09/05/2014 - Thierry Frémaux, Artistic Director and General Delegate of the Cannes Festival, breaks down his selection for 2014 and the current trends in world cinema

A few days away from the 67th Cannes Festival (14-25 May 2014), Thierry Frémaux, Artistic Director and General Delegate of the world's most important film event, sheds light on his selection for 2014 and shares his thoughts on current trends in the seventh art.

Cineuropa: How would you rate the quality of the range of films vying for selection at the Cannes Festival this year? What shape is arthouse cinema production in in the various regions of the world, particularly Europe?
Thierry Frémaux: It's always tricky to draw conclusions based on analysing one single year of selection. The general outlines take shape over, say, half a decade at least. On the other hand, the Cannes Festival finds itself in a very fortunate situation: people come and show it the best of arthouse cinema. But despite these reservations, I can say that arthouse cinema, the cinema that focuses on actual directing, the cinema designed to be an art form, which constitutes the very raison d’être of the Cannes Festival – this arthouse cinema is strong, inventive, varied and has for years been spreading like wild fire all across the globe. Cannes is thus able to showcase countries from all around the world that are very active in this domain (for example, Argentina, Kazakhstan, China and even the continent of Africa) and to emphasise how, despite the financial crisis, European cinema is continuing to produce unique and singular works, for example from England, Sweden, Italy and France.

Do you ideally look for a balance when you are putting together your selection (between young filmmakers and the masters, mixing up the genres of the films, trying to represent every continent if you possibly can, etc), or do you tend to favour love at first sight as a film fan? How do you approach this task?
We begin with the selection in November, adopting the same stance every year: the editorial policy will be established by the works themselves. We don’t define anything in advance; we are at the mercy of the films. Apart from that, yes, we do try to respect certain balances. A selection has to gather together different generations, styles and geographical origins. And it’s the sum total of these films that gives us the "policy", if indeed there is one. Fundamentally, the only policy is the quality of the films because once the lights go out in the theatre, the only thing that counts is the film itself; we don’t give priority to anything other than the strength of the work that’s been put forward.

How would you describe your selection for 2014, particularly the competition?
I think we’re in quite a similar situation to the one we were in during the 1960s: alongside the run-of-the-mill, commercial cinema at that time, Cannes was shining a light on the writer-director filmmakers who had a unique take on the world. People went to Cannes (or to the major festivals in general) in order to celebrate great creators. Today, in the age of the everyday digital all comers, the series, the internet and so on, people will be coming to Cannes for the same reason: to see great filmmakers at work. The Festival will remind people of the singular spot that cinematic works occupy within the audiovisual whole. And that is significant. If not, who would take a three-hour-and-twenty-minute look at a man’s solitude in the deepest, remotest parts of Turkey, as Nuri Bilge Ceylan did?

Do you have a more specific editorial policy for Un Certain Regard?
Two facts have to be taken into account if you want to fully understand what Un Certain Regard is: it’s not possible for all the films to be in competition, either because of the restriction on numbers or because they’re not all robust enough to endure such an ordeal; in fact, the Official Selection had to find something, some way to accommodate works that were somehow different, unique or fragile. And we needed a way to shine more of a light on young cinema than we can do in competition (even though the competition this year is giving young filmmakers a great deal). But otherwise, I usually define Un Certain Regard as “the Official Selection’s own counter-programme”.

Is France playing an important role in the production of films all around the world? How do you interpret this drive? Is it a blessing, or does it sometimes complicate your selection work because of the issue of determining a film’s nationality?
France is a country with great cinema and is considered to be a major player. A few days before we left for Cannes, Gilles Jacob and I were hosted by the French president, together with the filmmakers who had been selected in competition. Such a degree of attention and thoughtfulness isn’t common in other countries around the world. This tradition of love for cinema is the lifeblood of our entire society: we have movie theatres, producers, distributors, writer-directors, critics, historians, film libraries, teachers specialising in cinema, magazines, a National Center of Cinematography to manage it all and so on. Lastly, yes, France has an economic and legal system that really joins forces with the creative industry in order to make it stronger. And it is indeed both a blessing and a curse because Cannes is not a “French” festival, but rather a global festival that takes place in France. And our job entails supporting all the film industries, not just French cinema, even though it is clearly important.

What is your view on the sometimes difficult process of screening arthouse films in movie theatres? What do you think of the day-and-date solution for releases recommended by certain professionals?
Let's not generalise: a great many arthouse films do manage to find an audience. You just need to go abroad to understand the considerable privilege that the French have. So any remarks intended to complain about certain arthouse films finding it hard to reach theatre screens seem to me not to correspond particularly well with reality. That's not to say that everything's perfect – far from it. But sometimes it's an automatic mantra that has a lot to do with professed helplessness. It's assumed that arthouse cinema draws smaller audiences than mainstream cinema. It's only the latter type that people demand to be successful because that's exactly what it's designed to do. But it's also arthouse cinema's job to be at the forefront of creativeness. Yet this isn't always the case, and nor, for that matter, does mainstream cinema consistently draw in the crowds. But France has also always stood out because of its inventiveness, particularly thanks to its efforts to rally filmmakers, writer-director societies, the authorities and so on. It seems to be lagging behind what's going on elsewhere. Everyone is aware of it, and things will move forward. The most important thing is to protect our pool of movie theatres, but also not to remain frozen in a world that is itself changing a great deal.

(Translated from French)