A KVIFF viewing of Romanian auteur Cristian Mugiu's latest gripping modern exorcism tale which has garnered two wins in Cannes this year, a BEST SCREENPLAY award and the young pair Cosmina Stratan and Cristina Flutur shared Best Actress honor, which staunchly vindicates Cristian's consistent excellence not only in his fine-tempo and well-pitched directing bent, but a robust script and ultra-overpowering cast as a whole superlative pack.

Like his breakthrough chef-d'oeuvre 4 MONTHS, 3 WEEKS AND 2 DAYS (2009, a 9/10),the film anew grapples with the contentious subject-matters (this time it is about religious belief) and assigns two young girls in the main roles. The film acquaints its viewers with a secluded locale, an austere monastery (with no electricity and utilizing well water for example) is in stark contrast to the contemporary modernity, then slowly unwinds a tug-of-war in the name of love between God and human, a hapless destiny falls upon 2 girls from the same orphanage, one has become a pious nun so far, yet another is an obstinate non-believer, who chooses God as her love competitor and defies any compromise.

There is an unremitting impulse of captivation throughout the entire film which successfully banishes the awareness of its 150-minutes length. One of Mungiu's trump card is his virtuoso camera deployment, which has again fixated on a well-organized angle, especially in the indoor scenes, all the inconsequential items have been placed into incessant expositions of still paintings.

A strong-arm tension has been outstandingly established among three main characters (the said two girls plus the priest),although a few well-worn plot twists-and-turns may not survive the hindsight, however the eventual repercussion is nothing if not astonishing.

Much accolades should be granted to the film about its no shade of grey amplification of managing the thorny issue, the clear-minded of eschewing any grandiosity with a telling coda, which can never be less appreciated among cinephiles.

Okay don't believe any reviews that praise this movie because it's simply not true. Or I must be stupid to not see the greatness of this movie. That's also possible but I doubt it. The movie is extremely slow, with a very boring story that is painful to watch. I had to fight to stay awake and at one point I called it quits and just gave up. I normally do watch every movie till the end, even when they are very bad, but here I didn't see how this movie could improve towards the end so I just gave up. I'm a convinced atheist and maybe that plays a part in not liking this movie because it's all about praying their good Lord and so on. That people are so stupid to follow those ridiculous laws is their right but I'm certainly not going to waste my precious time on earth watching their boring life.

Like with many good films as there are many possible readings of the film and I'm sure its perception and understanding is and will be different depending on the personal experience of the audience, their relationship to the concepts of faith and friendship that are addressed in the film, their knowing of the realities of Romania today. First of all I think this movie should be seen as a work of art, a reflection and an opinion on a piece of reality, there is no judgment or assertion in the film with one exception that I will mention later, no pretend to express an absolute truth about the whole of the reality and even about the small universe of his characters. The viewer is left right to decide or judge, to sympathize or be indignant. Everybody at his own risk.

In a way the subject of 'Beyond the hills' takes one of the central themes of '4 Months, 3 Weeks and 2 Days', the friendship between two female characters, two young women barely out of the teens, who must face a world of hazards. Unlike the movie that received the most important prize at Cannes a few years ago, here the heroines are girls much simpler as education, marked by fate from birth, being abandoned in an orphanage, where they become friends, and there are enough clues in the film that shows their relationship becomes more than just a friendship. Fate separates them for a while and when the film begins Alina (Cristina Fluture) returns from Germany to take her girlfriend Voichita (Cosmina Stratan) with her to work abroad.

The relationship between Alina and Voichita develops slowly before our eyes. Alina finds Voichita at peace with the world after in a small monastic community between hills, among sister nuns and under the guidance of the priest (Valeriu Andrii) whom affectionately she calls 'Daddy'. The ascetic life of nuns, the caring relationships with the village or small town nearby are described simply and honestly, they seem positive and beneficial in a world that changes to the unknown and not necessarily for the better. It is true that the primary focus is to materiality, to solutions that offer peace and refuge in ritual rather than a deep spirituality, but no other institutions presented in the film (hospitals, police) seem to be able to provide clearer answers or solutions problems faced by people. Despite negative criticism received by the film in Romania, I believe that the approach taken by the script towards the church is at least neutral, if not positive at least up to a point.

The friendship or more than friendship, love between two girls will slowly be evolving toward tragedy. Whilst for Alina the love for Voichita is an obsession, Voichita is trying to attract her friend towards the life she had chosen. Mungiu does not give any explanation in terms of the reasons or motivation of Voichita's faith and and also not about Alina's violent outbursts, often they are not shown explicitly, we know they happen through the eyes of other characters. Is this a case of possession, and then resort to exorcism might be motivated, at least in terms of a certain category of religious beliefs? Or maybe it's a mental illness in the family, perhaps hereditary, as suggested by the character of the brother (Ionut Ghinea)? I was taught to believe that diseases can be cured in hospitals or specialized medical institutions, the science sooner or later finds a remedy. None of this happens in the film, profane systems seem to be powerless when faced with Alina's case and appeal to the sacred, even in an extreme form seems justified in the logic of the story. Watershed and breaking is the decision that cancels free will. It is the only time when we feel that Mungiu has an attitude. Everyone is well intentioned when the decision is taken to proceed with exorcism, but the lack of authority to make a decision regarding the fate of a man pushes things a fatal slope. Here comes the extreme, even violent part of the movie, but again it is narrated in a detached manner, with attention to details, especially emotionally significant details. For a moment I felt however that Mungiu's neutrality mask seemed to have fallen.

I will not dare describe the many moments of beauty and truth in the film. Mungiu creates together with the operator a life image of the small monasteries that remain imprinted in memory, with the white of the snow righteous unable to purify or even cover horror. The truth will come to light sooner or later in terms of the secular society. Not in terms of spiritual, sacred world, the second half of reality to which the film tries to open a gate. We'll also see in the film many meals, Mungiu's film likes to put people around food, and it presents those by the filter of Christian iconography and lifestyle with amplified significance, but they are devoid of the spiritual dimension, this dimension that is missing in the film despite the presence of institutionalized church. As always for Mungiu and other representatives of his generation, the details are as important as the whole, the secondary characters are as rigorously chosen and each portrait is as living and complex as the lead ones. Acting is impeccable. The Romanian cinema is still on the top of the wave.