Libertate

This movie is a technically well-done utter failure.

It exudes the hallmark of bad acting: actors shouting out their lines all the time. It presents the hallmark of a bad scenario: no conclusion, no catharsis.

I was there during that revolution. Everyone was trying to find out what would be next in for our destiny, if we'll end in the EU or the Russians will take over. People were trying to find out if their friends are alive, if they'll still have a job next day. Then came the summary process of the dictator on a Christmas Day (to be later followed by the Miner's revolts etc.). Nothing of this was a topic of the movie. A slapstic, one with a historically accurate scenography.

The marketing machine behind and the official endorsement made for a sold-out theatre. This is yet not on the same level with the new Romanian cinema which made a dent in the European cinema in previous years (4-3-2, Beyond the Hills, Aferim etc.). Not even on the same level with well-executed modern Romanian thrillers like Boss (2023).

1. Great Production

'Freedom' or 'Libertate' (2023), directed by Tudor Giurgiu and produced by Oana Giurgiu is a rare gem among the few pieces of Romanian filmography that takes a look at the events that have unfolded in Romania in December 1989. The experience is supremely immersive in part thanks to the speedy and well thought out camera movements (as if you are one of the background characters witnessing the story take place) and the incredible sound design and effects (complementing through your sense of hearing, your presence during these events). This effect is also achieved through the rather close-on-the-action camera and sound focus / angles / framing / sound design during dialogue or action-centric scenes. Everything, from the decor to the aftereffects, portrays a complete and profoundly immersive experience of the Revolution of '89 as seen from Sibiu, bringing about a feeling of 'Hollywood budget' production factor, for which the production team should be commended and which makes this movie a must-watch for all Romanians, especially those that have not lived through these events and would benefit immensely from adding this small point of reference to a vocabulary of insights on the history of their country.

As far as the dialogue goes, the lines are beautifully savory, capturing the colorful vocabulary of the times and the spirit of the Romanian people through their language in the face of adversity (thanks in no small part to the flawless delivery if the actors and actresses). Sparkled with cliche-ic, modern, humorous moments here and there, the immersion is not broken and the overarching theme of the Romanian saying: "Facem haz de necaz" - or "Poking fun when in trouble" remains beautifully captured, something which the Romanian audience would clearly empathise with despite the colorless, hopeless and gruesome atmosphere.

2. Lacking Message

The other side of the coin here is what ended up feeling like an incomplete artistic vision on the part of the directing team. Vaguely put, after exiting the cinema you are left with a confusing feeling of not completely understanding the message of the movie - as if being presented with a perfectly executed cake on a random Tuesday at 13.00 and wondering to yourself what the occasion is. As other reviewers have put it, this movie is an exceptional radiography of the events that have unfolded in that period, but as with any radiography it necessitates a diagnostician that should walk the patient through the end result of a proper and digestible conclusion - perhaps not in the case of modern art, but for certain when it comes to historical movies. In the case of 'Libertate' the director's vision was either outshone by the focus on production and realism or diluted in the process, to the point where a viewer does not feel gently waltzed to an overarching message or concluding moral, as is usually the end goal of storytelling, regardless of medium. This may be due in part to an intentional neutrality of the directing vision or an accidental oversight as a result on the focus on the story itself, the research, and its delivery. Conclusions can still be drawn, however, but may have been left uncomfortably much at the discretion and subjective experiences of the viewer who is this case, regardless of generation, is looking less for freedom of opinion and more for answers over what has actually happened in '89 and who is responsible for the many deaths that occurred.

Ironically the movie is portrayed and sold as a new and necessary look at the historic events that are still shrouded in mystery and censorship at the risk of being forgotten after 34+ years, but fails to deliver a stern position/opinion/message/new angle on such a controversial topic as if just as afraid to postulate one, just like the modern institutions it (and many others) accuses of the same fault. As if presented with an uninterpreted radiography, the viewer is purposefully left to make their own opinions on the story, symbolically similar to what led to the events back then - a general confusion based on the lack of a centrally delivered information, where everyone could only survive by making their own assumptions and accusing everyone else in the process, which ultimately led to the back and forth fighting and innocent casualties. Whether this vision was accidental or intentional and whether it will be a popular or unpopular one among audiences remains to be seen.

3. Opinions

Personally, I had the chance to experience the movie during its premiere at the old People's Palace, where the Romanian Communist Party Congresses took hold in the past, which is just in the vicinity of the building with the infamous balcony where Ceausescu was last seen in power before fleeing with the use of a helicopter. This, I believe, was a very inspired choice on the part of the organizing team. Soldiers in old uniforms were welcoming the audience silently as if to recreate the prisoners escort feel portrayed during the movie.

In aspects pertaining to the political and macro context, the movie benefited from a hybrid sponsorship between centers and authorities from both Romania and Hungary, from the National Cinematography Center and Film Institute of Hungary to the Ministry of Defense and Ministry of Culture from Romania, and numerous commercial sponsorship from high retail brands. This may have contributed to the rather politically neutral and uncontroversial, if not dutiful, perspective on the events. It delivered no more, no less than what is already known by most of the Romanian people about the Revolution (even though it tackled a story that is not widely shared), and does not try to shake the existing status-quo on the matter or provide answers to a topic littered in questions even today. On one hand, the movie may have assimilated the general reaction of the institutions that it has collaborated with in delivering a movie not meant to break the norms, on the other hand, its vision may have been a minimalist one from the start as if to say 'all we want to do is remind you that this happened, and not open a Pandora's box about the topic, and through this portrayal let you know that new events about something that happened 30+ years ago may still be uncovered, and that history is always worth researching'... then again perhaps not.

4. Conclusions

The movie remains an exceptional one and sets a new bar in terms of production value for the immersive experience it creates and its indirect educational effect as a result of that. Inevitably, when tackling such intense and emotionally packed topics, it will undoubtedly spark a political analysis and rekindling of the many questions on an entire nations mind - left yet unanswered. In that regard the movie had a modest if not tactfully avoidant stance, and has perhaps accidentally raised too high expectations (due to its marketing narrative and reported research into the events) for what its intended purpose was: to shed a simple and unambiguous light on one more small, yet important, story that unfolded during the events of '89, and not to provide closure to several generations. It succeded in reminding us that even in the absence of answers, or satisfying new insights, the people and the public should never stop asking the questions.

"Freedom" or "Libertate" (2023), directed by Tudor Giurgiu and co-written by Cecilia Stefanescu, Tudor Giurgiu, and Nap Toader, stands out as a remarkable addition to the limited corpus of Romanian cinema that explores the events of December 1989 in Romania. At the age of 29, I experienced these historical moments firsthand while residing in neighboring Yugoslavia, where the "revolution" was broadcast continuously for 24 hours. Consequently, this film was essential for me to view.

The film successfully balanced various elements, including violence, humor, community, and political themes. The events of the 1989 revolution still remain shrouded in mystery, yet Tudor Giurgiu excelled in presenting most of the facts in a tangible manner. The casting was exemplary, and each line delivered was fluid, credible, and appropriate for the historical context. This film effectively transports the audience along the continuum of time and space, but more significantly, it delves into the psyches of the protagonists, raising profound questions about the significance of moral ethics and the ability to maintain one's integrity in a dystopian world rife with corruption.

It is my sincere hope that this film receives the acclaim it rightfully merits, as it stands as a true masterpiece.

I encourage people to watch this movie...however much watching it infuriated me. It is a compelling and, as previous posters (apparently mostly Romanian) have written, it is indeed an "immersive experience," and deserves to be viewed and applauded from an artistic standpoint. But it is unfortunately a deeply regrettable travesty from the point of someone who has spent decades investigating the events of the Romanian Revolution of December 1989. My first, of several, hopefully, episodic, entries, is to demonstrate that despite what Tudor Giurgiu, the director, has said in his many interviews, and what one reviewer, Eugen Istodor, has said... "Vocea securistilor nu s-a auzit 30 si ceva de ani si filmul le da cuvantul." (Hotnews.ro 7 October 2023)..."The voice of the Securitate (communist era secret police) has not been heard for 30 plus years and this film gives them the floor."...there is nothing new in this story...in fact, it has been expressed repeatedly and has long since achieved a hegemony in the Romanian media and everyday life. (Tudor Giurgiu has spoken in public at these showings, I was there for one, about the "fake narratives (about the Army) that have dominated for 30 plus years...and about the supposedly dominant narrative of "the Glorious Army"...but let us test his claims here)...below, for English speakers, two famous public discussions of the Sibiu December 1989 events...from 1990 and 1997, therefore for 33 years and 26 years respectively...to be continued...

POET, ESSAYIST, AND NPR COMMENTATOR ANDREI CODRESCU in Sibiu in July 1990, seven months after the Romanian Revolution of December 1989

As my friends spoke, a strange feeling engulfed me. Most of what they said sounded true, but there seemed to be something missing, one element of the plot that no one cared to mention. Here, in the middle of this sumptuous feast, I experienced the eeriness of another (hardly new) revelation: They were all blaming the army for the shootings; none of them blamed the Securitate. And yet the official government line was that the Securitate-not the army-massacred all those people who were undeniably massacred in Bucharest, Sibiu, and elsewhere. Could my friends also have been ... ? I felt like drawing two fingers across my shoulder (a sign he had earlier related was used to communicate that someone had Securitate ties), but I had no one to do it for. In any case, the point they were making, and which was being corroborated everywhere these days, is that many shots had been fired, but few in defense of Ceausescu, He had been betrayed by everyone. Even his son, who'd been in charge at Sibiu, hadn't ordered anybody to fire at demonstrators. Ironically, the People's Army started shooting at the crowds at the same time that the army was officially coming over to "the side of the people." However, the shooting was intended to create more panic than corpses. Romania's TV revolution had only one side ...Everyone had been on it.

--"Big Chills: My High School Reunion in Romania," HARPER'S MAGAZINE, NOVEMBER 1990

and

Back in 1997, the American novelist and Pulitzer Prize Winner William McPherson wrote of what Valentin Ceausescu, communist dictator Nicolae Ceausescu's eldest son, told him about the events of the Romanian Revolution of December 1989. Here are some excerpts:

Valentin and I were having coffee in the Vox Maris, the same grand casino where the funeral feast was held. It was morning, two days after the funeral (of Nicu Ceausescu), and the crowds had not yet arrived.

--"Nicu was never groomed to be the successor. That was (only) the rumor." He paused for a moment. "But rumors even become the reality."

--"Yes. Especially in Romania."

--"Maybe others in the party thought it would be a good idea. He could command a lot of sympathy. He always wanted to look tough and act strong, but he wasn't. He was more like a child than anything else."

--"What about the 90 people killed in Sibiu?"

--"He did not order the shooting. I know when he's trying to lie, and he wasn't lying. I knew immediately. That's why I defended him so strongly."

--He paused and lit another Pall Mall. "Have you noticed? All the heroes in Sibiu now are the militia and the Securitate - all the dead people, and now they are the heroes of the revolution."

--"So the villains are now the heroes?"

--"Yes."

--And the heroes are now the villains.

The official toll of the dead, revised frequently with a final version released three years after the events, is 1,104; only 160 were killed before the dictator fled.

Curious - if the figures are accurate - that the majority of them were killed in Sibiu. "A lot of effort," Valentin once said, "to kill these two old people."

William McPherson, "A Balkan Comedy," The Wilson Quarterly, Volume 21, Issue 3 (Summer 1997)

Thank you, dear readers and watchers. --Domnul R.

I have just had the privilege of seeing this tonight, at a pre-screening before the actual launch and I can say I was very happy and relieved to see these stories told so well and yet also not be a documentary, in spite of the mountains of research and effort that went into recreating some of the aspects depicted. Probably the best and most mature non-meta Romanian film.

Please go out and support it by seeing it in cinemas, starting October 6th - it's well worth it and it deserves to be seen if you're even remotely interested in Romanian films, history inspired stories - or, indeed, great movies in general!