L'occident

A chain of stories. Impecable portrait of characters. Bitter humor. Ways of survive. And the choices defining different situations. A honest, realistic portrait of Romanian realities. Seductive for inspired performances, for the exploration of cliches and for the science to propose only events , determining the viewer to build his conclusion. Young people. Solutions . Their parents. And small circles of survive , fake succes or appearences as refuges.

Lucian is a 29 year old botanist whose financial security is threatened after his job gets cut. After finding himself evicted from his old apartment, his practical girlfriend is unwilling to accept his proposition to move in with his elderly aunt and himself and starts seeking solace in the company of an older foreigner about to return to France. Mihaela is a 24 year old romantic idealist and aspiring poetess who after being stood up at the altar has to reluctantly accept her willful mother's attempts at finding her a well-off foreigner suitor. "The colonel", a retiring police officer and Mihaela's father is approached by a Romanian expat to assist with breaking the news of the death of one of his friends, all the while trying to avert his daughter's ill-suited wooer.

The three stories in the film, although clearly delineated, are closely intertwined and interdependent, and its strings often blend seamlessly and fluently into one another. Showing signs of Kieslowski (imagery), Tarr (multi-perspective narrative structure) and Wong (theme of failed connections and longing), "Occident" holds a strong grip and deliberate pace on its three plots, gradually revealing more layers of each of its three protagonists, and often amending previously shown events through its crafty fragmented narrative.

Cristian Mungiu's first feature directorial effort paints a bittersweet picture on the transitional period of Romania a decade after the fall of the communist regime, most acutely marked by the large-scale brain-drain occurring after the late 90s recession. Frequently underscored by a popular local hit from the 70s, "Noi in anul 2000" ("We, in the year 2000"), whose youthful, innocently hopeful lyrics create a feeling of melancholy and forlornness when contrasted with the bleakness and ennui of contemporary adulthood in Romania, the film approaches themes of chance, displacement and longing. Allured by the mirage of an idealized West full of opportunity for a better life, the characters in the film are in pursuit of an ever elusive happiness, narrowly missing their chance and failing to reach a meaningful connection.

like many films of new Romanian wave, it is a picture. picture of a country.reflections of a people existence. a film about price of basic things and nuances of feelings. about meetings, expectations, hope and values. so, a kind of window. nothing more. it is difficult to write a review about this part of a not small chain. because it is not beautiful or impressive or sad. it is not a subject of meditation or basket with nice images. it is only little piece from a broken reality. gray, cruel, without profound sense, passive, prey of a form of Bovarism. nothing more. a game with nuances in which words are bones of silence. a testimony. like many others Romanian films. and search of beginning. or only drawing of them.

This is worth seeing for being from Romania alone, but also it´s a good movie. It takes place in present day Romania and over a few days you follow Nae and Sorina around in everyday events. In a "Short cuts" kind of way you first meet a this couple, and people they encounter and interact with are the people we follow around in the next part. In all you get to see the same events from three different angles which makes an interesting whole. Like in everyday day life, there are both sad and happy occurrences, that shows us that life is not black nor white. It´s partly based on the true stories that the director collected while working as a journalist, and partly based on his own and his friends experiences, which makes this movie very believable.

My friends in Bucharest recommended this film: 'you must see it, it's better than 4-3-2'. 4-3-2 is the short for '4 months, 3 weeks and 2 days', the film that made director Cristian Mungiu known in the West and brought him a 'Palme d'Or' in Cannes exactly one year ago. I tend to agree, but I would add 'yes, better, but mostly for Romanian viewers'.

'Occident' deals with what has been in Communist Romania a national obsession and what became today a national and social phenomenon - the aspiration of the young generation to run away from a country where they cannot build a decent life and the mirage of the Occident. The story happens in the year 2000 and is told three times, from three different angles belonging each to a pair of characters, each time changing the perspective and revealing new angles of the story, changing its sense and even its ending. It is a smart story, in a style much more nervous than '4-3-2' which had a linear story telling, with long scenes giving the actors better opportunities for deeper performances.

And yet 'Occident' tells a lot of harsh truths about the Romanian society, about its corruption, emptiness, lack of education. All these will be much better understood by Romanian viewers however. It is also a different time, the characters in 'Occident' may be desperate to run away, but the difference is that they can do it, while '4-3-2' characters have no place to run. This may be one of the reasons that '4-3-2' impressed more viewers out of Romania. What happened in the last years of the dictatorship of Nicolae Ceausescu was criminal and may be shocking for less initiated viewers, but is by no means news for most of the Romanians, excepting the very young ones. Ceausescu still sells better even after his death.