HEARTOF THETIGER photo: Ruud Jonkers
43rd International Film Festival Rotterdam #3 Saturday 25 January 2014
Domo de Europa Historio en Ekzilo
The good, the bad and the EU In a European election year and with support for the ‘European idea’ seemingly crumbling, IFFR includes three strands in its Signals programme that take a deep look at what Europe means to us today: what is ‘The State of Europe’? By Irina Trocan Walking through Thomas Bellinck’s exhibition ‘Domo de Europa Historio en Ekzilo’, all certainties about a prosperous European Union – maybe undergoing a recession, certainly doing its best to recover from one –slowly but surely begin to fade. Each room in this tour, which must be undertaken solo, is part of a museum looking back on what once seemed a plausible dream of peace and integration. The signs were already there – by 2017, even by 2008! – but everyone imagined they were living in a post-war world, when in fact it was the Second Interbellum. The exhibition accompanies this year’s Signals programme on ‘The State of Europe’. The films in the programme’s three sections – ‘Grand Tour’, ‘My Own Private Europe’ and ‘EU-29’ – can all be interpreted as sending ‘signals’ about pressing European concerns. However, they are not unvaryingly pessimistic, nor are they all primarily concerned with the EU as an institution; for some, it is more a distant backdrop, gaining clarity as the story progresses. House of Europe
“Rutger Wolfson had the idea for the State of Europe programme; he wanted it to be big, about fifty films.
Sign up for four digitals dailies containing CineMart and industry news from the festival grounds brought to you by Screen International, from Sunday 26 January. Register for the e-mail newsletters at www.screendaily.com/news.
12
We started discussing it without necessarily agreeing on what we thought about the programme, or about Europe. But this isn’t necessary, I guess; if you build a building – a House of Europe – every film is a window”, says programmer Gerwin Tamsma (curator of the ‘Grand Tour’ section), paralleling what Henry James once said about the multi-perspective House of Fiction. The ‘Grand Tour’ takes its name from a tradition among upper-class European families in the 17th to 19th centuries; sending their young men on a trip around Europe as a means of completing their education. “For my section, I was interested in what cinema traditions are alive in Europe and the way filmmakers deal with European issues. The audience should understand these references intuitively, based on their experience as spectators – there are very few people who will see The Selfish Giant, for instance, who have never seen a Ken Loach film. Of course, I think all films in the programme work perfectly on their own, but by placing them here they pose questions about Europe and about European filmmaking traditions.” Asked whether it’s possible to talk of national schools in an era of globalization and ‘Euro pudding’ (European co-productions that take advantage of several countries’ fiscal peculiarities but have no clear cultural identity or ambition), Tamsma replies: “We include a film in the Rotterdam selection because it speaks to us – not strictly to its local audience. Personally, I don’t like films that are rootless. Even if films have national idiosyncrasies that don’t translate very well, I still want to see them.” He adds there is great potential for European co-productions if they’re in good hands, as Lars von Trier’s work may show.
Migrant cinema
The EU-29 section proposes an imaginary 29th European state, which programmer Gertjan Zuilhof describes as “a country of immigration and moving cinema.” “I guess I learned from the programme myself”, Zuilhof continues. “I started with the vague notion that at least part of our Europe programme should be devoted to the many non-European, nonlegal, non-rooted people in Europe. I started with a few films, like Les Apaches by Thierry de Peretti or Até ver a luz by Basil da Cunha; films that do not moralize and have a realism that is carved in stone. They are provocative because they don’t look away from criminal elements in migrant communities – not so long ago, it would have been seen as politically incorrect to do this. After these discoveries, I was more confident I could find interesting films for the programme; in fact I found more than I expected. I also found out that the migrant is a very interesting figure in cinema; maybe one day migrant cinema will be a beloved genre.” Archipelago
‘My Own Private Europe’, curated by Evgeny Gusyatinskiy, makes a statement in itself by discussing European citizenship as a matter of individual conscience. “Of course politics does influence our daily and even private lives, though sometimes we don’t feel or realize this. Even [Vlad Petri’s] Where are you, Bucharest? – the only film in the programme directly related to politics – is more about a diversity of individuals who can hardly be united by the ‘shared values’ they desperately crave. Now everyone tends to create their own private platform, their ‘island’. In this sense, contemporary Europe is more like an archipelago than a unitary mainland”, Gusyatinskiy explains. ‘My Own Private Europe’ also includes Joaquim Pinto’s What Now? Remind Me; Boris Lehman’s six-hour marathon Mes sept lieux, as well as some ostensibly intimate dramas. “I think the films included in this section can work as a puzzle, each being a single piece – a unique, personal, intimate, subjective vision of a part of Europe”, claims Vlad Petri. “Where are you, Bucharest? presents the stories of some people I met on the streets
international film festival rotterdam
two years ago while taking part in the biggest protest after the 1989 Revolution. It is a film about Romania now, but also about Europe in a larger sense. The rise of nationalism and the extreme right, the need and search for alternative political solutions, the antiIMF and anti-capitalist messages are just some of the issues addressed in the film; issues that people in other European countries are also confronted by. One of my aims is to make films that can trigger debates and discussions, and it seems that IFFR is one of the best places for this, since it combines film screenings with discussion and debate.” Enlightenment
The burning question posed by the ‘State of Europe’ programme is how deeply and in what way these films can impact the audience. According to Gerwin Tamsma: “This is a very post-modern problem – we expose ourselves willingly to the gritty realities of those less privileged than us, but in the end we realise that, even if we care, this doesn’t directly help them. Yet what I expect of the whole ‘State of Europe’ programme is that it may provide the audience with a little bit of enlightenment.” He concludes modestly: “The good part about seeing films is that it’s not bad.”
Grand Talk IFFR has invited a unique selection of European thinkers to shed light on the state of the continent and European themes that occupy them and us during four ‘Grand Talks’. Stimulating, challenging and unpredictable, accompanying the screening of a European classic. Today, the first of these Grand Talks features director Claire Simon and film journalist Jean-Michel Frodon, with the screening of Simon’s documentary Géographie humaine. See Signals: The State of Europe, 15:45-18:00, Cinerama 1. €11, €8 with discount.