The president and members of the Jury of the International Competition section of TIFF were asked to give their answers to the question «Why cinema now;», TIFF’s motto for 2009, during the customary Jury presentation press conference held on Wednesday, November 18.
“The selection of the International Competition film entries defines a festival’s priorities, expresses a festival’s approach to cinema and is one of the marking characteristics of its personality. Of equal importance is the selection of the jurors. Their mission becomes all the more important, because they are by definition members of a select class. The jury consists of distinguished cinema personalities, who keep their minds on a state of permanent alert. I firmly believe that all films will be judged with respect, affection and after due reflection», said TIFF director Despina Mouzaki, opening the press conference.
Ms Mouzaki went on to present the members of the jury. Internationally renowned filmmaker Theo Angelopoulos is the president, while members are Amos Poe, one of the frontrunners and founders of independent American cinema, distinguished Hungarian filmmaker Gyorgy Palfi, Academy award winner production designer Eugenio Caballero, Lav Diaz, the ideological “father” of the Filipino new cinema movement, Lissy Bellaiche, Festival advisor of Trust Film Sales-Zentropa Productions, and distinguished actress Mirjana Karanovic.
TIFF President Georges Corraface noted that “it is very important to have a very strong team cinema personalities in the jury, because they will leave their mark on the selection of best pictures. I know how hard it was for them to find time in their busy schedules and therefore I would like to express my gratitude to them”.
Theo Angelopoulos was asked to comment his return to the Festival in another capacity. “I am here, because a whole group of filmmakers scorned the festival with their abstention. I believe they were wrong”, he stressed. The distinguished director was asked to comment on one of the demands raised by the abstaining filmmakers, the establishment of a “Film Academy” in Greece. “I was actually the first to open this issue several years ago. I had proposed to the government to establish a Film Academy at the premises of the former American military base in Nea Makri. There was even a subsidy available then, to the tune of one billion drachmas. It didn’t happen. A university school was established in Thessaloniki instead, with no facilities, no nothing. Establishing an Academy would be a positive step, and I am personally in favour of such a move. But the desire of filmmakers is not enough. An Academy needs substantial funding so the government has to make the decision”.
TIFF’s motto “Why cinema now” sparked many questions concerning the present and future of the cinema, its relationship with Hollywood and its place in our lives.
“I have no answer to give to the “Why cinema” question. I have long considered that cinema is not just a job for me. Films are my way of life, an extension of my personality. If I was not doing films, I don’t know what might happen”, said Jury president Theo Angelopoulos.
Lav Diaz said that cinema is “one of things that unite humankind”, a means of expression shared by people of all nationalities as well as “one of the most important things in our modern era, when so many things are nothing but noise”.
According to Tel Aviv - born Amos Poe, the “now” part of the question is not the most important one. “To me, what is crucial is ‘where’”, he said, adding that he feels alienated from his own country.
“The ‘why cinema now’ question is a philosophical one, because the cinema is the means by which we affirm our existence. By narrating stories, we are expressing our worldviews. I don’t want to be alone in this world, and films allow me to communicate”, noted Mirjana Karanovic.
Lissy Bellaiche reversed the question, saying: “Why not cinema? I could not imagine a life without cinema. It is important for people to be able to see the world beyond their own limited horizons. Cinema is a window to the world”.
Eugenio Caballero noted that the Internet has made everything interconnected, but “what is missing is the artist’s approach, the approach of someone who has no other agenda in narrating a story, except his desire to make people feel. The mere thought that stories can exist even in a world so violent as ours, fills me with hope”.
For Gyorgy Palfi, what is important is films themselves, not the medium per se. “One can watch movies on TV, DVD or the computer. I believe people will always feel the need to narrate and watch stories”.
As far as the future of cinema is concerned, the jury members were optimistic. “The means will change, maybe the approach as well, but the need for stories will stay intact, every step of the way”, said Eugenio Caballero. According to Mirjana Karanovic, the world is becoming ever more pluralistic. “In the past, the only music we could listen to came from the English speaking world. Today the situation has changed, there is no single world music centre. The same stands for cinema. There will always be Hollywood blockbusters, but at the same time important movies are filmed all around the world. There is a lot of space for unknown filmmakers and countries lacking a strong cinema tradition to express themselves in the language of cinema. Technology is a major help in letting new voices be heard”, she explained.
Lissy Bellaiche reminded that in 1980, Denmark was still off the world cinema map, “but then the ‘miracle’ happened with the Oscars and the situation changed dramatically. We rose from obscurity and strengthened our relations with other countries”, she said, adding that she is optimistic for the future of small countries in the movie industry.
Amos Poe admitted that now he watches many more movies thanks to the Internet. “I miss repertoire cinema, the dialectic between filmmakers” he said, foreseeing that, in the future, there will be a special cinema microchip in our brains, where entire film libraries will be downloaded and we will be able to watch the films we choose directly in our heads. “In the future, technology will make cinema ever less an common experience. It will become increasingly a solitary experience”.
The future of cinema in commercial theatres and the “battle” between independently produced films and Hollywood was one of the questions posed to the members of the jury. “We can not force all people to follow a healthy diet, eat lost of fruit and stop smoking. There will always be people who will prefer fast food, while others will try to do what is best for their health”, commented Mirjana Karanovic, adding: “I do not believe that art films will ever prevail over Hollywood - the two of them can coexist however”.
Amos Poe’s view was different. He predicted “the fall of the American Empire and of its Hollywood stronghold”. “This dominance will end with the end of the oil century”, he predicted. Eugenio Caballero referred to the example of Mexico. “When I was a child, it was hard to find a movie in theatres that was not one of the Hollywood blockbusters. Today, moviegoers are demanding more than mainstream cinema productions. Our fragmented world stimulates the curiosity of audiences. People look for something different. This reality in turn mobilises the people involved in the motion picture industry. Of course it is hard to compete with commercial movies, but so long as people keep demanding films from other genres, the situation will change”.
