Alternate Best Actor 1966: Anatoly Solonitsyn in Andrei Rublev

Anatoly Solonitsyn did not receive an Oscar nomination for portraying the titular character in Andrei Rublev.

Andrei Rublev is a masterful film that follows the titular Russian iconographer during the 15th century.

The nature of a film by Andrei Tarkovsky is unique to the filmmaker, in that despite expansions in technology or what have you, his work crafts an experience of its own. This as I think one could just examine the way he films a stream that is unlike any other filmmaker. Often it is the great director that realizes the viewer as a voyeur within the characters they're watching, that isn't the case with Tarkovsky, or at least not to me. This as he doesn't make you one who views what's going but rather oddly grants an empathetic state within the experience that is almost otherworldly in this achievement. In this sense though Tarkovsky's protagonists are almost the viewer in certain sense, as his focus upon the technical protagonist is different than most. Although this film technically it is about the painter of religious imagery Andrei Rublev, played by Anatoly Solonitsyn, the film is more so about the time and place of Russia. Rublev is in a way the guide, though only in a way, but most often as an observer. Solonitsyn's performance is one befitting of a man who lives in a monastery. This with careful consideration and manner. There is an intensity within his work of a man who is burdened almost by his thoughts as he must think about his artistry, his faith and his existence. A careful performance that fits well within a man whose behavior is similar, this even when compared to his brethren artists and his mentor, who are more outward in their passion and philosophy. Solonitsyn depicts a man of thought, and does so effectively. He creates the right presence to this state of the man.

We witness Rublev through a series of technically vignettes that are in some way associated with his period. These moments though typically don't always personally connect to Rublev other than he is in proximity of them. Solonitsyn's approach shouldn't be hand waved this as he is never invisible in the role even though Rublev is often in a way just part of the crowd. This in so many of the moments we see him witness various acts of quite the extremes that reflect his times from the performance of a fool, to the cruelty of a prince, to a pagan ritual or even a massacre around him. Solonitsyn's performance is tempered much of the time as a man of an internalized manner and whose ambition is associated with artistry. His performance though does reflect the right glints of the truth on the surface of those internalized feelings. Whether this bit a slight sense of lust at the naked women of the pagan women, or similar sense of horror or shame within his eyes at the violent cruelty he bares witness to. Solonitsyn realizes the very honest emotion of the man however with the sense that he essentially must keep it largely within himself if he is to function within his time and place. The most open initially is in his conversations with his mentor Theopanes the Greek, who more openly speaks on matters of faith and art. In Rublev's few replies and moments of reflection upon the words of his mentor, Solonitsyn conveys the idea of a man in the constant state of flux towards attempting to uncover his own truth. He grants the sense of a man who isn't quite aware of it himself even as in the same way we see the man's diligence and conviction within his approach to his artistic endeavors. The greatest change comes within the turmoil when Rublev takes a life to save another, a moment of brief intensity, followed by quiet yet potent sorrow within Solonitsyn's performance.The rest of his performance then is a solitary one though powerful. This in his eyes become affixed with this sense of a need for penance. He creates the sense of this with silence, despite even the prodding of others to break it, particularly as Rublev refuses to continue his artistry in this time. Although aided by some remarkable makeup, Solonitsyn impressively portrays the wear of this act and time in his physical motion, which is always minimal yet becomes more labored and weak as an older man. This is the man's state until another extraordinary, if almost accidental, act inspires him again. It isn't a big moment in Solonitsyn's performance yet still potent in granting the sense of the man finding inspiration. This in just again a glint in Solonitsyn's performance, yet still notable. That is his work in microcosm though. This isn't what one likely takes from the film, yet still an essential part as being the observer of the period, apart from it in ways, yet changed fundamentally by it all the same.