Analysis of the Distinctive Features of an Auteur, Stylistically and Thematically

Analysis of the Distinctive Features of an Auteur, Stylistically and Thematically

The formal definition of the word ‘auteur’ is “A film director,

especially one whose work is regarded as having some distinctively

personal quality about it…this film director’s practice also has to

comply with the ‘auteur theory’, which states that he/she must be

considered the primary creative force in a motion picture”. This

essay will argue whether Andrei Tarkovsky can be considered to be an

auteur. The evidence will be drawn from one of Tarkovsky’s earlier

films, ‘Andrei Rublev’ (1966) and ‘Mirror’ (1974).

The film opens with a scene unconnected to the remainder of the story

of a peasant sneaking into a tower to ride aboard a primitive hot air

balloon. He succeeds in briefly soaring into the atmosphere, only to

crash violently into the ground. This abstract opening sequence,

disjointed from the rest of the narrative, immediately sets an

elliptical and episodic structure to the film.

The scene may only serve as a metaphor in relation to the mystical

undercurrent that flows throughout the film, in that each of us can

find momentary happiness in the simplest of things, just before we

have to pay for them. This theme in a way relates to the Shelagh

Delaney’s play “A Taste of Honey” and the similarity in their

naturalistic styles is also noteworthy.

The main thematic concern of the movie seems to be that of art and the

question of good and evil. The protagonist, Andrei is a monk artist

who struggles to find meaning in both his Christian Orthodox faith and

his religious art. Historically , the environmental turmoil

represented by the hedon...

... middle of paper ...

...nd the outer glum,

repressed society. The women, peering into the holes observing the

reckless fun, which the men are indulging in, shows how they are

excluded from these moments of pleasure adding a possibly sexist

message to Tarkovsky’s film “Andrei Rublev”. The door of the building

also serves as a framing device, in a meaning identical to that of the

hole. For example, the Tatars intrusion into the peasant’s happy lives

takes place through the borders of the door frame, and when the

entertainer is commanded to go with the Tatars, he is only beaten and

harassed after he steps out of the door. The same rule applies to the

instrument, which the Tatar only breaks outside of the building. All

these events of contrasting natures taking place inside and outside of

the building are observed through the framing of the door.