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 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.