criterionforum.org

Yakushima wrote:Criterion just posted on their Facebook an amazing behind the scene footage from the making of "Andrei Rublev". A hopeful sign? [-o<

Don't get your hopes up. The video they posted was originally posted to their Facebook page by a user. They commented that they liked it and then re-posted.

(though I'd like this upgrade more than any other, so I'm always hopefully optimistic)

Bittersweet to see footage of the late, great Vadim Yusov behind the camera only a few weeks after his passing and quite a surreal experience watching this footage in color. Here's hoping a Criterion Blu-ray will eventually happen.

Maybe a sign Criterion will include the rare, color version of 'Andrei Rublev' on a future release?

Criterion made clear at the Wexner Talk that there's no plans in the works to upgrade Andrei. I'm pretty sure the primary issue is with materials available. (and rights, perhaps?)

I thought the gist of it was that they wanted to upgrade but had, at that point, "no immediate plans." The feeling I got was 2-3 years at the earliest. And though it seemed to be about the materials, situations like that can and do sometimes change quickly, as with Cinema Guild's Sokurov set.

As I mentioned before, I strongly suspect that Criterion is skittish about releasing only the 205 min. cut on Blu-ray since the print quality is fairly weak. If they could acquire the rights to the 183 min. edit, which is in much better shape print-wise, I'm sure they would issue an upgraded set including both versions.

I think, quality of 205 min. cut unacceptable for BD release. In Russia has perfect issue of 183 min. cut. by Digital Element (available for order). There is no point in waiting Criterion release.

Is the added footage just dropped in or is it a lot of alternate footage and/or re-arranged? Point of the question is, could they just drop in the lower quality 205 footage into the 183 with a branch so that most of it looks its best at least? Would also allow them to do one disc rather than 2

I imagine such an effort would cost a lot more money than this would sell.

Moe Dickstein wrote:Is the added footage just dropped in or is it a lot of alternate footage and/or re-arranged? Point of the question is, could they just drop in the lower quality 205 footage into the 183 with a branch so that most of it looks its best at least? Would also allow them to do one disc rather than 2

My recollection was that it contained alternate footage, but I'm not finding anything about this online. It's baffled me for years that the longer cut remains unrestored, since it's such a recognized masterpiece.

knives wrote:I imagine such an effort would cost a lot more money than this would sell.

But with a canonical film like this, there are more important considerations than "cost" and "profit"...
...
...

at the very least they can rescan the element of the long cut they have and run it through phoenix.

Then they can acquire the theatrical cut from whatever the best they can source it.

drop on a passle of extra features and you're pushing whether they'll need three bluray or just two, probably three.

Since we're now in the DF era that probably means a 3 disc bluray plus 4 DVDs, seven disc set!

albucat wrote:It's baffled me for years that the longer cut remains unrestored, since it's such a recognized masterpiece.

The source of the longer cut is just a single stray (festival) distribution print, isn't it? The film's owners presumably have far, far better elements for the shorter version, and may not even have access to the print of the longer version, and since both are "director's cuts" it's no wonder they've focussed their restoration attentions on the final version.

A restoration of the long cut would be a separate undertaking, and one that would most likely be up to the owners of that print, who don't necessarily hold secure rights to the film, so it's financially a much shakier proposition.

I'd be happy with Criterion issuing a good BD of the shorter version, with a fresh, unrestored warts-and-all scan of the long cut as an extra.

I imagine this prospective release is a bit of a conundrum for Criterion. I'm sure they wouldn't want to leave out either version, since the shorter cut is the canonical one and likely to be in much better shape, but the longer cut is a huge selling point and major Criterion exclusive. They'd also be expected, and no doubt want to, include extensive bonus material - at the very least they'll have to address the convoluted history of the different versions - but all of that suggests a five-disc edition at minimum (two Blus for the two versions, with extras spread across them; a DVD apiece for each version plus a third for extras), which makes for a very pricy release of a single film.

zedz wrote:The source of the longer cut is just a single stray (festival) distribution print, isn't it?

Didn't Scorsese smuggle it out of Russia, or was that just a dream I had?

swo17 wrote:

zedz wrote:The source of the longer cut is just a single stray (festival) distribution print, isn't it?

Didn't Scorsese smuggle it out of Russia, or was that just a dream I had?

Not necessarily smuggled that I can see, but Scorsese did provide it to Criterion

swo17 wrote:

zedz wrote:The source of the longer cut is just a single stray (festival) distribution print, isn't it?

Didn't Scorsese smuggle it out of Russia, or was that just a dream I had?

That's a rumour I heard as well, but I also heard a similar thing about The Colour of Pomegranates, which sounds more plausible. A 35mm print for a film as long as Rublyov would probably be larger than Scorsese himself!

in my imagination, it's a classic spy story switcheroo smuggling run. Scorsese comes to russia with prints of a few of his films to show to the filmmakers he wants to meet. He leaves russia with the print of Andrei Rublev in the cans that are marked as his films, and no one ever opens the cans to catch them in customs. And he leaves his prints in russia. :-p

And then in a series of unbelievably tense moments, the screaming and borderline violent Russian officials discover the ruse at the last possible moment and try to catch the plane Scorsese is on by chasing it down the tarmac in jeeps as it takes off?

Gregory wrote:And then in a series of unbelievably tense moments, the screaming and borderline violent Russian officials discover the ruse at the last possible moment and try to catch the plane Scorsese is on by chasing it down the tarmac in jeeps as it takes off?

and oscars were awarded to all, the end

albucat wrote:

Moe Dickstein wrote:Is the added footage just dropped in or is it a lot of alternate footage and/or re-arranged? Point of the question is, could they just drop in the lower quality 205 footage into the 183 with a branch so that most of it looks its best at least? Would also allow them to do one disc rather than 2

My recollection was that it contained alternate footage, but I'm not finding anything about this online. It's baffled me for years that the longer cut remains unrestored, since it's such a recognized masterpiece.

My understanding is that when Soviet officials took issue with elements of Tarkovsky's initial long edit and demanded cuts, he took the opportunity to rework the film to make it more aesthetically pleasing to himself (in addition to trimming the footage he was asked to remove). This resulted in a number of sequences in the later, shorter version that feature different editing and even different takes than what appeared in the 205 min. edit. Comparing the two versions completed by Tarkovsky, many of the editorial alterations he made for the later, shorter version are subjectively better than what he did the first time around. This is not just a case of the director's version being bastardized for release; Tarkovsky even expressed preference for the 183 min. edit.

What remains a point of conjecture is whether Tarkovsky would have retained the censored portions in his final cut if he had the opportunity. While it might be entertaining to have a "Comprehensive Version" that combines elements from both versions, I think the best approach* for Criterion would be to issue both existing edits in one set as "zedz" suggests.

*By "best approach", I mean the one I would really like to have on my shelf!

Roger Ryan wrote:My understanding is that when Soviet officials took issue with elements of Tarkovsky's initial long edit and demanded cuts, he took the opportunity to rework the film to make it more aesthetically pleasing to himself (in addition to trimming the footage he was asked to remove). This resulted in a number of sequences in the later, shorter version that feature different editing and even different takes than what appeared in the 205 min. edit. Comparing the two versions completed by Tarkovsky, many of the editorial alterations he made for the later, shorter version are subjectively better than what he did the first time around. This is not just a case of the director's version being bastardized for release; Tarkovsky even expressed preference for the 183 min. edit.

This is pretty much in line with my own understanding of the situation, and I agree - to me, it's very clear indeed that some sequences (notably the prologue) are substantially more effective in the shorter cut, and undoubtedly benefited from Tarkovsky being given the chance to revisit his work wholesale.

Roger Ryan wrote:My understanding is that when Soviet officials took issue with elements of Tarkovsky's initial long edit and demanded cuts, he took the opportunity to rework the film to make it more aesthetically pleasing to himself (in addition to trimming the footage he was asked to remove). This resulted in a number of sequences in the later, shorter version that feature different editing and even different takes than what appeared in the 205 min. edit. Comparing the two versions completed by Tarkovsky, many of the editorial alterations he made for the later, shorter version are subjectively better than what he did the first time around. This is not just a case of the director's version being bastardized for release; Tarkovsky even expressed preference for the 183 min. edit.

Well there's a fair amount of debate about this, too (of course). His opinions about the changes he made in order to get it released in the USSR were, of course, made while in the USSR for the purpose of courting the local censors. He didn't really have much say in which cut was his favorite if he wanted the film released--which also may have informed his later opinion of the film. In any case, I think it would be a mistake to ignore either cut, like with many Welles films. My main irritation with the re-edit would be that it adds cuts to certain shots that are whole in the longer version, giving us the first and last minute of longer takes. It's a different experience for me.

albucat wrote:Well there's a fair amount of debate about this, too (of course). His opinions about the changes he made in order to get it released in the USSR were, of course, made while in the USSR for the purpose of courting the local censors. He didn't really have much say in which cut was his favorite if he wanted the film released--which also may have informed his later opinion of the film.

This is negative evidence, but given Tarkovsky's personality, I'm pretty sure his diaries would have been full of endless moaning about the injustice of it all if he'd been truly unhappy with his final edit. He was not one to take professional slights - real or imaginary - lightly. He was pretty candid about his misgivings regarding Rublyov, and the 'forced re-edit' wasn't among those recorded.

I forgot to say: movies from Mosfilm you can see (and buy/download) on their site (some in HD, including Rublev). For watch Rublev short cut in HD on here page, press word "Смотреть".
All movies for Mosfilm site hosted on Youtube service and after beginning play you can select quality up to 1080p as usual for video on Youtube.

205 minute version playing in 35mm print on Sunday May 31 in Brooklyn.

Edit: URL fixed.