Andrei Rublev: Cinema as the Language...

Dir: Andrei Tarkovsky. Length: 3h 25m. Budget: 1.3 Rbls

My return to Andrei Tarkovsky's powerful and poetic second feature, Andrei Rublev, left me, as always when it comes to any work of Tarkovsky's, thinking of how Tarkovsky managed to pull off his shots and how he managed to work with so many artists fervidly without any flaws.

Andrei Rublev, released in 1966, is one of Tarkovsky's masterpieces, and it has earned such status throughout the years. But why is Andrei Rublev a mistake-less cinema?

When it comes to filmmakers like Tarkovsky, I think it is better to talk about them rather than dissect their work or… To understand why a film has stood the test of time, we must try to understand the filmmaker.

Tarkovsky, as is the case with all great filmmakers, understood the medium, and most importantly, he was aware of the purpose that lay behind what he worshipped as a filmmaker: cinema.

As artists, great filmmakers have a voice and a point of view. They have an urge to find ways to express themselves, their thoughts, perspectives, and philosophy. Also, because it's important to mention, filmmakers like Tarkovsky learn from life itself.

Tarkovsky went through a lot of ups and downs as a filmmaker. The hardships that he experienced made him stronger and inspired him further as a human being and, more importantly, as a filmmaker. 

When filmmakers like Tarkovsky make a film, their work cannot be imitated. There is no other film like Andrei Rublev, for no one could make such a film. Even today, with all the technology and money available, attempting to do what Tarkovsky did is impossible. This is regardless of how good of a filmmaker one is. 

A film like Andrei Rublev is unique to the language of cinema, and therefore it cannot be made by anyone else. Not language in the sense of speaking a language, but language in the context of cinema.

When we're on a quest to make films, we must first find that distinct voice and that point of view. Only then can we concoct a style so that, as time goes by, the style itself transforms into the language of cinema. It's exactly what Tarkovsky did.