Sunday 5 July 2020

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.

30 comments:

Luke Higham said...

So pleased you adored this masterpiece.

Ratings and thoughts on the cast, thoughts on the direction, cinematography, costume design, production design and makeup.

And your thoughts on the 'Bell' scene.

Luke Higham said...

1. Oscarsson
2. Pleasence
3. Axberg
4. Warner
5. Solonitsyn

Michael McCarthy said...

1. Oscarsson
2. Pleasence
3. Warner
4. Axberg
5. Solonitsyn

Anonymous said...

1. Oscarsson
2. Pleasence
3. Warner
4. Axberg
5. Solonitsyn

Anonymous said...

Louis, is Tarkovsky growing to be one of your favorites. There's a good chance you'll end up really liking all 7 of his films.

Lucas Saavedra said...

1. Oscarsson
2. Pleasence
3. Axberg
4. Warner
5. Solonitsyn

Matt Mustin said...

Louis: In the previous post you mentioned Hamilton is eligible for Best Director for you. I assume that means the direction of the film and not the play, correct?

Calvin Law said...

Very well written review, Louis. I’m even more eager to watch this now.

Calvin Law said...

Anonymous: I feel like at this rate, anything by Tarkovsky is going to be on Louis’ wavelength. A lot of friends of mine regard him as the ‘perfect’ filmmaker so to speak in terms of his career output.

Aidan Pittman said...

Haven't seen this or ay of Tarkovsky's other work, but just looking at some images of his films I can easily see myself loving them.

Louis: How do you rank the Oscar winning performances of the 2010s? Apologizes if this takes you a while, I know it's a lot.

Louis Morgan said...

Luke:

Let me start with the cast , though let me save Sergeyev and Burlyayev for the moment.

Lapikov - 4(He's good as really sort of the anti-Solonitsyn, in that instead of sort of self-reflection we see in his performance the focus on tedious and petty emotions. He too focuses on it in a largely internalized way however effectively as this quiet bitterness that grows over time. That is until his late scene where he's good in creating a similar intensity though now seemingly with some claim of notability in now the same sense of bitterness, though now with a hint of warmth, however now that it is towards Andrei not using his talents.)

Raush - 3.5(Effective in making an impression in sort of the "State" of her character that is naturally realized, and I should note this is itself remarkable, as if this was at all overacted it would be quite detrimental. Although of course she is natural as all the "normal" people.)

Bykov - 3.5(Effective in his two scenes one of sort of just that of a joyous performance where he delivers the innate energy and even humor effectively in the part. This against a stark contrast where he's terrific in the bitter and desperate man over years of hardship later on. Love how he's note one note in that in his expression you grant the sense of how dealing with the sort of resistance for his "revenge" wears on him quickly.)

Anonymous:

I mean he's doing so well so far, particularly considering since Nostalgia (which I can see how it might've been a little too abstract for its own good yet was still absolutely captivating) is supposedly his low point.

Matt:

Yes, so basically the direction is the choice in camera shots and the editing of them.

Calvin:

Thanks.

Anonymous said...

Louis: your top 15 rhea seehorn acting moments

Tahmeed Chowdhury said...

Louis: Which cut of this film did you watch?

Omar Franini said...


1. Oscarsson
2. Axberg
3. Pleasence
4. Warner
5. Solonitsyn

R.I.P. Ennio Morricone

Luke Higham said...

RIP Ennio Moricone, Maestro

Bryan L. said...

1. Oscarsson
2. Axberg
3. Pleasence
4. Warner
5. Solonitsyn

R.I.P. to a LEGEND, Ennio Morricone

Calvin Law said...

RIP Ennio Morricone.

Emi Grant said...

R.I.P. Ennio Morricone

GM said...

1. Oscarsson
2. Axberg
3. Pleasence
4. Warner
5. Solonitsyn

R.I.P. Ennio Morricone

Luke Higham said...

Louis: May I have the rest of your thoughts.

Tahmeed Chowdhury said...

1. Oscarsson
2. Pleasence
3. Axberg
4. Warner
5. Solonitsyn

Rest in peace, Ennio Morricone.

Luke Higham said...

*Morricone

Anonymous said...

Louis: Have you seen "Stalker" or "Ivan's Childhood" by Tarkovsky yet? And your thoughts on Morricone as a composer to commemorate the great man?

Luke Higham said...

Anonymous: He hasn't seen those yet or Solaris and The Sacrifice.

RatedRStar said...

R.I.P. Ennio Morricone

Luke Higham said...

Louis: Your thoughts on Georges Delerue.

Tim said...

R. I. P. Ennio Morricone

BRAZINTERMA said...

R.I.P. Ennio Morricone

My TOP10 Ennio Morricone's musics:
10º Investigation of a Citizen Above Suspicion
9º Tragedy of a Ridiculous Man
8º The Hateful Eight
7º The Battle of Algiers
6º Cinema Paradiso
5º The Mission
4º Once Upon a Time in the West
3º The Thing
2º The Untouchables
1º The Good, the Bad and the Ugly

Aidan Pittman said...

R.I.P. Ennio Morricone

Anonymous said...

Does Hamilton actually qualify for Oscar nominations or is it not allowed?