| home > festival reports > Berlin 2006 > Talent Press - Saturday, February 11th |
|
| coming soon |
Berlin 2006 - Daily reports
Saturday, February 11th
French Conception by Laurence Reymond 
Einstein Was Right by Oleksiy Radynski
New York Confidential by Katie Kohn
A low-profile labour of love by Maria Antonia Velez-Serna
Dreaming with open eyes by Soumaya Beltifa
A Second Attempt by Vera Brozzoni
Turning a passion into my profession by Olya Aylarova
Less Impact of Film Criticism by Anne von der Gönne
Keep the Passion Alive by Tamás Bella
On the Cusp of Something Big by Leo Mirani
French Conception
Why and how did I start writing film criticism ? Well, like everybody, I imagine, after years of watching movies every day, talking and reading about them, spending too much time developing my own and dictatorial ideas on what is and what should be cinema and film-making....
In France, film critics have a glorious father in François Truffaut, who once declared memorably that "every spectator is a film critic". I live in a very favorable country as far as critics are concerned. From very intellectual magazines such as Les Cahiers du Cinéma and Positif (the historical frères ennemis of French criticism) to more popular magazines such as Première and Studio, and literally everywhere -- from the weekly television programme to our daily newspapers, on TV, internet (and the radio of course), you can hear and read opinions on films. Cinema is probably the art we spend the most time discussing, it's like a national habit in France. The Nouvelle Vague, with all those radical film critics who became great directors (Jean-Luc Godard, Eric Rohmer, François Truffaut...), or to a profound thinker like Serge Daney, embodies this French passion and makes it pretty clear that a love for cinema leads logically to writing about films. Those endless discussions and debates are to me a tangible proof that cinema as an art is still and strongly alive and plays an important role in our society. So long as film critics get angry and committed about their art abnd their craft, there must somehow be hope... With the growth of the internet, innumerable reviews have been born, giving new critics a chance to be read (such as mine, actually, with the cultural website www.fluctuat.net).
It should not be forgotten, however, that even if it is a great part of our culture, almost every printed cinema review, as well as the cinema industry, is facing economical difficulties. Apart from the blockbusters, which are mostly comedies and historical movies, most of the "small" films produced by the French cinema industry don't have a large audience. At least, by comparison with other countries, those films are given a real chance here in France. And independent critics are here to stand for independent work. Of course, this whole system is fragile, but it's quite privileged and enduring.
Einstein Was Right
It's a weird experience to be a film critic in Ukraine, I should confess. Those who are informed on the current situation in Ukrainian cinema may wonder - how is it possible at all? Why being a film critic in a country whose cinema industry has been lying in the grave for fifteen years, and its attempts to get out from that grave are as scary as zombies in Romero's Land of the Dead, a film that was forbidden by Ukrainian ministry of culture?
Still, I enjoy being a film critic in Ukraine. This activity differs from casual criticism as much as hitch-hiking differs from a calm tourism. It requires an abnormal love to what you're doing - otherwise you'll switch to something more practical and less thankless. The same statement concerns making movies in Ukraine: once you become a Ukrainian filmmaker, it means you have no chance to do anything else. Otherwise you quit. That's why I would argue that Ukrainian filmmakers love cinema more than their colleagues from Russia, Poland or Germany. We know from our own experience: the more discrete our object of desire is, the stronger affection it causes. Since Ukrainian directors have no conditions to create a movie in a civilized way, the only thing that lets them survive is a great love to cinema. And sometimes cinema pays them back for their love. With prizes at the festivals, of course. In a few recent years Ukrainians have gathered an impressive harvest of cinema trophies - from Silver Bear at Berlinale 2002 for the animated Tram #9 by Stepan Koval to Palme d'Or for Ihor Strembitsky's short Wayfarers at Cannes last year. Someone supposes that this harvest means the end of our cinema crisis. Of course not - it means only that Einstein was right. The energy you produce never disappears.
For that reason I'm not going to quit loving Ukrainian cinema even if Ukrainian movies' production falls to zero someday. In that case I'll take a camera and shoot a movie myself. Or shoot myself.
New York Confidential
NYU is as barren an environment for philosophers as it is a veritable promised land for film students. Of course, I entered the university with interests of the former kind. By "philosopher" I mean one whose talents lie in absorbing and criticizing the world rather than shaping or producing it. I soon discovered that, in a nation where babies are born into Disney-brand diapers, children are raised on educational television and teenagers watch film adaptations in English class, today's "philosophy" major is in the cinema studies department, and today's (slightly diluted version of) critical theory, in film theory.
I wrote a few blurbs for the NYU student paper mainly to make the point that arts criticism should strive to be more than a cult of entertainment or the reinstatement of a canon. In response to so many Wes Anderson acolytes and Entertainment Weekly subscribers who collected Garden State ticket stubs like they were lotto tickets, I tried to provide a different voice. I wrote a brief hate letter to Frank Capra for that depressing ode to "little guy" capitalism, It's A Wonderful Life and then an unpublished piece concerning the maddeningly rare masterpieces by Lars von Trier, The Idiots and Europa which still await their DVD release in the U.S. After a few long conversations with film editor of the Washington Square News, I wound up with his position.
To be honest, I never would have sought out journalism if it had not found me. I reluctantly worked at the paper for the perks of having a weekly film column - which allowed me to stray into political and cultural criticism - and to indulge my passion for whipping bad writing into shape.
If I produce acceptable writing on films or events, it is only because my brain is, inexplicably, at its most productive while studying film. If I produce unacceptable writing on films it is also because of that hyperactivity, I am also trying to draw more intricate connections within a larger picture than the one on the screen. Sometimes ambitious thinking leads me down a dead end or leaves me stranded on thin ice and weak theories. More often than not, however, a mind ravenous for intellectual material leads me to meatier material and a more refined palette. I have acquired a taste for films that feed thought and am feeling a bit peckish for Peckinpah. Straw Dogs anyone?
A low-profile labour of love
In my country, when I tell people that I study film they usually go like "oh, cool!". Then I explain that I am not actually making movies, but writing about them, and they avert their eyes and give me that look.
Filmmaking is a highly fashionable career in Colombia, as it is in most parts of the world, I assume. It is seen as a fun hobbie, something easy and pleasurable that gets you closer to the jet-set. On the other hand, filmmakers define themselves as heroes, stressing the supposedly extreme difficulty of working in this country, in order to cover the blemishes of their attempts with an aura of martyrdom. As film only gained university status less than twenty years ago, most of the filmmakers and critics working nowadays have never been through formal studies; the struggle they faced in order to demostrate that experience is as good as anz diploma surely contributed to this mystification. Therefore, the mere courage to make a Colombian film is considered as a virtue in itself, regardless of its quality. Of course, same holds for quixotic film magazines, film clubs, and other forms of state-sponsored cinephilia.
Only a conscious and exigent film-related community can drive national cinemas towards creativity and pertinence. Since such community is still small in Colombia, critics find it hard to take distance, and to gain full control of the possibilities of their work. I think that if I could become a highly aware, vigilant critic, and if just one of my articles could spark debate or suggest a new idea to a director, then my job would be done. And if there were many more with me, then we could see some ripples on the quiet surface of Colombian film.
The first step in this scheme would be to prove that film is not just a light hobbie, but that it is not to be taken seriously, either. Only when filmmaking stops being mythical, it can start being human.
Dreaming with open eyes
My name is Soumaya Beltifa. I'm born and live in Tunisia. I can't say that I'm already a film critic because I honestly think that I have a lot to learn. Anyway, everything began in March 2001, when I started working for Le Temps, a daily Tunisian newspaper. I started with reports, articles and interviews about cultural events. I had the chance during the JCC 2000 (Carthage film festival), to begin writing about films and to produce a magazine while I was studying journalism at the IPSI (Institute of Press and Science of Information). I'm also an active member in the ATPCC (Tunisian Association for the Promotion of Film Critics), where we organize film events, writing about them and discussing with film critics.
For me films are important as the air we breath. Films are windows open to the world. They give me the chance to get in touch with several ways of thinking cinema. Films permit me to dream with open eyes. For that reason, I haven't a favorite film director. What is important is that I'm caught into the film and get touched. I like Takeshi Kitano, Clint Eastwood, Fassbinder, Youssef Chahine, David Lynch...
Regarding movie critics in Tunisia, I can say that there are two kinds of critic. In one part, we find cultural journalists who write articles on films and related events. They just write immediately about movies in an extensive way with spontaneous opinions that often imply a moral judgement. On the other side, we have people really interested in cinema. Most of them teach cinema in colleges or at university. Writers such as Khmais Khayati, Hèdi Khlil, Tahar Chikhaoui, Kamel Ben Ouaneshave already published books about our national cinema. They continue writing in some national publications like Le 7ème art, a monthly magazine. I might say that this is the only specialized magazine on cinema. We have developped through the ATPCC two other publications Cinécrit and Le Cinéphile.
It's quite difficult to be a film critic in Tunisia because of the lack of films that we can see. The problem is related to the fact that we can't see "good" films with the minimum of good projection facilities. Our national movie screen only commercial films such as Egyptian or Hollywood productions. Even those cinemas are facing problems. In the 80's, Tunisia had 80 screens while we now have only 16 in 2006. During the last two years, six cinemas have already been closed.
On the other hand, our national film production remains weak. In fact, since 2000 we've produced merely 30 films, many of them shown in international film festivals in Europe or other Arabic countries. Most of them were not ever distributed at home. Currently, we have created the FACC (African Federation of Film Critic) with other African associations in order to promote African film critics through the web site www.africine.org
A Second Attempt
My first attempt at writing an introductory article was a nice and ironic memory of how I developed my love for cinema and my current opinions; actually I didn´t know what to write because I hate writing about myself - what´s so interesting about it? Yet, since I am required to be interesting in my writing, I am forced to tell a less nice story and to use sarcasm instead of irony.
I am convinced that, in order to be a good critic (in cinema, in art, in anything) you have to be someone sensitive and open to all kind of stimula from the outside world, and still to retain your own opinions and personality. I approached the environment of Italian film criticism with all best intentions, proud to be allowed in the World Of Culture; stupid naive girl for a small town. What I found right from the start was a sexist environment that mistook my enthusiasm for foolishness and didn´t really care about what I was writing. I had the chance to tour film fests, I was invited at meetings and of course I was supposed to kneel down and thank my superiors; I can blame it on my lack of confidence, but I always felt that my role was to be a mere ornament.
One fine day I dared to harshly criticise a film for its hypocritical political views: this was considered ideologically uncorrect and troublemaking by the editorial staff, so I lost the only paid job I had had since I started writing. This is because Italy, besides being a catholic sexist country, has also a comic-tragic economic situation: you just cannot think of being paid for a creative job (unless you are a very big name, the kind of people who are invited to talk shows about "Big Brother" and stuff), and if you are that lucky, well you cannot make a living out of it. Period.
Now it may sound strange that I held onto a disappointing and irritating environment. Was it hard to resist? Do I consider myself particularly patient, enduring, prone to self-sacrifice? Do I look for a glory that can only be obtained through heroic deeds? None of that. I only enjoy what I am doing; I love films; I love criticism; and I trust my intelligence enough not to succumb to the bimbo-role that many people see I´m perfect for. From this point of view, moving to London was the right thing to do; not that everything is perfect since I left Italy, but re-starting from zero can be healthy, stimulating and inspiring. The rest lies in my future so I´d better stop writing. I hope it was interesting at least.
Turning a passion into my profession
Some people are lucky to have a passion in their lives. Some are happy to turn their passion into a profession. In my opinion, being a film critic is probably one of the most difficult yet amazing ways to express one's passion for cinema.
I studied journalism in the Moscow State University and I have been working as a reporter since 17. While a student I was invited to work for a TV channel dedicated to the film industry, and I have continued to write about cinema since then. After holding a variety of different positions at the channel, I decided to move on and continue my development as the international editor for Action! -magazine, a film industry weekly publication, where I have had the wonderful opportunity to learn a lot about film publications. I enjoy writing about the process of creating a movie, the mechanics of film business and bringing people the information they need to stay up on the latest changes in this fast moving industry. This work gave me a great opportunity to feel myself as a part of the process of filmmaking, to get to know it from inside. I am elated when someone like a film director or producer tells me that he or she found something new, interesting, and useful in one of my articles.
I hope that in future I will continue my education in the Russian State Cinematography Institute to be able to take a more academic approach to films. Who knows - maybe, one day I will be experienced enough to dare to make a film myself. In my opinion, only then I will know enough about cinema to be a good film critic.
In the meanwhile, I hope to go on with my work as a film reporter and film critic. Because of the current economic situation in Russian mass-media, there are very few serious publications that print film reviews by renowned critics. The cinema in my country is also in the state when people care more about budgets and revenues than art - which is also very important if we want our cinema to revive. Still, Moscow runs the A-class Moscow International Film Festival, and this year I have got the support for the idea of a daily festival news-paper that brings reviews, articles and interviews with the festival guests.
Almost all young critics dream of making their own film, and every reporter´s dream is to be an editor. That includes me, and I hope that the participation in the Berlinale Talent Press will give me new experiences, new skills, new colleagues, and new approaches to my profession.
Less Impact of Film Criticism
A classmate of mine in school used to come over to my house asking me to do his English homework for him. In exchange he promised to bring a movie. His English was so bad, that I eventually saw lots of movies in quantity and quality. This huge diversity opened my mind and is still helping me to dispel certain prejudices. I can enjoy a hundred million budget Hollywood flic as much as an independent production.
I began to analyse films, firstly concerning acting and direction. After a while I got more and more involved with film history and theory and I turned out to be more aware of cinematography. Back than it was still a very individual approach. It seemed clear that my field of study had to imply film criticism and that´s why I started communication science in Leipzig, Germany. Here I got the opportunity to review new releases for a local radio station and later I changed to printed media.
During my practical work as a film critic, it became obvious to me that German film journalists can operate unrestrained because of infinite democratic liberty. Besides that, critics get a pretty easy access to film footage. Regular press screenings are held in Germanys biggest cities such as Munich, Berlin, Hamburg a couple of weeks before the film actually opens in theatres. In the recent past journalists have criticised the companys criticism who tried to force them not to publish reviews before a certain date with menacing legal measures. Another alarming aspect is that most of the film critics of my generation are not salaried, but freelance. This is combined with the fact that by now almost everyone can be a film critic, because of the creation of new open platforms such as internet forums, web blogs etc., it is impossible to make a living just by relying on journalism, unless you are a staff member. Besides very aggressive film marketing has lessened the impact of film critics opinions.
German film is still blamed as being too cerebral for the mass audience. Only a very few films become box office hits, most of them comedies. It's essential for the creativity of Germany´s movie industry not to depend on financial considerations, which is why public film funding was arranged.
In the end my personal impetus is an enormous interest in human depth and a deep respect for filmmakers, who give me the opportunity to escape to different worlds by illuminating life.
Keep the Passion Alive
As always, the annual Hungarian Film Festival in Budapest is ending just before the Berlinale. Making a somewhat rural impression when compared to leading film events, this small festival does not even attempt to mask its eagerness to convey its best features immediately to the upcoming, far more prestigious event here in Germany.
Well, that's where I am from. You know, there is a Hungarian saying that goes "kis pénz, kis foci" - "little money, little (soccer) game," which certainly characterises my native land. It is a small country with small perspectives. It is a country where the entire motion picture infrastructure, from education to the handing out of state film funds and the control of specialized domestic festivals, seems to be in the hands of a single director, a country the cinema of which showed an unbelievably steep decline from the late 1970's on. The impotence and profound crisis of cinematic education has never been this obvious and terrifying: while the state-owned former College of Dramatic and Cinematic Art swells with haughtiness at being a University now, the outstanding artistic achievements of the last decade came without exception and doubt from helmers - from Béla Tarr to Benedek Fliegauf - who never went there, or never got a filmmakers' diploma.
The situation concerning film criticism is no less alarming. Although the number of movie magazines has skyrocketed in recent years, the vast majority of them are only Hungarian equivalents of mammoth Western pop movie mags, which are more than half filled with explicit advertisements and the other half stuffed with feebly disguised puffs for the next big thing coming to theaters soon. In magazines like this, a Lukas Moodysson masterpiece might receive a ten-line review, plus four stars out of ten. Ugh! The only magazine with a significant circulation that has retained the arthouse point of view is Filmvilág (Film World) that, however, also bears an unfortunate dichotomy: while accomplished key members of the editorial staff are adherents of the outdated cinematic heritage of the 1960's, they often give great publicity to suspicious (post-)postmodern babble.
As a film critic, I consider myself a rogue and an elitist. I belong to a small minority, because I believe that film is a medium able to shed light on, and reflect, human behaviour and its crucial conflicts; besides, I am not particularly attracted to its popular mainstream. Regarding the passionately analytic, cerebral critique that seems to vanish step by step - along with its audience - my primary field also underlines my membership in that minority.
When starting to write film reviews, I knew that if I wanted to reach a wider audience with my intellectual writings, Filmvilág would be the right platform for me to publish them. However, despite having received an award in their motion picture essay competition, I did not feel that the staff was really welcoming. We greenhorns could do mini-articles and stuff for the essay section-meaning mostly irrelevant filler crap like "The Imagery of the Industrial Revolution in Cinema", "Aliens/Robots in Hollywood Movies" or "Action Amazons in Hong Kong". Nothing for me, really. So I never started climbing the career ladder there and was relieved when I spectacularly won Filmkultúra's (Film Culture) art-house review competition. That was the way I became a freelance member of the Filmkultúra crew - I found the supportive atmosphere here very appealing, but I still had a hard time struggling with the routine of an online magazine completely owned by the Hungarian National Film Archive.
Well, and can I earn my living as a freelance film journalist? No. After almost one entire year of hustling hard, I had to give in and also take a full-time job. Very few people in Hungary can scrape a living from analysing art films: three or four people, tops, at each major magazine. And even if they can, most of them are forced to regard the trade as a regular job, going to screenings and writing articles day after day in a monotonous routine that kills their passion for movies. Mine is at least alive.
On the Cusp of Something Big
I was born in a country of a billion people, a country that makes nearly a thousand films a year, a country in which, according to the Producer's Guild, 15 million people watch a movie in one of a hundred languages on any given day.
I was born in Bombay. The capital of all things film. The nerve centre of Indian popular culture. The home of Bollywood - India's biggest film industry and possibly India's biggest export. A city where directions often include "turn left at Amitabh Bachchan's bungalow" or "It's right by Shah Rukh's place."
And I was born to two film journalists, though I'm really not quite sure how I became one. I sort of fell into it, I suppose, a bit by default. It seemed like the easiest thing to do at the time. Besides, it was really all I knew.
I first started writing about films in the monsoon of 2003, when AFP asked me to be their Bollywood stringer and I first started doing reviews in September 2004, when Time Out launched its Mumbai edition. In the years since, I've sat through dozens and dozens of truly awful films. And I've never regretted it one bit.
I have one of the greatest jobs imaginable in a country of a billion film fanatics. I watch films for a living, I go to parties and get to call it work, I meet this country's Gods and Demigods. I live out the collective fantasy of a billion people and it's my job.
Bollywood, like India, is on the cusp. This industry, our industry, has the technical prowess to be among the best in the world, but has, for too long, been constrained by the diversity of a nation with thousands of dialects, hundreds of cultures and over two dozen states. Making a film that will appeal to all of India is akin to making a film that will run across Europe, from the shores of Portugal to the eastern capital of Moscow. Making money on it, harder.
But things are a-changing. We're seeing the creation of genres. While we're not abandoning the formulaic masala film, we're experimenting. We're seeing the rise of actors to complement our stars. We're seeing offbeat cinema that dares to be different. We're seeing a new wave of younger directors who're comfortable with the urban Indian idiom and context. We're seeing a resurgence of regional cinema to fill the vacuum of rural India ignored by new Bollywood. We're on the cusp of something big. We're at the brink of a revolution. And it's a great time to be a film journalist in India.
© FIPRESCI / Berlinale Talent Campus 2006
|
| recent festivals |
Berlin 06
Talent Press |
