Urgent narrative.

4 MONTHS, 3 WEEKS AND 2 DAYS (4 LUNI, 3 SAPTAMINI SI 2 ZILE)

BY CRISTIAN MUNGIU

113 MINUTES, 2007

International film festivals in 2007 saw some surprising successes, most notably the Romanian film 4 Months, 3 Weeks and 2 Days (4 Luni, 3 Saptamini si 2 Zile, 2007) by Cristian Mungiu. The film, set in the Ceausescu period and detailing the events surrounding an illegal abortion, certainly benefits from the momentum and confidence created by the recent Romanian wave of reflective films that exhibit some of the most exhilarating and challenging contemporary cinema anywhere in the world. The most noteworthy have been Cristi Puiu's Un Certain Regard winner The Death of Mr. Lazarescu (2005) and Corneliu Porumboiu's Camera d'Or winner 12:08 East of Bucharest (2006). Though the premise of the film may not initially seem captivating, 4 Months, 3 Weeks and 2 Days won the Palme d'Or in Cannes and it is worthwhile examining its success.

In 4 Months, 3 Weeks and 2 Days, set in 1987, two students, Otilia and Gabita share a room in a university dormitory in a nameless Romanian town. Otilia books a cheap hotel room for three nights to meet a mysterious man called Mr. Bebe. Gabita is pregnant and abortion being illegal, a clandestine set of events takes place over the course of several days. The film does not properly explain why Gabita has reached such a late stage of pregnancy before pursuing an abortion, but aside from the likely financial reasons, this withholding of information in a poignant situation creates the tension and urgency that make a compelling story. Facing big risks with few resources, Otilia is forced to negotiate the state-imposed criminality of the abortion.

Using her savings and money from her boyfriend, Otilia raises the money to pay for the weekend in the hotel and the abortion. Despite Gabita's precarious situation, it is the limits imposed on Otilia's movements that align the viewer with her throughout the film. This ordinary young woman caught up in an intense situation invites notions of how we would behave in such circumstances. Otilia has to balance her complicity with and resentment toward Mr. Bebe, who is crucial in performing the abortion. Though Bebe is portrayed as the antagonist of the film, his survival as a family man in an oppressive state explains a callous instinct that Gabita and Otilia may understand later, making it difficult to pass moral judgment.

The interior scenes at the hotel, with the static camera and the silent desperation of the characters, particularly Otilia, create a feeling that something dramatic is impending. The camera opens the space but then somehow conceals it, making the framing oscillatory, gravitational, and claustrophobic--a positioning that is fundamental to the film's structure. The characters' maneuvers into screen space are seemingly magnetic so when they move off screen they are soon pulled back into the frame again. As a result the controversial scenes in the film, particularly toward the end, are not considered so grotesque in their explicitness, because the film refutes any moral doctrine that may have been precipitated from the outset.

Mungiu only shoots on location, which created certain challenges in replicating the time period. Mungiu stated in a press release, "In the late eighties there was no light on the streets ... and a very bleak and gray atmosphere overall. This explains the grading of the film." Cultural references to this Romanian era also help to set the period, particularly the presence of Kent cigarettes and Tic Tacs, which were in high demand at the time.

[ILLUSTRATION OMITTED]

[ILLUSTRATION OMITTED]

4 Months, 3 Weeks and 2 Days is an ambivalent film because it is difficult, yet highly compelling. Perhaps due to the urgency of the story, Mungiu does not stop to think about questioning the morality of the characters. The film is so self-contained that it does not even seem to need an audience, but that makes its world all the more complete and fascinating. It is an authentic snapshot of a period and a depressingly real scenario with which the audience cannot help being engaged, albeit from a safe distance.

STEVEN YATES writes widely on film and is an English language supervisor for the FIPRESCI Web site. He recently sat on their critics' jury at the Motovun and Pecs film festivals.