Fjord’s Director Steps into the Role of Moderator Amidst Challenges

Cristian Mungiu’s sixth film, *Fjord*, revolves around a family facing legal scrutiny. The parents appear to be upstanding, devout individuals, but they are far from proponents of gentle parenting. Having relocated from Romania to a quaint village in the fjords of rural Norway, the family consists of Mamma (Renate Reinsve), Tata (a bald, bespectacled Sebastian Stan), and their numerous children. They are openly religious and actively share their beliefs. However, in 2026 Norway, there’s a growing skepticism towards the devout, with the nation’s famed tolerance seemingly reserved for the secular.

*Fjord* begins quietly, gradually building tension. We follow the family as they navigate their new environments—schools, jobs, and places of worship. A second Norwegian family serves as a contrasting backdrop. This raises questions about the nature of discipline versus punishment. Mungiu invites viewers to engage with the complexities of morality, suggesting that every detail—from a piano note to a casual comment—can be viewed through a different lens, enriching our understanding.

In a conversation with Mungiu, who hails from Romania, he reflects on how his early journalism career shapes his storytelling, his experiences under Nicolae Ceaușescu’s regime, and the joys and challenges of independent thought.

He begins by discussing a question he posed at Cannes: Are there good minorities and bad minorities? Has your perspective shifted since then?

Not really. While it’s crucial to recognize the value of tolerance and inclusion for all minorities, we must also accept that even those with differing values deserve our tolerance. If we don’t, how can we claim to have a liberal, progressive worldview?

Of course, there are limits. We must condemn violence and support those in need.

When it comes to religious beliefs, even if we don’t share them, it’s important to allow others to express their views. Many around us hold irrational beliefs, from astrology to alternative medicine, and we accept that. Why should we judge those who are religious? It’s beneficial to encourage rational thinking, as our beliefs influence others. Change should be gradual; imposing views only leads to radicalization.

You mentioned frequently encountering articles about immigrant families in Nordic countries. Is keeping up with the news part of your creative process? Where do your ideas originate?

I read a lot of news daily and organize articles into themed folders. It took years before I decided to create a film based on these ideas. Initially, the articles were sensational, merely reporting on dramatic events. For me, a film should delve deeper, exploring the reasons behind these occurrences and what they reveal about our world.

I aim to avoid sensationalism, seeking to understand how these stories relate to our lives. It took me eight years from the first article I read to the decision to make a film.

Can you elaborate on your creative process? What happens during those eight years? Specifically, how do you transition from research to fiction? Is it a seamless shift?

I didn’t spend all ten years in research, but I was always aware of the subject. For instance, I spoke with a family involved in a high-profile case from three years ago. I interviewed them and their children, visited Norway, and met their relatives. I sought out everyone connected to the case—lawyers, journalists, and even the child welfare agency. I attended trials related to child welfare issues to gather diverse perspectives.

Ultimately, I crafted the screenplay based on the arguments I collected. I didn’t need to invent much; I just organized the material. The fictional elements of the film come from a second family, which allowed me to explore the story from the adults’ perspective. I wanted to balance the family’s viewpoint with that of another family that shares the societal values of their community, highlighting how these values clash and evolve through their interactions.

What was your experience as a reporter early in your career? How did you transition to filmmaking?

I began my journalism career in 1987, which brought me closer to my goal of storytelling. At 19, I aspired to be a filmmaker, but during communist times, getting into film school was not straightforward. So, I turned to writing. I started working for a newspaper, honing my writing and photography skills—activities that felt like stepping stones toward filmmaking. My screenplay writing style still reflects that early period of learning to craft news stories.

Fortunately, the fall of communism opened up the press, and it was an exhilarating time to be a journalist, as people craved the truth after years of censorship.

My writing style was shaped during that time. I focus on depicting situations without inserting my own opinions, encouraging viewers to engage critically with the material. I aim to empower the audience to interpret the story based on facts rather than being led by character dialogue, which can be misleading.

So, your goal was always to be a storyteller, and you found film as your medium?

Exactly. I initially thought I would be a writer, but I was deeply influenced by the films I watched, including some peculiar Romanian films of that era. They often felt disconnected from reality, serving more as propaganda than genuine storytelling.

This led me to believe that filmmaking shouldn’t be overly complicated; it should reflect reality.

Interestingly, I received a message today from a half-German, half-Norwegian family asking for help, expressing that nothing has changed regarding their situation. I want to highlight that this film isn’t just about Romania and Norway; it also addresses issues in the U.S. The polarization we see today needs to be addressed, as living in isolated bubbles can lead to dangerous outcomes.

How do you respond when people reach out for help?

I reply to their messages.

During my promotional tour in Norway, I encountered many individuals from both sides of the issue. One woman shared a heartbreaking story about how the fear of losing her children led her to consider abortion. Others expressed strong support for the film’s perspective on child protection, fearing that in a conservative society, their children wouldn’t receive the same care. This illustrates how people often believe that one extreme viewpoint can be countered by another, which isn’t the solution. We need more integration and empathy to foster dialogue.

In the courtroom scene, Sebastian Stan’s character highlights how liberal societies often prioritize physical harm over emotional or verbal harm. You’ve mentioned that there’s no such thing as a neutral perspective. While you claim your opinion doesn’t matter, I’m curious about your stance on this argument.

It’s essential to clarify that when there’s proven violence in a family, we must act swiftly to protect those involved, whether children or women.

However, the film explores the complexities of making decisions without knowing the full context of a family’s situation. After two years of research and discussions with all parties involved, I still can’t definitively say whether the real family in the case was violent. Our biases often cloud our judgment, making it challenging to adopt an objective viewpoint.

We must recognize our biases and understand that when we claim to act in the best interest of children, we often believe our solutions are the best, just as others do with their opinions.

It’s crucial to ensure that everyone in society has the freedom to be who they are. After exploring how minorities are treated in conservative societies, I became curious about how liberal societies respond when conservatives become the minority. One might expect greater empathy, but that’s often not the case. The majority’s identity can overshadow ideological values.

Literary theorist Terry Eagleton once said, “Ideology is like bad breath. We only recognize it in other people.”

I understand that precise choreography is part of your filmmaking process. You’ve mentioned avoiding cuts to maintain authenticity. Does this mean that the goal of art is to capture reality? If not, what purpose do movies serve? Why do you create films?

I believe in diversity in filmmaking, and while entertainment is a valid approach, it shouldn’t be the only one. The films I aim to create encourage deeper thought and awareness of the world around us. I want to make viewers conscious of their surroundings.

There’s no such thing as an objective viewpoint, but I strive to avoid manipulation in my style. I present two sets of values for viewers to examine, prompting them to reflect on their beliefs and consider when they last questioned their own convictions. Everyone is convinced they are right, but the first step toward dialogue is listening to others.

*Fjord* premiered in select U.S. theaters on October 9th, with a wider release scheduled for October 23rd.