With the 59th edition of the Karlovy Vary International Film Festival (4-12 July) approaching, Cineuropa spoke to its artistic director, Karel Och, about the lasting legacy of the festival’s president, the late Jiří Bartoška, and its evolving programming strategies. Och reflects on the inclusion of more formally and thematically provocative films, the incorporation of new voices within the selection team, and the festival’s ongoing commitment to supporting emerging Central and Eastern European talent.

Cineuropa: The recent passing of festival president Jiří Bartoška, who led the gathering for decades, surely leaves a void. Has this led to any structural or leadership changes?
Karel Och: We agreed with our colleagues that Jiří Bartoška’s position of president should end with him. The way he embodied this role was so unique and inimitable, through his personality, charisma, expertise and charm, that attempting to replace him simply felt inappropriate. In recent years, Mr Bartoška was much less involved in the festival’s executive decision making, so operationally, nothing will change dramatically. However, we are now carefully thinking about the best way to honour his memory, not just as an actor, but also as the festival’s long-time face and spirit.

Regarding this year’s edition, were there any new selection principles or themes shaping the main competition?
There was one important procedural change: for the second year, our former programmer Martin Horyna remains involved externally, focusing on Asian cinema. And for the first time in our modern history, we brought a foreign member into our core programming team, Lorenzo Esposito, a long-time delegate for Italian films, and a former selector for Locarno and the Berlinale. Having him on board naturally introduced some new dynamics and discussions. I’m curious as to whether our audience will pick up on a slight shift in taste this year. We have given a bit more space to films that are more provocative, both in form and in subject.

Can you give an example of such a movie this year?
A very good example is the Greek title They Come Out of Margo [see the news] in our Proxima Competition. It’s centred on the personal crisis of its titular protagonist, conveyed through an unconventional form blending various influences, including animation techniques reminiscent of Jan Švankmajer. It’s a vivid, unpredictable audiovisual cocktail – exactly the type of work we aim to champion in Proxima.

Several films from Central and Eastern Europe seem to share themes of societal disconnection, disrupted structures and personal alienation. Is this something you observed across the submissions?
Absolutely, it’s not something we consciously plan in advance, but it does reflect certain recurring themes that filmmakers are drawn to. I think these motifs are still very much connected to the region’s ongoing political, economic and mental transformations. There’s also a strong generational dimension: younger filmmakers are increasingly exploring their own identities in contrast to the older generations, whose experiences and cultural frameworks can feel quite distant from theirs.

Speaking of younger filmmakers, there seems to be a strong focus on emerging talent this year, especially among Czech and Slovak filmmakers. Was this intentional?
It’s a natural evolution of our ongoing efforts. For example, Dužan Duong’s Summer School, 2001 [+lee también:
crítica
entrevista: Dužan Duong
ficha de la película] is a film we’ve followed closely: he brings a cosmopolitan perspective and a strong cinematic education. Katarína Gramatová, whose movie Promise, I'll Be Fine [+lee también:
crítica
ficha de la película] we are hosting as a European premiere here, is an alumna of our Future Frames programme, so we’re proud to see her development. Ondřej Provazník, with Broken Voices [+lee también:
crítica
tráiler
entrevista: Ondřej Provazník
ficha de la película], is making his solo debut in fiction features, while Miro Remo remains a focused documentary filmmaker whose approach we truly value; he brings along Better Go Mad in the Wild [+lee también:
crítica
tráiler
entrevista: Miro Remo
ficha de la película]. So, fostering emerging talents and watching them evolve remains central to our mission.

On that note, the festival also runs KVIFF Talents. How does this initiative feed into the festival programme itself?
Our aim, like many festivals, is to support films at various stages of their lifecycle. While we never impose conditions like premiere requirements, we do hope our development programmes can help promising projects take shape, and sometimes those projects eventually return to our main selections. Additionally, this year, we’re launching KVIFF Central Stage [see the news], a new industry platform focused on showing off the new projects by established filmmakers from our region to the international industry. It’s designed to respond to changes in how projects are scouted today, as distributors and sales agents increasingly get involved much earlier on, during the development stage.

KVIFF has been balancing its public and industry sides. How are you shaping the festival experience for both communities this year?
We’re working to ensure that the programme doesn’t overwhelm either group; we want industry guests to have time to attend screenings and engage with filmmakers. This year, for example, we have an intriguing project that exemplifies this attempt at bridging: a feature film which is a cinematic cut of the Czech video game Kingdom Come: Deliverance II. It’s a fascinating experiment in adapting video-game storytelling for cinema.

This year, you have programmed several titles with extended running times, such as TrepaNation [+lee también:
crítica
tráiler
ficha de la película] and When a River Becomes the Sea [+lee también:
crítica
tráiler
entrevista: Pere Vilà Barceló
ficha de la película]. How do you approach this as programmers?
We strongly believe that auteur cinema should take the form it needs. If we sense that a filmmaker’s vision requires three hours to unfold meaningfully, we support that, provided the result truly justifies its length. Yes, these films will divide audiences and demand more attention, but they also offer unique viewing experiences that can expand how we think about cinema itself.

Some festivals face tension between programming more audience-friendly films versus more formally radical works. Do you encounter this dilemma?
Not really. We don’t see it as a conflict. These two strands of cinema can absolutely coexist. We want to offer viewers a clear path: those seeking accessible films can find them, while those craving more challenging or experimental works can as well.