When Adrian Sitaru’s Hooked played last year at the 2008 edition the Toronto International Film Festival, it came at a time of doubt. The New Wave had passed, and the flood of critical praise had trickled down. All of the big names in Romanian cinema had either gone on an extended break (Porumboiu),or were in the process of working on a new film (Mitulescu, Mungiu, Puiu). As destiny had it, Cristian Nemescu would unfortunately no longer be able to continue his success.
To sum it up, 2008 was a year for Romania to prove to the critical and public eye that its previous success foreshadowed a lot more than a handful of films. This is where Adrian Sitaru’s film comes in: the only Romanian production to screen at TIFF’08, it had already opened at the prestigious Venice Film Festival. When it played to three sold-out screenings, it not only invigorated the hope for that New Romanian Cinema, it showed that within the vague and undeveloped pigeonholing of its ‘miserabilist’ genre, Romanian film had evolved.
The big irony is that Sitaru’s film, was in fact a blast from the past, having actually been filmed in 2005 in just 10 days, on a shoe-string budget, with established actors, and a skeleton crew. Three years later and with the help of French producers “Movie Partners in Motion Film”, it resurfaced, winning awards in Thessaloniki and Palm Springs. And so, ToRo sat down for a brief chat with actress Maria Dinulescu during TIFF in September 2008, to discuss her role in the film, and the production’s winding path to the festival circuit. We bring you this interview as a small preview to our festival’s closing-night (February 15) screening of Adrian Sitaru’s brilliant film Hooked. ToRo is honoured to have Maria Dinulescu as a special guest at the festival in February.
ToRo: To start off, I want to ask how the festival has been for you, and how the film was received.
Maria Dinulescu: Let me begin by telling you how my life is currently since California [Dreamin'], which evidently had an impact on two levels: a very emotional one for me, and of course, the impact the film had internationally. In a way I have been waiting for this moment that I have with Hooked, because a lot has been written about California and I’ve been on the road for 7 months traveling for festivals – I’m returning to the film in Slovakia. For me this movie wasn’t about the success it would receive, or how well it would be appreciated by the public. I had a very constant and solid relationship with Cristi [Nemescu] which was simultaneously very arduous, because it affected my character a lot. It’s not easy to return to ‘normality’: you revisit the film constantly, and everybody asks you about it; very often it’s the same questions over and over. I could hardly wait for a new project to take me to a new stage in my life. These sensitive issues will forever be there, especially because he was such a good friend. It’s a situation which I don’t want to accept; you have no way of understanding it. So in a sense, Hooked became a bandage for me.
ToRo: Hooked was filmed before California Dreamin’, in 2005 right?
Maria Dinulescu: Yes it was. We premiered it at the Venice festival. After Cannes, where you get a ten-minute standing ovation, you receive the grand prize, everybody is interested in you – that’s what happens when you reach that level of fame: you get all sorts of smiles, some honest, some fake…
ToRo: …I read that you received something like five offers at Cannes after the ceremony.
Maria Dinulescu: You’re sought after by everyone. When you’re up there, everyone’s after you. “Wow, gorgeous, amazing, ’super.’” In Venice we didn’t go to the festival proper, but the parallel section Venice Days – like the Quinzaine in Cannes. Having been to enough festivals, I realized that I will not be put up in a 5-star hotel and picked up in a limo. I went, but I didn’t think of one detail: that the 10-minute standing ovation won’t be there. First of all, since the translation wasn’t too well done, the audience didn’t take in the film perfectly…the reactions I was expecting, and would otherwise be normal to get, weren’t there. So at the end, when I heard about a half-a-minute applause, I felt anxious. Afterwards there were enough questions from the audience to make it obvious that they found the film really interesting. Following that reviews came in from Variety and Hollywood Reporter; some good, other not so good. But at least they were good reviews concerning my role – which makes you feel okay, ’safe. My performance was described by Hollywood Reporter and Variety as being “bewitching and bubbly (in a difficult role)” and also was appreciated with the best actress award in Thessaloniki Film Festival in 2008.
ToRo: It’s also a much smaller film, in its narrative range, cast of characters, budget…
Maria Dinulescu: In either case, it’s a different film, for a different kind of audience – one that doesn’t opt for films that make them comfortable or puts them at ease. And since most cinemas offer up these kinds of movies…not even Bucharest has a theatre that shows art films…
ToRo: But there’s still the Cinematheque, and also the Czech Center.
Maria Dinulescu: Yes, the Cinematheque is still there, as for the Czech Center, they show a documentary each Monday. Admission is free, and they even give you a Czech beer to consume. Also, discussions follow each screening. It really is a pleasant event.
ToRo: Hooked hasn’t been released in Romania yet.
Maria Dinulescu: No, it hasn’t. I’m absolutely convinced that when it does it will be very well-received. When it will have its Romanian premiere I’ll breathe a sigh of relief.
ToRo: How strange was it to return to a movie which you’ve already completed a couple of years back?
Maria Dinulescu: I’m not sure…I’ll find out tomorrow. Just yesterday as I was coming out of a screening, I was wondering how it’s going to be talking about California again. I don’t think I’d want to see it again – I’ve watched it more than 15 times. In either case, I don’t want to go to festivals anymore. It was important at the start because you get to meet a lot of people and of different cultures. Plus I also learned more about the film industry and this [festival] aspect of it.
ToRo: And? Did you like what you saw/learned?
Maria Dinulescu: There are two big aspects of it. One is that everybody’s frantic – that’s the perfect word to describe it. Everyone’s anxious. They all want to make films as quickly and with as much money as possible, to sell it as much as they can, and if they can meet with 200 people a day…the more the better. At the same time, if you’re a person with your head on your shoulders, you’ll understand that in a film festival, you cannot possibly have more than three important meetings. And by important I don’t mean those that involve millions of euros for your film, but those meetings with people that think cinema, and know it well. Otherwise, like everywhere else, it’s a big business which has to turn a profit.
ToRo: It hasn’t become a bit demoralizing?
Maria Dinulescu: It’s an energy that needs to be created in order for the whole industry to work. And you must love what you do a lot, otherwise it’s too demanding, too ‘fake’ – you speak and you’re replied constantly “Oh, Great, Amazing, etc.” They tell you ‘yes, I’ll be there at your film’s screening,’ and evidently they don’t show up, but these are all things that must happen for the wheels to remain in motion. But the festival itself, which generally is a stand-in for a huge market, – because that’s where you’re trying to sell your film, or find people to fund it – has nothing to do with the artistic aspect of cinema, the story, or the people that are really behind its creation.
ToRo: Yeah, TIFF has been considered to be the biggest festival around (surpassing Cannes) precisely because it was an important market for the films that were screening.
Maria Dinulescu: Yes, it is an important market. As an actor, if you’re more interested in having an agent to ’sell you,’ it may be easier, faster, and more superficial…In other words if you’re more interested in a career from which to make a living, you can have one. But if you’re the type of actor who tells himself “if I make one or two films, and it’s enough for me to live comfortably for a year, without worry or stress” then you don’t belong there. Unless you’re there to see films which otherwise you wouldn’t have the opportunity to see.
ToRo: So compared with Venice how was TIFF?
Maria Dinulescu: Well first I have to mention that in Venice, I went with: Adrian Sitaru and his future wife, Adrian Silisteanu (DOP) with his wife and kid, Adrian Titieni with his wife and two children. Ioana Florea was 8-months pregnant with twins, so she couldn’t come.
ToRo: Very cool…so it was basically a big family of cast & crew representing a film made amongst friends.
Maria Dinulescu: Exactly. We all went out together…it was very ‘cozy.’
ToRo: Not to mention that you were in the city of Venice.
Maria Dinulescu: Well yeah, Venice is superb. There’s no way for you to not like it there. But as far as Toronto goes, I heard from the start that the audience is very good – they are very welcoming to foreign films. So because of this my expectations were even higher. I’m not saying the film wasn’t well received, but in my heart, I wished for a bit more. The critics from Variety and Hollywood Reporter, having reviewed it already in Venice, didn’t write anything about the film here. I didn’t see any reviews for the film at all. However, as soon as I arrived, I was told the box-office was closed for its screenings, because it was sold-out. Yet it’s still frustrating to not read anything about it in the paper – neither good nor bad.
ToRo: The only ‘review’ I read in the paper was part of a TIFF preview in the Toronto Star, where a critic from the US chose Hooked as one of his “festival 3-picks” because he was interested in Romanian cinema, and the film hinted at early Chabrol and Polanski.
Maria Dinulescu: Viola. On the other hand, for me, Toronto was a new country and culture, where I met a couple of interesting people. I saw some interesting movies, and that’s about it.
ToRo: What movies did you catch at the fest?
Maria Dinulescu: I saw the Heart Locker, Nuit du Chien…Hooked I saw twice…I met a film critic from Chicago who writes for Screen, a couple of producers from the UK and France. Otherwise I met a lot of ‘fake’ people, and if I lived in LA and made the film in Romania the people would’ve acted differently. But being Romanian the interest wasn’t that big. I’m heading to Korea very soon, and I’m really curious to see how the film will be received there.
ToRo: Have you been to Asia with any other film in the past?
Maria Dinulescu: Never, no. It’s my first time. And keeping in mind that Korean people have lots of patience, this film will fit them like a glove I hope. If you don’t have patience for this film, while they [Miha and Mihai] drive for the opening 15 minutes you’re going to walk out. So seeing as how Koreans are patient and can enjoy slow films, they might like the movie. At the same time, they don’t fully tolerate sexuality and violence, so they might have an adverse reaction to all the slaps Ioana Flora receives in the film.
ToRo: I was going to mention that the violence which exists and is excused as being part of the couple-dynamic of Adrian Titieni and Ioana Flora is fairly disturbing, especially since they’re the central characters which carry us through the film.
Maria Dinulescu: As an audience member, I find the film very well made from the point of view of the couple. They’re [Miha and Mihai] lovers, (she’s cheating on her husband with him) and we’re always shown [in movies] what relationship dynamics exist in a family, especially those between husband and wife. Well now we’re shown the relationship that Miha has with the person she’s cheating her husband with. So it should be a better situation. However when we see them in certain circumstances, we sit and ask ourselves “why are they still together?” Miha is shown as ‘unbearable,’ frigid and frustrated, while Mihai slaps her, and lets himself be seduced by Ana-Violeta. That’s why it’s a clear irony when Ana-Violeta asks him “how long have you two been together?” They seem to be together for 10 years or so, but in reality they’ve been going out for only a year-and-something. That’s why I really appreciate the nuances of these two characters, as well as the relationship they have. It’s incredible how they can still be together, more so what eventually happens to them. Bottom line is that they’re an abnormal couple, and I find that to be extremely valuable in the film. Not to mention the moments when you see how easy it is for Ana-Violeta to mock them: “Well you know that I’m a prostitute…it’s prostitution right? That’s what they call it. Why are we beating around the bus?”
ToRo: Speaking of nuances and your character in the movie. She seems very naïve, yet as the film progresses, she reveals herself to have more clout than any other character. I also found the way in which you depict her naiveté with a relentless ambiguity, vis-à-vis her intentions with the couple, very important.
Maria Dinulescu: She’s not naïve, not at all. In fact, she gets revenge. In the movie she has very different relationships with each of the characters. With men, her attitude is that “she does whatever she does because it pleases her.” Mihai is not the kind of man to which she’s attracted physically. He’s portly, he’s not macho, yet he has a nice personality and he has a clean conscience.
ToRo: A man of principles, like he says in the film.
Maria Dinulescu: Principles to a certain degree, yet he’s involved with a married woman. It’s true, however, that it’s his principles that keep pushing her to leave her husband and legitimate their relationship. In either case, Ana-Violeta sniffed them out. She realizes he’s a nice, quiet, home-grown man, so she likes him – they have a good rapport. With Miha on the other hand, she tries to get her revenge: the way she forcibly touches her, speaks to her, and how she flirts with Mihai…She’s the kind of woman who likes sex and has decided to make money from what pleasures her. In reality, she’s also the most sincere out of all of them – which is why I find the film very interesting to study and analyze. It’s a very well constructed film, starting with its script.
ToRo: You can see in Waves, as well as in Hooked, that Adrian Sitaru has a phenomenal ability to construct a character and direct him across the entire narrative faithfully.
Maria Dinulescu: That’s his distinguishing characteristic. I think this is his greatest quality, as I’ve learned from knowing him all this time – this is what he will succeed with. Right now he’s in Amsterdam, working on a project supported by Cinefondation. It’s a personal film dealing with the true story of his mother’s hospitalization – when she was in critical condition – and what happens to him during this period.
ToRo: Speaking of Sitaru and his qualities, how did you get involved in the project?
Maria Dinulescu: They had already started rehearsals for the movie when they called me in. They had a different actress for the role, (I won’t mention her name) a good colleague of mine, who in general plays these kinds of roles. I didn’t understand why they were calling me for the audition, since I knew she was perfect for the role and was already rehearsing for it. Well I got the call for audition guess what I did: I had a dress at home which I never wore, because each time I’d put it on, the strap would fall of to the side. So I put it on, added some purple – because you know it never hurts – frizzled my hair a bit, and went to the audition. Each time you go for casting, you have to lie to their faces. They will never look at you and say “oh, Maria, you have finished 4 years of university, you have 9 years experience, and you’re an intelligent person who can invent this character.” Ninety percent of the directors – with the exception of Nae Caranfil – they will choose you based on your looks. Which can be quite frustrating sometimes. So to get back to the story, while I was talking to them in the audition, my strap kept falling off. If you noticed, at a certain point in the film, I have my bra on, and my breast is coming out underneath it – it’s not well adjusted. I purposefully had it that way. Either way, at the casting, I would re-adjust it every 10 minutes, and eventually I got the part. I think they also liked the fact that I have a very ingénue expression, and seeing as how they wanted a naïve character, it helped a lot. After that we began the rehearsals, which lasted about a month.
ToRo: Did you know you wouldn’t be paid for the role?
Maria Dinulescu: Yes, from the start. I knew before the audition it would be a low-budget movie. However, I also knew that they had already cast Adrian Titieni and Ioana Flora. Adrian Titieni was my professor, who helped prepare me for university (UNATC). For me it was an honour to play alongside him. I also appreciate him as an actor, so it didn’t matter if they were going to pay me or not – I wanted to work with him. Ioana Flora, at that time, was a well-respected actress – prior to Hooked she played in “Stuff and Dough.” To sum it up I wanted to work in the film for two main reasons. The first, to play alongside Adrian Titieni, and secondly, to see how Ioana Flora works. Evidently I considered the script to be very well written as well.
ToRo: Did you know anything about Adrian Sitaru as a director? He had still to establish himself with Waves, correct?
Maria Dinulescu: I knew nothing of him. He was a director coming out of a private university, who wanted to make a movie on digital format, rather than work with film – not a very enticing prospect. However, I found the script and the story to be very interesting – it’s akin to Closer, a movie I like very much. I also liked the fact that Adrian didn’t know me at all, so he saw me in a different light, allowing me to fully get into character. I worked very hard on the film, not overlooking any detail pertaining to the story and character – what, how, why, etc. It’s true that the results speak for themselves, but it was a difficult film.
ToRo: How long did you work on it?
Maria Dinulescu: We had an entire month for rehearsals – literally repeating every position and placement of the camera, its movements, etc. Afterwards, we rehearsed in Adrian Titieni’s backyard, on the grass. It was difficult because at our school (UNATC) they teach directing differently than at private universities so it was tough at first for Adrian Sitaru and I to fully understand each other. Plus, Ioana Flora had finished school long before me, so it was tricky to get used to each other. We would wake up every day at five in the morning to start filming at six. Not to mention that we were filming in March, so imagine what it would be like at six in the morning in winter. I have a picture on IMDB in which I’m wearing a hat and coat – it was taken at the film shoot. In-between takes, I would stay with the hat on, and with that coat which I keep especially for film shoots. All in all, the shoot was very tough, so right now I’m breathing a sigh of relief and satisfaction that I can see the film finished.
ToRo: How long did you shoot for?
Maria Dinulescu: Ten days. The film itself was filmed three years ago. But there were pick-ups (the drowning scene for instance) which were filmed a year apart. The editing, sound mix and 35mm transfer were literally done this year. It had a very long path.
ToRo: So in a sense it was, in more ways than one, an “independent film.”
Maria Dinulescu: Absolutely. 100%. The sandwiches were prepared by Adrian Sitaru’s girlfriend – that was our catering.
ToRo: Have you played in other independent feature films?
Maria Dinulescu: I’ve played in a lot of independent short films, but as features go, this was the first.
ToRo: How was it playing to the camera and breaking the 4th wall for the entire duration of the film?
Maria Dinulescu: Having played in TV long enough, you learn right away to act to the camera. I actually have a sweet story about this. In my first year of university, Catalin Mitulescu [dir. The Way I Spent the End of the World] called me to film a videoclip for a band – whose name I forget – and their track called “Floare Alba Floare Neagra” (you can find it on YouTube). The videoclip had a gypsy theme and featured Costel Cascaval. For the shoot, the DP was a schoolmate of ours, Liviu Marghidan (he shot California Dreamin’, C Block Story, etc.), as well as a good friend to Mitulescu. In the clip, Costel Cascaval comes and kidnaps me – I play a gypsy – from my parents, and takes me away on a horse-drawn carriage. At a certain point we stop and go dipping in a lake. Now, during the shooting of this scene, Catalin wanted me to look straight in the camera. Instead of filming with my partner in the clip, Costel Cascaval, I filmed with the camera and that dop – I sort-of liked him, eventually becoming my first boyfriend. So then looking at the camera, I was also staring at the guy behind it – to have a natural flow to my gaze. That was the moment when I fell in love with him, and inevitably, forever, with the camera. In the end it didn’t work out with him, but I remained with the camera. Ever since then, everytime I’m on camera I feel great. Everything’s good, calm and creative. Afterwards I started working in TV, where I would constantly have to look to the camera. In this case, i would instead look at the audience members.
ToRo: So I’d assume it came a lot easier for you to play in Hooked then…
Maria Dinulescu: Well, yes and no. In the film, my character is very interested in each of them [Miha & Mihai].What I mean is that her relationship with the camera is therefore very strong and direct. So I didn’t have a problem playing to the camera. At the same time, an issue comes up. A person’s eyes and face, body, etc. actually transmit ideas and feelings which modify and affect you. In a sense, this actually continues to further create the scenario and set the mood. It’s precisely because of this that we rehearsed for an entire month, six hours each day: to know exactly, at every minute, what Adrian wants with the character, and where he wants to go with it. I would first rehearse with the actor, we’d know what we wanted, then we’d do it with the camera, and everything was technically pre-arranged in your body. Which is pretty hard.
ToRo: A mechanization of acting in a sense.
Maria Dinulescu: Yeah, you basically knew everything ahead of time. Technically, you knew where you had to be from point A, to point B. Let me tell you something else: very often, you have acting partners which you have to look at when you’re acting for the camera. At the same time, you also wish to be alone when acting, because you can have partners that do the following: when the camera’s on them, they play in a certain way – the way they’re supposed to for the movie. When the camera’s off of them, they try their hardest not to act the same way as they’re supposed to, so that you won’t be playing at the same level. In time, you learn that no matter what kind of partner you have, you have to play your best; which is the reason why you always ask for a general rehearsal, to know what the director wants during the shoot. This way, during the master take you’ll know exactly how your partner has to act, or you’ll let him/her go first in order to know what level you’re playing to. You already have a pre-established technique, regardless of the reactions you’re receiving from your partner.
ToRo: What do you think Hooked has to offer to an international and Romanian audience?
Maria Dinulescu: First of all, to an international audience – especially those that read and know cinema – it offers astonishing proof that a film, made solely from an idea, has turned into a movie which eventually received huge funding for film and sound editing in Paris, 35 mm print transfer and traveled to some very important festivals. As for those in Romania that actually produce films, it gives them the certitude that it is possible to succeed. As a film, I think its biggest drawing-point is the multiplicity of nuances that it carries within it. Sure, we can take the film at face value and see only a seemingly normal couple, who’s actually more abnormal than one would define abnormality. However you can analyze the film from a multitude of angles – there are three angles…
ToRo: Quite literally…
Maria Dinulescu: Exactly. So in a way, this film offers you an hour and a half of analysis. Now it’s expected that a “generous” bra will make you feel even better at a movie, but the comfort level is still hard to achieve because of the subjective angles used.
ToRo: I think that’s its appeal. The “fishing game” of the title, being Hooked – as defined in the film – becomes in a sense, the reality of the spectator, through the self-referential mode of filmmaking.
Maria Dinulescu: Actually, each character in the film speaks to you. One after another, he/she tells you their version of the truth. You get that with Mihaela, Mihai, and especially with Ana-Violeta (a character very well written). You’re urged to move along with the film, because your interest is heightened. That’s why I think the film is very well structured, and that you’re always intrigued.
ToRo: I found extraordinary the way in which the film offers you those specific perspectives you were talking about, ‘hooking’ the spectator throughout the entire film. In a way, the film becomes self-reflexive about the way in which the spectator perceives and structures the narrative within his consciousness. Ana-Violeta becomes in this case, a catalyst not just for the story, but for the film’s interaction with the viewer as well.
Maria Dinulescu: Again, it’s the film’s characteristic of offering up plenty of interpretations for the viewer, who could come up with 200 opinions. You start thinking of a lot of things.
ToRo: Indeed. I remember in the first screening’s Q&A you said “It doesn’t matter what I say, or what my opinion as an actress is. What’s important is that the film stirred an opinion from you.”
Maria Dinulescu: That’s all that counts. I went to a movie yesterday – a documentary in my opinion – whose director wanted it to be a grand, “extraordinary-phenomenal,” art film. He finished literature so he was talking a lot, very cinematically, etc… What’s clear is that I don’t think a movie must be what I think it is. Rather, I find it to be more valuable if it allows you to learn other things. When I watch movies I want to be told things that I needed to think about. Most ask “what did this mean? What did the director want that to symbolize?” Instead, ‘What does it mean for you’” should be the question. If the film, put together from the hard work of an entire team, has a certain meaning for you, then that’s the answer. What I wanted it to be doesn’t matter anymore. And it’s always the case that at Q&A’s you get the most extraordinary questions. Like the interpretation of one gentleman at the first screening, describing the film as a theatrical play. Not for a second did I ever think of it in such a way – but in fact, it is; it really could be a theatre play. Another example is what a woman asked at the second screening: “what does the red balloon mean?”
ToRo: Happiness for 50 lei.
Maria Dinulescu: That’s what I said as well. I answered that it means ‘happiness.’ This is what I was looking at in the movie: after the balloon is burst, and the happiness that Ioana can’t have is dissipated, she begins touching and pulling at the rubber in desperation. As for the air from the balloon, since it’s so vital to life, one could say it’s Ana-Violeta. Both Miha and Mihai need it in order to move on – for her to call her husband and end their marriage, for him to come to terms with his true feelings for Miha and going back to school. This way, the movie becomes a mathematical exercise, offering you multiple variants to try out.
ToRo: At one point you become completely confused regarding what exactly happened between each of them.
Maria Dinulescu: That’s why I keep saying the script is very well written. Now I can’t say that Adrian wasn’t lucky to have good actors, because if you hire a person who can’t carry the role…
ToRo: They all act well…I especially liked Ionut (Nicodim Ungureanu)…
Maria Dinulescu: He actually had a problem with his voice at the time. If I remember correctly, Sitaru told him as well to speak as if we seem to come from the same “milieu.” But as far as my preferences go, I would go for Miha, since it’s so hard to play an unlikable character – nobody wishes for such a role. Another thing to remember is that if you film me at full-frame, I’ll move and react in a certain way. If you shoot me from “plaine Americain” [knee-up] I will act differently. Yet when you’re in a close-up shot, it’s very hard because you need to be careful not to overdo it. You may think that it’s appropriate, yet on a 30m screen it might look horrible. So for instance, because of this I remember having to constantly ask Sitaru “I hope it’s not too much.” In the end I was happy and relieved that everything was ok. Yet one must always remember that as an actor, film notices everything, which is why it all must be done perfectly.
ToRo: Did the specific way in which the movie was shot give you a feeling of claustrophobia or make you feel confined?
Maria Dinulescu: The camera was always up-close. But it’s the same in life: when something’s tough, the best thing is to ignore it, which is why I wasn’t thinking about where the camera was. I knew perfectly what I had to do, and I would do it. From my point of view, acting is very easy, I find it very simple.
ToRo: Speaking of ease of acting, you’ve played in many international productions. How much more difficult is it for you to act in a foreign language? Or does it simply feel as a very different role?
Maria Dinulescu: Everything depends on the director. It depends on what energy he brings, in what way he envisions film, and how he connects with you. That’s what it’s all about. For example, when I’m on set, I care about nothing and nobody. I’ll talk with the producer if I want something; otherwise, the only person that I need to speak with is the director. Even if I discuss anything with the other actor, it’s my obligation to do it in front of the director. It’s very important for me. If the director creates a certain energy and if we can communicate together in a specific way, then it works. However, if we can’t establish any common dialogue you’re essentially doing a project for money – which happens in Romania quite a lot. The script is bad, maybe the actors are good, but the director isn’t. I was in this situation actually with a movie I worked on. So I said to myself: this director is considered fairly weak, but he insists on directing. Why don’t I like him? Because he’s overly-talkative, he says the same thing twenty times over, and he doesn’t see things that are right in front of him. So all things considered, I said that if this man is so persistent, somewhere, he must possess some creative energy. Just because he’s pointed himself in a totally wrong direction (vis-à-vis cinema) doesn’t matter, because deep down he’s creative. So since I accepted the project, I might as well take it as it is, and offer something that he never receives: complete trust. In the end you listen, tolerate him; you make up a list for yourself with what his best and worst qualities are – because everybody has something good in them. I ended up having the surprise of discovering something that I really needed for the film, because even though he didn’t know how to realize it, he was able to tell it to me through his specific vocabulary. A person will function properly if you offer him/her your trust. And if it’s his project, you can be sure that he’s been working on this for years, and in his mind, everything fits and works perfectly. So by offering him positive energy there’s no way that everything won’t run as smoothly as it’s supposed to. The talent can be really small, but if the interest and passion is enormous, there’s no way for things not to click.
ToRo: Speaking of interest and methodologies of working with directors, what’s your next project?
Maria Dinulescu: Someone asked me yesterday actually: “what’s your next project?” I answered that “I’ll continue to do the same thing that I did before and after this film: go home, watch a movie per day, read a book…” I get restless if I don’t see a film a day.
ToRo: What’s the last film you watched that you liked?
Maria Dinulescu: I watched a British short film which I liked a lot. When Cristi [Nemescu] was around, being close friends, we’d go together to the cinema and he’d always get me films to watch at home as well. He’d know exactly what films to give to me, telling me to “watch this one, and that one.” He was in a way my film professor for seven years. Ever since, I’ve been alone. I remember that one day I was about to call and ask him about a film. It has been tough… Two years have passed since then, and I’ve been left in the situation where I have to go see the films myself – the bad ones, and the good ones.
ToRo: To come back to the previous question…do you have any films coming up?
Maria Dinulescu: I have an Italian project that I’m not sure if they’ll even get the funding for. There was also an Ireland project slated for this year. I also had several things for TV, but I don’t want to work in TV anymore…
ToRo: Because it’s TV?
Maria Dinulescu: Yeah… it makes no sense for me to do TV projects. If I can live off of doing something else, so be it. When I’ll run out of money I’ll go back. However, I’ve worked with a really great guy on a project that I chose because he’s an amazing director: Radu Mihaileanu [Train de Vie and Va, Vis et Deviens…]. It’s called The Concert, and guess who’s my onscreen boyfriend/partner? Ion Sapdaru, the mayor from California Dreamin’. He’s such an extraordinary actor. The movie’s obviously a comedy, and a superb one at that. There were only three Romanian actors. Vlad Ivanov had a much longer role, while Sapdaru and I had only a scene which was shot in five days, showing our wedding. I play the young wife to his big mafia boss husband, and eventually get drunk, start singing…really a great experience. Mihaileanu is such a dear. He called to ask if I wanted to play a small role, telling me that if I refused he wouldn’t get angry. In my mind I was thinking “Excuse me?” I asked him “I’m speaking with Radu Mihaileanu, correct? You’re a person that I’ve wanted to meet for a long time. I want to work together, regardless for how long. Let’s get to know each other, and next time we’ll work on longer projects.” I’d love to work on a six-month production with him. I would learn so many things…a director needs to fascinate you, as an important figure, but also as a mode of thought. If he doesn’t captivate you and you don’t like it, it’s hard to work. But when you love it, you bring things to the role that you couldn’t believe you were capable of. Imagine that I was at the Roman Arenas in Bucharest with a thousand extras, and I had nothing to say in the scene. But I mentioned that I’d like to say something in Russian when I’ll get drunk. I told him from the first time we met: ‘I can’t sing, yet I’ve always wanted to.’ I think that the big role that will make me famous will be playing someone who doesn’t have a singing voice, but wants to sing – a comedy in other words. So a couple of Russians on set taught me how to sing an old Russian song. And I’ve got to tell you that at the end, all the extras stood up and applauded…
[At this point, we check the time and it's 3pm, fifteen minutes too late for the interview to finish... we left off asking our typical closing question:]
ToRo: If you were asked to do the ToRo, what would your answer be?
Maria Dinulescu: Initially I didn’t want to return to Toronto, but ToRo promissed to show me the people and places of Toronto as they really are outside of the festival circuit. I’m open to new things, I’m happy with the attention that [Hooked] is receiving and I’m eager to participate in an exciting Q&A. I learned that the smaller events are usually more full of life, ethusiasm and credibility than the already established festivals. I’m looking forward to surprises.
