Hottoceame The Age of Commercialism

AutCuddly Great movie! If you want to be entertained and have a few good laughs, see this movie. The music is also very good,

Arianna Moses Let me be very fair here, this is not the best movie in my opinion. But, this movie is fun, it has purpose and is very enjoyable to watch.

Zlatica One of the worst ways to make a cult movie is to set out to make a cult movie.

adonis98-743-186503 The life, times and afflictions of the fifteenth-century Russian iconographer. Andrey Rublev was unfortunately not different from any of the other movies that i've seen from the list and definitely not a good religion film as well as let's say 'Passion of the Christ' and definitely also not a good story as well. The film is also way to long and close to 3 and a half hours and why really should it be that very long? What's the purpose of the movie being that long? The answer? Really? There's no explanation cause it just didn't need that much of a time but.. (0/10)

Poshlust It's not a biography by any means, it's largely fiction - it's only loosely based off Rublev's life. The film focuses more on his dedication to Eastern Orthodoxy, as well as its role in his evolution as an artist. There are certain characters that each represent different philosophical outlooks under a single unanimous religious belief. In particular, Theophanes is an interesting take on someone being God-loving yet simultaneously overly cynical in his repulsion by His man's vile nature. Outside of characters, the story is alright. The second half is mostly boring in my opinion. Being shot in black and white to emphasize the colorful ending - no doubt to add "life" to the conclusion - is kind of gimmicky, but otherwise a decent film.

Ricc0 "Agreed-upon" to be one of the cinema's masterworks, "The Passion According to Andrei" or simply "Andrei Rublev" revolves around the life of Russia's 15th-century great icon painter. The unique and great Tarkovsky carried the idea of this film from the first beginning, even before finishing his first film "Ivan's Childhood". Yet, after a single premiere screening in Russia (Dom Kino) in the year 1966, the film did not get a public release. Tarkovsky's masterpiece struggled for years in the Soviet Union and upon releasing it in December 1971 there were several cuts applied to it, where it was shown in the 186-minute version (the original was 205 min. long). Before that in 1969, the film was requested for Cannes Film Festival where it won the FIPRESCI prize, and from there on it was widely regarded as one of the greatest movies of all time.Rublev's character appears for the first time leaving the Trinity monastery with two other monks to search for work in Moscow. At the end of the movie, Rublev goes back to the same monastery, where he began his journey, to paint his "Holy Trinity". Between this and that, Rublev accomplished his spiritual journey and found his voice (innerself) not between the walls of monastery, but in the harsh circumstances of life back then. The film indeed shows little about Andrei Rublev himself and yet in a way shows a lot. As always Tarkovsky surprises his audience. The biographical film does not tell us about Rublev in the traditional meaning of the word, since he is most of the times a witness of what was going on and a passive observer. Yet, it tells us more about the interaction of this personality with existence, life, and with the conditions and occurrences of his time. In fact, Tarkovsky's psychological stance and spiritual meditation had to do a lot with the result of this film. That is why many regarded it as an allegory to Tarkovsky's own struggles in Russia or with his own-self. It is then the passion according to both Andrei Rublev and Andrei Tarkovsky.The film is divided into eight chapters (with a prologue and epilogue) each with a unique title. The opening scene starts with a prologue of a hot air balloon ride. Some consider this amazing scene as an allegory to our spiritual relationship with the "world of appearances". It may also seem an allegory to the struggles of the innovative, the spiritual, and the human in general with the circumstances life presents. Well, it may also mean both; since Tarkovsky uses powerful images that carry lots of meanings to evoke our emotions and drive us to react to them from our perspective. A horse (to Tarkovsky it resembles life) is seen collapsing. Rublev then is shown leaving the monastery.. the journey begins.Envy, desire, love, betrayal, freedom, faith.. wars and tortures and murders and struggles all of which Rublev feels and witnesses, and so he'd be greatly affected. He becomes disturbed and shaken.. and undergoes a vow of silence until he finds his faith again. Then, after seeing a boy achieve by faith what he was incapable of by knowledge, Rublev finds himself again in a moment of inspiration. Now we're ready to see Rublev's work in detail.. the film concludes with horses standing peacefully (the only scene shot in colors alongside Rublev's frescoes).The film's spirituality offended many officials, its depiction of Russia's history offended many nationalists, and its boldness offended some of the religious. Yet, Tarkovsky was not trying really to take sides or attack or criticize anyone. He was just being Tarkovsky.. the genius.. with his thoughts and emotions. He was presenting from what he deeply felt a piece of art.

Trivox First of all, this is a movie about the medieval age in Russia. It's about a dark and dangerous time. I wouldn't wish to be born at that period of time even to my worst enemy. The only island of stability and culture in that ocean of darkness is a Church institution.This movie is a set of episodes from around a life of famous icon painter, a monk Andrey Rublev. Yes, it is not exactly his life stories; these stories about a life of that time, about hideosity, about severity. There is much naturalism in it; but there's no "too much" naturalism feeling which leads to a poor style. You understand it while watching: this is the way that it was then, nothing more.It is a masterpiece of photography and scenery. A visual image settles firmly into my memory. It is a genius acting; even a small role of Yuri Nikulin is a diamond between other diamonds. Crowd scenes are really massive. Altogether, there is a complete diving into the atmosphere of the movie.I don't much connected with faith nor religion internally. It's not close to my feelings. But I don't think that the movie is about religious feelings. Also I do not know much about details of that period of time in Russia; but it's not really matters too, methinks. But I consider this movie as a genuine art, and I'm very proud that my homeland is a homeland for a such genius person as film director Andrey Tarkovsky.I heard that Tarkovsky was a kind of fanatic. I heard that for achieving maximum realism he allowed horses to break their legs due a filming process; or even some people accuse him in burning a cow alive during the battle scene of Golden Horde's warriors raid. I do not know how much truth are in that statements, and I wouldn't comment these no more. All I know that his fanaticism was well transformed into a great result which couldn't be achieved by anyone but him.My rate: 10/10