Although Closer To The Moon is based on true events some scenes in the movie just seem not very plausible. Those scenes, that are quite unbelievable and make no sense at all, made this movie lesser good than it should have been. I really doubt the 'gangsters' were that happy in those times. In the end credits you see the actual footage of their propaganda movie and nobody seemed happy there, much more realistic than the whole movie is trying to show. The cast is really top, all actors did a good job with their respective characters, so that was the best thing about this movie and that was what makes it worth watching. Plus the excellent directing from Nae Caranfil, not so much for his writing though. Closer To The Moon isn't bad for a one time viewing.
20 Reviews
quirky fun film
catspeech5 April 2020
once you go bank robber, you never go back
lee_eisenberg11 October 2015
You've probably never heard of the Ioanid Gang, or the bank robbery that they carried out in Bucharest in 1959. I had never heard of it before I watched Nae Caranfil's "Closer to the Moon". The movie isn't any kind of masterpiece, but sufficiently looks at this incident, and how Romania's Soviet-backed government arrested the gang and forced them to star in a propaganda film reenacting the robbery.
One of the thing that we notice while watching the movie is the hypocrisy of the Eastern Bloc governments. They claimed that they were establishing classless societies but there was a high society (and the people in the government had no qualms about themselves jewelry). Later on, Nicolae Ceaușescu forced women to have as many children as possible, which overfilled Romania's orphanages. Most of the heads of state in the Eastern Bloc were typical ideologues, but Ceaușescu sounded like a mental case.
Anyway, the movie's worth seeing.
One of the thing that we notice while watching the movie is the hypocrisy of the Eastern Bloc governments. They claimed that they were establishing classless societies but there was a high society (and the people in the government had no qualms about themselves jewelry). Later on, Nicolae Ceaușescu forced women to have as many children as possible, which overfilled Romania's orphanages. Most of the heads of state in the Eastern Bloc were typical ideologues, but Ceaușescu sounded like a mental case.
Anyway, the movie's worth seeing.
Deja vu background on an aberrantly recurrent theme by Romanian directors
EddieRade24 July 2014
Almost all high-rate Romanian directors have a somewhat perverted fetish about Communist Romania stories. That being said, if you've seen a Romanian movie from the 2000's until present day, in over 90% of the cases it's some story set in Communist Romania,and how bad it was and how people where so against it all. Nothing further from the truth! All of these stories are filled with one-sided prejudice opinions and resemble the directors view of the world. So, this movie isn't any different from all the other famed movies our directors have launched in the past years about pre-1989 Romania. The Ioanid gang, who where a bunch of superficial silly Bonn vivers on film where in fact a gang of guys (and a girl) with no ideological stance to their continuous dissidence before the WWII and afterwards. They where acting against the regimes only for the fun of it, for the adventurous filling of being in contradiction with those in power , not because they opposed Nazism and Communism as ideologies. They where Jews, who where oppressed by the Romanian Nazi collaborators and afterwards resented by the same Romanian Nazi collaborators(fascist legionnaires disguised as Communists and Bolsheviks as Romanian Iron Guard followers where to do after Germany lost the war) wrapped in the red flag of Communism. All in all the actors played their parts well, as they are professionals. But the storytelling, the way Caranfil romanticized a bunch of fools is not to my taste. As a different approach by our distinguished directors, I'd like to see a movie about the atrocities committed in the years when fascists where in power in Romania, when our 'honorable' King Carol II imposed his dictatorial regime, banning parties and letting the legionnaires from the Iron Guard rise to power before slaughtering them as they, in return, set Bucharest on fire and killed many Romanian Jews and other personalities such as Nicolae Iorga. But there is no real interest. It is more comfortable to pick the same over done subject of Communist Romania. My advice to you after seeing this artistic movie is to see the real reenactment "propaganda" movie made by the authorities in 1960. It's with the real participants and has a better way to sticking to facts as they occurred.
Strange film
blanche-210 September 2017
Warning: Spoilers
Harry Lloyd, Vera Farmiga, Mark Strong, and Anton Lesser star in "Closer to the Moon" from 2014.
This is a fictionalized version of the The Ioanid Gang's bank robbery in Romania that took place in 1959. The gang was made up of six Jewish Romanian intellectuals (at least in this film, though there were others involved apparently). They stole Romanian lei, about $250,000 U.S. dollars from an armored car at the National Bank of Romania.
This was a controversial robbery (to say the least) because no one exactly knows why they did it. The Romanian lei could only be used in Romania and not exchanged for hard currency, though supposedly the money was going to Zionist organizations. However, none of the robbers were Zionist.
The film comes up with a theory. These people were underground revolutionaries fighting the Nazis in WW II. At that time, they knew they could be caught and killed at any moment. The leader says to them, robberies are never committed in Communist countries, it's something done in capitalist countries. Let's rob a bank and make people sit up and take notice and question the ideals of Communism. We never expected to live this long anyway, so let's make our lives count. If they are caught, the punishment is execution.
They pull off the robbery under the guise of shooting a film. They are caught and then re-enact the robbery for a propaganda film. Were they forced to, were they told their executions would be canceled - no one knows.
A strange film on a strange subject for sure. My problem was that it was presented at times in a very lighthearted way with jaunty music which was odd given that the end result was going to be execution. There's nothing wrong with using humor in serious matters - Divided We Fall is an example, as is To Be Or Not to Be, and The Producers - but this was an odd mixture that, while interesting, didn't come off.
The film was also slow-moving and lacked excitement.
In the real story, the woman, played by Farmiga, is not executed and ultimately freed because she had two children. In the film she has one child, and a slightly different reason is given for her freedom.
The acting was good, particularly from David DeKeyser and Alan Corduner.
This I don't believe is an accurate re-telling of that robbery, but if you have any interest in it, you may like this.
This is a fictionalized version of the The Ioanid Gang's bank robbery in Romania that took place in 1959. The gang was made up of six Jewish Romanian intellectuals (at least in this film, though there were others involved apparently). They stole Romanian lei, about $250,000 U.S. dollars from an armored car at the National Bank of Romania.
This was a controversial robbery (to say the least) because no one exactly knows why they did it. The Romanian lei could only be used in Romania and not exchanged for hard currency, though supposedly the money was going to Zionist organizations. However, none of the robbers were Zionist.
The film comes up with a theory. These people were underground revolutionaries fighting the Nazis in WW II. At that time, they knew they could be caught and killed at any moment. The leader says to them, robberies are never committed in Communist countries, it's something done in capitalist countries. Let's rob a bank and make people sit up and take notice and question the ideals of Communism. We never expected to live this long anyway, so let's make our lives count. If they are caught, the punishment is execution.
They pull off the robbery under the guise of shooting a film. They are caught and then re-enact the robbery for a propaganda film. Were they forced to, were they told their executions would be canceled - no one knows.
A strange film on a strange subject for sure. My problem was that it was presented at times in a very lighthearted way with jaunty music which was odd given that the end result was going to be execution. There's nothing wrong with using humor in serious matters - Divided We Fall is an example, as is To Be Or Not to Be, and The Producers - but this was an odd mixture that, while interesting, didn't come off.
The film was also slow-moving and lacked excitement.
In the real story, the woman, played by Farmiga, is not executed and ultimately freed because she had two children. In the film she has one child, and a slightly different reason is given for her freedom.
The acting was good, particularly from David DeKeyser and Alan Corduner.
This I don't believe is an accurate re-telling of that robbery, but if you have any interest in it, you may like this.
A group of Romanian communists robs the National Bank. But why?
zoranov10 March 2014
Unless you have at least some basic knowledge about Communist Romania, this movie might seem very far away from a rating of 10. As the story unraveled, it sucked us into an atmosphere that most of us feel is long gone, and nevertheless, so close to us. It's the period when the first cracks in an apparently perfect egalitarian world started to appear. Robbing a bank with guns in a communist country is like robbing a supermarket of its toilette paper. Money then and there was useless unless you could justify its origin. And that is what makes this story so strange for us. But there are many, many other layers to the story. The cast is great. The historical background is fascinating (at least for us, Romanians). And the cinematography is far above average. This movie was like a breath of fresh air. One full of poisonous gases, as seeing the movie, you will discover that there are many things about the human race that will upset you, but at the same time, air that provokes an uncontrollable laugh. Some people in the audience didn't appreciate the jokes. I did, because I considered it was the only way not to make the most depressing movie in the world. A masterpiece that will most probably be considered as such many years from now, when people will start making movies about our not so egalitarian society.
good movie, if you don't care about the history
Flexmaen26 September 2018
After wondering why reviews for this movie are quite polarizing, it became clear after watching the movie and reading about the history it is based on.
The movie does work well as a fictional story, if you don't care about the history. It is well done, has a catchy story, and an interesting way how it is told. Unless you don't just watch Hollywood action blockbusters you might be fine with this movie.
But the problem starts, when you take a look at the history. The story behind this movie is not suitable for a fairy-tale where main characters are enjoying their role. No wonder people will find this irreverent. The movie itself does refer to the story it is based on, it also provides footage of the original propaganda film - and that does not match to the way the story is told.
Other things that might be irritating is that main characters are speaking English and that Romania is too colorful for that time. No problem if you get a dubbed version of the movie, no problem if you see it as a fictional story. But the movie itself makes the connection to the historical background - and that's where it doesn't work.
The movie does work well as a fictional story, if you don't care about the history. It is well done, has a catchy story, and an interesting way how it is told. Unless you don't just watch Hollywood action blockbusters you might be fine with this movie.
But the problem starts, when you take a look at the history. The story behind this movie is not suitable for a fairy-tale where main characters are enjoying their role. No wonder people will find this irreverent. The movie itself does refer to the story it is based on, it also provides footage of the original propaganda film - and that does not match to the way the story is told.
Other things that might be irritating is that main characters are speaking English and that Romania is too colorful for that time. No problem if you get a dubbed version of the movie, no problem if you see it as a fictional story. But the movie itself makes the connection to the historical background - and that's where it doesn't work.
Romanian director wins BIG
andreea_bur946 April 2014
I was so completely entertained by this little film. I understand the historical data is highly accurate and appropriate for the Romanians that have lived in that exact period - which I respect so much . The amazing cinematography traps you along with power-house performances from Farmiga and Strong, the story is simply amazing and unique ( i think we all crave for unique stories nowadays). Caranfil's directing took me by surprise because I have never expected this level of craft from a director also trapped in a country where films at this scale are only a dream. I loved every single one of the shots and the editing was also amazing. I really hope Caranfil will make more movies like this - keeping the amazing dark, funny and artistic tone. ( See The Rest is Silence - it maintains that unique blend of tones ). One of the best non- American films i've seen in the last couple of years.
Could have been a great black comedy
goldbarn23 November 2023
Much like JFK's assassination, the Great National Bank Robbery of 1959 is shrouded in mystery, the first being whether the robbery did in fact take place (or was instead fabricated to justify the purging of undesirable party members), and the second concerning the motives for the robbery. Here, Caranfil depicts the robbery as a real event symbolizing an act of resistance against a communist regime that has failed to live up to its ideals. It's an idealistic plotline that molds the protagonists into crafty anti-establishment heroes, and that's fine in principle, but I don't think he manages to convey his story convincingly.
The main problem is that Caranfil empowers his protagonists to the point where it becomes difficult to feel pathos for them. Rather than endowing them with a tragic backstory to make their suicide mission believable, he depicts them as privileged party members who live care-free and suffer from existential boredom more than anything else. And although their fate is ultimately in the hands of the authorities, they always seem to be in control of the situation: they plan and execute the heist without a hitch, knowing that they will get caught; they laugh at the authorities during their trial, and they make a mockery of the film shoot without getting reprimanded.
As far as authenticity is concerned, it also doesn't help that the director chose an English-speaking cast and portrays communist Romania as a rather idyllic setting (granted the late 1950s were a more liberal era than what came afterwards). That said, I give him credit for at least shooting it in Bucharest and having the actors pronounce the Romanian names accurately.
To be fair, it's not a terrible movie from any technical standpoint (acting, set design, cinematography, etc.) and I found it both genuinely funny and cringy, because you can't overlook the absurdity of 1950s Romanians speaking English with British accents (note: if you enjoy that, I recommend the 2017 TV-series Comrade Detective). But my impression is that the director missed a golden opportunity to create a black comedy that is both tragic and comic, choosing instead to shoot a light-hearted parody.
The main problem is that Caranfil empowers his protagonists to the point where it becomes difficult to feel pathos for them. Rather than endowing them with a tragic backstory to make their suicide mission believable, he depicts them as privileged party members who live care-free and suffer from existential boredom more than anything else. And although their fate is ultimately in the hands of the authorities, they always seem to be in control of the situation: they plan and execute the heist without a hitch, knowing that they will get caught; they laugh at the authorities during their trial, and they make a mockery of the film shoot without getting reprimanded.
As far as authenticity is concerned, it also doesn't help that the director chose an English-speaking cast and portrays communist Romania as a rather idyllic setting (granted the late 1950s were a more liberal era than what came afterwards). That said, I give him credit for at least shooting it in Bucharest and having the actors pronounce the Romanian names accurately.
To be fair, it's not a terrible movie from any technical standpoint (acting, set design, cinematography, etc.) and I found it both genuinely funny and cringy, because you can't overlook the absurdity of 1950s Romanians speaking English with British accents (note: if you enjoy that, I recommend the 2017 TV-series Comrade Detective). But my impression is that the director missed a golden opportunity to create a black comedy that is both tragic and comic, choosing instead to shoot a light-hearted parody.
Irreverent But Not Very Entertaining
larrys329 October 2015
Warning: Spoilers
Set in 1959 and '60, in Bucharest, Romania. and based on a true story, this film focuses on the plight of the group that was to become known as the Rosenthal Gang. The group led by Max Radoiu Rosenthal (Mark Strong) were all once daring Jewish Resistance fighters vs. the Nazis during WWII, in Romania. They were all Communists as well, and when the Soviet Union seized complete control over Eastern Europe after the war, many of these Resistance fighters held elite positions in Romania.
However now over a decade later, many of the fighters are being blacklisted and purged from the country's hierarchy. As the film opens, the so-called Rosenthal gang is staging a daring daylight robbery of a bank transport van carrying loads of cash. They're using the pretense of making a movie as the heist progresses, in the middle of Martyrs' Square in Bucharest. Of course, this type of crime is unheard of in a Communist country.
Flash forward a year, and we find the group has all been captured, tried, and sentenced to death by a firing squad for their crimes. However, before their executions can take place, the government wants to recreate their story in a propaganda film, that will serve as a lesson for the Romanian people.
The movie, written and directed by Romanian filmmaker Nae Caranfil, is presented in a most irreverent and satirical way, which unfortunately only at times came across as entertaining to me. Towards the end of the film, as we finally learn the motivations of the "gang", it made little sense to me considering the dire consequences of what their actions could bring.
Overall, I know this movie is presented in a most satirical way, but it had me "scratching my head" half of the time, specifically as to the path the main characters chose to take here.
However now over a decade later, many of the fighters are being blacklisted and purged from the country's hierarchy. As the film opens, the so-called Rosenthal gang is staging a daring daylight robbery of a bank transport van carrying loads of cash. They're using the pretense of making a movie as the heist progresses, in the middle of Martyrs' Square in Bucharest. Of course, this type of crime is unheard of in a Communist country.
Flash forward a year, and we find the group has all been captured, tried, and sentenced to death by a firing squad for their crimes. However, before their executions can take place, the government wants to recreate their story in a propaganda film, that will serve as a lesson for the Romanian people.
The movie, written and directed by Romanian filmmaker Nae Caranfil, is presented in a most irreverent and satirical way, which unfortunately only at times came across as entertaining to me. Towards the end of the film, as we finally learn the motivations of the "gang", it made little sense to me considering the dire consequences of what their actions could bring.
Overall, I know this movie is presented in a most satirical way, but it had me "scratching my head" half of the time, specifically as to the path the main characters chose to take here.
Excellent ! ! !
cekadah15 July 2014
It is always gratifying to find a film you do not know anything about and it becomes one of your favorite movies.
Director/writer Nae Caranfil has taken an obscure incident in Soviet occupied Romania in the late 1950's and has offered it up to the 21st century cinema to give us a most pertinent message for today's world.
That message is not robbing the bank! The message is to be found in how the system (society) can single out certain groups and marginalize them into committing a desperate act --- and not really have any reason to do this act but to just fight back.
The entire cast is perfect in their individual roles, the script is intelligent, the photography beautiful! This film should a 10 in anyones book!
Director/writer Nae Caranfil has taken an obscure incident in Soviet occupied Romania in the late 1950's and has offered it up to the 21st century cinema to give us a most pertinent message for today's world.
That message is not robbing the bank! The message is to be found in how the system (society) can single out certain groups and marginalize them into committing a desperate act --- and not really have any reason to do this act but to just fight back.
The entire cast is perfect in their individual roles, the script is intelligent, the photography beautiful! This film should a 10 in anyones book!
His story
andreeeei3 August 2014
In reality, something happened. Some people have been executed without being guilty. They have been forced to play a role in their fake trials and all ended in their execution. A false history was created by some top authorities in order to teach some kind of a lesson to the people that worked in the communist regime structures. This movie was not made for the public. This false reenactment most probably inspired Lucian Pintilie to create a cinematographic masterpiece, Reconstruction (1968). Add to that the fact that Pintilie's film has been done in those crazy times, when you could have gotten into big trouble for criticizing the regime.
Now, here comes Caranfil, a great director, that takes the original story and twists it once again, turning these people into courageous heroes that opposed the regime. They get into a suicidal mission just to send a message. How much believable is that? Does this bring justice to the original six persecuted people? I'm not sure about that. There's a documentary, called Marele Jaf Comunist (The Great Communist Robbery) that reveals more of the true story. Anyway, a drama is not supposed to tell the real story, and that's OK, but in this case, it's a pity that some people will take it as history.
The real six people have been persecuted in communist style with fake trials and five of them were killed. They were Jews and they were high professionals. Moreover, ironically, they had a history in participating successfully in bringing the communism to Romania. So, why did the regime chose them in order to teach a lesson to the other communists, and probably to the Jewish communists?
The movie might leave you with the impression that all Jews were persecuted under the communism. Many of them they were. The Russian occupation brought suffering to all kinds of Romanian citizens. But many of the Jews supported the regime since the beginning.
I know that many of the Jews have been disappointed by the communism that they previously believed in. Most of the Jews went to Israel sometimes in the Sixties, but also, many Jews supported the communist repression, leading to massive deportation, imprisonment and execution of hundreds of thousands of Romanian citizens. You will not see this in the movie.
Now, here comes Caranfil, a great director, that takes the original story and twists it once again, turning these people into courageous heroes that opposed the regime. They get into a suicidal mission just to send a message. How much believable is that? Does this bring justice to the original six persecuted people? I'm not sure about that. There's a documentary, called Marele Jaf Comunist (The Great Communist Robbery) that reveals more of the true story. Anyway, a drama is not supposed to tell the real story, and that's OK, but in this case, it's a pity that some people will take it as history.
The real six people have been persecuted in communist style with fake trials and five of them were killed. They were Jews and they were high professionals. Moreover, ironically, they had a history in participating successfully in bringing the communism to Romania. So, why did the regime chose them in order to teach a lesson to the other communists, and probably to the Jewish communists?
The movie might leave you with the impression that all Jews were persecuted under the communism. Many of them they were. The Russian occupation brought suffering to all kinds of Romanian citizens. But many of the Jews supported the regime since the beginning.
I know that many of the Jews have been disappointed by the communism that they previously believed in. Most of the Jews went to Israel sometimes in the Sixties, but also, many Jews supported the communist repression, leading to massive deportation, imprisonment and execution of hundreds of thousands of Romanian citizens. You will not see this in the movie.
Excellent movie.
reformamostucasa6 April 2014
Warning: Spoilers
Excellent movie. A quintet of Jews seeing their status drop in postwar Romania rob a bank in Nae Caranfil's Closer to the Moon, only to be caught, convicted, and forced to reenact their crime in a slyly anti- Semitic propaganda film. Though based on a true story, the film discards some of its claim to authenticity right off the bat, casting Brits and Americans in all the leads and having them speak English instead of Romanian; later, it will have trouble establishing the gang's motives for a crime they all but knew would lead to their execution. Stateside potential is modest for the semi-convincing yet enjoyable tale, relying on familiar names in a cast that acquits itself well given the demands of the unusual plot. The dialogue may not sell viewers on the motivations for a robbery where the loot was a nearly worthless currency, but the setting offers a melancholy that would be welcome elsewhere in the film.
The Red Army didn't free, but enslaved the country, along with the whole Eastern and Central Europe. An iron-fist regime was installed.
Sylviastel4 November 2018
Vera Farmiga and Mark Strong played Romanian Jewish Communists who along with three others plot to rob the Romanian State Bank, a crime punishable by death. The court and country decide to use the case to teach a lesson in propaganda film. The burglars are acting as themselves in this film. The burglary was more about robbing the bank but anti-Communist. There is a nice romance in the film as well. Vera Farmiga and Mark Strong gave the best performances in the film. I would have liked to know more about it. The film was shot on location abroad.
cheesy
odraghici2 December 2015
Just so you know, I am Romanian, and I've lived there before and after 1989. This film is full of historical inaccuracies (except the main subject, the robbery, which indeed took place in 1959). I wanted to leave within 20 minutes, but that would've not been polite towards the other people in the theater, so I put up with it till the end, to my utter despair. It reminded me of commie propaganda, except this one got a mushy Hollywood feel, and is cheesy to the bone. I can't comment on the acting/directing/etc., since I wasn't able to watch it beyond the first half an hour; I was that disgusted with it. I've seen movies by this director, and expected something decent at the very least. It wasn't the case. If you frequently watch Hollywood B movies, then you'll be fine with it. If you prefer intelligent, well articulated movies, don't bother. This is as commercial as it gets. That being said, it's probably not as bad as Titanic (thus a rating of 2 instead of 1).
Aleluia it was about time.
goku_af911 June 2016
This film it was marvelous. Im proud of my romanian film maker Nae Carnfil. Maybe the movie wont respect all the history in that time. But the cast was excellent the costumes were great.
And what i had liked the most, they respected the black jokes with allot of irony and cinism in them. They showed the crazy leaders were in that time the real murders and how easily were peoples fooled by the system.
The movie 100% need's an Oscar i hope he will get in time. Also a word for Hollywood, "Bro come in Romania start to learn more history and than make more movies with romanian stories"amen.
Message to my fellow romanian brothers, don't try to judge to movie be proud cause you are a ROMANIAN the movie is PERFECT.
10+
And what i had liked the most, they respected the black jokes with allot of irony and cinism in them. They showed the crazy leaders were in that time the real murders and how easily were peoples fooled by the system.
The movie 100% need's an Oscar i hope he will get in time. Also a word for Hollywood, "Bro come in Romania start to learn more history and than make more movies with romanian stories"amen.
Message to my fellow romanian brothers, don't try to judge to movie be proud cause you are a ROMANIAN the movie is PERFECT.
10+
Missing Moonshot!
spookyrat126 January 2020
Just a very odd movie! A sometime film, within a film, based on true circumstances, but feeling very artificial and contrived. Closer to the Moon is a Romanian production with a Romanian director helming a cast of mainly British and American actors who speak English. Many of the scenes are filmed indoors which almost begs the question of why locate the production in Romania anyway. The answer probably is tax breaks, but as I said earlier, this alone serves to heighten the unnaturalness of this admittedly deliberately absurdist take on historical events.
The actual events really do sound crazily sad with 5 Jewish mid-level Romanian communists deliberately concocting a fiasco of a bank robbery in 1959 to protest the Soviet encouraged, anti-Semitic purges. After being caught and convicted they were forced to take part in a recreation of their "crime", as a propaganda warning to others, who may be of a similar mindset.
Closer to the Moon has a certain comic dark element to it, without it ever really being particularly humorous. Similarly, it fails to even have pretentions to drama and/or suspense. We know what's going to happen and all the many flashbacks and (sometimes confusing) flashbacks inside flashbacks serve to do is to delay what we know will be the inevitable. It's for this reason too, that it is difficult to identify with any potential heroes, as heroes generally don't engage in probable suicidal missions just for the fun of it, or to make a point, which is what we're asked to do here. I've always been a fan of Vera Farmiga and versatile character actor Mark Strong, but they are just wasted here playing Romanian caricatures of later 1960's American Yippie types.
For an improbably largely true story, we never really are convinced of the motives behind the actions of this tiny resistance cell. I feel a more authentic, persuasive argument may have been made by writer/director Nae Caranfil by at least filming in Romania with a largely Romanian cast. As it stands, Closer to the Moon suffers from a lack of narrative cohesion, which is only exacerbated by its very uneven dramatic and comedic tone.
The actual events really do sound crazily sad with 5 Jewish mid-level Romanian communists deliberately concocting a fiasco of a bank robbery in 1959 to protest the Soviet encouraged, anti-Semitic purges. After being caught and convicted they were forced to take part in a recreation of their "crime", as a propaganda warning to others, who may be of a similar mindset.
Closer to the Moon has a certain comic dark element to it, without it ever really being particularly humorous. Similarly, it fails to even have pretentions to drama and/or suspense. We know what's going to happen and all the many flashbacks and (sometimes confusing) flashbacks inside flashbacks serve to do is to delay what we know will be the inevitable. It's for this reason too, that it is difficult to identify with any potential heroes, as heroes generally don't engage in probable suicidal missions just for the fun of it, or to make a point, which is what we're asked to do here. I've always been a fan of Vera Farmiga and versatile character actor Mark Strong, but they are just wasted here playing Romanian caricatures of later 1960's American Yippie types.
For an improbably largely true story, we never really are convinced of the motives behind the actions of this tiny resistance cell. I feel a more authentic, persuasive argument may have been made by writer/director Nae Caranfil by at least filming in Romania with a largely Romanian cast. As it stands, Closer to the Moon suffers from a lack of narrative cohesion, which is only exacerbated by its very uneven dramatic and comedic tone.
Having Turned it Off Midway...
Moviegoer1910 May 2015
About five minutes into this film I had the sinking feeling that I had just paid to see a film I would not want to watch. I chose it from a list of "On Demand" films on TV and the blurb was misleading otherwise I probably wouldn't have chosen it. The blurb said something about WWII, Jews,and Communism, so I thought it was about WWII and the Holocaust, but it is not. Anyway, I would have stayed with it but found it both confusing and boring. It struck me as an artistic film that's more about the acting and other aspects of its production, than it is about storytelling. I found it to be similar to watching an early Fellini production in which a certain grotesqueness about the actors' faces and behaviors is supposed to be moving and often, humorous. Perhaps if I had had more knowledge about the history upon which the film is based, I would have enjoyed it more? Somehow, I don't think so.
There's also the possibility that the discomfort I felt watching the film was the reaction the director and producers were going for. If that's the case, I suppose it warrants a much higher vote than I gave it.
There's also the possibility that the discomfort I felt watching the film was the reaction the director and producers were going for. If that's the case, I suppose it warrants a much higher vote than I gave it.
Seriously disappointing.
tony-70-66792012 March 2016
The synopsis sounded intriguing, and I'm a fan of both leads, so despite misgivings I went to see this film. Big mistake.
The main problem was the inappropriately jaunty, comic tone. Even when they were in the dock and being sentenced to death the gang were fooling about. It's safe to say that Communists aren't renowned for their sense of humour, and are unlikely to be at their perkiest when facing death.
I was so bored I fell asleep, so never found out why they pulled the robbery, or who had fathered Alice's child. The fact that this won 9 Romanian Oscar equivalents, including best picture, doesn't reflect well on that country's cinema. Funnily enough there were no awards for the acting, which was the best thing, apart from the actual propaganda film at the end. (The man on whom the leading character seemed based was as bald as Mark Strong, so why was this fine actor made to wear the least convincing toupee since Wayne, Stewart and Heston were last in films?)
The main problem was the inappropriately jaunty, comic tone. Even when they were in the dock and being sentenced to death the gang were fooling about. It's safe to say that Communists aren't renowned for their sense of humour, and are unlikely to be at their perkiest when facing death.
I was so bored I fell asleep, so never found out why they pulled the robbery, or who had fathered Alice's child. The fact that this won 9 Romanian Oscar equivalents, including best picture, doesn't reflect well on that country's cinema. Funnily enough there were no awards for the acting, which was the best thing, apart from the actual propaganda film at the end. (The man on whom the leading character seemed based was as bald as Mark Strong, so why was this fine actor made to wear the least convincing toupee since Wayne, Stewart and Heston were last in films?)
It's a Jewish movie, but little else
mformoviesandmore9 September 2015
Now perhaps the fact that it was a movie about Jewish people should have been obvious from the description. But that needn't be a bad thing. Fiddler on the Roof showed how to tell a story about underlying tragedy in a humorous and inclusive way.
To paraphrase: Closer To The Moon is no Fiddler on the Roof
It is just a poorly made movie.
I gave up watching it after 10 minutes, which was 5 more than my senses told me I should. I skipped forward to see if it got any better. It doesn't.
Very much a niche movie.
To paraphrase: Closer To The Moon is no Fiddler on the Roof
It is just a poorly made movie.
I gave up watching it after 10 minutes, which was 5 more than my senses told me I should. I skipped forward to see if it got any better. It doesn't.
Very much a niche movie.
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
