Sieranevada

The long demanding exhausting movie is permeated with Eastern European scent. The legacy of the poor relatives and backyards of Europe is recognisable in every excruciating detail for those who had grown up there. Smallish crowded kitchens with dilapidated cabinets. Worn out light switches which were the same in Bucharest or Kyiv. Long tables if unfolded occupy the whole living room and you squeeze yourself out to get to your seat. Low-waged doctors who downshift to medical equipment salesmen. And the family saga which unfolds painfully slow and mesmerisingly absorbing. Once you are on the other side of the film equator you cannot but start guessing what the hell is going on in this family. Cutting of the movie is so unorthodox that you start wondering if there had been any cutting at all.

It is a film too long and too boring. Too many characters in a space too small. All moves back and forth in a permanent and annoying tangle. Even the film's title is without sense and misspelled. The idea is to depict the miserable appearance of the Romanian people so it is very realistic. Another finding about the level of decay that we reached now in Romania. I appreciate his many actors even those appearing in supporting roles. It thought the sound was not well done; dialogues in Romanian language are not perfectly understandable, but of course it may depend on the cinema. We also appreciated the collaboration between filmmakers from so many countries.

With a delay of three years I managed to see Cristi Puiu's 'Sieranevada', a film that I had read and heard much about. Three years are certainly not enough for a 'historical' perspective but they are enough to better place the film in the context of what happened in the Romanian cinema before and after it and to understand the rather heated disputes it has created among critics and viewers. The film is indeed complex but also complicated, interesting but also long, providing many reasons to like it but also a few that can leave viewers from different categories of audience confused or dissatisfied.

The opening scene looks like a quote from the other new wave, the French one. A camera set up at a fixed point shoots for a few minutes a Bucharest intersection, with the chaos, agglomeration and noise that we know. The characters of the film, which we do not distinguish, are still silhouettes among the many that make up this hubbub. We'll follow two of them in a car that drives them for several minutes to the apartment where most of the action of the film is taking place. There they join the family reunited for the commemoration meal (following a regional traditional custom!) of the head of the family, who had died 40 days ago. For two hours, almost in real time, we will witness the ceremony, discussions, conflicts of a family large enough to include some of the characters known to those living in Romania today - the physician who abandoned his job for a more profitable trade , a young supporter of conspiracy theories, the older generation of those economically affected by the transition who try to adapt with little success to the new realities, a nostalgic for the communist regime, the young woman with dubious connections and habits including suspected drug use, the priest who is late due to a busy schedule because the religious business is going full on, couples in crisis or marriages already broken up. A beautifully constructed mosaic, a diverse and tormented world. And yet, they will also meet at future occasions or holidays, because family and friendship ties, together with adherence to a religious tradition that is not forgotten or abandoned, are the only links that somehow hold together the Romanian social fabric. These and maybe also the humor.

It is worth watching how Cristi Puiu and his cinematographer Barbu Balasoiu work with the camera. Sometimes the frame is fixed, most often mobile, it follows the point of view of one character or another, giving the feeling of a claustrophobic maze in the 3 or 4 room apartment where the action takes place. It is a sensation programmatically induced to the spectators, when we are outside the apartment we are dealing with the same chaos, with the same maze of human relations in crisis, only that the spaces are more open, but the atmosphere is frozen. The semi-darkness predominates and makes the film not easy to watch, also the sound capture is not optimal, but I think that the reason does not lie in technical issues but in the decisions of the director. Acting is superb, mentioning any name will do an injustice to all the other. The film captivated me and I did not feel or resempt the length at any time. But I can understand those who did not like the duration, or had difficulties in tracking the image or voices, because Cristi Puiu did not aim the aesthetics but wanted to convey ideas and sensations. Foreign viewers will have difficulties understanding many nuances, and those in Romania who are tired or exasperated by the mirrors that some of the contemporary directors put in front of them also have reasons to be upset. As much as I liked the movie, I believe that the minimalist formula has exhausted its resources and has certainly lost the elements of surprise and novelty. That's why I'm not surprised that the movie was ignored in the Cannes palmares. In 2005, Cristi Puiu made one of the first remarkable films of the new wave of Romanian cinema - 'The Death of Mr. Lazarescu'. 'Sieranevada' made in 2016 may be one of the last outstanding films of this wave.

This is definitely a carefully crafted movie by a gifted director.

The result is disappointing though: way too long.

I enjoyed the fact that it captures real conflicts and emotions.

Could have done that in half the time though.

Good film for movies snobs.

There are two things you need to be willing to embrace before you watch this film. First, the film is not going to make the connections between the characters easy for you. If you are a lazy viewer who is not paying close attention to the dialogue or you do not grasp the connections between the various dramas that are played out, you might be frustrated with what superficially appears to be a lack of direction and feel the film is "pointless". Second, the film is EXTREMELY Eastern European in character. If you want a Hollywood ending you will not find it here.

However, I simply love films like this that propel you into a difficult family situation and spend most of the film time there, allowing you to try to figure out for yourself what's going on. "The Godfather" is one example; I was also a huge fan of Roman Polanski's "Carnage". For people who like that kind of thing this film is a huge treat. It is only at the very end, after the slightly odd car monologue by the main character, that you really feel satisfied with what the film has accomplished and that you have come to understand a subtle coherence within the mess of individual failed narratives. Every character in this film is a self-actualized, 21st century individual who has come up with their own personal story about how the world works. The film's plot makes that obvious, but the remaining questions are up to you: where are the lies? Where is the truth? What happens to the main character at the end? This is a rather beautiful puzzle to behold.