The Greek Film Critics Association (GFCA) press conference quickly turned into an open discussion on the present and future of Thessaloniki’s Film Festival and the Greek cinema in general. Among the issues that dominated the discussion were the abstention “filmmakers in the mist” and the provisions of a new film law pertaining to the role of film critics. The press conference took place on Thursday, November 19 at the Pavlos Zannas Theatre, in the framework of TIFF.
Opening the event, TIFF president Georges Corraface presented an honorary citation to GFCA president Andreas Tyros, noting: “This is an important year for the Festival. In our common course throughout these 50 years, the bonds between the Festival and film critics have been strengthened. Your critical view is valuable, and has broadened the horizons of the Festival. We are counting on your faithful and consistent service to the cinema, thanks to which we can communicate more effectively with the essence of the Seventh Art”.
GFCA president Andreas Tyros stressed: “This year is crucial indeed, and the truth is that things didn’t turn out exactly as we expected in the Festival’s jubilee. It is disheartening to see that Greek films are absent from this year’s festival. This development, however, can turn out to be extremely creative”, adding: “In the era of digital cinema, in the post-material age of cinema, it makes no sense to talk in the language of the past. Various parochial views and special interests have harmed the Festival as an institution over the years”. In flashback to the first steps of TIFF, when the Festival was conceived by Pavlos Zannas and the Macedonian Art Company «Techne» with a view to promoting the Greek cinema, Mr Tyros said: “It was the heroic, innocent, black and white era of both the cinema and the Festival”. He also referred to the role of film critics in the 1960s, stressing that they “were looking for artistic expression in a Greek cinema dominated and subjugated by the Finos commercial productions”.
Mr Tyros also referred to “Exostis B”, characterising it as “a Polytechnic uprising preceding the actual Polytechnic uprising”, a venue of free expression, which later decayed and resorted to slogans, jeering and infamies”. Then, he continued, “after the regime change-over, film critics picked up the thread defending once again the artistic values of quality and freedom of censorship”. In 1977, this group of critics participated in the Antifestival, and a few years later a law was passed that provided for GFCA participation in all the governing bodies of the Festival, in both the organising committee and the jury. The worst of times, according to Mr Tyros, “were the times of conflict in the late1980s, when film critics were defending the Greek exceptionality of Tornes, Kanellopoulos and later Economides and Avdeliotis, defying not only the low artistic standards of the day but of many film critics as well”. “By the early 1990s, the Festival is in deep crisis and the GFCA proposes its internationalisation, in order to escape from its parochialism and cure its infantile diseases. This move was vindicated beyond any doubt”, noted Mr Tyros, adding however, that this internationalisation provoked a general feeling that the Greek cinema was being neglected. “I hope that in the near future, the Festival will be more compatible with the post-material world, maybe ‘smaller’ in size, but more modern and versatile, with a stronger character and identity. In this future festival, we are hopeful that Greek cinema will find its rightful place”.
Referring to the upcoming cinema law, Mr Tyros said: “Laws cannot prostrate long established habits, nor are they magic wands that can turn untalented filmmakers into cinema wizards. The braking up of the association into warring splinter groups runs contrary to everything that GFCA stands for. We make an appeal to all: before you split into three or four factions, overcome your personal sympathies and antipathies. The draft law – not so much the Festival per se – will decide what kind of cinema we want and are able to do. We agree with «Filmmakers in the mist» there is a need for a new law and for putting an end to the lack of transparency in the State awards. We fail to comprehend, however, why there needs to be a change of venue, why the state awards should be moved and take place in Athens. If it is Thessaloniki’s humidity the problem, let the awards take place at a different city each year, Volos, Veroia, Kavala or wherever. This way, cinema will move closer to the Greek periphery. If cinema becomes an Athens stronghold, the stronghold will eventually fall. Our presence here is a statement of support to the Festival”.
Taking the floor, film critic Ninos Fenek Mikelidis recalled the efforts made to establish the GFCA. This effort started in 1966 but was fulfilled only in 1975. He also explained the reasons behind organising the Antifestival: “The law wouldn’t change, things just didn’t move foreward. I remember we held a football game then between directors and actors to fund the event and we did even better than the Festival. Since 1979, when the GFCA was recognised by the Ministry of Culture, our demands remain the same concerning the issues of the film archive, of cinema education and more generally of the regulation of the cinema industry. We hope the new law will finally solve these issues”.
Film critic Demosthenes Xifilinos referred to events and memories form the 1980s, when large queues were being formed outside theatres during the festival. He also commented that «The Festival gave a tremendous push to Greek cinema. Many of the movies it has screened in the past, would never have seen the light of day had it not been for the Festival”. He completed his speech with an appeal that both sides find some common ground.
Taking the floor, Dinos Giotis, president of the board of Scriptwriters Guild of Greece, asked the GFCA representatives to take a stance on the issue of the cash prizes accompanying the state film awards: “This is the million dollar question!”, he said. “We are not interested in dollar questions, only in cinema”, replied Mr. Mikelidis. Mr Tyros stressed that GFCA’s disagreement has to do with the selection process of the winners and not with the cash prize that accompanies the state awards. “Money was never an issue for us. Whether there is a cash prize or not, this is a matter for the awarding party to decide, i.e. the state. Provided, of course, there are no strings attached that for a film to be eligible for the state awards it must participate in the Festival. The Festival must convince filmmakers that it represents the best venue for showcasing their movies. This would make any mandatory entry provision meaningless”.
Film critic and Thessaloniki’s Cinema Museum director Vasilis Kehagias, referred to the influence the Festival has exerted on Greek cinema in previous decades.
Taking the floor, director and producer Lefteris Haronitis said: “It is the critics’ duty to open the dialogue on modern cinema, especially considering the advent of social media. There must be an overarching cinema debate. It was the Antifestival, the conflicts and the struggle of ideas that brought about the Law of 1986. It took three years of negotiations then. Now we have to hurry, to run. We have to see what changes need to be made, what the legal framework in other European counties is, which felicitous provisions of the current law are not being enforced and why, always taking under consideration the specific conditions in Greece. The Festival is not the problem – cinema itself is the problem. If only there were 53 festivals in every Greek city - the periphery needs this dissemination of cinema. Thessaloniki’s Film Festival has a bright future, because the city that has supported it for the past 50 years will continue to support and develop it in the future”.
