Comments:

NOTE : The below Blu-ray captures were taken directly from the Blu-ray disc. ADDITION: Criterion - Region 'A' Blu-ray - August 2018: Criterion present 2 cuts of Andrei Tarkovsky's epic masterpiece, "Andrei Rublev" on 2 Blu-rays . The first disc presents a new high-definition restoration of the director's preferred 183-minute cut. When compared to the Artificial Eye Blu-ray , this image seems framed slightly tighter on the top and bottom. There is more grain and slightly more detail in the Criterion transfer. Depth and contrast look slightly better here as well, with black levels appear deeper and more varied. Disc 2 houses "The Passion According to Andrei", the original 205-minute version of the film that was originally suppressed by Soviet authorities. This cut does not look as good as the 1st disc. Interestingly, this seems to be a different print than Criterion's previous non-anamorphic DVD. There are burned in subtitles and the light seems to blow out the image a bit, resulting in a loss of detail. There are multiple instances of scratches and debris. Contrast levels are nowhere near as impressive as they are on the 1st disc's cut. When there are moments of color at the end of the film, the colors are slightly different here than on the 1st disc (see cap of horses in the rain). Still, nice to have this included here, and it is a big step-up over Criterion's old DVD.



The first disc's audio features an uncompressed mono track. This is a 24-bit Linear PCM track in Russian. The second disc also has a 24-bit Linear PCM 1.0 Russian track but this is a different track altogether, certain dialogue is different and the sound is nowhere near as crisp as it is on the 1st disc. There are optional English subtitles (a new translation) on disc 1, and burned-in English subtitles on disc 2 (the longer "passion" cut). This is available in Region A -locked Blu-ray .



"Inventing Andrei Rublev" is a 12-minute 2018 video essay where filmmaker Daniel Raim looks at Tarkovsky's creative process and the unique aesthetic philosophy he applied in creating Rublev, using the director's own words from interviews and essays. "Vlada Petric" is a 49-minute selected-scene commentary, with film scholar Vlada Petric analyzing the formal characteristics of Rublev (produced in 1998). "Robert Bird" is a new 37-minute interview with film scholar Robert Bird, author of the BFI monograph Andrei Rublev (2004). Here Bird discusses Tarkovsky's film and the complex relationship between it and the historical painter Rublev. "Tarkovsky's Andrei Rublev: A Journey" is a new 30-minute documentary from filmmakers Louise Milne and Sean Martin. This doc features interviews with actor Nikolai Burlyaev, cinematographer Vadim Yusov, Tarkovsky personal assistant Olga Surkova, film critic Dmitri Salynsky, and Tarkovsky scholar Vida T. Johnson. "On The Set of Andrei Rublev" is a 5-minute collection of silent footage of Tarkovsky directing Andrei Rublev. This archival material is held by the Russian State Documentary Film & Photo Archive in Krasnogorsk. "The Three Andreis", a 19-minute short 1966 documentary about the making of Andrei Rublev is a project by Dina Musatova, who studied at the VGIK film school with Tarkovsky. This film is held by the Russian State Documentary & Photo Archive in Krasnogorsk. Criterion have also included Tarkovsky's first publicly released film of any kind, "The Steamroller and the Violin" from 1961. This 45-minute film was his thesis project from the VGIK film school in Moscow. The US rerelease trailer is also included here. as is an essay by critic J. Hoberman.



Andrei Rublev is Tarkovsky's masterpiece, and Criterion have created quite a complete package here with two versions and extensive supplements including the select-scene commentary. Criterion fans have waited patiently after It's non-anamorphic DVD of 19 years ago. It's unusual that the longer 205-minute cut has burned-in subtitles, but it is, at least, very satisfying to finally have it in 1080p. Cinema fans know the value of the film and having it in the HD resolution is somewhat of a revelation. Colin Zavitz *** ADDITION: Artificial Eye - Region 'B' Blu-ray - July 2016: As we already knew - this would be the shorter cut, but my viewing in 1080P was still a revelation. The higher resolution adds another dimension to the viewing experience. It carries a heavier, film-like feeling than any of the SDs. In-motion it looks very pleasing. I'm still analyzing the static images and some visual comparisons but my initial observations are very positive. AE use a linear PCM 2.0 channel (16-bit) and Vyacheslav Ovchinnikov's score sounds rich and moving via the uncompressed. Quite marvelous and impacting. There are optional English subtitles on the region 'B' Blu-ray . Extras include another educational 'Mary Wild introduction' to 'Andrei Tarkovsky's metaphysical dream zone' followed by the second part (1st is on AE's Blu-ray of Ivan's Childhood) of a visual essay (Part 2: Andrei Rublev's Metaphysical Structure) by the film psychoanalyst running almost 14-minutes. There is a 5-minute making of 'Andrei Rublev' and short interviews with Yuriy Nazarov and Marina Tarkovsky discussing the director. The package contains a 36 page, liner notes, booklet. One of cinema's all-time greatest films - brought to adept Blu-ray with some solid supplements by AE. Fans will be very appreciative. Strongly recommended! *** A DDITION: MK2 (France) - Region 0 - PAL - May 2005 - Bottom line on this is the same as in the Mirror comparison - the MK2 is a direct port of the RusCiCo PAL, which is the same as the AE edition. Although it is anamorphic the image has a huge black border around it limiting horizontal resolution. The Lizard edition eclipses all other "shorter" versions of the film and the Criterion is still the definitive for the extended edition. **** ADDITION (Lizard edition Aug 04) The new Lizard edition has a very good image - perhaps the best I have seen. It is one DVD9 and one DVD5 and appears (from the screen captures) far superior to both the Criterion and RusCiCo. It again shows the cropping on the Criterion and that the CC edition has weak contrast. I was expecting to find Edge enhancement but it seems clean. It is sharper, brighter and the best contrast. Unfortunately this is the 'cut version' and is only in Russian with no English subtitles, but it is quite gratifying to know that another version could be available to us with such sterling quality. Colors are different, and may possibly be the most accurate. Its hard to know for sure, but they are more vibrant. If you are very familiar with the film, and want the "cut version" the Lizard print is the way to go... even if its just for the visuals. Let's hope this ignites a fire to get a strong print "cut version" for English language audiences soon. From Andrey Diment: I admit, "sharp" may not be the right word. Still, a problem does exist. Contrast edges (on the Lizard) look washed out a little, kind of Gibbs effect... A good example is the Idiot Girl capture - splashes and the girl's hair look more natural on the Criterion capture. *** These two DVDs were made from different prints of Andrei Rublev. There are at least 4 version that I am aware of and the RusCiCo is a "cut version" where the Criterion is the "Director's Version" (also referred to as the 'Scorsese version' as it was with his efforts that it was snuck out of Russia). This makes a comparison all the more interesting. Both films are valid versions, both of great film historical value - both from Tarkovsky's hands. The jury is still out on what version Andrei actually preferred. On the image quality, the Criterion displays a softer, warmer image, in comparison to the grittier harshly contrasted RusCiCo version. The Criterion is sharper. It also has more accurate colors hues in the limited sequences that have colour at the end of the film. Probably the biggest disparity between the two images is in the aspect ratio. The Criterion is cropped on various sides at different times. It is not consistent, but this is only in comparison to the RusCiCo which may also have some image placement manipulation. The RusCiCo has other issues though. It is slightly out of ratio with characters appearing slightly slimmer and taller. The RusCiCo image has some contrast boosting in spots and dampens its own detail because of this. This borders on visible edge enhancement. The Criterion is an easier winner in this category regardless of the fact that the RusCico is anamorphic and the Criterion is not. The Criterion Rublov looks as if the source element was overexposed by about 1 stop throughout - perhaps the Scorsese print is an 'answer print'. It appears as if there is not enough shadow detail and it looks like perhaps Criterion tried to compensate for it by slightly boosting the luminance. Criterion has used a similar effect in many of their recent transfer of ilsm to DVD. In the sound department, the RusCiCo have bumped the original mono track to a 5.1 Dolby Digital track. Although this sounds wonderful for Home Theatre aficionados, it is not accurate for the context of the director presentation of the film. The RusCiCo should have given the original mono as an option. The RusCiCo also has a French voice-over available in place of the original Russian as an option. Although the Criterion has a wonderful commentary track and rare Tarkovsky interview, the RusCiCo has a multitude of extensive Extras Features, many of which remain quite buried within the text screens of the filmographies. It is pretty hard to say one is better than the other in this category, but I would lean towards the Criterion, but suggest that true fans of the film may want both versions simply for the Extras. The Criterion menus are much cleaner and easier to navigate. Because the RusCiCo has a stipulation not to sell or rent this DVD on any former territories of the USSR, it has made set-up very cumbersome and confusing. The menu system seems designed simply to avoid any ability to watch this DVD without subtitles unless you have the French Voice-over on. Many of the extras features are displayed with a hard to distinguish, poorly colour -coded font. Final comment: This is a majestic piece of film-making and it is impossible not to recommend the Director's Cut as the definitive viewing option. However the RusCiCo 'cut version' offers other insights into the censorship of the film and I was unable to determine conclusive reasons why certain scenes were omitted, but it was none-the-less fascinating. I look forward to Richard Malloy's eventual article/essay discussing these two versions in the near future. - Gary W. Tooze