No doubt some people of a particular bent would point to Four Months, Three Weeks and Two Days as the perfect example of a film which would offer food for thought and change minds. The film depicts one story, arguably one of many, of a woman seeking abortion during a time when it was illegal in Romania back in 1989 when the story is set. Variations of this story were no doubt told in countries all over the world at one time or another when abortion was illegal, and are harrowing to anyone with even a small belief in the concept of women being allowed dominion over their own bodies. But for those adamantly against the practice, I’m sure their response would be, “Tough shit, you shouldn’t have broken the law and killed another human being.”

Two friends, Otilia and Gabriela, have arranged to meet with an abortionist. Otilia is supporting the pregnant Gabriela, who appears to be rather clueless for much of the film’s running time, much to Otilia’s frustration. While it’s easy to say that Gabriela’s state is due to her physical condition, the fact is she’s probably less emotionally mature than her friend.

The plan was to meet at a specific hotel, but Otilia discovers upon arrival that the room hadn’t even been booked, and there’s no longer any rooms available. The women have no choice but to get a room at another hotel where they check for IDs and such. Later, Otilia meets up with the abortionist, who is upset because he had specifically told Gabriela that she was to meet him and not to send anyone else in her place. We also find out that Gabriela had lied to the abortionist about the length of her pregnancy; she had said it was less than two months, when it really was... well, look at the title of the film.

Of course, none of this would be happening if abortion was legally obtainable. Instead of going to a hospital and dealing with qualified medical professionals, the women resort to dealing with dubious characters such as this back-alley abortionist, which carries not just a legal risk but also a real risk of maiming or death on the part of the woman getting the abortion.

The most intense scene in this film is by far the scene in the hotel involving the two women and the abortionist. This man is not some idealized hero, some brave champion defying the law for the sake of women’s rights, but a scumbag who exploits these desperate women for his own pathetic gain. He is not above receiving sexual favours in exchange for doing what he describes as an even more dangerous procedure due to Gabriela being further along in her pregnancy than she had originally claimed.

During the course of the film, we realize the main character is not Gabriela but Otilia, who is by far the more resourceful and sensible one. And she also ends up being the one most emotionally impacted as the film draws to its conclusion, while Gabriela clearly has no emotional attachment whatsoever with the life growing inside her body. She could dispose of it (or get someone else to dispose of it for her), even through illegal and potentially dangerous means, and then eat a meal at a hotel restaurant as if nothing happened. For those against the practice, Gabriela could easily be seen as the poster child for all the reasons why abortion should never have been legalized in the first place.

This film is typical of some of the international film that has been released over the past number of years, in that it strives to be as anti-Hollywood as possible. Many of these films attempt to be as realistic and naturalistic as possible, even so far as to keep in all the boring bits. The film itself lacks any sort of visual sense, as many scenes consist of little more than a static, stationary camera recording events unedited as they unfold for five or six minutes at a time. But the only truly gratuitous scene would appear to be the Otilia’s visit with her boyfriend and his family, which includes a dinner scene in which the family members, sitting on either side of her, yak about a number of subjects which we don’t care about. We’ve already got the point that Otilia is uncomfortable about being here five minutes before the scene is over.

Four Months, Three Weeks and Two Days has a similar style and approach to another Romanian film,The Death of Mr. Lazarescu, in that they both deal with harrowing medically-related subjects. While this film depicts a legal situation which is no longer the case in that country, The Death of Mr Lazarescu was set in the present day and had bigger fish to fry, a damning look at the ineffectualness of the Romanian health care system through the eyes of health care workers and of one particular individual knocking on death’s door. But both films are about our rights as individuals to get the medical care we need. To deny someone their right to treatment, due to either puritanical morality, legal barriers, or inefficient bureaucracy, doesn’t seem right, but these situations exist in various forms in many nations around the world. Neither of these movies provide all the answers, but they do provide something to think about.

Recommended:
Yes

Viewing Format: DVD