Giona A Nazzaro speaks passionately about his experience as artistic director of the Locarno Film Festival (5-15 August), the changes he would still like to introduce and, above all, cinema’s role as a mirror reflecting an increasingly complex world.

Cineuropa: In your view, what are the main new developments and trends emerging from this year’s selection?
Giona A Nazzaro: We realised that having the privilege of programming a festival at a historic moment such as the one we are living through also comes with a certain degree of responsibility. We tried to put together a programme that, when revisited many years from now, might show that those who conceived it were asking themselves some very specific questions: what does it mean to create an image today? What does it mean to present it to an audience? And what happens when two images are placed in relation to one another? This may sound like an abstract reflection, but it actually concerns the relationship between cinema and its historical moment. We asked ourselves whether it is still possible to conceive images capable of engaging with the present.

The other fundamental element we reflected on was the pleasure of watching a film. Engaging with the present does not mean giving up the pleasure of cinema. The question that accompanied us throughout the selection process was very simple: would we go and see these films ourselves? In short, we tried to create a programme that is conscious of the historical moment we are living through while also remaining varied, adventurous and, in the most etymological sense of the word, diverting.

In the Filmmakers of the Present competition [see the news], I noticed that many of the filmmakers come from different backgrounds, including contemporary art, video, writing and performance. This multidisciplinary approach seems to be increasingly widespread. How do you interpret it?
I believe it stems from several factors. On the one hand, the way films are being produced has changed profoundly. On the other, the way we access images has been radically transformed. For aspiring filmmakers, traditional cinephilia meant spending entire days in film archives. Today, people engage with the history of cinema through far more diverse paths.

Another crucial factor must also be taken into account: the circulation of images is now entirely digital. In the past, it took place mainly in cinemas and film clubs. This was followed by the era of pay television, which helped spread arthouse cinema. Today, however, people can build their own cinephilia through YouTube, digital platforms or online communities that share even extremely rare materials. Inevitably, this also changes the way filmmakers look at and use images.

There has also been another important transformation: from the 1990s onwards, what became known as the “creative documentary” gained ground. People came to understand that reality could also be portrayed through an openly subjective perspective, rather than solely through an apparently objective approach. On top of all of this, there is also a significant generational factor.

I noticed that there are relatively few first features in the International Competition [see the news]. Given the festival’s strong commitment to supporting emerging filmmakers, how do you explain this choice?
In recent years, we have deliberately changed the role of our main competitive sections. In the past, the Filmmakers of the Present competition was closely associated with the idea of first or second films. Today, we prefer to free it from this strictly career-based criterion. A director can be a “filmmaker of the present” even after having made several movies. What interests us is the vitality of their perspective, not how many works they have already completed.

This decision has enabled us to create a broader selection, also welcoming filmmakers who have reached their third or fourth feature. More generally, our aim is to support contemporary cinema by helping it exist beyond the festival circuit. We want to prevent these filmmakers from being perceived solely as “festival filmmakers”. The real challenge is ensuring that these movies find distributors, are acquired, circulate and reach increasingly broad audiences.

So that means support for emerging filmmakers does not end with their selection for the festival.
Exactly. One need only look at what often happens after a first film: many filmmakers struggle enormously to make their second. This is even more pronounced among women directors, with gaps that can get drawn out to five or six years.

For this reason, I consider it essential to create the conditions that make the transition from a first to a second film genuinely possible. The future of cinema undoubtedly depends on artistic freedom, but also on the concrete possibility of these works being seen, distributed and supported financially. In recent years, this position has been borne out. Several films presented at Locarno have subsequently been distributed in numerous countries and received international awards, enabling their filmmakers to secure the resources needed to make their subsequent works. Personally, I am wary of the idea of a festival that celebrates arthouse cinema without asking whether it can also thrive beyond the festival circuit.

I believe that today, particularly in Europe, this is also a political issue. We are living through a complex historical moment, marked by international tensions and mounting difficulties in sustaining cultural policies. In this context, it is essential to defend a strong, young, pluralistic and artistically free European cinema. I believe Locarno can play an important role in precisely this direction.

After these years at the helm of the Locarno Film Festival, what continues to motivate you? Are there any projects or new initiatives you would still like to introduce?
What continues to motivate me above all is curiosity. I would describe these years at Locarno as a long apprenticeship, a process of self-education. Each edition represents an opportunity to learn something new and to reflect on the present.

Looking to the future, I would like to broaden the festival’s scope still further, creating an even more explicit bridge with what we commonly refer to as contemporary art. My ambition is therefore to create more spaces for encounters and to expand the festival’s cultural offering even further.