Transylvania

come form Transilvania and I lived there as a Hungarian ethnic minority. I watched this film in Budapest, and I liked it very much. Still, some of my Transilvanian friends told me that they are embarrassed to tell other people about this movie, because it shows only the "bad" things about Transilvania, and foreigners will think that this country is full of gypsies and poor people. Well, I don't have this problem. Gypsies do exist in Romania. And anyway, this film is not a documentary. It is a subjective movie, using Transilvanian images, music, impressions. It shows mostly gypsies,yes, but hey, the story IS about gypsies. This film might contain mistakes (for example, they showed Romanians from the Maramures region dancing on a street festival together with Hungarian women wearing costumes from a completely different region). But this doesn't matter! Of course not everybody is gypsy and poor in Translivania. But who would pay to watch a documentary called: FACTS ABOUT TRANSILVANIA?? It gives a general impression, which is not that bad at all. Those who think this country is only miserable, will think this anyway. I was singing loudly the Hungarian, Romanian and gypsy tunes in the cinema, and I was proud to show that I know these songs. It also gave me this mystical feeling of my home country, which I will never lose. People are not better or worse there , but they are different, and I like it. If the film raises curiosities and debates, foreigners will visit the country, and they can make their own opinions. Maybe they won't find witches and magic, but they will definitely sense a special feeling. And for that this film was an excellent means.

I saw Tony Gatliff's film Transylvania in Melbourne, and, despite the presence of horror princess Asia Argento, the film has absolutely nothing to do with vampires. Part travelogue and part exploration of two masochistic lost souls, this incredibly strange, surreal, lonely, music-filled journey is unlike anything I can recall seeing before. If nothing else, it proves that cinema is not dead: not every film is manufactured in pitch meetings and script workshops. This is clearly a film not overly designed to appeal to any audience at all-perhaps explaining its practically nonexistent release outside of film festivals and special retrospectives since its Cannes debut in 2006-and, for better or worse, this is no doubt the film Tony Gatliff wanted to make, directorial flourishes and all.

Asia Argento . . . she's getting there. Though not a great actress, she's earned her place in history already, I think, by sheer measure of her persona and willingness to go places few would have the balls to explore, say french kissing a dog. In terms of physicality, she's incredibly skilled in the ways she's able to use her body. She can brandish it violently, smashing herself up against a wall in a moment of ecstasy and deep sorrow, or twist it painfully and quietly into a crumpled ball of limbs and self-induced isolation. Hurling herself full force into a musical cyclone and smashing dishes with the flick of a hand, Argento is able to bring the character to life.

It is in her line readings, during scenes that call her to sell the character in words rather than physical manifestations, that Argento never quite manages to reach the point of believability required of her. Her voice often settles into an off-putting monotone that, in quieter moments, can undermine the inner complications and emotions meant to come through in what she is saying.

Aided by often remarkable shots of a countryside not normally used in film and a truly impressive collection of folk music, Transylvania is not easy an easy film to recommend nor is it easy to dismiss as yet another self-indulgent festival film created by a director trying to force more of his vision into 100 minutes than it can support. I am unsure if the film works on every level, I suspect that it does not, but the ways in which the film both indulges in its own artistry and refuses to go out of it way to cater to the personal tastes of anyone other than its own makers are strangely admirable. Even if you don't like Transylvania, it's nice to know a film like it can be made at all.

Well, actually I was told about the movie by a lady-colleague of mine. Interestingly, she is a Hungarian born in Southern Slovakia, and she has been living for many years in Prague. The movie made her excited. But I told myself: Oh, wasn't her excitement only because she had some roots and historical sentiments there in Transylvania? So I forgot the movie. Some time thereafter, again, my friends told me about the movie. But meanwhile it nearly completely disappeared from Prague cinemas! Clearly as the attendance was not "money-making". Finally, by chance, I discovered the movie's projection in a small, something like "suburb" or forgotten vintage cinema not far away from my house. So me and my friends went there. Not more then 20 people altogether were watching the movie that night... But I have to say that the over-mentioned Hungarian lady-colleague of mine was absolutely right in her feelings. Transylvania is really heart moving movie. Very different from Kusturica's plain mixture of comedy and tragic. Transylvania has been telling us an archetypal story about loosing and finding human bonds, human bodies and human souls. That's why I consider Transylvania as a heart moving movie. It talks about the quality of our hearts. About their weighing by gold and by love. About countries in our hearts and minds. About subconscious and non-conscious powers that direct our values and lives. Transylvania as a country - and as a movie - is the place where people have been still living their very real life; while there in the West humans' life is hardly something more then a process of consuming - the products, goods, sex, thoughts and ideas. So, maybe the main message of the movie Transylvania is in the unspoken words of Zingarina: "It is of no key importance that Transylvania has been coming back to Europe - but just the opposite: that our hearts have free choice of leaving the prison of consumed life and return back to place where we can give our lives their true meanings."

Tony Gatlif is a French director of partial Romani descent. I understand that a lot of his movies focus on the Roma (often mistakenly called gypsies, which is actually a derogatory term). "Transylvania" is the first movie of his that I've seen.

While the title might imply that it's a Dracula adaptation, it has nothing to do with vampires. The protagonist is an Italian woman (Asia Argento of "XXX") who goes to Romania in search of her boyfriend, having a somewhat gritty experience in the process.

I've never been to Romania, and I don't know any people of Romani descent, so I can't comment on the movie's accuracy. What I can say is that it's interesting to see a movie about a culture that we don't often get to see. A lot of the music sounds like Johannes Brahms's Hungarian Dance (to which Charlie Chaplin shaved a man in a scene from "The Great Dictator"). It's not any kind of great movie, but it's one of the few movies focusing on the Roma, so it's got that going for it.

This film consists of a number of impressionistic paintings. The different emotions are put together on a string of beads. It is true, there is no moralistic message. It will not give exalted thoughts. It is pure gratification. The music is compelling. Do not expect a clear-cut storyline. Do not expect a logical sequence of happenings. Don't expect people to be predictable. If you like surprises:this film has the unexpected behind any bend in the road. It is not a film about a relationship between two human beings. It is ten separate moving images that each have their own character and meaning. By gluing these together the viewer is confronted with the mysteries of life through Toni Gatlif's eyes. You cannot compare this film with any other Gatlif production. Thoroughly recommended.