California Dreamin'

All of us, when tired, look for an easy and full of fun or action movie in a Hollywood style. However, once in a while, sooner rather than later, is not bad watching a movie that makes us use a little our brain in conjunction with our emotions. California Dreamin' is such a movie. First of all, you must take into account that this movie was not post-processed almost at all due to the tragically death of its director. It is useless to think how it would have been looked if it was finished by Nemescu. We have to look at it as it is. Even like this, movie was brilliantly directed making me remember of Antonioni's Blow-Out. Lots of people would not like it because it shows too much poverty or does not show all aspects of Balkan's life or just because is not a Hollywood movie. Let's be straight, no movie gives you a panorama about a region's life, for this you should watch News or read magazines. Movies give you a vision built by a group of people starting with the screenwriter and ending with its director. You may agree with it or not but this is not important. Important is if after a while it makes you think and if it does the movie was not useless. Others didn't like the movie being ambiguous but they forget that this is an art movie which is not giving you solutions, but based on presented facts you have to find the answers by yourself and no wonder if each person will find different conclusions because after all we are different from each other. Or this is the greatest merit of this movie: makes you think about a lot of things among which why life is so hard when can be easier. Obviously this movie was a hard option for Nemescu but eventually because of this option it is his postmortem triumph. In the end, this movie is not an image of Balkans but an image which can be applied to 80% of this world. The feelings and emotions included in it can be applied to 100% of this world. It is tragic Nemescu died after his first movie, but it is fortunate he left as legacy such a movie rather than a regular "big hit".

I never wrote any review so far, but after reading the other comments I felt compelled to do it. First of all, you must understand this was a work in progress, the movie remained unfinished. To all the users that made negative comments I say to try not to feel directly involved and to give the movie a objective note. Yes, there are some stereotypes involved and people from the Western countries must realize this is not who we are, neither we, as Romanians, nor other Balkan nations. There were a lot of movies that had similar plots, like "La vita e bella" by Roberto Benigni. This is a movie about war and it must be judged this way. Try to get past the black screens, like some user complained about, not giving the movie a fair interpretation. Things like that MIGHT happen in the future, maybe this movie should be watched by our politicians, as I consider it as a satire. What stroked me the most was the the evolution of Assante's character, beautifully portrayed. Above all, I recommend this movie for those who are fed up with Hollywood's blockbusters and the "they lived happily ever after" movies. The world needs from time to time a pure dose of reality.

In artistic terms the movie is great. The story is superb, the acting is excellent too. Nevertheless there is an issue that should be taken into account when a director decides to make a movie with an eastern European setting. Films like the ones directed by Emir Kusturica or Nae Caranfil and now by Nemescu reveal and insist on revealing only one side of the Balkans. This facet is often exaggerated for artistic purposes and while it identifies the Balkans in certain aspects, it can also be very hazardous on the longer term. The Romanian, Serbian or Bulgarian societies are certainly more complex than the instances and the characters depicted in "White cat, black cat", "Philantropica" or "California Dreamin'". This picturesque facet constantly addressed by film makers represents a reality of the region but should not be generalized. This is the hazard of making such movies. Westerners and Americans, not very accustomed to the history and the society of the Eastern Europe might reduce them to this narrow view: gypsies, easy and shallow girls, the general poverty and corruption and a scene populated by low-lifes and scums. Everyone seeing this film should enjoy it for what it is, but should also keep in mind that, although true at a certain level, Romania means more than that.

It's funny how similar are all the comments posted by the Romanian viewers. The first time I saw the movie I thought "God, is it possible to never forget such a sad existence? Such a bitter-sweet look upon our life? The so-called *balkanism*?..." Do we ever make a jump, like a time-lap, and have different views on what do we do every day?

Further more beyond the "national sport" (as someone once called it) of self-complaining lies the truth. A certain truth that hurts. We can all see the progress of the Romanian society; we think that the rest of the world doesn't. We point the finger on "the other side" or "the good side", so there shall be no mistakes... Well, I've been once in Capalnita, and I had a shock because after seeing this movie I realized it's all there! There's no need for sets, there's no need for trained actors... The grass still grows between the pieces of the sidewalk in the railroad station... Only today's mobile phones and the car models have changed.

Why should a film director make a "more expensive film" or a "non-low-budget" one? Do you really care about how much did it cost? Or, should really be the film an accurate projection of the real life? Was it ever so? No matter what good or wrong you you'll see in the recent Romanian society, there are certain people living in this country who can make genuine art. And finishing a work of art is utopia.

I couldn't avoid to observe Nemescu's care for details and real life like shots. Many excellent Romanian film directors tend to have a keen sense for the dynamism of the short takes by "wearing" the camera like a peer of glasses. No soundtrack is needed except the music within the scene. In the most cases the human eye concentrates on human subjects just like Nemescu's lens did in this masterpiece (from normal to long focal lens, say 85mm or even more than 200mm in some cases). One surrealist shot (with the "Romanian-made" Efel tower) caught my attention as an exception. No image stabilizer is needed when you make a non-commercial movie. On the contrary! Usually, in a very dynamic scene -like a fight- your eye captures only bits of shocking details, cause you're frightened. Complementary artificial lighting is quite moderate if not absent. Sure, this version of the displayed picture needed further cuts and refinements. And this is not because the picture is "too long". That's Hollywood's paradigm, cause art in general doesn't deal with units of measurement. Strangely as it seems for the "outsiders", for those who consider the play of the actors and the action are overreacted, this film can generate pure emotions, antipodes, anger, hope, deliverance, fervour, grace... And this is the main purpose of the 7-th art.

Yes, it's a great movie, even if it's unfortunately unfinished; like an unexploded bomb in the Romanian consciousness... But is there anything "finished" or it has ever been something really "finished" in our country, Romania? Maybe Cristian Nemescu new why it's "endless".

Can you make a better film by leaving it unfinished? George Lucas, famously, thought he could have done better with 'Star Wars', but the changes he made after 20 years were generally met with derision. In the case of Cristian Nemescu's film 'California Dreamin'', there's a sadder story: the director died in a car crash while the film was in edit. What he left behind was a story (about American soldiers marooned in a Romanian backwater) that is arguably overlong and unfinished (indeed, the film even has a subtitle to this effect), with some unlikely cuts and juxtapositions (that may or may not have been intended). It's certainly likely that, with more time, he'd have cleaned it up, made it a little slicker and to the point. Or maybe not. Because the wonder of this film is its lugubrious charm, the sense you have in watching it that you are every bit as stuck as the Americans. It's a mood piece, and yet also a piece of uncertain mood. As well as the sort of sly comedy that is consistently to the point without ever actually making you laugh: you watch it with a twitch of a smile perpetually on your face, yet it's downbeat style continuously pulls back from being actually funny. Star of the show is Armand Assante as the bamboozled American captain, out of his depth in a peace zone.

This film brought back memories for me, as I visited Romania twice in the early 1990 (although five or more years before this film is set). And I recognise every thing about this world: the bureaucracy, the corruption, the former communist officials still in place, the decrepitude of the public infrastructure, the general sense that no damn thing works; and of course, the pretty girls excited by the faintest hint of outside. When the captain calls it 'paradise' it's unclear if he's lost his marbles; but the film has certainly not lost its own sense of irony. And yet, I did wonder why a Romanian director should have wanted to make a film that shows such a picture of his country. But then I was reminded of another film about a local community (this time in Scotland) visited by an American, Bill Forsyth's 'Local Hero'; and there are aspects of both films that are similar, not least in the ambiguous relationship of the movie to the people it depicts (superficially, in both cases, our initial sympathies are with the outsiders). 'California Dreamin'' is a much darker movie; but for all its oddness, I loved it. And it reminded me of another time in my life surprisingly warmly.