rawkmonster History must always be written in retrospect. The trouble with this viewpoint is that we tend to fit and squeeze events to fit our narrative. 1977 was the year of punk for example, but how many people were punks? I recently read Barry Cain's book '77 Sulphate Strip', in which he begins each chapter with that month's UK singles and album charts. The Sex Pistols and The Stranglers appear here or there, but on the whole the charts continue to be dominated by the likes of Olivia Newton-John, Showaddywaddy and Neil Diamond. Major events become significant only through retrospect, and by contrast many things that seemed vitally important at the time are later shown to be completely insignificant and forgettable.Director Corneliu Porumboiu recalled that at 12:08 on 22nd December 1989, the moment Ceausescu fell from power signalling the end of Communism in Romania, he was playing ping-pong with a friend, and came home to discover the news on television. He later saw a television show very much like the one in our film, discussing whether or not there was a revolution.The initial premise seems sound enough; if people were out protesting before 12:08, then it was a revolution; if they came out only after 12:08 then it was not a revolution but a reaction. Our characters are soon obsessing over these details, trying to pin everything down to a precise minute, arguing over who was where when. Throughout the entire show, Piscoci is barely spoken to at all until the host has all but given up. His recollections are about an argument with his wife, and that he had gone out to the square only after 12:08 in order to impress her. He doesn't appear much fussed about the revolution, regretting that Ceausescu was unable to deliver the 100 Lei he had promised because he would have taken his wife on holiday with it. His is really the voice of reason here. Manescu, our would-be hero, is an alcoholic school teacher who insults his Chinese friend and borrows money from everyone. His revolution amounts to going to the square with three other teachers, chanting, throwing stones at a window, trying a locked door and running into a guard post after being confronted. The idea that any of these things, even if proved true, could in any way constitute a 'revolution' in the town is ridiculous. Nevertheless, our sympathies lie with him because he is a human character. His Chinese friend calls in to vouch for his character, saying he is the kindest person he knows and that he doesn't like how Romanians treat each other. This seems unusual until we see how the host deals with him, by aggressively repeating the very same insults that Manescu had slung at him. The difference is that Manescu said these things while drunk and doesn't mean them; Jderescu, the TV host, says them not only while sober but while on air.The host Jderescu is one of the more savagely hilarious caricatures. He is shown as tremendously arrogant, exploding at Manescu off-air for daring to bring up his background as a textile engineer and unravelling a long introduction name-dropping Plato and Heraclitus. Some of the characters are particular to Romania, such as the former Securitate man who is now wealthy and threatens legal action with an arrogance even eclipsing Jderescu, but at the same time are universal enough for anyone to recognise. People are people, after all.Piscoci we see as a kind, humble and simple man, his hilarious early attempts to lean into shot aside. We also see him rankle at being described as an elderly man, attempting to suggest the caller is describing Manescu. Despite his age he retains a child's sense of mischief, buying firecrackers and setting them on the children who set them on him. His version of the revolution, seeing it on TV while doing, thinking about and planning other things is probably the most universal, but it is the one no-one wants to accept. Big events need big heroes.Piscoci is also the most poetic, a genuine poetry compared to Jderescu's pretentious introduction. His comparison of the revolution to the town's streetlights gives us a memorable image. We're shown that in some places the lights do come on all together, and in others they come on one by one. Your interpretation of which is true depends on where you are seeing the event from. Piscoci demonstrates that the guard in his sentry box could not have seen Manescu in his alleged position because a statue was in the way. While the others are obsessing about precise minutes, it is again Piscoci who points out that the town clock has not been on time since it was installed.12:08 is a clever, clever film and its characters are all extremely memorable. There is something in everyone, Jderescu's wife who cuts off her nagging at a second's notice, the boy singing the Latino song, his band mate who has somehow broken his instrument and is standing by the wall. Many of the characterisations are all the more remarkable because they occur off-screen, they are the voices of callers or people like Jderescu's daughter who only appear in third party accounts, yet we have a concrete picture of them.The film's great strength is its willingness to stand alone and be itself, something that proved a challenge to those marketing it. Lumping it into a communist comedy niche alongside 'Goodbye Lenin' does not do it justice. The choice of title, '12:08 East Of Bucharest', is a curious one; the original Romanian title is 'Was There Or Wasn't There?'. Like the revolution, it is hard to pin down precisely, and the accounts of others do not always match up to your own.

Family-Bert This is the first movie by Porumboiu. It is sarcastic, witty, and humane. The revolution is the backdrop for the old theme that nothing changes much after all. The drab lives of the people remain drab, the Securitate bully is now the rich bully and the recollection of the revolution in the town turns out to be underwhelming. What redeems these sad truths are small acts of kindness and, of course, humor. I took three points off because the movie could have been put together better. The first half does not connect well with the TV interview. A better sequence would have been to start with the interview and put some scenes in the middle, back and forth. Also the script did not exploit fully the possibilities of what could have been a drama as well as a satire. I hope Mr. Porumboiu keeps at it.

Roland E. Zwick "12:08 East of Bucharest" is a droll Romanian comedy that deftly examines how the citizens of that country look back on one of the pivotal events in their nation's history.The movie takes place 16 years to the day (December 22, 1989) after the Communist government, led by Nikolai Ceausescu, was overthrown in that country. Now, Jderescu, the host of a local TV talk show, is hoping to commemorate that anniversary by examining what role his own town might have played in that seminal event. The issue Jderescu hopes to settle is whether a revolution actually took place in their town or whether the citizens simply waited till it was "safe" - i.e. after Ceausescu had already fled the scene by helicopter at precisely 12:08 PM on that fateful day - before venturing out in protest. Jderescu has chosen to have two "common folk" guests on his show to discuss the matter - an alcoholic history teacher named Manescu, and a cranky retired old man named Piscoci. Manescu at first tries to pass himself off as a hero, claiming that he and a group of friends headed over to the town square before the downfall of the government, but conflicting testimony from some of the callers to the show begins to call into question the truthfulness of his story."12:08 East of Bucharest" feels a bit like two movies combined into one. The first is a casually paced, noncommittal look into the everyday lives of three citizens of this town. We see Jderescu having breakfast with his wife, making phone calls to re-confirm the guests for his show, and spending time with his mistress, a beautiful young reporter at the station where he works. Manescu struggles with a hangover from the night before, visits the bar to pay his tab, apologizes to a Chinese merchant he insulted while drunk, and contends with a bunch of recalcitrant students who would much rather be setting off firecrackers in the hallway than learning about the Romanian Revolution (though they all seem to know about the French Revolution well enough). Meanwhile, Piscoci divides his time between fighting with his television set and buying a Santa Claus suit for an upcoming children's party at which he's been asked to perform. Writer/director Comeliu Porumboiu has filmed this section almost entirely in medium and long shots with virtually no close-ups or cutting within scenes. The advantage of this naturalistic approach is that it allows the scenes to play out in what feels like real time, while the disadvantage is that it distances us somewhat from the characters, making it harder for us to identify with them and the things we see them doing.Still, this section helps us to better understand why a man like Manescu might feel compelled to place himself center stage at an event of such profoundly historic magnitude. Perhaps it affords him the opportunity at long last of being an active participant in history, rather than a mere teacher of it. We all create new identities for ourselves, Porumboiu seems to be arguing in his film, for who among us wants to be known as nothing more than a face in the crowd, a person ground down to nothing by the prosaic realities of our humdrum existence? Heck, even Jderescu, the talk show host, is finally unmasked on-air for the mere textile worker he was in the years before the revolution. Apparently, personal reinvention is not something exclusive to movie actors and rock stars anymore.However, it's when we get to the talk show itself that the movie truly begins to engage our interest. As caller after caller deflates Manescu's attempts at making himself out to be the hero he probably wasn't, we get the sense that Porumboiu is implying that the issue itself may not even be worth debating all these years later. Just because Manescu and his fellow unarmed citizens didn't risk their lives by confronting the Communist military doesn't make them bad people. Still, there's no denying that Manescu's appearance on the show brings to the surface a whole host of feelings on the part of the general populace regarding the part each of them played in the revolution. By opening up this dialogue, the movie, I imagine, serves a healing function for the Romanian people. What matters for the rest of us is that the movie raises these issues with so much genuine humor and compassion that the dilemma becomes instantly recognizable for viewers the world over.

sake herbert ...a revolution in our town? This is not a movie about the revolution, it's a movie about life. You will notice perhaps how the writer inserts new elements on top of the old ones. The city, the people, their every day life seems to be the same. But there they are, a mobile phone next to the old furniture, the sofa with the carpet on it, a shiny car over the grey background of a building, the Chinese man who can speak romanian surprisingly well. These are signs of change, since the revolution, as the transformation was intended to be seen here. Also you will notice that the name of the town is hidden in all scenes: " Primaria (imagine brad de craciun)UI va ureaza..." ("The city hall of (the image of the Christmas Tree)UI is wishing you a Merry Christmnas!"). Also in the TV show, the name of the town is never mentioned, being replaced instead with "our town". This may be the writer's idea of cutting down the importance of the event (my guess). Another subtle way of summarizing the whole movie is right at the beginning of it: "the lightening of the street lamps", idea further carried out by Mr. Puşcoci: "The street lamps light up down-town first, and then one-by-one all the way to the suburbs".So that is the way the revolution was seen. The comic part of the movie as others may have suggested is actually the reality of people trying to do what they see and think is good, to feel better about themselves, to appear better in the eyes of others, even if it is too late(Mr. Puşcoci's wife is dead), is about growing up and struggling to do better. I liked the music, the paper boats Mr. Puşcoci makes during the TV show, the way the wife tries to convince her husband to give her money for their daughter's vacation by showing him an old photo, the way a new day starts when the street lamps turn off,etc.