Filantropica

I had the exquisite privilege to see the film's premiere and since then I've been to see it five more times. It is the best Romanian film ever made. From the script writing (plot) to acting, costumes, camera movements, editing, everything has so high a quality it acquires international value. The disadvantage of it being so Romanian may diminish a lot of its humor for foreign viewers, but there is something universal about humor that makes the bittersweet truth reach the humanity of each member of the audience rather than their nationality. It is a sour sweet satire of the contemporary Romanian society and underworld of which fiction one begins to doubt as credits start rolling.

This is for those who don't know how the director looks like: Nae Caranfil has a cameo as a Karaoke singer. Does the foreign audience applaud when there is a good scene or when the director appears in a cameo, like they did here?

What else? The Romanian film critics had designated "Filantropica" as representative for our country in Best Foreign Picture pre-nominations for the Academy Awards. Unfortunately, they didn't know much about publicity and didn't even come up with all the necessary data for the sites & all, but this does not diminish the film's value and the excuse may be that the event was a first time ever.

I am used to Romanian movies being dark, verbally violent, poorly acted, poorly directed, wanting to shock, yet saying nothing. Most of them are like that, but not this one. This was actually a dark comedy with almost no violence. The threads of the story do end in despair, but not in tragedy, giving the viewer that "jigsaw puzzle completed" feeling.

The acting of the main characters was superb, even the extras did their job well; the script contains a too complex and interesting story to be told here, all I can say is that it's a great tale; the music gives a Romanian feel to the movie and nicely selected for this particular idea; the directing has to be good, since almost none of the actors slipped, none of the scenes made me say "Cut" :) and the movie carried me from the first scene to the last with no discrepancies.

This movie may have turned my pessimistic view of Romanian film-making around, along with "Asfalt Tango", which is a movie of the same caliber and quality (with the same great main actor ) and I am looking forward to good, watchable movies like these two, with great and original stories.

In Romania they call it the 'transition' period. Whoever invented this term meant to describe the period between Communist Romania and a normal society, a period where people can recover dignity, learn speaking the truth and trust their human fellows. The issue is that in Romania, as in all other former Communist countries this period was marked by a great amount of dis-illusions, by many broken dreams and destinies as the recovery proved not to be easy neither on the economic not on human plans. The place of human relations was taken by tricks and robbery, the emptiness of the Communist slogans was replaced by the emptiness of the commercial TV, surviving as a human being is tough.

'Filantropica' presents a point of view which may be unknown or hard to catch for many non-Romanian viewers. The Romanian literature and theater has a great satiric tradition, and the founder of absurd comedy theater Eugene Ionesco was of Romanian origin. This is where the villain characters in 'Filantropica' like the one of the master combinator played by Gheorghe DInica come from, although the figure of the little professor of literature dreaming to overcome his miserable condition (through money? through love?) played by Mircea Diaconu is as universal as a Benigni or Woody Allen would have created it.

Some comments consider 'Filantropica' as the best film of the Romanian cinema. I believe that this is an exaggeration, there are certain flaws especially the extended and un-justified use of off-screen voice in the first part of the movie. 'Moartea Domnului Lazarescu' of Cristi Puiu, another movie inspired by the reality of the same period is a better film, with somehow a more optimistic message. Yet this is an important film about this complex period in the history of Romania.

This movie was highly appreciated, I belive, because of its mere content, meaning that the director Nae Caranfil puts all its talent into it and struggles to evince that Romania is a very complex and intricate country, full of contrasts and paradoxes. Caranfil is eager to make the public appreciate its creation and that can be seen several times throughout the film. iTs satisfaction is all that counts. In Filantropica, he blends comedy in drama in the very specific and contondent way which Romaniands behold as "laugh of worries and trouble". That's why this is an excellent movie. The social and psychological satire couldn't be more obviously conveyed than it is by the main character, a superficial teacher, who drggs his dull life day by day neither with a purpose, nor with a glimpse of satisfaction. But what has satisfaction become nowadays ? Does satisfaction mean money? Must you be ignorant and most of all corrupt to be happy? Under this superficial layer lies the multitude of social convictions and the chaos of a society that struggles to keep, and moreso to gain its real and unhypocrite identity, under a constant flow of foreign However the prospects are grim. Being a satirical comedy, "Filantropica" tries to put in mind of the beholders one question? Have we become so anonyme and unimportant individually that we haven't even realized it and are we constantly manipulated by social cercles beyond our reach and knowledge? We'll never know, will we? All that we can do is "laugh at our own incapacities and faults" of middle or lower class people that we are, as the great Chaplin said. So go and watch Filantropica. I became pretty damp after seeing it, realizing how useless people, specially in the ex-Comunist countries can be. But in order to reach that point of view you must first know the words of a great philosopher: Andre Malraux: "What is the human life? Nothing! But nothing worths more than a human life!". Is this the idea conveyed in "Filantropica"? You will have to judge, so go and see it and then try to answer the previous questions. Although not a great movie, it is very good and maybe it will put a differnt view of Romania to all you westerners(I don't say this disdainfully)who know it only by extreme poverty and degradation. See the film and you will understand a small, but important part of my country 8/10

Is Filantropica the best Romanian movie? Some may say yes, other may have been less impressed by Caranfil's satire. But no matter how you look at it, you have to agree that Filantropica has something that many Romanian movies lack. It's got a story, a pulse, a damn heart beat. What that means? I suppose it means it's got some likable protagonists as well as debatable villains and its satire goes beyond the social layer and reaches the human one. That's what makes Filantropica so cool: its not just a film that's got something to say, it's a film that's got something to show off with. Finally, a Romanian movie with an earth-bound story, less chat and a bit more of "this and that"!

Filantropica is a film about the fate of a professor who falls in love with a rather "sophisticated" lady, who just costs too much. But because love knows no limits, our professor is prepared to do anything in order to fulfill his yearning. And, as all know, the easiest way to conquer a shallow heart is by being a financially affluent person. Most unfortunately, the professor isn't in such a position and he searches desperately for a solution. The solution, as unexpected as it may be, is, of course, business related. A bit unconventional, maybe. That is, if you consider "organized" begging an unconventional business.

OK, so it's fun and it criticizes some very disturbing facts of the lower social classes and, in the meantime, it details the rather dark career of a beggar. Yeah, I know, I never thought someone could make money out of beginning through such an organized and well planed scheme, but it seems it pays off. Now the sad thing is, it's mostly true and it's impossible to control in the current conditions (moral ambiguity). But in Filantropica, it is - and this is of great relevance - another matter of life. It's part of something bigger and more important, it follows an ideal, morally shabby, but conceptually good. The context (aka the story, the characters) make it real. And that's what good films are (sometimes) about.