On screen: ten years’

On screen: ten years’ worth of Wild Romania footage turns into major documentary

Dan Dinu and his team filmed Romania’s wild nature and animals for over 10 years, and the resulting documentary, Wild Romania (Romania Salbatica) is now in cinemas all over the country. Business Review went behind the scenes with the director to find out more.

By Oana Vasiliu

How would you describe the documentary for someone who doesn’t know much about Romania and its wildlife?

Our documentary encourages people to appreciate nature without being a manifesto. Through the message of the film and the emotions it conveys, we tried to make people understand that nature is not merely a resource that can be exploited at our convenience; it is our home, without which we would not exist. But all these things come gradually, and they are subtly introduced into the mind of the viewer without being uttered explicitly.

Was there ever a point in the collaboration when there were different visions about where the story should go or did you always have a very similar view of what you wanted this story to be?

Working on the script for the film was like a complicated puzzle. It started about 6-7 years ago, when the documentary was very descriptive, with a small number of animals and some stories from their lives. Not because we didn't want to have more, but because they were complicated to film. After we finished certain sequences, we would add more script lines, change certain parts, create more and more connections. What I wanted most was for there to be no parts of the film that wouldn’t flow narratively into a unitary story, so I worked on that a lot. Sometimes, after a shoot, I would come home and change the script to fit the new story, adjust to what I already had or even give up on some things. It was a permanent process of adaptation. The closer we got to the end, the better things went. But what I knew from the beginning was that we wanted to have an emblematic story for Romania and that it had to be as authentic as possible, with nature itself as the main character, not the people. some moments out. Are there any in particular that you really wanted to leave in but ultimately couldn’t?

We had to leave out lots of sequences, either because they were incomplete from our point of view or simply because the documentary would have been too long. One of them was about amphibians. We shot several species of frogs, mating newts, and salamanders, but even though we took all this footage, we realised that it could not go into the film. They were even named areas that no longer fit for various reasons, but we have enough material and ideas for a sequel.

What do you want audiences to take away from the film? Are people responding in ways that you had imagined they would?

I am very happy that viewers don’t just appreciate the film, but also see it as a very good educational tool. From the very beginning I wanted the whole project to help nature, and it’s been a success from this point of view. Many people who have seen the documentary have told me that the film elicited a lot of different emotions, which again I think is a big plus. And a lot of people felt responsible when they watched the end.

Since the release, have you seen increased local interest in protecting the natural areas featured in the film?

Perhaps it's too early to say whether our film will generate change, but we do hope so. During Q&A sessions after screenings, I received lots of questions from people regarding how they could get involved. We receive this question on the Facebook page quite frequently as well, so we’re hoping that the film has struck a chord with audiences and that more nature lovers who see this film will be motivated to help out. It would bring us great satisfaction.