Tarkovsky sought to create a film that shows the artist as "a world-historic figure" and "Christianity as an axiom of Russia's historical identity" during a turbulent period of Russian history.

Due to the film's themes, including artistic freedom, religion, political ambiguity, and autodidacticism, it was not released domestically in the Soviet Union under the doctrine of state atheism until years after it was completed, except for a single 1966 screening in Moscow.

Even more since being restored to its original version, Andrei Rublev has come to be regarded as one of the greatest films of all time, and has often been ranked highly in both the Sight & Sound critics' and directors' polls.

The main film is divided into eight episodes dealing, directly or symbolically, with transitional moments in the life of the great icon painter.

The jester, or skomorokh, is a bitterly sarcastic enemy of the state, the Boyars, and the Church, who earns a living with his scathing and obscene social commentary.

Theophanes is portrayed as a complex character: humanistic and God-fearing in his views yet somewhat cynical and disillusioned with other people, regarding his art more as a craft and a chore.

Kirill talks to Theophanes, who is impressed by the monk's understanding and erudition and invites him to work as his apprentice on the decoration of the Cathedral of the Annunciation in Moscow.

Kirill eventually accepts, on the condition that Theophanes will personally tender the offer in the Andronikov Monastery, in front of all the fraternity and Andrei Rublev.

Kirill is jealous of Andrei and, in a fit of anger, decides to leave the monastery for the secular world, throwing accusations of greed in the face of his fellow monks, who also dismiss him.

While Foma has talent as an artist, he is less interested in the deeper meaning of his work and more concerned with the practical aspects of the job, like perfecting his use of unstable azure pigment.

Andrei confides to Daniil that the task disgusts him and that he is unable to paint a subject such as the Last Judgement, as he doesn't want to terrify people into submission.

Foma, impatient and wanting to work, leaves Andrei's group and takes an offer to paint in a smaller, less prestigious church.

Sergei (Vladimir Titov), a young apprentice who escaped the assault unharmed, reads a random section of the Bible aloud, at Daniil's request, concerning women.

A young woman, Durochka (Irma Raush), whose name identifies her as a holy fool, or Yurodivy, wanders in to take shelter from the rain and is upset by the sight of the paint on the wall.

Kirill talks to Andrei for the first time since their departure from the monastery, assuring him that harming a holy fool is considered bad luck and a great sin, and that Durochka will be released unharmed.

On site, Boriska constantly contradicts and challenges his father's old team of workmen, having his own way in choosing the location of the pit, the selection of the proper clay, the building of the mold, the firing of the furnaces and finally the hoisting of the bell.

He gives fewer orders and lets the work crew take over; as the furnaces are opened and the molten metal pours into the mould, he privately asks God for help.

According to Tarkovsky everybody had a different image of the historical figure of Andrei Rublev, thus casting an unknown actor who would not remind viewers of other roles was his favoured approach.

[13] Solonitsyn would continue to work with the director, appearing in Solaris, Mirror, and Stalker, and in the title role of Tarkovsky's 1976 stage production of Hamlet in Moscow's Lenkom Theatre.

Whether one wishes to fly before it has become possible, or cast a bell without having learned how to do it, or paint an icon – all these acts demand that, for the price of his creation, man should die, dissolve himself in his work, give himself entirely.

One reason for including this color finale was, according to Tarkovsky, to give the viewer some rest and to allow him to detach himself from Rublev's life and to reflect.

All in all, I have counted thirty-six shots which were completely deleted in the 185-minute version of Andrei Rublev, and about eighty-five which were considerably abbreviated, including nine very long takes which are split each into two or more parts.

Andrei Rublev was accused of being "anti-historical" in its failure to portray the context of its hero's life: the rapid development of large cities and the struggle against the Mongols.

[21] In the Soviet Union, influential admirers of Tarkovsky's work—including the film director Grigori Kozintsev, the composer Dmitri Shostakovich and Yevgeny Surkov, the editor of Iskusstvo Kino[16]—began pressuring for the release of Andrei Rublev.

We shortened certain scenes of brutality in order to induce psychological shock in viewers, as opposed to a mere unpleasant impression that would only destroy our intent.

[12]The original 1966 version of the film titled as The Passion According to Andrei was published by The Criterion Collection in 2018 and released in both DVD and Blu-Ray format.

The epilogue showing details of Andrei Rublev's icons was in black and white as the Soviet Union had not yet fully transitioned to color TV.

[29] Criterion's producer of the project stated that the video transfer was sourced from a film print that filmmaker Martin Scorsese had acquired while visiting Russia.

The website's critical consensus states, "Andrei Rublev is a cerebral epic that filters challenging ideas through a grand scope -- forming a moving thesis on art, faith, and the sweep of history".

Time (magazine) compared the movie unfavorably to Dr. Zhivago; those other New York reviewers who took note begged off explication, citing Rublev's apparent truncation.