An intense movie about a girl who helps her roommate get an abortion in Communist-era Romania. The atmosphere is thick. You can just taste that crumbling, decrepit hopelessness of the era. The main girl is brilliant in her role, the girl getting the abortion is annoyingly stupid and the abortion doctor is, well, geez, he’s really complex for a secondary character. What’s fascinating about the film is how the scenes are so mundane but the abortion lends them extraordinary drama. It’s one of those foreign films that put saccharine Hollywood dramas to shame.

4 months, three weeks, two days is a 2007 Romanian film written and directed by Cristian Mingiu. This is Mingiu’s second feature film. It won the Palme d’Or at the 2007 Cannes Film Festival (; the Palme d’Or is basically the award for best film). This movie represents European art cinema at its best – nothing is overstated in the traditional sense. The characters’ emotions and point of view are never outrighlty articulated by conventional narrative devices. There will be no thought bubbles, direct camera address, narration, direct object cuts, or even much musical accompaniment to cue the viewer in. Rather, the viewer is expected to see the subtle moments of this film. The actors are in control, their characters’ emotional responses to the brutal surroundings and life of 1987 Communist Romania sustain the plot and setting.

The narrative begins in the tradition of media en res, with little exposition to clue us in. The opening shot is of a smoking cigarette on a table. The camera pans out to reveal Otilia smoking, her eyes darting back and forth like a proverbial mouse her character represents. While the camera gives little away the naturalistic acting and long, steady takes allow the viewer to gradually ascertain clues about characters through their syntax and body language. Otilia’s introduction portrays her timid and victimized attitude in seconds.

In the plot our two protagonists – Otilia and Gabriela are confronted with numerous obstacles of a socio-cultural nature. At its core this film is about the issue of abortion and whether or not Otilia will successfully have one. However, the narrative explores themes of relationships (romantic and friendly) and the various idiosyncrasies of society. In juxtaposition to Otilia’s timidity Gabriela possesses a quiet inner strength while in frame. She grimly endures Mr. Bebe’s sex fee to help her friend in need. After the act is done, she’s seen dispassionately cleaning up in the bathroom; either too shocked or emotionally walled from the situation to even mentally address it. Our window into her life provides an almost painful amount of dramatic irony in the dinner scene with Adi’s family. The emotionally detached camera allows the viewer to understand both Adi’s family’s as well as Gabriela’s emotions throughout the scene, regardless of whose viewpoint we agree with. The entire debacle eventually comes to a head when Gabriela leaves Adi’s house to check on Otilia.

The central question: ‘will Otilia have a successful abortion?’ is also treated with a detached narrative style. Gabriela leaves Adi’s to go back to the hotel, not knowing whether or not Otilia is OK. In an added bit of suspense an ambulence is parked outside of the hotel when Gabriela arrives. Both Gabriela and the viewer are held in uncertainty. However, everything is revealed to be fine when Gabriela comes to Otilia’s room; the abortion has been successful. Gabriela wraps the fetus and unflinchlingly dumps it in a trash chute. The fetus is never seen, except as a bundle of cloth. This narrative ambiguity reinforces the realism of the narrative and makes the goal of the protagonist’s less spectacular and meaningful as a result.

While the narrative began in the middle of the action it also leaves in the same way. After a harrowing day Otilia and Gabriela are seen in a dark, nearly empty restaurant not speaking to another; the audience assumes they are both deep in thought. The camera pans out the window and away from the action, abruptly leaving the narrative. No questions are answered in this denouement except for the issue of the abortion. Rather, more questions are asked – the least of which is where will these womens’ lives go? This lack of closure more accurately imitates real life and also causes the viewer to flesh out the characters with our own emotional subtext and experience. This in turn helps build a more realistic narrative. Hence these aimless characters and their seemingly goalless stories represent a world that we’ve looked into; their lives, as well as the viewers’ lives, will continue as before even after the camera stops. For what purpose? No one can say.

Gabriela

I saw 4 months, 3 weeks, and 2 days (Mingiu 2007) for sale at the store-closing sale at the Blockbuster on Riverside. I was going to get it because I love watching foreign films. But, I didn’t get to buy it because the next time I went to Blockbuster it was closed and gone forever. So I was really glad the film was on our list. I had to see it!

4 months, 3 weeks, and 2 days is mainly about Otilia, a student, that helps her pregnant roommate, Gabriela, get an illegal abortion. The film is set in 1987 in Romania during communist times. People during this time were not allowed to use birth control at all. They were encouraged to have big families. Otilia helps her friend so much throughout this story. She sticks by her until the end. Both women go though a horrible experience to get this abortion. I won’t say. You have to go watch it. It was an emotionally packed film. They students speak quietly and naturally but you can sense their frustration, desperation, and anger. The way the characters responded to their unfortunate circumstances reminded me of the Italian Realism films I saw for this class. The students just roll with what comes along. They persevere even though their situation becomes more stressful and difficult to handle. Gabriela and Otilia’s predicament is that her pregnancy is long term and considered murder in the country they stay. The abortionist points out that what she wants is considerable worse than abortion.

I love this film because is shows the reality of women’s issues in a country with a patriarchic and extremist government. It also shows the difficulty in getting through this emotional experience in general. For instance, Gabriela tells Otilia to bury the fetus even though they were told not to. Otilia feels really sad for her but continues on as planned. Also, Otilia argues with her boyfriend over abortion at one point during the film. She asks him what he would do if she were pregnant. He is very insensitive and just doesn’t understand the complexity of unplanned/ unwanted pregnancies. She becomes very angry and reminds him that when they had sex he went inside of her even though she told him not to. This film has such a direct way of getting across this tragic story that happened during a miserable decade under the Ceausescu regime.

The interactions between people are depicted in such a beautiful way; still but very expressive. The aesthetics are very captivating and art-like. Moments of silence bring out intenseness at some times or tranquility at others. This reminds me of the minimalism we saw in Umberto D. Also, the film has an indie quality. The plot isn’t CHC at all. Moments aren’t clear into they develop later in the film. At first we follow Otilia around the city while she reserves a room and buys cigarettes and Tic-Tacs. Then we finally understand for sure that what the girls were worried about in the beginning in the illegal abortion. Even the ending is ambiguous. The story is resolved at a certain level but not really. Gabriela got the pregnancy terminated like she wanted but both women seemed completely disturbed by their entire experience. It’s a movie that makes you think about what we’ve just witnessed and what the characters have just endured. In that sense, it fits in the art house category also. There’s no closure like in CHC.

This film was successful worldwide and received many awards and much recognition after being screened and the Cannes Festival. It was highly acclaimed in Canada, the United States, Sweden, Australia, Spain and other places as well. This film’s budget was 600,000 in European currency but grossed close to 10 million internationally. The film fits many different styles of filmmaking period, which probably lead to its success. I recommend this movie to all.

When it was over all I could say was thank god.  I definitely have a new #1 on my list of movies I wish I never watched.  I implore all of you have not seen this, to never ever watch it.  This movie just replaced Dr. T and the Women on my wish I never watched it list.  What could top a movie that ends in a live birth,  like Dr T?  What about a movie that ends with an abortion, and you actually get to see the dead fetus.  I am not even sure what the point of this movie is.  Is it a movie for or against abortion?  On the one hand it could be against abortion, because it does show how gruesome it can be.  On the other hand, it could be pro-legal abortion, because it shows how gruesome back-alley abortions can be.  Or is this movie just trying to show how much life in Romania sucks?  If that is the point, then the director hit the nail on the head.

This movie is definitely an independent, if based solely on the plot of the movie. Stylistically it is definitely not classic Hollywood cinema, and since it is a foreign film, that also lends itself to its independent status.

On a more positive note, the acting in 4 months 3 weeks 2 days was really very good considering the subject matter.  The main character really does a good job of portraying the emotion that you would feel while trying to help out a friend with an abortion.  Additionally, the scene with her boyfriends family was an especially good job of acting on her part; she captures the “pissed off but can’t show it around my boyfriends family” face perfectly.  I think that this is the best part of the movie.  The girlfriend is meeting her boyfriend’s family for the first time, but she is also worried about that her friend is lying alone in a hotel room having an abortion.  Additionally the girlfriend had to have sex with the man conducting the abortion, because they did not have enough money.  In this scene you really feel badly for the girl as she is trying to deal with all of this.   You also feel for the boyfriend because he has no idea as to why his girlfriend is so upset.

The other actors in the film play their roles exceptionally well.  For instance, for the girl who is getting an abortion, the audience feels both sympathy and hatred for her.  The audience can sympathize with her position of needing an abortion, but the way she lies to everyone, especially her friend who is trying to help, makes one loathe her.

The shots in this movie seem to take forever.  There is definitely no 8 seconds and then cut in this movie.  Some of the shots last minutes without a cut.  This lends itself to the movie’s overall sense of hopelessness.  The place where the movie was shot, Romania I believe, looks like it could be the location for the movie The Road.    I guess there is not much of a difference between post apocalypse america, and post Communist eastern Europe.

This movie is well made, but why anyone would want to make this movie, let alone watch it, I will never understand.  But at least it is well made, especially the ending.  The ending ends with the two girls, the one who had the abortion and her friend who helped sitting in a restaurant.  The friend who helped says something to the effect of ‘we will never talk about this again’.  That is how I feel too.  I never ever want to talk or hear about this movie again, and I am done writing about as well.

For my supplemental screenings, I don’t choose the film on the list that seems most interesting to me. Instead, since I have a Netflix account, I look for a film on the list that I can stream from the Netflix website because of the convenience. There usually is at least one film every week I can stream. I also use this method for selecting supplemental screenings because it prevents me from picking the most popular or recognized film on the list, which I have a tendency to do. I’m especially glad I chose to do this for this week’s set of films.

4 Months, 3 Weeks and 2 Days (Mungiu 2007) is the first Romanian movie I’ve watched and even heard of. The film takes place in 1987 Communist Romania and centers around two college roommates, Otilia and Gabita. Gabita is pregnant and wants an abortion, which is illegal in the country at this time, and Otilia decides to help her. Gabita makes arrangements with an abortionist, Mr. Bebe, and books a room at a nearby hotel to have the abortion done. The film begins the morning the abortion is to take place and ends that same day. That morning, while Gabita packs for the overnight stay at the hotel, Otilia visits her boyfriend, Adi at the college. Adi asks Otilia to have dinner with his family to celebrate his mother’s birthday. Initially Otilia declines, but doesn’t tell Adi about Gabita’s abortion. After arguing for a while though, she agrees. Otilia then heads to the hotel to confirm the reservation, but there was a misunderstanding when Gabita made the reservation over the phone and Otilia is forced to look for a different hotel. She finds a hotel with an available, but expensive, room and Gabita makes her way there while Otilia meets with Bebe to take him to the hotel. Bebe is upset with the arrangements because he told Gabita to meet him and he had asked her to book a room at the first hotel specifically. When he arrives at the hotel, Bebe demands more money than the girls initially thought would suffice. After arguing and begging they come to an agreement. Bebe has sex with both girls, one after the other, then performs the abortion and gives Gabita and Otilia specific instructions on how to dispose of the fetus. Otilia then makes her way to Adi’s mother’s birthday dinner, arriving late. Also there are family friends who are well-to-do. She eats for a bit but grows more uncomfortable hearing their conversations because she comes from a less wealthy background. Otilia then tells Adi, in private, about Gabita’s abortion and they discuss the circumstances of what they would do if Otilia were pregnant. They have another disagreement and when Otilia cannot reach Gabita over the phone, she leaves abruptly. She arrives back at the hotel room where the fetus is lying on the bathroom floor. She then follows Bebe’s instructions on disposing of it, taking it to a high-rise and dropping it down the garbage chute. Otilia then tells Gabita they are never to talk of the abortion again.

Everything about the 4 Months, 3 Weeks and 2 Days says foreign art-house cinema. Shot on location in Budapest, the film consists of a tight plot, very few characters, a small budget (about $800,000), and a controversial subject. Several parts in the film force the viewer the think and infer as to the meaning of the characters actions or words. For instance, at the beginning of the film, without having read or heard anything about the plot, the viewer doesn’t know what Gabita is packing for, as the big event of the day is not explicitly said by either character. Also, when Gabita and Otilia cannot pay Bebe upfront, he does not explicitly say that he expects them to have sex with him in return. The acting mostly makes this a great film. The actors portray their characters with great realism and the dialogue used relates to common people. The director also uses a few long and still shots in the film. The most noticeable one is used during the dinner at Adi’s place where Otilia is placed directly at the head of the table and middle of the frame, surrounded by the family friends. As the conversations and shot drag on, both Otilia and the audience become increasingly uncomfortable, which I think was the director’s aim in choosing the shot. 4 Months, 3 Weeks and 2 Days won many film festival awards, including the Palm d’Or at the 2007 Cannes Film Festival and critics everywhere seemed to unanimously agree that it was an excellent film in its acting and directing.

Bebe, Otilia, and Gabita. A tense scene during the film.

Otilia putting the fetus in her bag

The film is great in many aspects, but I did not enjoy viewing it. As with most people I think, I felt very uncomfortable in many of the scenes, such as when Bebe was arguing with Otilia and Gabita about payment and especially during the shot that focused on the fetus lying on the bathroom floor. Gabita’s character, timid and scared throughout the entire film, also frustrated me a great deal, but I think the realism of her character was true.

So this weekend I decided to sit down and find me a free copy of any movie on the supplemental screening list.  So I went to the City of Austin public library online card catalogue and I found a film that was located at the closest possible library off of St. Johns.  This film just happened to be 4 Months, 3 Weeks and 2 Days (Mungiu 2007).  So I raced over to the library and had a hell of a time trying to find the foreign film section.  A dollar later (I owed money because of late fee’s) and a few drops of gas burned I was able to race home pop the DVD in to my player. Not really knowing what this film was about I was sure in for a surprise.  The story is about a young Romanian college girl named Gabita played by Laura Vasiliu who is seeking out an illegal abortion.  The story follows her roommate/ friend Otilia played by Anamaria Marinca as she goes through her whole ordeal with her friend.  Like a few post below mine, this is also my first foreign art house film and it was not what I expected.  I suppose I should start with what I expected out of this film.  I did expect it to be foreign and sub-titled.  With a title like 4 Luni, 3 Sapamani si 2 zile (Mungiu 2007) what else could you expect.  Secondly, I know it was going to be low budget.  I was anticipating bad lighting and simple sets.   I guess I was also expecting a sad story line.  On the flip side, I was not expecting the lack of camera movement during certain scenes as well as the amount of quietness with a lack of dialogue.  However, this film was a global success being shown in nearly 30 different film festivals all around the globe from the United States to Stockholm and many in between.  Lastly, I suppose I should add that this was not my favorite film.  All those silent parts sure did make it seem longer then it really was.  Also, the lighting bugged me.  At times there the entire screen seemed to be black.  This is not a film I would recommend watching at night without a cup of coffee.  My mother, who I watched this with, fell asleep 6 times (I counted) during the film.  I guess over all it was not as bad as it seemed.

For my supplemental screening I watched 4 months, 3 weeks and 2 days (Mungiu 2007) , a film about a young student, Otilia, who is helping her friend Gabita get an illegal abortion. That is the very basic plot, and not really what would classify this as an “art-house film.” What does set it apart, aside from the fact that it is foreign and typically any foreign film that manages to make its way to the United States is “art-house,” is the camera work and the focus on small, personal moments.

The first thing I noticed while watching this movie was how long the shots were. Rather than following the typical Hollywood style of a constantly cutting camera, the shots often lingered or followed characters. The specific scene that comes to mind is when Otilia is at her boyfriend Adi’s house for his mom’s birthday. They sit down at the table and the camera doesn’t move for the entire scene—in fact, it reminded me a lot of Ozu’s style. The table was cluttered and everyone was talking and grabbing food (except Adi and Otilia, who sat almost motionless and in complete silence), while the camera stayed in the exact same position. Even the following scene, which was an argument between Otilia and her boyfriend, involved the two of them moving around (Adi even left the room at one point), while the camera remains in position. As I mentioned previously, the focus on small, personal moments also seemed pointedly art-house. Various bits of dialogue that seemed irrelevant (such as the purchase of cigarettes throughout the film) were frequent and made the movie seem that much more “real.” And perhaps that’s what makes me feel like 4 months is an art film—the reality of it. Like Italian Neo-Realism films, 4 months was made for a relatively small amount (under $800,000) and used techniques like hand-held cameras and location shooting (which were very likely cost cutting measures rather than for the sake of art), giving the film a since of realism and a feeling of artistry.

4 months, 3 weeks and 2 days (Mungiu 2007) is a Romanian film notable for its place the “Romanian New Wave,” a renaissance in Romanian cinema that was coined after several successes like 4 months, 3 weeks and 2 days (Mungiu 2007) in international film festivals like Cannes—in which 4 months received the Palm d’Or. Along with the Palm d’Or, this film was nominated for a Golden Globe and (across the world) won 21 awards and had 16 additional nominations. And if its international success doesn’t place the film in a category of “global” filmmaking then its line-up of distributers certainly must. 4 months has a combined total of over 30 distributers across Europe, the Americas, and Asia for both theatrical runs and DVD release. This being said, I feel like most foreign art-house films, if critically and financially successful, are inherently global. When a film is made it is sent to film festivals. In this case, it is a Romanian film that was sent to a film festival in France. Here, it has become a global product. And when it won the prestigious Palm d’Or, it was bought by distributers from countries around the globe—a by-product of being recognized by an internationally recognized festival. Anyway, this was a wonderful movie and it can easily be considered both a global film and an art-house film.

Cover of Persepolis (Pantheon, 2007); image courtesy of shelflove.wordpress.com

When I saw the film version of Marjane Satrapi’s graphic novel Persepolis, it was a pretty rad time to be a feminist moviegoer. In the last month of 2007 and the first month of 2008, this movie came out, along with Juno and 4 Months, 3 Weeks and 2 Days. Having just completed a girls’ studies course, I was ecstatic that three different movies, each from a different country, were released with complex, resilient protagonists who were girls and young women.

Two of these movies earned Oscar nominations a few months later. Juno won Best Screenplay. Persepolis was nominated for Best Animated Feature, but unfortunately lost to Ratatouille. 4 Months, which documents the harrowing day of one college student trying to procure an illegal abortion for her roommate during the last years of Nicolae Ceauşescu’s in Romania, won the Palme D’Or at Cannes earlier in 2007, but failed to receive any nominations. For some reason. Perhaps it escaped nomination as a technicality, but I don’t understand why no one, particularly writer-director Cristian Mungiu or lead actress Anamaria Marinca, got any Academy recognition. Perhaps because it lacked the allegorical importance of No Country For Old Men or There Will Be Blood and cut to very real (and tremendously gendered) issues facing real people in the real world, many of whom reside in developing nations. 

But it is really no matter. No Country, There Will Be Blood, Julian Schnabel’s The Diving Bell and the Butterfly, and Todd Haynes’s I’m Not There were but more examples of what a very fine time this particular two-month period was for movies. But 4 Months was easily my favorite movie of that year. The movie whose source material will be the focus of this post was a very close second.

Having seen the movie upon its U.S. release, some context has changed considerably upon revisiting Satrapi’s autobiography about coming of age inside and outside of Iran from the late 70s to the early 90s, a time period where the country witnessed the fall of the Shah (aided by the United States), the swift and crushing oppression of its citizens by Islamic extremists, a devastating eight-year war with Iraq, and the neighboring country’s launch of the Persian Gulf War. In late 2007, we were still living under the Bush Administration, so the country’s positioning as part of the ”axis of evil” was in my mind, but being pretty ignorant about the country’s political history and our involvement with it past the Iran-Contra Affair, Bush’s branding of the country read more as a promise that the United States were, in fact, going to try and spread democracy by force to all of the Middle East, snatching up its real or imagined WMDs and drain its oil resources in the process. And I knew about President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and was disgusted by his views on the Holocaust and heartened by the student protests around his adminstration, but was not yet aware of just what a dangerous despot he is.     

This was, of course, before this year’s highly controversial presidential election, which Ahmadinejad “won” by a suspiciously high margain over rival candidate Mir-Hossein Mousavi, an Independent reformist. At the time, what seemed more present in our minds in the states was what Twitter was doing to help cover and contextualize the civic protests and how quickly mainstream broadcast news was going to incorporate the still-emergent micro-blogging site’s Tweets into their 24-hour cycle, regardless of how accurate they were. 

As a result, I was a little jaded by the “Twitter users coverage of the Iran election is going to change news reporting” angle many seemed to be taking and instead wanted to know more about how the election was fraudulent, why certain people (specifically journalists, protesters, students, and politicians) were being arrested, what the stakes were, who was doing a good job covering this news story, and, most importantly, what circumstances led to the current iteration of Iran. Remembering that local branches of Barnes & Noble were donating proceeds to the Paramount upon purchase last weekend, shilling out my money to the big box chain for the sake of preserving a historical movie theater seemed as a good an opportunity to buy the book that may provide answers.

And, I’ll be honest. Reading the book left me with more questions than anything else (a similar feeling came over me when reading Khaled Hosseini’s The Kite Runner and A Thousand Splendid Suns, two books whose timelines stretch past the 70s-90s, but contain a considerable overlap in terms of time with Persepolis, focusing on what was going on with ordinary people in Afghanistan, another contentious Middle Eastern country that borders Iran). It was hard not to check some ugly American tendencies I have toward Islamic traditions — particularly toward its views on marriage, sexuality, gender politics, and dress. At the same time, I was incredulous of how pro-West rhetoric and ideology, alongside our smuggled trinkets of popular culture, could possibly reform a nation, or at least save a person.

Luckily, Satrapi is skeptical of both and, like me and other feminists from all over the world, has a lot to negotiate. She grapples with these issues head-on. She argues with teachers against the physical restrictions and societal double standards that come with the hijab and the burka (sidenote: I know that Faegheh Shirazi, who teaches Middle Eastern Studies at UT and rejects traditional Islamic dress, has written and taught courses on gender and clothing in the Middle East, but any other suggestions for further reading are welcome). She watches her female peers grow up to only want marriage and children, in large part because these are the only things their nation’s leaders believe define their worth. Particularly poignant for this co-habitator, she regrets getting married to a man named Reza because they could not legally live together (or even walk the street) without proof of marriage, dissolving the marriage and leaving for France.

Marjane and friends reject the hijab; image courtesy of rand.org

Satrapi is a smart rebel who reads constantly, thinks clearly, and never backs down from an argument. She yells at authority figures who bully her or deny that there are any political prisoners in Iran after learning about the loss of her grandfather, who was son and prime minister to the ousted king (a tie that Satrapi suggests is not uncommon).

College student Satrapi damns the man; image courtesy of butterfliesandbears.wordpress.com

Luckily for Satrapi, she gets through all of this with the love and support of her politically aware and resistant parents, their friends, and one rad paternal grandma. Not so luckily, she also knows and meets lots of folks who suffered for speaking up, speaking out, or just living in the wrong house during an aerial bombing. Something tells me that many Iranians could recount similar tales of horror.

Satrapi also learns that the ways of the West are not always ideal, either. While a pre-pubescent in Iran, she hangs Iron Maiden posters on her wall her parents smuggle from a vacation in Turkey when the government lifted border restrictions. She defiantly walks around her neighborhood, blaring Kim Wilde’s “Kids in America” from her Walkman while sporting a Michael Jackson pin. But noting that their daughter’s rebelliousness is hardly a phase and that escalating conflict with Iraq could mean the imprisonment or death of their mouthy teen, her parents send her to live with a friend of her mother’s in Vienna.

Still from the film; image courtesy of whatsontv.co.uk

Satrapi finishes high school, barely scraping by as she finds odd jobs, dates dumb boys, takes a lot of drugs, and runs into authority figures who want her to tow the line and behave. She also falls in with a group of radical misfits who dabble with nihilism, Marxism, hair dye, and punk. While Satrapi initially finds a home with these punks and new wave kids, she soon discovers their privilege has made them cowardly, pretentious, self-righteous, entitled, and lazy. Her outsider status also makes her cool, her Austrian peers clearly jealous by what she has seen and experienced without really processing the weight of it between drags off their joints and skims through their copies of the Marx-Engels Reader in their well-appointed bedrooms. It’s small wonder that, when Satrapi finally returns home to Iran after she finishes high school homeless and afflicted with bronchitis, she washes off a punk stencil from her bedroom wall. And while she’s sad that her mother gave away her cassette tapes, she probably wasn’t going to listen to them anyway. She would’ve kept the Kim Wilde tape, however.

So, ultimately, I do feel this revisit of Persepolis helped clarify my feelings about the state of Iran. It also left me with several questions and a need to know more. Ultimately, though, it left me with the sense of universality that exists between people, especially tough, smart women and girls, while at the same time recognizing the particularities that inform their realities. And continues to inform them. Back in June, Satrapi spoke out against the election results with filmmaker Mohsen Makhmalba. Something tells me that her grandmother, who passed away shortly after Satrapi moved to France at the close of the book, would be proud.

Quality time with grandma; image courtesy of rwor.org

Anamaria Marinca and Laura Vasiliu undergo a grueling night.

(IFC First Take) Anamaria Marinca, Laura Vasiliu, Vlad Ivanov, Alexandru Potocean, Ion Sapdaru, Teodor Corban, Tania Popa. Directed by Cristian Mungiu.

The communist regime in Romania was a particularly repressive one. There were strict laws governing the lives and morality of the people of Romania lived in constant terror of breaking those laws, which sometimes became necessary as in the case of a young unmarried woman facing an unwanted pregnancy. Abortion, you see, was illegal.

College roommates Otilia (Marinca) and Gabita (Vasiliu) are preparing for a night away from their noisy dormitory. This is no mere vacation, however. Gabita is pregnant and desperate and has turned to her roommate to help her obtain an illegal abortion.

Gabita is a mess. Unable to follow even the simplest instruction, she has no inertia, no drive. She more or less relies on everyone around her (i.e. Otilia) to take care of her. Otilia raises the money (much of it from her boyfriend Adi (Potocean) who comes from a professional family of doctors) and checks them into their hotel. Gabita even sends Otilia to meet the abortionist (Ivanov), a violation of the rules that the abortionist, Mr. Bebe, set in advance. In fact, Gabita had even been unable to make the reservations at the hotel Mr. Bebe had specified, leaving Otilia to scramble to find any kind of hotel that had rooms available.

Because of Gabita’s gaffe, Otilia is forced to find a more expensive hotel, leaving them short in the agreed-upon amount for the abortionist. He forces them to make up the amount in trade – a very explicit trade. Not just with Gabita, but also with Otilia. At first she balks, but eventually gives in. She even goes first.

As it turns out, Gabita has even lied about how far along she is in her pregnancy, adding more risk to the abortion. After Bebe does what he has to do, he informs Gabita that she must lie still while the drugs do their work. Afterwards, the aborted fetus must be disposed of – preferably, down the garbage chute. However, Otilia has made previous arrangements to attend a birthday party for her boyfriend’s mother and must leave Gabita alone for a short while.

This is a brutally stark movie that levels an unblinking eye on a time and place in history. The participants are flawed, frightened and all-too-human. Director Mungiu chooses a simplistic approach. There are no jump cuts, no montages, none of the things associated with modern short attention span cinematography. Instead we get simple one scene, one shot set-ups with close attention paid to camera angles. In fact, there is not any incidental music in the entire film.

This is a wise move in that it forces the viewer to focus on the performances and the story. The two leads do a remarkable job. Marinca in particular, is noteworthy. Despite the storyline, this is more her film than Vasiliu’s as her character is the one that really carries the action. Even so, Marinca’s Otilia gives in to pressure, attending the birthday party even though she knows her friend needs her; sleeps with the abortionist so that her friend can have the abortion. She’s a fascinating contrast of strength and weakness.

Vasiliu has more of a thankless job, playing a character that is passive and self-centered. Her final scene with Marinca has been decried as anti-climactic, but it is one of her finest on-screen moments in my opinion. We see a bit more of the girl’s personality, making it obvious that she has learned nothing from the experience. It’s just an unpleasantness to be put behind her as quickly as possible.

There are those who will be uncomfortable with the abortion scenes, which are fairly clinical and graphic. While those who are pro-life might object about a movie that is about seeking out an abortion, these scenes will sell the anti-abortion point of view far more effectively. It is hard to tell if the filmmakers have a point of view about the morality of abortion; I suspect they may be anti-abortion if anything. Nothing good seems to come of the procedure here.

In many ways, however, this isn’t a movie about the pros and cons of abortion. It’s about the characters and how they are changed by what they do. The depiction of Romanian society is chilling; the paranoia is dealt with in an almost matter-of-fact style, which can be a bit jarring for western audiences used to freedom.

The starkness of the film may be off-putting to some, but it is one of the things I liked most about it. This is an honest, unflinching look at a place and time, and how that place and time affected the people who lived in it. We in the west are very unfamiliar with that place and time, and it is worth the perspective of seeing a glimpse of it to make us appreciate what we do have all the more.

WHY RENT THIS: A stark, unflinching look at a repressive society that we in the States have little knowledge of. Remarkable performances by Marinca and Vasiliu are worth checking out.

WHY RENT SOMETHING ELSE: May be too graphic and honest for some. Subject matter may also be off-putting to those who find even the subject of abortion intolerable.

FAMILY VALUES: The is a graphic depiction of an abortion, as well as some nudity, and implied forced sex.

NOTABLE DVD EXTRAS: An extraordinary documentary about attempts to show the film in Romania. There is also a very interesting interview with director Cristian Mungiu.

FINAL RATING: 7/10

TOMORROW: Right at Your Door

And now for something completely different.

The film 4 Months, 3 Weeks, and 2 Days, directed by Cristian Mungiu, takes place in 1987, one of the final years of the Nicolae Ceauşescu era in Communist Romania.  The film follows a young woman as she helps her friend have an illegal abortion.  The film’s title refers to the latest a fetus can be carried to term before an abortion can be performed.

It’s a superb, stark drama about life in part about life under Communist rule in Romania at the time and focuses solely on the struggle of Otilia (an amazing performance by Anamaria Marinca) helping her friend through the many obstacles to get this illegal and dangerous procedure done.

It’s a difficult film to discuss because it’s such an emotional journey and Mungiu fully plunges the viewer into that journey with the characters.  The camera sits as an observer to the events and just places itself in the room and watches the drama unfold.  There are no smash cuts or close ups of any sort.  The camera just gently sits there for long, arduous takes and walks along beside Otilia with long, complex shots.  The camera is filled with an ugly grey and in a sense its almost suffocating in the circumstances of the film.

What Mungiu has crafted here is a film where the film totally lies in the audience as observer and constantly manipulates and plays with the viewer through every scene.  During one dinner scene as Otilia must be forced to attend her boyfriend’s parents’ dinner party, the camera rests at the end of the table with Otilia framed perfectly in the middle as the guests on both sides continue their pointless conversations about politics, life, education, whatever.  The audience grows restless as the scene just draws on and on with no cuts and no movement whatsoever.  We are stuck there with Otilia.  The audience is made to feel the restlessness that Otilia must be feeling.  It’s a scene that any one of us could have experienced.  That feeling of being in a place that’s so casual and so light and airy when you’ve just come from or just experienced something heavy or going through something that no one else in that room could understand.  You want to scream but it just wouldn’t be appropriate.  Being so far removed from the events in front of you as another part of you is just gliding along, going through the motions of actually being there.

As this scene shows, this is not a pleasant film to sit through.  But it’s a vital one and an amazing piece of filmmaking.  It’s a film that sits with you deep in your gut and doesn’t let go.  It’s a film that really makes you feel as if you’ve experienced something even when you’re just sitting in your comfy chair at home.   Mungiu creates a complete aura of filmmaking reality.  Otherwise mundane scenes are part of his tapestry in building agitation and unease.  He uses the camera and the amazing performances contained herein to recreate a reality that is so unsettling.

Now, on the issue of what side this film ends on in the great debate over a woman’s right to choose, the film straddles a line and never puts itself into the middle of that issue.  There is nothing good about what happens in the film and every character becomes compromised in every way possible.  Mungiu merely presents a story of great struggle and emotional heartache.  It’s an issue with no clear side and the film illustrates this to a great extent.  The lingering shot of the fetus on the floor is, in itself, both explicit and tells the audience a thousand different things.  The dangers of the procedure are explicated thoroughly in the scene with the doctor and what he demands in exchange for doing the procedure is chilling.

However, Gabita’s (Laura Vasiliu) circumstances around her pregnancy are never alluded to.  The father is unknown, why she is seeking the abortion is unknown, every single aspect beforehand is shrouded and only just barely hinted at.  This creates little sympathy for Gabita’s character as she often is infuriatingly forgetful or absentminded throughout the film.  Our sympathies are with Otilia and her worries for her friend, of getting caught, what could happen, her deeply unsettled feelings as we track her throughout her day.

The film, in the end, deals in crushing realism.  There is no discernable soundtrack and the film runs almost silent throughout.  It is the sounds of Romania and the simple, real, sparse dialogue that echoes throughout. Mungiu settles the audience as he does the camera in an unblinking fashion on the journey of this woman through an experience that will undoubtedly stay with her.  Mungiu attempts to recreate this feeling in the viewer, a feeling that may never leave you.  The last shot is one of simplistic elegance and cuts to black and credits, in complete silence.  It is a filmmaker breaking away from the audience, pushing you back into your own world in a stupor.

This is an amazing masterwork of filmmaking.  Anyone interested in the pure experience that a film can bring about, should see this amazing, emotionally devastating work.  What Mungiu creates with what seems like so little is an amazing work of social commentary that both tells a captivating story about life in such a specific time and place while putting the audience in that character’s emotional journey.  An incredible film.

Things have been moving a bit slowly around Tone Marrow Reviews the past couple of weeks, but, hopefully, that will change soon beginning in an unexpected way with this post. This is the introduction of a new occasional feature around here called Film Foray. I’ll post a review or an appreciation for films both classic and contemporary. However, the primary focus of Tone Marrow Reviews will continue to be on covering new music.

—————

I’m neither a film critic nor the son of a film critic, so I didn’t see all of the critically acclaimed films of 2008, though I did see some great ones. Of those that I got to see, here were my favorite ten.

Top Ten Films of 2008

10. Slumdog Millionaire (dir. Danny Boyle)

Is Slumdog Millionaire a fairy tale that honors the Indian culture and Bollywood cinema, or is it the other way around? It’s difficult to say because it does both so well. Slumdog was honored with the Best Picture Oscar a few weeks ago which serves as a bit of a change of pace for that award after the past two winners, 2006’s The Departed and 2007’s No Country for Old Men, were substantially darker films. Like any story of redemption, this one takes a long, arduous trek through a young man’s very hard life before he gets on a popular, Indian game show which changes his life forever. Slumdog Millionaire, despite a few flaws, is a helpful reminder that, in life, the bitter makes the sweet so much sweeter.

9. Man on Wire (dir. James Marsh)

Man on Wire is a documentary focused on what many have called “the artistic crime of the twentieth century.” French entertainer, Philippe Petit, walked on a tightrope between the Twin Towers in 1974. The story is told by those who were involved, including Petit himself, who tells his story far better than any dramatization ever could. However, the film does recreate many of the scenes leading up to and following the stunt and these scenes have the same feel as a bank heist. There are also home videos and photos used in the telling of Petit’s amazing and inspiring story which add an intimate touch to the film. Though there is no mention of the eventual fate of the Twin Towers, it is always present in the viewer’s mind which adds a layer of emotional resonance to the story. This is Petit’s tale from start to finish so it ultimately serves as a celebration of art and dreams, and yet, it’s impossible to deny the therapeutic power this documentary will have for those who remember that fateful day in 2001.

8. Rachel Getting Married (dir. Jonathan Demme)

Rachel Getting Married is about a weekend in one family’s life during which Rachel, well, gets married. Yet the focus of this story is not on Rachel but on her fresh-out-of-rehab-sister, Kym, played by Anne Hathaway in one of my favorite performances of the year. The film is shot with hand-held cameras almost like a documentary and it gives the viewer a sense of really participating in the lives of this family as well as all the baggage they’re carrying. I felt like I was sitting at the table during the rehearsal dinner which Kym nearly crashes with a terribly awkward speech; I felt like I was celebrating on the dance floor during the reception; and, for just a short time, I felt that I was a part of this severely dysfunctional family and as a result, this film provided gave me with the most emotional, heart-breaking viewing experience I had in 2008.

7. In Bruges (dir. Martin McDonagh)

In Bruges is the best movie that the Coen Brothers never made. The story of two hit men going to Bruges to wait out a botched hit back in London includes hilarious dialogue, emotional performances, and an ending that boasts shocking violence, chilly irony, and a truly bizarre scene which manages to reunite most of the characters from the film. Not a scene or line of dialogue is wasted and the script is one of the most original in years. Collin Ferrell gives a brilliant performance which is both hilarious and heart-wrenching. And yet, through all of this, the film prods deeper pondering questions about sin, forgiveness, and purgatory in a very compelling, thought-provoking way.

6. Shotgun Stories (dir. Jeff Nichols)

William Shakespeare’s tragedy meets Flannery O’Connor’s gothic South in Shotgun Stories. It’s a modern day tale of a father who had two families: one he loved and one he deserted. When the father dies, the sons try to sort through their thoughts about him and their hatred for each other. It is a movie about revenge and family ties and as things escalate and blood is shed, you just know in your gut that this can’t have a good ending. The conclusion is, indeed, unexpected and shocking.

5. Doubt (dir. John Patrick Shanley)

Doubt is adapted from a play and it’s simplicity and starkness still carry a bit of that feel. My favorite Director of Photography, Roger Deakins, photographed this movie and the straightforward manner, which he lends to the Coen Brothers so often, works perfectly here. Doubt is a film about crimes in the church, speculation, gossip, certainty, and doubt. It’s no coincidence that all four major parts here were nominated for acting Oscars, these were easily four of the best performances of the year. Philip Seymour Hoffman gives one of the most charitable portrayals of a Christian on the silver screen in quite some time (depending on how you interpret the film, of course–I’ve given away my interpretation with this sentence). The play, on which the film was based, bore a subtitle: “A Parable.” That’s appropriate because this is a story that is trying to teach us something– exactly what depends on how you view it’s ending. Allegedly, the writer/director, John Patrick Shanley, was inspired to write the play when America invaded Iraq looking for WMDs– now that opens up a whole new realm of possible meanings.

4. Synecdoche, NY (dir. Charlie Kaufman)

A sprawling mess of a movie– it is the exact opposite of Doubt, though ironically, both feature incredible performances by Philip Seymour Hoffman. This marks Kaufman’s first time behind the camera as director and we find what is perhaps the most ambitious, overwhelming film of 2008. Kaufman asks us to consider the human life and how the passing of time, the decay of the human body, and the way we view our lives affects the way we live. When I walked out of the theater I thought it was the worst film I’d ever seen, 24 hours later, I wondered if it might be the best film I’d ever seen. As it turns out, it was only the fourth best of 2008. However, this movie is so rich, so deep, and so layered with ideas and questions that it really ought to be digested on multiple viewings. If I’d had the chance to see it a second time, there’s a strong possibility that it would have placed even higher on this list.

3. 4 Months, 3 Weeks and 2 Days (dir. Cristian Mungiu)

4 Months, 3 Weeks and 2 Days is a Romanian film about a college student seeking an illegal abortion in Communist-controlled Romania during the 1980s. Though Gabriela is the one seeking the abortion, the focus of the film is on her friend, Otilia, who is helping her. Otilla is in nearly every scene of the film and is brilliantly portrayed by Anamaria Marinca who carries the film on her squarely on her shoulders. 4 Months, 3 Weeks is composed of these long, slow-burning shots that draw the viewer into this world with which most Westerners have little experience. The film is a stark view at how Communism strips people of human dignity and teaches them not to think in moral terms. While, the movie doesn’t appear to preach a certain agenda regarding abortion, the much-talked-about climactic shot of the film has been described by some as one of the most compelling pro-life arguments ever made.

2. WALL*E (dir. Andrew Stanton)

PIXAR is pretty much an unstoppable force in cinema these days as they have boldly proven that animated films don’t have to be just for kids. WALL*E is a special film that combines elements of the silent film era, romance, science fiction, comedy, a dash of the musical, and it’s enjoyable family film to boot! The animation is gorgeous, the characters are fully realized (though they many of them are robots), and the story is just stellar. As fun as it is, there is also a poignant message here as well– we were created for relationships and community, not for the rugged individualism that is so valued today. In Genesis God declared that it was not good for man to be alone, and WALL*E shows us that by way of a robot. PIXAR has been responsible for some spectacular films, but WALL*E is now their crowning achievement.

1. The Dark Knight (dir. Christopher Nolan)

It may seem a bit odd that a list containing a documentary, a foreign film, and a slew of independent features would be topped with the blockbuster of the year, but that is just a testament to how spectacular this movie really is. Though it isn’t a flawless film, it is my favorite of 2008 because it gave me the greatest cinematic experience of the year (twice in theaters and one unforgettable viewing in IMAX). The Dark Knight was a fearlessly dark film which got my blood pumping and had my mind reeling– a rare treat in contemporary cinema. Another compelling factor is Heath Ledger’s iconic performance as the Joker which will be stuck in our memory for years to come. This is a morality tale with many philosophical underpinnings and it’s also a very relevant movie for the world of the 21st century as it boldly asks how we are to deal with terrorists and terrorism. I’m not sure that it makes a definitive statement on the invasion and protection of civil liberties as some have claimed, but it has gotten people talking and isn’t that what great art is meant to do?

————————-

For What It’s Worth, 11-15:
Paranoid Park, Chop Shop, Pineapple Express, Flight of the Red Balloon, The Wrestler

Chilling take on life and not an abortion film, no matter who tells you it is!

Written By: Cristian Mungiu
Directed By: Cristian Mungiu

I was struggling with how to explain the effect 4 Luni, 3 Saptamâni Si 2 Zile had on me, so I did what I usually do when I am struggling to write about a movie, I did some reading on it. I like to read the thoughts of others on a movie, for the same reason that I hope people like to read my work, you can find tremendous insight in the thoughts of others. My problem in breaking down 4 Luni, 3 Saptamâni Si 2 Zile in my head was that I knew it was a tremendous movie but I couldn’t quite place why I loved it so much or why it worked for me outside of the obvious acting and look of the film. Enter fellow Filmspotter, sdedalus, who posted a tremendous breakdown of the film that highlighted exactly why I loved it so much. So thank you very much sdedalus, because without your breakdown I doubt the following text would ever have been able to take shape.

First and foremost, 4 Luni, 3 Saptamâni Si 2 Zile is not an abortion movie or a movie about abortion. It is a movie where an abortion is the impetus for what you see, but this film is about the people involved with the abortion, not the abortion itself. In this regard 4 Luni, 3 Saptamâni Si 2 Zile doesn’t take a stance and doesn’t make any moral judgment on either Gabita or Otilia. 4 Luni, 3 Saptamâni Si 2 Zile is very much a “here’s what’s happening, now you watch it and decide what you think” movie. I love those types of movies because the film maker realizes that the audience is smart and doesn’t need to be told what to think, they can watch the movie play out and come to their own conclusions. 4 Luni, 3 Saptamâni Si 2 Zile is all about thinking, and it is about the people involved, not the act of abortion they are partaking in. I know that anti-abortion zealots will see this differently, but hey, I’m anti-abortion and I’m telling you, this film isn’t about the act of abortion at all and isn’t endorsing it in any way.

4 Luni, 3 Saptamâni Si 2 Zile plays like some macabre combination of a dark comedy, suspense thriller and horror movie. You have moments such as the final meal brought to Otilia and Gabita at the hotel that screams out dark comedy. The movie spends a lot of time setting up events that you think will come into play, the knife from Bebe’s briefcase, his forgotten ID, and Otilia’s trek through a darkened Romania create a deep sense of suspense, or dread for what might be coming. The horror elements are present in the way the director, Cristian Mungiu, uses the mundane urban setting to play on some standard horror scares. We all think to ourselves, “No, Otilia, don’t go down that alleyway, something bad is going to happen”, or “Get away from that guy Otilia, he’s following you, it’s dark, we can’t see him and he probably wants to kill you and wear your skin or something.” That sense of menace permeates 4 Luni, 3 Saptamâni Si 2 Zile for a good part of the film, and when that menace isn’t present there is an odd discomfort. The early scenes at the dorm are awkward because we can’t figure out what is going on, and the dinner scene with Adi’s parents is extremely discomforting because all that petty talk means nothing next to what Otilia is going through.

Technically speaking 4 Luni, 3 Saptamâni Si 2 Zile is a brilliantly crafted film. There aren’t many edited together scenes, most of them play out in one long take and this perhaps more than anything creates the tense mood and atmosphere. The lack of music also helps, its absence in this case causes us to realize how off kilter this world is compared to what we usually see. There are many long takes, long takes that help to show the banality of what is going on. There isn’t a moment in the film that you can point to and label a misfire.

Then you have the acting of Anamaria Marinca, Laura Vasiliu, Vlad Ivanov and Alexandru Potocean as Otilia, Gabita, Bebe and Adi respectively. All four actors deliver powerful, and memorable performances and each of them do so by coming from different places. Marinca stands out above the others, in her performance as the always erstwhile and put upon Otilia. She has one scene in particular, after she has prostituted herself to Bebe for Gabita, when she looks into the mirror and you see a woman that has just lost her soul and no longer knows who she is but knows she must go on. Vasiliu is great as the idiotic college kid who is in way over her head and makes mistake after mistake and doesn’t care to stop and realize what she is putting Otilia through under the guise of friendship. Potocean is much the same as Adi, a man unable to grasp what is going on, only concerned with himself and how Otilia acts around him. Lastly Ivanov is scary as the calm and reserved abortionist, taking what he wants and manipulating the girls who thought they could manipulate him. It’s a testament to the film making that in a scenario where the woman getting the abortion is the one I should detest instead I detest Bebe and feel sympathy for said woman. 4 Luni, 3 Saptamâni Si 2 Zile depends on its performances and every performance delivers.

4 Luni, 3 Saptamâni Si 2 Zile has been a much talked about film due to its growing popularity, its subject matter and its confounding Oscar snub. However I still see a great number of people who want to talk about 4 Luni, 3 Saptamâni Si 2 Zile as the abortion film and I can’t help but think that type of talk is doing a disservice to all this movie really has to offer. Go see 4 Luni, 3 Saptamâni Si 2 Zile if you ever get the chance but do so with an open mind and do so with the knowledge that it isn’t an abortion film, and you will get much more out of the film that you otherwise would have.

Rating:

****

Cheers,
Bill

I rented this movie on the strength of its numer one rating in the Metacritic polls of critically best received films of the year.
A film about an illegal abortion in Romania turned out not be great Christmas Eve viewing – mea culpa, sorry Mum.  It was authentically detailed in summoning up 1980s Communist era Romania, so my Mum tells me, but the story, such as it was, simply lacked fleshed-out characters. The lives of the two female characters were just not sufficiently developed in this film for us to really care about them.  It wasn’t entertaining or vitally informative, though obviously made by a talented Director.
I often suspect that these types of realist ‘harrowing’ films are acclaimed by critics because they offer some kind of temporary relief from Hollywood product or CGI heavy epics.

Thank Heavens I also rented Ratatouille and Wall.E, true works of art that can be enjoyed many times over, on many levels….just as well with my kids.

Of neen: de beste films die ik zag in 2008. Ik ben dit jaar namelijk geen enkele keer in de filmzaal geraakt. Oorzaken? Omstandigheden, het gebrek aan een goeie cinema in de buurt, dat hele gedoe dat er bij komt kijken (op tijd vertrekken, parkeren, aanschuiven, ellendige lawaaimakers in je buurt (mensen tout court?), de rit terug,…). Het is dit jaar gebleven bij films op tv en DVD. Het waren er wel redelijk wat, en dit zijn de beste tien die ik dit jaar zag (voor het eerst, want Braindead, The Conversation, A Night At The Opera, Dirty Harry en Police Academy VIII kunnen niet elk jaar in die lijst staan):

• American Movie (1999), van Chris Smith
• Capturing The Friedmans (2003), van Andrew Jarecki
• Cidade de Deus (2002), van Fernando Mereilles
• Das Leben der Anderen (2006), van Florian Henckel Von Donnersmarck
• No Country For Old Men (2007), van Joel & Ethan Coen
• 4 Months, 3 Weeks & 2 Days (2007), van Cristian Mungiu
• Sympathy For Lady Vengeance (2005), van Chan-Wook Park
• Requiem (2006), van Hans-Christian Schmid
• Snow Cake (2006) , van Mark Evans
• Eastern Promises (2007), van David Cronenberg

Ook heel graag gezien: HUBERT SELBY JR.: It/ll Be Better Tomorrow, Michael Clayton, 3:10 To Yuma, Stranger Than Fiction, Jesus Camp, The Dark Knight, Letters From Iwo Jima, Syriana, Clean, Punch Drunk Love, The History Boys, The Last King of Scotland, Wattstax, American Gangster, The Departed, The Three Burials Of Melquiades Estrada, Little Miss Sunshine, Bombon El Perro, Capote, Interview en Thank You For Smoking.

Hard gelachen met Shortbus en John Rambo.

Loft gemist!

De beste series die ik zag:

• The Wire – Season 4
• The Wire – Season 5
• The Staircase (or.: Soupçons)
• The Shield – Season 5
• The Shield – Season 6

Verder benieuwd naar Green Wing: Series 1 en Flight Of The Conchords (liggen klaar) en True Blood (dat nog niet verkrijgbaar is).

Morgen: BOEKEN!

NP: The Vandermark 5 – Beat Reader

Director - Cristian Mungiu

Writer - Cristian Mungiu

Starring - Anamaria Marinca, Laura Vasiliu, Vlad Ivanov, Alexandra Potocean

Language – Romanian

Runtime - 113 minutes approx.

Age Rating – 15

Genre - Drama

A FILM REVIEW BY ROSS MILLER

Winner of 2007’s prestigious Palme d’Or award at the Cannes Film Festival, 4 Months, 3 weeks and 2 Days has a lot to live up to. Up against such films as a personal favourite of last year, Quentin Tarantino’s Death Proof, and one of the best films of last year, David Fincher’s Zodiac, this film had some tough competition. But as much as I loved some of the other films in the running at Cannes I simply have to concur with the decision to give 4 Months one of the most respectable awards in the film world.

The film follows two university friends, Otilia and Gabita, in Romania in 1987. A few months after Gabita falls pregnant the two friends arrange a meeting with Mr Bebe, in a hotel, for him to perform an illegal abortion.

To say the subject matter and content of this film is going to cause some controversy is a bit of an understatement. Those who are “pro-life” are inevitably going to be in an uproar about the central plot of the film and thus get it even more attention than it otherwise would. After the first few showings of 4 Months it was known as “the Romanian abortion movie” but once more people got a chance to see it and word of mouth got around people soon realised, as I myself do now, that this film is so much more than that. Abortion may be the thing that is central to the story but there is so much else to think about and envelope yourself in that at times you almost forget about that.

What makes 4 Months work as well as it does is the sense of rare realism achieved, due to many contributing factors. First of all the whole film is set literally within the timeline of a single night which gives it it’s first dose of immediacy. Secondly the director often uses the handheld camera technique we have seen in quite a few films as of late but he uses it in such a fresh and unique way that it almost seems as refreshingly different as it did when we first saw the technique. Many of the interior, dialogue driven scenes (which most of the film is) is shot in a very static manner, allowing for everything within the scenes to take president over the viewer’s watching of the film. And in a strictly opposite fashion the scenes of someone walking or when a scene becomes erratic in any way the camera will act in the same manner. Director Cristian Mungiu uses the shaky-cam technique extremely well to give us the sense that we are right there “in the moment” with the characters.

Another equally major reason why 4 Months achieves its quality is the three central performances, in particular that of Anamaria Marinca who plays “patient’s” friend Otilia. Although the abortion storyline isn’t central to her character she is, arguably, the focus of the film. We see how such an act, because of the legal factors among many others things, affects her as a person and how it shakes her to her very core. Not too dissimilar to the core of the viewer, and how the film achieves a powerful impact rarely seen in film nowadays. Most of the films screen time Marinca is on-screen acting her heart out, in particular a scene where she is almost forced by her boyfriend to sit through dinner with his parents as Gabita is waiting back at the hotel room. The mentioned scene stands out for many reasons, not least because it is done without any cuts and how Marinca is able to get across what the character is feeling without saying much. She is supported superbly by Vasiliu and Ivanov who both provide standing round for Marinca to be even better than any viewer could imagine. If we don’t see some Award nods for the cast, and specifically Marinca, it would be an absolute travesty in my eyes.

For anyone out there who has read the plot outline and is wondering; is it graphic? Well in the sense that, “do they show you explicitly what is happening?” then the answer is no. But that doesn’t mean it’s any easier to watch. A couple of moments in particular spring quickly to mind that may shock and inevitably test some audience members. But take my word for it; even though it may be a tough watch it is most certainly a worthwhile and rewarding one to view in its totality.

Every scene within the film is completely memorable, and I for one can’t think of the last time that has been achieved. Usually a film as some unnecessary dialogue, moments or whole scenes that you just feel could have been shortened or removed completely. In this case, however, every single scene in pivotal to the overall experience and ultimately it brings the very rare word “masterpiece” to mind. Is it good enough to be awarded with that title? In my opinion absolutely.

4 Months, 3 Weeks and 2 Days is one of the most rewarding experiences of the past few years and I doubt in the coming months there will be a more rewarding film released. Gritty realism hasn’t been captured like this in film in a long, long time and with three master class performances also included I can’t see a reason why anyone wouldn’t recognise just how good this film is. And I am sure it will stay in the memory much longer than the title suggests.

4 Months, 3 Weeks and 2 Days
[ 3 stars out of 4 ]

This was an interesting move-going experience because I expected it to be like “Lake of Fire” only in a different language. The gritty tempo of it really worked for me because the situations the characters were in, the way they thought, talked and acted when faced with a dilemma could happen to anyone. This movie being in a different language did not bother me at all because the central issue is universal, especially in countries where it’s illegal or it’s looked down upon to get an abortion. The acting here is pretty believable and downright impressive thirty minutes into the film; each character is complex because all of them are flawed. Yet, it’s easy to connect with them, at least for me, because I saw a bit of myself in them. They deny the truth when reality is giving them the chance to be free, their actions don’t always match their beliefs, and they are both selfish and selfless in varying levels. I also liked the fact that this film did not attempt to sugarcoat anything. This is definitely not for everyone because there were some pretty graphic scenes here that only a select few can watch without wincing. Still, the graphic level did not match “Lake of Fire,” which I consider to be a better movie only by a little bit. This one is more fictional, a little bit more “accessible,” and shorter. Still, if one is interested in films that deal with abortion, such as “Lake of Fire” and “Vera Drake,” I enthusiastically recommend this one.

Jumper
[ 2 stars out of 4 ]

I thought the beginning was pretty fascinating–about how Hayden Christensen’s character discovered his power for the first time–but it went downhill pretty fast. The film lacks a good plot behind the interesting premise so it doesn’t hold up to anything. The latter two-thirds of the movie is basically about Samuel L. Jackson’s character hunting down Christensen without any sort of an explanation why. Jackson’s main quip is that no one should have the power to be everywhere at once. I can’t help but roll my eyes whenever that is said in the movie. If you’re going to have a villain who is both strong and smart, give him or her at least one driving force that justifies (at least in his or her mind, or even better ours as well) his actions. Jamie Bell is about the only great thing about this film. He actually outshines the lead character because he’s conflicted, funny, and charismatic all at the same time (and has nice accent!). Not only that, compared to Christensen’s character, he seems so much more agile and aware of everything. It’s just not good to root for the supporting actor when one is really should be rooting for the lead. As for other characters jumping in and out of the characters’ lives (pun intended–I couldn’t help it), especially Diane Lane’s, it’s distracting at best. The ending is a bit too frustrating as well because there were so many unanswered questions and open-ended stories. It really, really begs for a sequel to the point where it got pathetic. There’s pretty good visual effects here and there but this is far from solid. See it for Jamie Bell.

Other Boleyn Girl, The (2008)
[ 3 stars out of 4 ]

I didn’t know what to expect coming into this film. I heard from a friend that there were a lot of drama here so I decided to rent it. Plus, the trailers looked very promising. I’ve always wanted to see Scarlett Johansson go head-to-head with Natalie Portman because I see a lot of similarities with both actresses. Both of them delivered even though their characters are two polar opposites. I heard that the story is not necessarily accurate but I didn’t care because it was entertaining. It’s like watching a season finale of “One Tree Hill,” “The O.C.” or “Gossip Girl” when things are revealed in very dramatic ways and the characters (both good and bad) ultimately deserve what they get. I must commend Portman for being deliciously evil here because I’ve always seen her as a nice leading lady in movies. As for Johansson, I’ve always thought that she acts the same in every movie but she offers a different kind of tenderness here. I liked pretty much everything about this movie but I can’t quite give it four stars because the middle portion felt a little bit too long. Still, the supporting characters are interesting (such as Jim Sturgess), the costumes were grand, and I was constantly curious on what would happen next so I will recommend it to anyone who loves drama.

recently been watching a few films…

star wars a new hope and empire strikes back: discovered finally why i was hating the newer  (actually older, story-wise) episodes… there is no han solo and no millenium falcon… guess star wars to me is as much about lightsabres and ‘may the force be with you’ as it is about han solo and his Manly deeds… the character brilliantly plays upon the huge amusing possibilities of the Man… miss the Man in the sleeker episodes of present days…

stardust: i was hugely impressed by gaiman when i read his take on midsummer night’s dream in one of the issues of the sandman series… in stardust he plays aournd with the fantasy genre essentials… and some of it is very likeable… robert de niro gets to play brilliant character… captain of semi-pirate semi-trader air-ship (zeppelin) who is ’secretly’ into cross-dressing and calls himself ’shakespeare’ while (he thinks) his crew call him ’shake speare’… a dear soft-hearted person who puts on the appearance of the rugged captain just for the sake of the stupid ol-fashioned crew… while the crew members are all aware of this queerity of their captain but pretends that they do not and appreciate it out loud when the cap’n puts up the ruggedness show… all together a very lovable matter… but pity that female characters are very poorly done…

eternal sunshine of the spotless mind: brilliant in conceptualisation and its realisation… utterly moving… was pretty mushy watching it… lurrrvvvvd the use of color…

the simpsons: i have never been a regular viewer of the show… liked the film… though a bit boring… very blunt takes on american way of doing things… not bad…

crash: unbelievable that films such as these gets made in the name of sensitive films… apparently very sensible… but huge problems within… all characters are bloody stereotyped… bordering on defending white racism… the iraqi father gets all blame for not unerstanding english… had he understood english there wouldnt have been any problem for him… the asian guys just get slammed on the road becasue they are short and cannot be seen from inside of suv-s… also asian guys are always so busy smuggling illegal migrants, they do not even look out for cars comiung their way… even the nastiest white racist has a sad past justifying his ill-thoughts and at the moment of crisis it is not as if he wouldnt help black women he just finished molesting… and black guys trying to become ‘mainstream’ are just getin aliented from their roots… cant believe they actually made this film…

michael clayton: george clooney hehehe… sad that michael clayton stopped being himself and shifted into daniel ocean… oherwise nice… tom wilkinson is superb again!

ray: okie, its decided, hollywood is unbelievable! its hugely amusing that somebody can use the theme of oedipal complex such genuinely and such bluntly without being slighly aware of that fact… only possible in hollywood… roflol… lurrrvvvvd d film… jamie foxx is mind-blowing… great songs… in love with d actor who played ray’s mother…

women on the verge of nervous breakdown: almodovar warming up and boy is he stupendous! start from the name… women are known for nervous breakdown arnt they? but wait she aint gonna break down… just on the verge of it… lol… so are the women on the verge being Women? and there starts the subversion-marathon… starring a pretty young banderas… and the best hair ever adorned by pedro… and superb characters… and pedro’s on-screen presentation of filming activities as a persisting reference to the ‘manufactured’ nature of the story we are seeing… and perhaps the best blody brillinatly subversive chase sequence in the history of films… gotta see this…

4 months 3 weeks and 2 days: i gotta write on this later… hugely moving and thought-provoking… grab a copy asap… guess even finding the Man amusing is part of the reproducing hegemony business… saw some reviews of this online… most written by men… and most see this as a statement on the romanian communist totalitarianism… guess this is less about communist totalitarian reality and more about the Male totalitarian reality… awesomely distrubing…

ps: btw, i think ‘dekhta hai tu kya’ from krazzy 4 is brilliantly subversive… like asking back the male gaze, ‘what u fukin gazin at?’ asking that takes away the anonymous omnipresence of the gaze… no longer it is anonymous and all over… the source is identified… and the source is being asked what exactly it is lookin at? with that question the gaze is unsettled… no longer all powerful to look at any and everything without declaring what it is looking at… or am i missing something here?