As the audiovisual sector undergoes constant, rapid transformation, film schools are facing mounting pressure to adapt. This was the starting point of the panel entitled “Can Film Schools Keep Up with the Industry?”, held during the Industry@Tallinn & Baltic Event. Moderated by Anna Huth, the session gathered together representatives from FAMU, Warsaw Film School and Aalto University, alongside Taiwanese filmmaker Quentin Hsu, to examine how training institutions are navigating this shifting landscape. Huth opened with a provocatively simple question: “Do we really need film schools today?”

(El artículo continúa más abajo - Inf. publicitaria)

For FAMU’s Vice Dean Vít Schmarc, the answer remains yes. Schools, he argued, are still “part of understanding film,” even if they’re wrestling with a contradiction: “We’re gatekeepers teaching the craft, but how do we open the gates to the industry?” The tension between a school’s safe, exploratory environment and the pragmatism required after graduation remains one of his core concerns.

Artur Zaborski, Vice-Rector at Warsaw Film School, highlighted the mindset of younger students who have grown up with smartphones and who believe they already have a grasp on cinematography. “Then they come to film school, study cinematography, and after two months realise they know nothing.” A key challenge is getting them “past that obstacle” and rebuilding their understanding from scratch.

Filmmaker Quentin Hsu offered a counter-example. Now 42, he personally didn’t graduate from film school but stressed he’s “not a villain.” Film schools shaped him indirectly through open courses and literature. He recalled being rejected from certain schools and being unable to afford others. To survive, he worked as a PA, learning directly from Taipei’s film community. His path, he insisted, “was never about wanting to be a director first, it was about finding a job to survive.” His debut Admission is screening in the festival’s First Feature Film competition.

From Aalto University, Hanna Maylett reflected on her 1990s training. “We were taught production and technical skills, but we totally missed out on the collaboration side of things,” she lamented. Today, she sees teamwork as fundamental: “This is a collective art form.” She also stressed resilience — emotional and professional — as a teachable skill. “We weren’t taught how to be resilient, how to work in a harsh industry, how to get your films made… It’s also a skill knowing how to process the fact that you’re not where you want to be.” Aalto’s course now includes a Professional Practice module covering pitching, scholarships and communication with producers.

Schmarc agreed that schools rarely prepare students for the difficult transition after graduation, “a very depressing period” where they have to earn money whilst pursuing their first feature. Schools provide “a safe haven,” he explained, “but then you end up in a jungle where you need to be very pragmatic.” His priority is strengthening ties with the industry and with incubators.

Zaborski described Warsaw Film School’s practice-driven approach. “We teach practice,” he said. Students make films every year and go through market-like pitching sessions in which a council allocates funding. Professors may reject projects if they seem “oneiric [or] metaphorical”: “They want to teach you how to make a film, not how to become an artist.” Students can then rework projects and pitch them again.

At FAMU, budgeting follows a more egalitarian model. “We have a white book — the budget is the same for everyone; your money is guaranteed,” Schmarc enthused. The school also oversees playful exercises such as the DoP-led “dream” assignment. But with 600 students producing around 500 films or exercises per year, quantity brings risks. Whilst this volume offers “an incredible number of opportunities to make mistakes and learn,” it can also lead to burnout — a recurring theme across schools.

Maylett confirmed that burnout had once been widespread at Aalto, prompting the introduction of artistic and self-leadership courses — how to lead a crew and how to be led — with gradual progression from BA to MA. “The proportion of burnout has decreased,” she confirmed, adding that emotional management “is one of the skills you can actually teach.”

All three educators acknowledged the challenge of updating curricula amid constant market shifts. Maylett questioned whether film schools should try to be reactive at all. “Continuity is more important,” she argued. With industry conditions changing within months, chasing trends creates instability; skills and expectations must be treated as long-term foundations.

The panel also touched upon internationalisation. Zaborski explained that international students at Warsaw Film School follow a curriculum similar to Polish students, though locals study more national cinema and literature; international students also learn Polish. At Aalto, Finnish BA and international MA students frequently work in mixed groups, with English as the primary language.

Audience questions prompted discussion around collaborations with start-ups and other disciplines. Zaborski insisted that Warsaw Film School is “very open,” while Maylett noted Aalto’s proximity to engineering, business and science faculties. Though not structurally integrated, interdisciplinary collaborations often arise organically as students approach graduation.

By the end of the panel, a nuanced picture had emerged: film schools remain essential, but only if they evolve, balancing artistic exploration with market readiness, whilst offering stability in a volatile industry. Above all, as Maylett put it, their promise is to “support students to find their voice,” ensuring that new filmmakers can enter the field with both creativity and resilience.