1-10 November 2013
Press Conference by the International Jury
The jury of the International Competition section of the 54th Thessaloniki International Film Festival held a press conference on Monday, 4 November 2013, at Warehouse C of the Thessaloniki port complex. TIFF director Dimitri Eipides attended the press conference. This year’s jury president is American director of Greek descent Alexander Payne, who is joined by Variety magazine film critic Scott Foundas, producer Ada Solomon, musician and composer K. Bhta and Edouard Waintrop, artistic director of Quinzaine des realisateurs at the Cannes Film Festival.
In his opening remarks, Mr Eipides said: “I am very happy and proud to have such wonderful and distinguished professionals as jurors. Alexander Payne is the president of the jury. He has visited the Festival in the past and we are very proud he is part of our jury. His movie Nebraska will be the closing film of the 54th edition of the Festival. Scott Foundas is an important and esteemed film critic from New York, widely read and respected by filmmakers. I also still find it hard to believe that Ada Solomon, the most distinguished producer of Romanian cinema, made the time to join the jury - I think perhaps the other jurors were the key. Edouard Waintrop has been a film critic for the French newspaper Liberation for 26 years; he is very active in a number of fields and he also serves as the artistic director of Quinzaine des realisateurs at the Cannes Film Festival. I am also happy I was able to convince Mr Bhta, a very talented musician and painter, to find the time to judge the films of this year’s international competition.
Taking the floor, jury president Alexander Payne said: “Standing here next to all those cinema connoisseurs, I feel primus inter pares, first among equals. We will be meeting on Tuesday, then again on Thursday, and by Friday we will have reached a verdict. I believe festival juries should adopt two perspectives: on one hand, we are called to use all our knowledge and experience in judging the films, but at the same time we should pretend that each one is the first film we ever saw, watching the films as if we were children.”
Ada Solomon added: “It is a great honor to be a member of the jury of a beloved festival that has helped my career immensely, through both the Competition and the Agora sections. I am filled with awe sitting next to my fellow jurors. I also feel rather selfish, because I think that being part of this jury will enrich me with new experiences and knowledge, since every film is a journey to a different world through the different vision of each filmmaker. Each juror will see the films from his or her own perspective and this is both typical and useful to all of us. I don’t believe our role is to judge the films, but rather to celebrate cinema and see the films through the eyes of our soul. Simply participating in this prestigious festival is at any rate an important distinction for the films. Who wins will depend on the sensitivities and personal approach of the jurors, but our judgment is not the Gospel. I am against this kind of hierarchy.”
Edouard Waintrop noted: “For me, this is a light duty - in Cannes, we have to watch 700 films and prepare a single program, whereas here we will only watch 14 films, those taking part in the competition section. So there is no pressure, only enjoyment.” Scott Foundas agreed and added: “I don’t have to write about the films I watch. Also, when I worked for the New York Film Festival, I sometimes had to watch incomplete films. Here, the films are screened exactly as the filmmaker intended, so it is different. I have only seen one of the films from the Festival’s competition lineup, so I am looking forward to discovering new films.”
Mr Bhta said: “I am very happy to be here. I have attended the Festival as a member of the audience many times in the past. It is very important for me that I am joining these important people, sharing things with them. When I go to the movies, I expect the film to let me communicate with that feeling, that universal vibe. Cinema breaks down frontiers and national borders. Movies let you see the things that unite and separate us. It is also a great experience to see what these emerging directors have to share with the rest of us. Personally, I have another expectation from films: a movie must be able to transcend history, to “penetrate,” and create poetry at a deeper level, going beyond the narrative.”
The other jurors also discussed their own expectations. “In a competitive section, you hope to discover the new generation of voices, not only directors, but also actors, scriptwriters, and other contributors competing for the various prizes. I have watched four films already and I can say that these new filmmakers are truly fascinating,” said Mr Foundas. Alexander Payne added: “We like movies! Film festivals are like christenings. You celebrate the birth of a new film, a film that, if it is worth it, will stay with you for a very long time. And it would not be an exaggeration to say that we are the godfathers of those films.” Ms Solomon commented: “I want to keep the pleasure, which is why I watch the films through the eyes of the average viewer. It would be a mistake to focus on the technical aspects. I try to watch the films through the eyes of my heart.” Mr Payne said in turn: “However, for me it is impossible to overlook the technical aspects - the script, the direction, the editing; but I also watch the film like a child. And if a film makes me forget of the technical aspects, it means it is a very good film.”
The jurors commented extensively on a question about the new wave of Greek cinema. Mr Waintrop observed: “I dislike ‘labels’. I judge filmmakers individually. So much nonsense has been said in the past about the French new wave, that I have long avoided using labels. It is true that there are good Greek filmmakers, but that is all I can say. I do not want to talk about a ‘new wave’ in Argentina, Belgium, Greece or anyplace else.” Mr Foundas added: “These are films that definitely draw attention. I have written about the Romanian new wave and the German school, but the filmmakers themselves dismiss such terms, because they don’t feel they are part of some organized movement. Still, critics use these ‘labels’ for practical reasons. The Greek cinema is attracting a lot of attention, which was not the case perhaps ten years ago, while important changes have also transformed distribution and the number of films participating in international festivals. The doors are open, and now we have to wait and see what happens. There are three or four very interesting Greek filmmakers; we are waiting for more to emerge.”
Commenting on the dichotomy between commercial and independent cinema, in relation to the financial crisis and its effects on the film industry, Ms Solomon said: “I don’t know if it is just the financial crisis, a wider crisis in film or something else. You have two kinds of cinema: fast food and gourmet cinema, the latter being a kind of slow food, a food for thought. There are movies that raise your awareness on certain issues and stay with you for a long time. And I do believe the audience is now thirsty for originality. People are no longer content with simply buying a burger and devouring it. They are searching for new flavors. If you have spent your entire life eating french fries and you suddenly discover caviar, you start eating slowly, small pieces at a time. I think this is the case with Festivals, special programs and artist meetings: they foster love of film. Mass distribution is not what it used to be; it will either become digital or evolve into something else. At any rate, cinema will continue to exist and we must change our perception of it.”
Mr Foundas added: “It is a fact that movies now reflect the financial crisis. Even Hollywood productions do that, an industry that used to show only rich people with successful careers. In last year’s Bridesmaids, for example, the protagonist cannot afford a plane ticket from Detroit to Las Vegas - this is something you wouldn’t have seen in the past.” Mr Waintrop observed: “In some countries cinema is threatened by the crisis. In Spain, Portugal and Greece some subsidies are no longer available. But I am not sure that the crisis is truly global, affecting all countries in the same way. In Latin America, for example, subsidies are abundant. Cinema is under threat particularly in the European South”.
Jurors also commented on the view that “national cinema” has become a trend. Mr Waintrop said: “Perhaps exoticism is at play here, but let us not forget that the Press is interested in selling copies. I know that very well, I worked for a newspaper for 26 years. The important thing is to go beyond ‘labels’.” Alexander Payne pointed out that national cinema is often the child of historical necessity, with Mr Waintrop adding: “After WW I, German cinema was outstanding. But this is a judgment we can make now. I don’t think we can foresee whether Greek cinema will continue to be important in ten years. It is premature. Only later can we appreciate what worked and what didn’t. The situation becomes more complicated by the fact that, during a crisis, young people may disappear or find alternative means of expression. The only common element with France is that French filmmakers wanted to make movies that were different from the ones their fathers made; they also had fewer resources, which is why they took to the streets. The financial crisis had played no role in that development. I know that in Spain there are filmmakers trying to make films with minimal budgets and they can do that, thanks to the digital media.”
Mr Foundas added: “I am also somewhat suspicious of trends and doubt their actual existence - sometimes they are simply coined by journalists and the Press. But it is noteworthy that a new Romanian cinema burst out of nowhere. The same is happening in Greece, it might also happen in Arab countries as well. I can’t draw a clear line between reality and exaggeration, but it is often the case that interesting cinema is born out of violent political events.”
Ms Solomon noted: “Speaking from my experience from Romania, I would say it is important to take advantage of the attention some films draw, because it doesn’t last very long. In 2013, around 20 or 22 Romanian feature films were candidates for the Cannes Festival. Not all of them are masterpieces of course, nor are the filmmakers well-known. But the fact remains that these films travel abroad, carrying the voice of their makers. Nothing lasts forever and attention turns elsewhere: to Greece, Mexico, the Arabic countries. Romanian cinema’s “minimalism” is not only about form, but reflects our limited resources as well. We must do the best we can with what we have.”
In her closing remarks, Ms Solomon gave a piece of advice to Greek filmmakers: “Stay united. Forget your egos, you need each other. A film is a collective project: it is not only the director and the actors, it is also the wonderful technicians, the scriptwriters, all the other contributors. I believe that if you stay united you will help yourselves and your work, your future voices, building a more powerful reputation.”
