European film funds: the last hope?

Earlier this month, an editorial in the Argentinean film website otroscines.com entitled “Bye Bye Europe” reported on a situation that was (and still is) seen as a very troublesome: several European governments have decreased the percentage of their financial support for film funds intended to help filmmakers from non-European countries - such as, for example, the Dutch Hubert Bals Fund of the Rotterdam Film Festival. The general landscape the article depicted was that the financial crisis had finally reached the film funds circuit worldwide, and that this would surely have an impact on the development of independent cinema in non-EU countries, specifically in Argentina.

Why was this so important? Well, because the role European film funds have played in the emergence of new filmmakers from these countries has been essential. Artists like Lisandro Alonso, Apichatpong Weerasethakul or Tsai Ming Liang – who are now renowned filmmakers, regarded as aesthetic beacons for cinema – were all granted at some point early in their careers a much-needed helping hand from institutions such as the Hubert Bals Fund, Fond Sud or the World Cinema Fund. Here in Alba, the recently created TorinoFilmLab is doing its share by inviting more than 30 projects for its Training and Development Programmes, and planning to award 50.000 - 200.000 euros at its Final Event, in November.

The flow of European funds for Third World countries’ films was particularly strong during the late 90s, when the economic recipes of neoliberal think-tanks that where strictly applied had very little consideration for cultural spending in general, and young cinema in particular. Even in the cases where there was some sort of government funding system, it was certainly not easily accessible for newcomers. So today, European film funds have become a backbone for young filmmakers trying to get their films made and seen by as many people as possible (which within the current international distribution circuit has proven to be not so much a business as an adventure, or even a suicide mission).

However many people think that such a dynamic also has had its downsides, such as the search for the ‘next big trend’ (like the cinemas of Iran, Argentina and Romania have been), and the degree of influence these funds have had in projects –this influence sometimes becoming a kind of dependency. This would translate into projects being tailor-cut to fit the kind of “local” imagery and stories expected by European audiences and selection committees. These expectations (and the filmmakers’ will to follow them in order to get financing) have driven some films to portray local issues and characters in a way that some have interpreted as the result of internalising the European perspective when looking at one’s own culture. On the more financial side, these projects get further away from local government funding, as the presence of these funds give official institutions the excuse to keep financing already established or well-connected filmmakers.

Although the financial crisis is surely having an effect on the independent film industry, film funds are still there to lend a hand to those talented young filmmakers who need them to realise their visions. And while some are really hopeful that the world’s economy won’t destroy this option, many also believe that this hypothetical “save ourselves” situation can be an opportunity for the self-sufficient growth of their local independent cinemas. The debate is still open.

Agustin Mango