Lucian's Blog

Soem years ago almost all Romanians wathced movies only on DVD in their homes. With the arrival of cinema multiplexes and cinema halls, Romanians turned to see movies again. But what happened?

First, during communism (a period so well portrayed in numerous recent Romanian movies), the state controlled all the productions. The country's cinema board aproved a certain amount of movies to be made inside a certain time interval, many of which were propagandistic. After being aproved, a movie's fate was still depending on the moods of the censorship. There are numerous cases of movies ready to be screened, but never to be seen because the communist censor board had forbidden them. It is the case of "Reconstituirea", "De ce trag clopotele, Mitica?" or " Concurs" They were seen as a threat by communists, who thought they are damaging the official communist policy towards culture. In 1984, Ceausescu stated his views about the future cultural movement in Romania, declaring from that moment on, only movies with a communist theme must be sustained and produced. His statement had come after a visit in China and North Korea, which inspired him this idea. Propaganda movies, films with engineers and teachers heading for village communities to implement communist ideals, movies about the great technological and construction achievement, about the great historical past of the country (in this case the script was careful enough to underline the emerging communist ides in the mentality of the past rulers) flooded the cinemas. In order to have an audience, children and pupils, along with batalions of workers were obliged to go to these movies, thus demonstrating the support the people had offered to these movies.

After 1989, the movie attendance plunged. During 1990 and 1998, only a handful of movies were produced in a year, with reduced audiences. People turned to foreign movies or did not attend any cinemas. Moreover, because they were not sustained by a lucrative industry, the cinemas degraded and were used for other purposed or were simply left to decay.

Still, there were some stars rising during these years. But the great development was reached only a few years ago. First, in Cluj-Napoca, in the heart of Transylvania, a group of ethusiasts had established TIFF (Transylvania Film Festival). The festival reached to an young audience who wanted to see their thoughts and lifestyle portrayed in movies. Over the years, TIFF became a beacon for the new cinematic movement.

Encouraged by the audiences, but ignored by the National Council for Cinematography, the movie directors assumed the role of saviors of Romanian cinema. Cristi Puiu (winner in 2006 Cannes Festival, section "Un Certain regard"), Cristi Porumboiu (winner in TIFF 2006), Cristi Mungiu (winner of "Palm d'Or" 2007, also greatly apreciated for his film "Occident"), Tudor Giurgiu (with his "Dangerous Liaisons") or Catalin Mitulescu (with "How Did I Spent The End Of The World"), Cristi Nemescu (with his short movies and his first and last feature movie "California Dreamin'" imposed a new perspective (one might say "un certain regard") in Romanian cinema. The public returned to give their support to the new faces and new themes. But is it enough?

The answer is certainly "not". The National Council for Cinematography is still a very slow-going enterprise, with an birocratic aparatus very slow to react to new ideas. The board of the council is formed by ancient communist directors, a part of the corrupt administration appointed by the governments after 1989. They use the funding they get (insufficient each year) to finance movies with a certain orientation. They refused several scripts and projects that targeted the political orientation of Romania after the Revolution and had a special "clientelle". Long story short: the resorts that worked during communist are still very much alive today.

Romania cannot sustain a private movie industry without the infrastructure needed to makje things work. Almost all successful productions mentioned above were made possible by the enthusiasm of the directors named (Cristi Mungiu said in a recent interview that he used personal objects in order to decorate the sets in "4 Moths, 3Weeks and 2 Days", Cristi Porumboiu relied entirely on the financial and logistic support of his father, a weathy business man, in producing "13:05, East of Bucharest"). Without the implication of foreign producers (as in the case of "How Did I Spent The End Of The World", produced by Martin Scorsese) or the state institutions, the recent sucesses the young generation had in Cannes will not be seconded in the years to come.

Lucian Dragos

Cristian Nemescu was a rising star. Known especially through his last two short-movies, one winning a prize in Transylvania Film Festival last year, he was expected with very much interest to accomplish his debut in long production. However, his first movie is a postume one.

Cristian Nemescu was killed last summer in a car accident in Bucharest. It was a black year for Romanian cultural life, the same fate being shared by rockstar Teo Peter.

Cristian Nemescu was a talented young cinematographer, with a great skill in showing the tragical-comic side of everyday life. His first and last film is named "California dreamin'" and it is speaking about yet another Romanian trauma during communism. In the first years after the second World War, Romanians believed they are to be liberated from the Soviet Red Army by a great air attack comming from US. Almost 10 years partisans in the mountains and the entire society expected what they called "an imminent attack". This was never to come. The rest is history: communism was fortifyed with the help of the secret political police, partisans were captured or killed, dictatorship became ruthless.

Nemescu shows us a piece of an imagined history. In a province small village, we have a railway station, with a director still waiting for the americans. He refuses to give the green light for a NATO train heading for Kosovo. The train is supposed to pass through the station and continue south. But the director is comitted to make the Americans stay in the village, thus ending his waiting.

It's all about Romanians wanting to be free. It's about the dispair 50 years of communism and 17 years of endless transition had produced in the souls of the simplest people. After almost 70 years of waiting, finally somebody has the power of making the Americans stay.

The great care for details, the great play of actors comming from very complex and different cultures (Razvan Vasilescu plays the railway station director, while Armand Assante is the US Army captain, Ion Sapdaru, known from "13:05 East of Bucharest", winner of the great prize in TIFF 2006) and the perfect absurdity of the script are proofs that Cristian Nemescu mastered the art of story-telling and the visual approach to reality.

The new, numerous generation of Romanian directors has lost one of its captains. But in the battle for the survival of Romanian cinematography, nobody's lost; everyone becomes sooner or later a soldier of the open skies.

Lucian Dragos

A dramatic story covering the last years of communism in Romania emerged as one of the greatest surprises in Cannes 2007, some critics saying it might have a chance at Palme d'Or. It's the film of Cristi Mungiu, a director from the young generation of cineasts (including Mitulescu, Porumboiu, Puiu), "4 Months, 3 Weeks and 2 Days". The critics stumbled upon a story discovering the hard choices a young student has to take during late 1980's in Romania. She finds out she's pregnant, but her ellected option is not possible, because the state does not allow abortion.

The story captivated the public and the director and the actors were given great showers of applause at the press conference. Yesterday, during the official screening of the film, another shower... Photographs and reporters were also captivated by the presence of Laura Vasiliu, another acting discovery of Cristi Mungiu. She, along with co-star Anamaria Marinca, but also Doroteea Petre ("How Did I Spent The End Of The World", "Rina"), are the acting force imposing Romanian films during last years.

Cristi Mungiu, the director responsible for what the French critics already call "a success", was known untill now for his movie "Occident", depicting the life of young people in the hard years after the 1989 Romanian Revolution. This time he goes back in time to offer us a piece of life threatened by the prospect of losing freedom. The topic tackles an incredible political document issued by the communist authorities, the famous 1966 decree, stating abortion is illegal, unless the life of the mother is in jeopardy. The document produce two or three generations of "decree kids", children not wanted by their parents, but wanted by the political regime. These generations are now the active, hard working gererations that produce a 5% economic growth in today's Romania.

Seen through the eyes of an introvert girl, the story thrills nyone who lived or visited Romania during communism or visits some of the neighborhoods still extant these days, with their grey shades and unwelcoming atmosphere.

The first in a trilogy named "Tales in a Golden Age" (the name given to the Ceausescu era), Months, 3 Weeks and 2 Days has achieved much and promises a lot more.

Lucian Dragos

Some of the readers of this blog may have noticed we are covering one of the growing Film Festivals in Eastern Europe, "Transylvania International Film Festival", taking place in June each year. In 2007, the festival will be present in Sibiu, the European cultural capital of 2007. Open space projections and the presence of an office in the city's square will ensure the presence of the festival in the environment of cultural manifestations in Sibiu.

Between June 1st and 10th, TIFF 2007 will take place in the regular space, "Republica" cinema, in Mihai Viteazu Sqare. The categories of the Festival remain the same: "Competition", "Supernova", "3X3", "What’s Up, Doc?", "Shaddows" and "Romanian Film Days".

The Romanian presence will be a central point in the festival. After the success of "How Did I Spent The End of the World" and "13:05: East of Bucharest" last year, this year's Romanian production will include "3 Months, 4 Weeks and 2 Days - Memories from the Golden Age"" (d. Radu Muntean, the director also in charge with making each year's festival logo), a film also present in the official competition at Cannes Festival this year. Cristian Nemescu, a Romanian director tragicly killed last year in a car accident will have his last film presented in TIFF, California Dreamin'. In the short films category, we'll have "The Lamp with the Hat" (d. Radu Jude), "The Water" (d. Constantin Popescu Jr) and "Don't you mind, but..." (d. Adina Pintilie). In this section will have documentaries exploring techniques of manipulation (in "Manufacturing Dissent") or the way in which the movies come to be rated ("No Body is Perfect"). Death and its proximity will be revealed in a Israeli documentary "Cemetery Club", as well as the death of simple economic enterprises in globalization era in "The Big Sellout".

In "No Limits" section, we'll have the opportunity to see "Shortbus", as well as the star of the film, Sook-yin Lee, in flesh and bones (hopefully). Shocking as always, this section will include "Electroma", "So Lange du hier bist", "The Bridge", "Another Gay Movie", "The Whispering of Gods", showing us images of drama, suicide, sexual behavior and much more.

A new section, "Walking along" will consists in productions that have only two characters speaking to each other. The rest is just inside our minds.

The festival will be covered, as we did last year. Log on to www.habitusnetwork.org/blog to see day-to-day coverage.

Lucian Dragos

During the last few years, the press and other public institutions have underlined an increased preocupation of the local Christian communities to develop their own terms and regulations in the relation with the ecclesiastic autorities. There are as many as tens of such cases.

One of the most known in the Tanacu case, presented in detail on habitusnetwork.org. This case stunned the public with its cruelty, but it also gave an alarm sign about the authority the bishops and the higher clergy do actually have inside monasteries and parishes. After the Tanacu tragedy, there were a few commissions named by the local bishop, but their members (priests) were rejected and were not allowed to investigate the case. Some of them were seen as the messengers of Satan, who is active inside the diocesan seat.

In many other cases, the local rural communities refused to accept the ruling of the bishop, who decided that the local priests cannot perform services inside the community. The villagers gathered in some cases and rejected the messengers of the bishopric who came to install the new priests. In other cases, a delegation of villagers made the trip to the bishop's see to plea their case. In the most recent case, the bishops themselves made the trip to the turbulent monastery (monastery of Moisei, northern Romania), but didn't calm down the spirits. They tried to change the head of the monastery, but the prior was heavily sustained by his fellow monks and by the faithful.

On one hand, the clergy is detached from the realities existing in their communities. It is not a simple fact that in the two cases involving monasteries mentioned above (Tanacu and Moisei), the local bishops are very old and they lost their grip on what in happening inside their jurisdiction. Their argument is that people should obey the ruling of the bishop, but in here lies a problem. First, we are not twenty years ago, when people were backing up whatever the bishops had in mind. They like to express themselves, they are now used to have their voice heard and understood in the decision-making process, even if it's a matter of faith involved. Second, they see and are informed about the problems and undecent deeds some of the members of the clergy make. For example, in the case of Moisei monastery, the faithful protested because they saw in the replacement of the prior of the monastery a gesture equal to a robbery act, the clergy making their way easier towards the monastery's posessions.

On the other hand, the mob can be easily manipulated by well-trained church-men. If a priests wants to back himself up in order to be protected if caught with something wrong (witchcraft, unusual services etc), he may think the mob is the best way to intimidate the clergy. The line here is very thin and it cannot be walked upon easily.

There is a need for a reinterpretation of the role of the clergy and the role of the lay people inside the local church. Lay people are present in the statute of the Orthodox Church and they should be consulted and heard in the matters of the church. In reality, they have a decorative role, they do not arrive to make their voice heard inside the church and thus, they are left aside in many cases. This makes the clergy a plenipotentiary force in the matters of faith and cannon law. But this is just a step ahead of ecclesial totalitarism.