California Dreamin'

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.

I'll begin with a piece of trivia: it's very funny to see that all among the comments about this movie, the worst are originating from Serbia. Why? Because the subject is approaching in an objective way (not a demonizing one) Romania's cooperation with the N.A.T.O. forces, during the Kosovo crisis at the end of the last century. (Besides this, it's significant to see that Mladen Ilic is inventing faults, in his drive to dis-consider the movie - or, perhaps, the poor man is just a profane spectator who has no grasp of the profession; if this be the case, he is excused).

Another piece of trivia is that, after the press screening of the movie, the writer was almost coming to blows with me, because my public comments during the conference had included a certain criticism. (Fortunately, now we are okay again.) To get to the point, I should say that my official review of the movie is pretty detailed, and any Romanian-reading user can read it on Cinemagia or Liternet (unfortunately, I can't post the links here, since the IMDb rules forbid it; but you know what I'm speaking about). The important thing is that "California Dreamin' (Unfinished)" is indeed one of these golden movies of Romanian's present day's generation. It expresses an unmistakable Romanian note, in style, content and feeling, and also a definitory trait of its sadly departed author, the talented an exceptionally rigorous Cristian Nemescu (here comes the THIRD piece of trivia: we fought like mad on the Cinemagia Forum - but, thank God, we made up one year before his tragic demise).

A very important piece of info: Cristi Nemescu had the habit to shoot much more than it was meant to get into the movie, and then to ruthlessly re-organize and cut short his footage, while editing. It was his own way to reach the maximum level of his expression. Still, because of his death, the producer and crew decided to keep as much as possible of his shot footage - out of respect for his work. This is why the movie remained so long and somewhat dissipated in the last quarter.

The good news is that even those scenes are well done, precise and compelling, so the fault belongs only to the structural principles, not also to the pictures as such. Although loosely articulated, boring it doesn't become, that final section! Putting together all the good and bad points, "California Dreamin' (Unfinished)" remains one of the best Romanian movies of all times - and, more than that: as an East European movie in the widest sense. Highly recommended viewing - if you have an atom of cinematographic taste, you won't regret it one bit!

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.

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".

This movie is definitely in my Top-5 of 2007, along with "The life of Others".

It's just amazing to see how creative artists from Romania and the Balkans can be. The humor and general spirit of this movie reminds me a lot of Emir Kusturica's talent.

Too sad the director died a year ago in a car crash, 28 year old only.

Obviously, the best flicks don't come from Hollywood lately. Wanna know why ? It's because foreign movies are not ruled by profit-only oriented producers.

It's about "Art" first. Remember ?... Cinema is an art form, not just your regular supermarket product! That's why capitalism is (most often) incompatible with good movies.

With this movie, you'll get another proof confirming this theory.