Helge Albers

Congratulations for your invitation to the “Atelier”. What kind of possibilities do you think will result from this participation for Red Cross? We have a German-Portuguese coproduction with funds from Berlin-Brandenburg, the Portuguese and Turin film funds. This is a stable funding, which can be extended. In Cannes we will be searching for partners, who want to be involved without considerably changing the structure of the coproduction model. The main idea is to be present at the “Atelier”, find partners and make the project visible at an early stage.

Which challenges do you see in Red Cross? This is a project which works for me on an emotional level. I am interested in the main character; I want to know what drives this person and get to know him on a very open level without prejudices. I met Hugo and realised that he wants to challenge himself with this film - he is up for a tightrope walk on virgin cinematographic soil, which convinced me.

Based on which factors do you chose new projects? It’s different from project to project. We try to find films that are special. Hundreds of films are screened in cinemas every year - you have to produce films that stand out. The goal has to be to produce films which are inventive, tell the viewers something they haven’t seen this way before and are entertaining at the same time. But entertainment is a flexible term. From my point of view entertaining films can be challenging, animating and inspiring films. We try to find projects that can be both entertaining and intellectually inspiring.

The consequences of the financial crisis on the film industry are not negligible. What are your strategies as a producer? You have to find films for an explicitly definable public. You have to be able to address parts of the public that have been neglected. As e.g. has happened with Wolke Neun or the Korean documentary Old Partner, which started with seven copies and has gained 14 million dollars in the Box Office so far. This is the kind of movie nobody is counting on, which is difficult to plan and to sell. But it shows evidently, that there is an audience that wants to be found. The more focused a film is on addressing its audience, the higher the possibility to be seen in the cinema.

What is your evaluation of the recent developments in digital production and distribution? Internet piracy used to harm the majors more than the independent companies. But this is going to change as digital distribution is becoming more important for independent films. The advantage of digital distribution is that small interest groups can be reached more effectively. The disadvantage however is the possibility to copy and spread the films, which is going to affect the independent companies as well. But I can’t tell yet if this is going to affect Flying Moon existentially – from my perspective right now I wouldn’t say so. I support the French model, which unites producers to assume control over the digital film rights. The web is the key to the target audiences, thus the branding of independent companies is critical. There are no models yet that are marketable. And as long as the situation in Germany is vague, we wait and see.

In your opinion, is there a “European cinema”, aside from cultural and national specificities? It’s difficult to identify a European cinema per se. I think there are French, English and German Cinemas that have a “national handwriting”. The individual characteristics of films which are the results of coproductions have more interesting aspects, in my opinion. I think that films such as Bienvenue chez les Ch’tis, Billy Elliot, East is East and Amélie are successful in Germany, even though they don’t have a German background, because they tell stories that are understood - which also reflects the wishes of German audiences. You can’t give consideration to a film and its creators if you classify it by its national aspects.

Zsuzsanna Kiràly