|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
I saw Andrei Rublev when it came out around 1970. Sure enough I didn't remember every episode, but many of its images have been haunting me all that time.I was far less mature thirty some years ago, but the undeniable power of Tarkovsky's image-making branded some of the characters and events deeply into my memory. From that movie came some of the most disturbing images that I have been carrying in my conscience ever since.
Thirty years is long time and no matter what spurred my interest in it again, it WAS time to revisit that film. This time not on the huge screen of one of the better Leningrad theaters, but on a modern large screen TV. Criterion collection is just a few keystrokes away - so fortunate for all of us.
Andrei Rublev is a monumental work. It is not something you take lightly, as besides just being long it is also incredibly deep, and requires concentration.
The subject matter is so foreign to most viewers that it would be understandable if some simply gave up and switched to something much more palatable. The 15th century Russian monk and his problems with G-d and existance are not your average fare. And if AuPh found Solaris to be nothing but the sleeping pill, imagine what would be his reaction to THIS. "Someone would actually watch it?"
The incredible mastery of its creator is obvious from the VERY FIRST shots. And from the very first frames you get immediately drawn into the film. And it never lets go. You forget about trips to the bathroom - so needed during this monstrous 205 minute viewing. But if you have time, and your mindset is a right one for that time travel, then you consider yourself incredibly lucky, for the long experience is not something you will encounter too often in your life.
Tarkovsky can create the emotions and feelings like very few other directors can. He also paints the horror in one of the most vivid and disturbing ways - completely matter-of-factly, much like I am sure it used to happen in the Dark Ages when human life had no value. For it WAS dark ages in Russia, never mind that the rest of the world had already moved forward.
With every segment so rich with emotions and underlining statements, one could slice the film into perhaps twenty small ones, each one having meaning, the philosophy and even the plot. The short hot air balloon flight is a simple story that has several important levels to it, and even all by itself could give someone enough food for thoughts for many days to ponder. But you are treated with one such story after another, and the invisible underground intensity is increasing.
I got restless as the events got closer to the scene I consider one of the most brutal in the world cinema - the henchmen gauging the eyes of craftsmen. My heart rate shot up and I could feel it... something you don't normally encounter at the movies.
If certainly helps if one is familiar with the history of that period, as otherwise some important understanding would excape the viewer. But even without it one could simply latch onto the simple story and follow the hero through all his trepidations and mental anguish.
I could go on and on, as the large work provides enough material for endless discussions. But the main point here is that the film will continue haunting me for many months and years, this time perhaps even stronger than the first time around. It is one of those works that you never forget, keep coming back to different parts of it and relive vividly again and again.
Some might call it a spiritual experience.
Follow Ups:
Hey Victor,now you got me interested. Unfortunately I haven't seen it (yet). Will endeavour to get it from the videorental place around the corner, they have lots of very old movies (almost all of Dr.Who by the way).
I love Russian movies by the way (because I am getting sick and tired of the typical hollywood plot). I saw a very good one the other day, cant remember the name but it was something about a window that lead people from Moscow to Paris and back. Very funny and also an interesting political background. You probably know it.That reminds me also of "dinner with Andre", a french movie. I loved that too, very philosophical (I am sure AuPh hates it).
nt
When dealing with a film like Rublev it is natural to concentrate on the director as its creator. However, again, when dealing with a film like that, where every shot is a beautiful picture, we also should mention its cinematographer... the man who controls the camera.Cinematographers are usually invisible to audience... in most cases we don't know their names.
Few famous ones come to mind, with perhaps Sven Nykvist leading the pack, as the lifetime long partner of Ingmar Bergman.
The role of the cinematographer in film like Rublev can't be appreciated too much. And here Vadim Yuson truly shines, reaching the hight where only the select few have ever flown.
His list of achievements is impressive. He shot Tarkovsky's first film - Steamroller and the Violin, and what a visual treat that one was!
From there he did Ivan's Childhood, and - of course - the Solaris. The Russian audience also knows his "I Step Through Moscow" and "Don't Grieve" - both interesting films.
To make it more accessible they should really do a Hollywood remake – computer generated Mongols and stuff.
Who do you think would be better Rublev - George Clooney or Brad Pitt?
How about Al Pachino as Pheophan Greek ? Hoo-ha!
this is a very hard movie to sell to a contemporary audience. "well, it's a long, slow, black and white film in russian ... and the main character takes an oath of silence part way in."anyway you cast it for the remake, maybe you can have Andrei take an oath to show off his naked butt.
"You think you're BIG TIME? Now you gonna die BIG TIME! Hoo-ha!"
I have to admit, the thought of a remake has not entered my mind till now. Perhaps it should have... he-he...How about a remake with the twist? Andrei is........... a woman! Climing up the American corporate ladder.
BTW, reading the numerous reviews of that film on imdb is quite interesting in itself.
She´d surely be an impressive chaste, silent nun, searching for God and a meaning for her existence at every corner of every step in the corporate ladder...Or maybe Sandra Bullock?
You have plenty to choose from, man!
Directed by Steven Spielberg, and sound in Dolbyxxx, of course. While others would go for Woody Allen...
And now seriously, what do you think Almodóvar could do with that?
Regards
Push-up bras... if you knew the Russian women you would never ask that question!All your suggestions should be forwarded to Andrei himself, I am afraid. Almodovar? The film would benefit greatly from plenty of Almodovar-red, in few scenes, for sure. I mean - it is 1969, for pete's sake, who in his right mind would make a B&W film? But Tarkovsky is not your average guy, not even by the stale Soviet standards. In some way he reminds me - even in his appearance - one Russian artist I met in 1990 in Leningrad. He was producing the most amazing drawings using just the pencil. He woudl sit there all day long, his face with heavy glasses low above the piece of paper, endlessly sharpening his pencil and drawing the most incredibly images... I bought several of his works, still have them, they are unique in their rendition and the life he would bring to simple pencil lines. His drawings would look natural next to Tarkovsky's masterpiece. There's got to be something incredibly Russian in that austerity.
NT
"Oh no, I can't do anything to the death. Doctor's orders. You see, I have this ulcer condition, and death is the worst thing for it."
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: