler will be picked up by strangers who treat him raw.

Kirill searches Theophanes the Greek. Theophanes, a prominent icon painters of his time, has the task of imagining the Annunciation Cathedral in Moscow. He submits Kirill offered to assist him in the work. Later, however, he sent a mounted messenger to Andrei to make this same offer. Kirill will realize that he will not work for Theophan. It takes him a huge envy, and he leaves in anger the religious community in which he had been staying.

Andrei falls on a night walk to a gathering of pagans, celebrate an occasion, which is characterized by sensual pleasure. Andrej is obviously fascinated by the rituals he witnessed will. However, it is taken up and tied to a cross. Freed, he is has come through a woman wearing only a jacket open to him.

Some scenes play in church interiors. For months, it comes with the work that Andrej has taken over there, not advancing. He has come to the conclusion that he is gone missing the ease of mind that an artist needs as a prerequisite for his work.

Great detail is shown as Tatars invade a town and rob, plunder, and murder. Andrei knows a looming rape only to prevent this by slaying the offender. About this fact, he gets even more than before in self-doubt. He decides to give up the profession of a painter. It also sets a vow of silence.

The turnaround in Andrejs life comes when he is a witness of how a bell is cast. The work will be led by a young bell-founder, who falsely claims he knows the traditional recipe for the correct composition of the metal. When the plant finally succeeds, he falls in relief in a sob. Just as he also shows Andrej relieved breaks his silence and decides to begin work on his works again.

The film ends with scenes where the camera sweeps over works of the icon painter Rublev. While the film had previously only shown black-and- white images, the display changes in these final scenes to color.

Interpretation

The film shows Rublev than one, which is not easy for you to keep the faith in one's own artistic mission under the present difficult conditions. Since the film was made in the days of Soviet rule, it seems likely that Tarkovsky wanted to report from the lives of the artists of his own time to encrypted manner.

With the bell-founder scenes Tarkovsky is a sign of hope towards the end of the film. It shows that there may be young people who go to work in their work with passion and ensure that valuable old traditions remain. This reflects the hope Tarkovsky reflects a new generation, which revives the old values ​​again.

Special

Andrei Rublev is mostly seen by reviewers as a difficultly accessible film. The following points can prepare viewers difficulties:

• The inner connection between the scenes can not be detected easily. It represents only a vague impression that the film is told in chronological order.
• Rublev can not be determined as a person acting in many scenes. It often occurs as an observer.
• Tarkovsky does not work with the quick cuts that define the narrative technique in many modern films. The pace of presentation often approaches by at the pace of real events.
• There are multiple scenes in which are reflected in detail questions of religion and art.

Reception

In 1969, the film - shown at the Cannes Film Festival out of competition and was awarded the International Critics - despite Soviet protests.

The first version of the film (1966 completed ) has been criticized by government agencies; particularly met some scenes with depictions of cruelty to rejection, and the film was re-cut according to the specifications of censorship.

The " Encyclopedia of the international film " ( Catholic film work ) notes to the 196 minutes long Andrej Rublev ( Andrew's Passion):

" Tarkovsky's monumental work in the reconstructed original version, which was banned in 1965 by the Soviet censorship and has never come to the cinema. The equally realistic and poetic film may elude in this original version of a hasty ideology, but is within its clear reference to the Christian Passion story quite well, controversial ' political accents that the ban on the grounds of artistic immaturity ' led. [ ... ] - Interesting. "

The period from January 11, 1974 was that once you get to the strict and brittle film language of this three-hour black and white film was set, you would feel a physical force in the pictures that barely know a comparison in the history of film.

Awards

Andrei Rublev won in 1969 with the film festival of Cannes FIPRESCI Prize, while Irma noise a year later the French Étoile de Cristal was awarded as Best Foreign Actress. Other awards in 1971, the Prix Léon Moussinac the Association Française de la Critique de Cinéma best foreign film in 1973, the Finnish Film Awards Jussi in the same category.