ROUND TABLE DISCUSSION
"NEW CINEMA, NEW PERSPECTIVES"
A Round Table discussion on "New Theater - New Perspectives" was held Wednesday, November 9 at the John Cassavetes Cinema as part of the Market activities of the 52nd International Film Festival. The director of TIFF, Dimitri Eipides, and the speakers were: Andrei Tanasescu (director of the Toronto Romanian Film Festival), Katriel Schory (Director of the Israel Film Center) and Gregory Karantinakis (General Director of the Greek Film Centre). The discussion centered on whether the recent cinematic success of three small countries, namely Romania, Israel and Greece, has been the result of organized effort or lucky coincidence.
Mr. Eipides stressed the crucial importance of emerging young Greek directors to the recent development of the domestic film industry. Then Mr. Schory spoke about his country’s cinema’s recent grim past: "I was a producer for 25 years, while for the last 12 I have been director of the Israeli Film Center. I remember that the '90s were terrible for us. '98 was the worst year in history, as all Israeli films only sold 36,000 tickets in a market of 10 million. So it was clear that we should change radically, while we asked the state for one last chance. He added: "On the one hand, we were looking for an independent legal framework for national cinema. We knew we would be finished if we did not put aside our differences or organize a solid committee of directors, producers, actors, etc. We were the ones who shaped the laws on film, as we were the only ones who knew what cuts should be made. We managed to make all film institutions independent, non-governmental, non-profit organizations. We kept the politicians away as much as possible, while constantly pressuring each individual Member of Parliament to pass our law. So, we took our destiny in our own hands and finally began to see light at the end of the tunnel. The Parliament gave us enough money for 5 years and freedom to act, while we changed everything by means of a massive program. We radically changed how we worked, from the way we financed films, to the initial idea for a film down to the film posters. So we managed to lift ourselves up, with a 13% increase in ticket sales in 2004 compared to 0.3% in '98. "
Next, Mr. Tanasescu said: "I live in Canada and I had a long-distance view of Romanian cinema. Since 2007 I began working with Romanian festivals and the so-called New Wave. At the end of the Ceausescu era, in '89, the local film industry was at level zero, while over the next few years there was a dramatic reduction in cinemas. However, this negative trend at home proved profitable abroad, as the New Wave received recognition in international festivals and international audiences, thus succeeding in obtaining foreign funding."
Mr. Karantinakis then talked about the situation in Greece: "Here things are a little different. The dire economic climate has created a series of processes in the film sector, which focus on the personal efforts of directors, who are growing like mushrooms in the forest. The new law was passed after many years, as well as tax incentives that open new possibilities. Money is everything in cinema. However, all of us at the GFC are trying to restructure the funding policies. The crisis has led to new trends and new proposals, which have also influenced the new film law. I find it normal that dynamic individuals are popping up because of the crisis." He added: "But I would not call what is happening a wave, but rather a trend by some young directors, with a different outlook. Greek cinema is now the focus of foreign festivals. As the GFC, we need to find alternative sources of funding aside from the government, and we still have a lot of work to do regarding distribution. I have lived through other crises in the past, I was a student during the Soviet Union's Perestroika. I think the crisis is an opportunity to renegotiate everything. "
Then Mr. Shory spoke, taking a wider look at other attempts made regarding Israeli cinema: "Public money was meant to create opportunities and take specific risks. A very important part of this is to find new talent, but we need a mechanism to do this and public money needs to serve this purpose. At the same time, we had to regain the audience for our films, without going overboard with production costs. We have now constructed a system that is perfectly clean and fair. Each director, no matter who he is, has to follow the same procedure in order to make his new project. Personally, it is my duty to see every student film in order to find new talent. However, in order to decide on funding, we take into account everything from the talent to the degree of preproduction that has been done." About the Israel Film Center, he added that: "It is also our responsibility to help with distribution, but of course we never interfere in the creative process. On the other hand, an important part of our Center’s budget is devoted to script development and a professional writer helps the person involved for free. The only thing that interests us is to promote what we call Israeli film, without allowing the government to interfere with our work. "
Then Mr. Tanasescu made a brief reference to the origins of the Romanian New Wave, which according to the Romanian film director and writer Christy Puiu did not begin with the generation of the early 2000’s, but by that of the '60s." With all that happened in the '90s being a shock to Romanian society, many young filmmakers had the opportunity to express themselves as they liked, without necessarily fitting in with the aesthetics of the New Wave. Mitulescu, for example, made very personal films, which did not contribute to either the New Wave or the broader history of Romanian cinema. But what they had in common was dissatisfaction with conventional mod
ern cinema." He added that: "Prior to '89 there was censorship, but then the market was flooded with Hollywood movies, so the Romanian public has not been trained to see New Wave films. Today, one in four viewers goes to see local films, but the highest percentage goes to Hollywood productions and few choose to see another European film. There is little interest in art cinema now. So, if a New Wave exists, it is because of specific people. "
Referring to the institutional framework of Romania, Mr. Tanasescu observed: "Despite the cuts, there is still funding of 7 million euro, but many scandals have come out about the practices of the Romanian Film Centre, which has been accused of supporting only recognized filmmakers." Mr. Karantinakis tried to provide more details about the actions of the GFC in supporting young directors: "The good thing is that films are being made. Our regular budget is 2.5 million Euros and our special budget which comes from tax returns is about as much, so our resources are quite limited. Many filmmakers, being aware of this, make their films either with private financing or through sharing the costs among the crew as a “team”. We are trying to restructure the way in which the Centre can help production. Everything begins with training and in Greece there is no such structure, aside from the Film Department of AUTH. For a trend to be called a wave, we must start somewhere. The GFC, already having a reduced budget will establish a program offering funding opportunities to as many people as possible, supporting directors at every stage of film production."
Talking about how it is possible to increase the audience for local movies Mr. Shory focused on the need for individual action: "First, as a specialized agency, the Israel Film Center operates by sharing responsibilities: for example, some are involved with documentaries and others with short films. Secondly, I personally urge producers to handle their own distribution. At the same time, we created a vast network in 50 cities in Israel, where there are many screenings in cultural centers, schools and camps. In addition, a viewer can buy a six month ticket so he can see six Israeli films before they come out in theaters. These screenings help us gauge public response. Our goal is for the viewer to enjoy Israeli cinema. "Shory added: "We also deal with advertising, since as a Center, we can do mass negotiations, obtaining a discount of up to 65%, which particularly benefits the producer. The fact that there is such an entity that can make such general agreements is very beneficial. Additionally, the last 4-5 years we have developed a program for upcoming directors, which can provide financing up to 50,000 Euros. However, in this program for these “rebel" filmmakers we include agreements which producers support directors no money, thus providing new possibilities."
Answering the same question, Mr. Tanasescu said: "Romanian films have had a much better reception outside Romania. It seems that what we are losing in viewers we are winning in international festivals. But there are exceptions, and in 2002 there was a film that managed to become one of the 10 best commercial movies of the year. The issue however is to produce Romanian films which can attract an audience, without them necessarily being horror films. "
The Market as an international venue for meetings and networking takes place during the International Film Festival and offers professionals a total market experience. This year, the Market of the 52nd TIFF, supported by the European MEDIA program, is participating in the Thessaloniki – Cultural Crossroads and, along with other 52nd Festival activities, is funded by the European Union – European Regional Development Fund as part of the Regional Operational Program of Central Macedonia, 2007-2013.
