11/12/2002

An interview with the Head of Co-productions and Acquisitions at the Drama department of ARTE François Sauvagnargues: “Artistic creativity must not be polluted by financial cooperation”.

364 films from every corner of Europe were presented at the Eureka Screenings. What does this say about the current European film panorama?
“It is important to see the direction each country has taken in terms of production and even if the numbers do not give us great cause for optimism, meetings like Eureka show that we are going in the right direction, regardless. As head of European co-productions and drama acquisitions for TV channel ARTE, I came here to get an overview of what is happening in the Balkans, and I must say that what I saw was interesting.”

There is much talk of the financial problems associated with circulating European films in Europe. Is the problem just financial?
“With the exception of a handful of films like Amélie or those by Pedro Almodòvar, it depends on the stories and on the way in which the films were made. And, of course, on the cast. It often happens that actors who are famous in one country are virtual unknowns elsewhere. I think that TV has an important role to play in widening the circle of film circulation.”

And more precisely?
“For example, ARTE has long put Europe on the top of its list of priorities. However we have to defend French cinema before all others, and do that with a budget that is way below that enjoyed by the more important TV channels. By year’s end we will have co-produced around 20 films: both a lot and a little. Clearly our first duty is to French cinema, and there is little space left for the rest. We continue to produce films by Angelopoulos and Wenders but there it is a more a question auteur-driven films. There’s very little space for new young talents. The financial aspect is gaining importance on a daily basis. We often programme entire cycles of films, the most recent dedicated to Yugoslavian cinema. But these are mostly retrospectives, six films at most, that illustrate the chosen country’s film industry in a rather summary fashion.”

And perhaps the audience is not as large...
“That is another important aspect. Many films, even really good ones, are aired in their original version with subtitles, and it’s therefore to be expected that they only manage to attract a niche audience. And that does not contribute to getting more funding, a fundamental element if we are to pursue our policy of increasing the circulation of European films.”

Returning for a moment to the issue of circulating European films, how can co-productions help here?
“On the European level, coproductions for films are obligatory. That also applies to television: major productions like Napoleon could never have been made without co-production. One only manages to get funding for film and TV projects if big names are invovled: directors like Michael Haneke or Roman Polanski. Films by artists of their calibre can do well or less well but they will always be easy to sell abroad.”
All too often co-productions are the result of financial cooperation. Artistic creativity should not be polluted by financing and coproductions and therefore by compromises about the screenplay or the choice of the actors. When that happens the final result is disappointing and gets an equally disappointing reception. The results of contradictory or inconsistent decisions are never successful. The films that work are the ones that are based on a proper project and which are made without giving in to compromise.”

Could you list the weak points of European cinema with respect to its American counterpart?
“That relationship cannot be compared. America is a big country where one language is spoken and this is an extraordinary strength. Europa does not even begin to approach this: we will never resolve the language problem. But we must concentrate first and foremost on the public: people always go to see an American film first, and only later do they see national or European productions. It goes without saying that when a film is good, it will always find an audience, wherever. For example the films of Almodovar’or Amélie. So we have to think in terms of the project: does it appeal or not? The United States are successful because their action and special effects films appeal mainly to a younger audience. That is a type of cinema that Europe cannot always reproduce, and even when it tries, as in the case of Luc Besson’s The Fifth Element, you realise right away that the resulting films are very distant from the American blockbusters of the same genre. The latest results show that we are recovering our genre cinema: a growing number of European directors are making adventure, thrillers and historical films with excellent results. Things are finally moving in the right direction and that will bring justice to European cinema.”