Absolutely amazing

There's a more than satisfactory amount of boom-boom in the movie's trim running time.

A movie that not only functions as a solid scarefest but a razor-sharp satire.

The story, direction, characters, and writing/dialogue is akin to taking a tranquilizer shot to the neck, but everything else was so well done.

Tarkovsky's magnum opus. Made way back in 1966, the visuals are still awe inspiring. An epic retelling of the life of the painter-monk set in turbulent medieval Russia. Tarkovsky paints Rublev as almost an Christ-like figure who repents for the sins mankind commits and uses themes of artistic freedom, religion, art under authoritarian regime. Controversial at the time of it's release, a strong spiritual movie from the atheistic USSR, today this is an undisputed Masterpiece. Arguably the Russian Auteur's best work.

Where do I begin? The wonderful B&W photography, the hypnotic camera movement, the incredible production design, the cruelty that this beauty finally depicts; Tarkovsky is an Orthodox saint. Here's a proof that god lives in arts and art is in the cinema. This is a masterpiece on pair with its subject's works. Tarkovsky is Rublev.

The film's final version, shown on Canne film festival and shown in many countries afterwards, is titled "Andrei Rublev". So-called "original version" today was titled "Passion according to Andrei"(Страсти по Андрею). I think that they are different films, and all shortcomings that many reviewers of "Andrei Rublev" pointed out are far more obvious in that "original version" (which was released on DVD,unfortunately, by "Criterion", famous level among cinema lovers).Tarkovsky himself, after his emigration to West, never complained as if Soviet authorities had spoiled his film by forcing him to re-edit it.Of course he knew that the long period of re-editing, which was really annoying for him at first, allowed him to clear up surplus shots and episodes(including those of lengthy animal abusing, of wrestling of Great Prince with his younger brother on snow) and to correct inadequate editing(especially that of "Bell").So I recommend everyone to watch "re-edited"version, which is really "Andrei Rublev", and not to see lengthy 3 hours and 26 minutes "original version" which is half-made product. But if you are interested in the practical technique of editing film, maybe comparing these two films is useful. My rating is for "Andrei Rublev", which was a favorite film of I. Bergman and is probably still so for many other filmmakers.

In 1966 Andrei Tarkovsky directed Andrei Rublev, also known as The Passion according to Andrei. The film loosely depicts the life of Andrei Rublev, an early 15th century monk who is renowned as Russia's greatest creator of religious icons and frescoes. Tarkovsky used this historical figure to anchor the film in one of Russia's most tragic period, making Andrei Rublev not only a witness of his Time but also depicting the artist's creation process, the importance of his faith, the Loss of it and more importantly how the two (Art and Faith) can help go through event you can't really grasp or even understand. The complexity of the film as well as the political implications explain why Andreï Rublev was not released in an atheist USSR until 1971 and in a censored version mind you.The film starts with a prologue where we see a man call Yefim taking off from the roof of a church in a hot air balloon and escaping a mob trying to prevent the Take-off. Yefim seems highly exited and delighted by the sight he experiences from the air; but as the air balloon crashes, we understand that elevation in this obscurantist time is not going to be easy. We fall before we reach enlightenment. This is our Human Condition, this is what Life is about and the shot of a Horse lolling in the grass by a river bank epitomizes Life, its struggle and its beauty. This prologue summarizes metaphorically the seven chapters that follow narrating the trepidations of Andrei Rublev looking for elevation and falling back into his Human condition.For Andrei Rublev, Faith and Art are intimately linked, he paints religious icons and frescoes because he believes this is his priesthood the only way he can transmit his Faith to the people. Losing his Faith in Humanity might imply losing his Faith in God and so in Art. It's only when Andrei witnesses the casting of a bell that his life turns around. He meets the character of Boriska,the bell caster, another creative character a reminiscence of young Andrei and when Andrei sees the young Boriska collapsing on the ground of fatigue and breaking into tears, he takes him in his arms to comfort him and break his vow of silence. He understands he is not alone struggling with the concept of artistic creation and Faith as both (the young Boriska and the older Andrei) brought people so much joy. An artist with a vision can create and eventually echoes god's power of creation by using his or her technical skills but more importantly his or her heart and Faith.The "tour de force" of Andrei Tarkovsky is to use the same creative process than the one of his film's protagonist. By putting his heart and soul in the core of his cinematographic technique he transcends the genre and the medium. We understand that "in cinema it is necessary not to explain, but to act upon the viewer's feelings, and the emotion which is awoken is what provokes thought". To this respect Andrei Rublev is a film to experience and I humbly suggest we experience it with our heart and soul.