MovieChat Forums > Cum mi-am petrecut sfârsitul lumii (2006) Discussion > That's what I'm talking about!

That's what I'm talking about!

posted 18 years ago by veo
8 replies | jump to latest

Young Romanian directors, like Mitulescu, know how to make a movie. Too bad their short movies seem to me mere scenes, well directed and played, OK, but just some scenes. I had written about one of those shorts something like "you should do real movies"... Well, that's precisely what Mitulescu did :) That is cinema. It's hard to make a film about Romania, Ceausescu's era, the misery, the Revolution etc, without the toxic stereotypes that poison Romanian movies. Well, this one avoided all stereotypes and sins and delivered a very balanced view of that time. Good movie! And although young Doroteea Petre stole the show, the film remembers us veteran Jean Constantin is a very good actor when playing seriously in a good movie.

PS - No way they could eat already-sliced bread and square slices of cheese in a village in 1989... but well...

No, lieutenant, your men are already dead.

[–] oana0109 18 years ago

that was in bucharest...they did'nt eat those things, but that was bucharest...not some village...

[–] veo 18 years ago

I may be wrong, OK, though they DID live "somewhere east of Bucharest", also close to the Danube.
But even in Bucharest you couldn't eat that kind of bread and cheese in 1989... come on!

No, lieutenant, your men are already dead.

[–] danutzaoti 18 years ago

The problem is not the slices of bread and the cheese, which I noticed myself. The big problem and fault of the movie is the ever present character that should always be hidded: the microphone!! It spoiled the whole movie. Too bad such things still happed in the 21st Century! I was disappointed and unfortunately no one could focus 100% on the movie. The microphone above their heads kept reminding us it was just a movie... :( Too bad!

[–] dragzor 18 years ago

i subscribe to that. but couldn't it be more to it that meets the eye, literally? i mean come on, it's not to be considered a low budget film where they couldn't get some extra funds for a wider ranging microphone that could not be seen in the shot. so...my question is: is there any chance that the microphone was intentionately let in the shot? like some sort of a director statement? i doubt it but i'm looking forward to other opinions.

[–] mdp1986 18 years ago

In don't think it was a statement, but it didn't bother me. I noticed it, but I think you really exagerate when you find such a small detail spoiling the whole movie.
The film took place in Bucharest I think, but the Bucharest-suburbs really look like villages, with un-asphalted roads and wooden houses and things like that. But they're taking the tram to go to the center at the end of the film, so they have to live in the city itself.

[–] domusaurea 18 years ago

Microphones may appear on the screening of any movie - I for one saw it it a lot on "The Sixth Sense". Actually, what happens is that the screening you went to was not correct - they should center the frame and leave out a tiny part at the top. I don't know exactly how it works, but a friend of mine who's a filmmaker explained this to me once.

I saw this movie yesterday, quite nice! So that was the suburbs of Bucharest, then? I also thought it was a village. Which border was the one they used to run away?

[–] radurazvanstanciu 17 years ago

I rented the official DVD and didn't see any microphone. The border is obviously the Yugoslav one, because you couldn't escape from a Warsaw Pact country by going to a fellow member country ( in this case Bulgaria ).

[–] robvonnegut 14 years ago

Which is why they take the train, the Yugoslav (now Serbia) border is far from Bucharest.

By the way: you could not buy sliced bread then, but you could buy bread and slice it before serving, no big deal.