Abstract
Five programme advisors from the British Film Institute (BFI) London Film Festival offer reflections on film programming during and post COVID. In addition to a discussion on hybrid festivals, the programme advisors also comment on audiences, Q&As, the engagement with filmmakers, and what it means to programme for both virtual and live festival formats.
Programming during the pandemic can give more freedom. There are the nerves of having to introduce films with pre-recorded videos, knowing the slightest mistake has more permanence, but knowing the audience is potentially bigger means championing work may have a greater impact. You’re able to programme films that don’t conventionally ‘sit well’ in a cinema – recognising the desire for some to watch films alone. You can also really choose to make your mark given the unique context. Bold choices in film programming seem a little easier to commit to while the world faces a once in a generation global health crisis. (Aduke King)
Virtual film festivals are a whole different entity. They don’t have the live component and pre-recorded Q&As have a distinctive vibe but these virtual events have a purpose and they reach more diverse audiences. The future looks to be a mixture of hybrid and live; we can no longer go back to a pre-COVID world and as we look at what programming might look like in the future, the digital space of exhibition looks to acquire an ever more important profile in thinking about how cinema is consumed and experienced. (Maria Delgado)
Although it is possible to reach a greater and more diverse audience with an online festival, it is impossible to know that audience individually or identify them as a group as they are watching at home. Nonetheless, home festival viewers have reported that they still felt part of the festival using the festival’s online platform that carried the same format and quality of information, and the same branding. The experience still had a ‘festival feel’ which was important to audiences during the time of lockdown. Despite this, any effective method of monitoring and evaluation was hard to develop under circumstances where it is difficult to collect audience feedback. (Helen de Witt)
Curating for online audiences had a number of issues: generally the programme was smaller so curatorial choices were harder; not knowing whether the programme would attract the same audience online or a new audience that requires a different approach to programming; not knowing if audiences would watch individual shorts or short films within a whole curated programme; determining with distributors and sales agents how long the viewing window should be; negotiating with filmmakers who may prefer to wait to have their work screened in cinemas. (Helen de Witt)
Technical issues could be quite substantial in terms of selecting the online delivery platform. All have different advantages and disadvantages. Security had to be a priority to protect the filmmakers’ Intellectual Property (IP), so geo-blocking was essential. Staff at some festivals have raised the issue about the ethical considerations when dependant on the tech giants for programme delivery. (Helen de Witt)
During the pandemic, festivals had to financially remodel their events to cope with reduced or no box office income, and possibly the loss of sponsorship as well. This was particularly significant for smaller festivals. (Helen de Witt)
Post-COVID, festivals continue to face significant challenges, in part because the pandemic situation has changed people’s habits as they became used to staying at home and watching films online. There is consequently sometimes an expectation for continuous year-round online delivery that puts great strain on festivals’ resources. (Helen de Witt)
An important positive outcome of festivals following the pandemic is the continuing practice of using video conferencing, not just for filmmaker interviews and screening introductions, but also industry events that means many more international professionals can participate even if they are not able to travel to the festival. (Helen de Witt)
While fully understanding the need for pre-recorded filmmaker introductions and Q&As, what the COVID-responsive process seemed to make newly possible in the online version is the idea of live but remote Q&As for filmmakers or creative talent who are unable to attend a festival in person. It’s clearly not the same as being in the room, but where previously Q&As might not have been considered without physical attendance, perhaps this remote option is now considered more viable. (Leigh Singer)
There’s an interesting challenge in the dichotomy of balancing a wider, more diverse (online) audience with the intimacy and shared experience of a physical cinema screening. Perhaps financial models could be investigated with a tiered ticket system reflecting the different options and leaving both open. Though, on a personal note, the absence of a live audience/filmmaker connection and the remoteness – in all senses of the word – of the online viewing experience were very unsatisfying. (Leigh Singer)
I’ve been thinking a lot about ‘triggers’ – and how you ensure viewers are aware of material that may be distressing or difficult and have an open space in which to discuss questions that films raise. How do you do that in a virtual space? How can you provide a forum for discussion after the screening? The ‘live’ film festival offers a space for dialogue with the creative team where audiences can be very much part of the discussion. The virtual space needs a different kind of duty of care and it’s much harder for the programming team to be part of the discussion with the filmmakers concerned when the event is not ‘live’. (Maria Delgado)
Online screening Introductions and Filmmaker Q&As were much easier with filmmakers you had already met before and had a relationship with. Both I as a curator and the filmmakers themselves seemed a lot more relaxed for the recorded online Q&As if we had previously met and done Q&As in person before. I felt there was a greater sense of trust between us. There was more to our interaction than what was just recorded on the day. Filmmakers often get very nervous when presenting their work to a public audience, whether in person or online. I was constantly reminded of how important it is to meet with filmmakers in real life and to have time to develop relationships and trust. I cannot underestimate the value of having the opportunity to talk in private with filmmakers about their work and more outside of the pressure of public presentations, Q&As etc. It isn’t easy to make new relationships and build a rapport through online-only interactions. (Sarah Lutton)
Many filmmakers say that festivals with a large public audience are their favourite environments in which to share their work. Such events offer filmmakers opportunities to experience ‘real’ audience reactions to their work, and all importantly to hear from a paying public what they think about their work, whether that be through public audience Q&As or more private comments and interactions in the cinema lobbies etc. As a curator, I am also really interested to watch festival films with an audience, to hear where they laugh and gasp, and to see what kind of questions they have. Online only screenings took this opportunity away from filmmakers (and curators). They felt like a one-way offering. There was little or no opportunity for responses or feedback from audiences. I would want to build in some audience interactivity into hybrid/online screenings and Q&As if I were to do more in the future. Social media offers possibilities for moderated discussions and feedback for those accessing the programme online. Obviously, it’s not the same as being in a cinema with filmmakers and audiences but could help alleviate feelings for online audiences of watching something alone without any opportunity for interaction or feedback, and for filmmakers and curators presenting work online of showing and talking about films into a vacuum. (Sarah Lutton)
Film festivals are by nature social and have celebratory elements. They have a sense of an event and/or occasion for audiences, filmmakers, delegates, and staff alike. They have a sense of place and presence within the host city and/or screening venues. Online screenings and events do not offer any kind of similar experience. (Sarah Lutton)
When we returned to in person film festivals many filmmakers expressed how much they’d missed meeting other filmmakers and seeing new films. In person film festivals offer valuable informal networking opportunities for filmmakers. Filmmakers relish the chance to see other work at film festivals (they are often the only chance filmmakers get to catch up with contemporary cinema from around the world) and to meet their peers at screenings and festival social events. As well as expanding their networks, many successful creative relationships have been established via meetings at film festivals (i.e. ‘I met the cinematographer I was to work with on my next project at a film festival when I was travelling around festivals with my last film. I saw something they’d just shot and knew I wanted to work with them’.) Online only film festivals stalled this valuable opportunity. (Sarah Lutton)
There is something very special about the possibilities of the live film festival – the encounters that happen, the opportunities that present themselves, the never quite knowing who you will bump into. But there are also ecological concerns that we have to grapple with about how programmers and filmmakers travel to see work and meet with sales agents and producers and what the ecological footprint is for such travel. There are no easy solutions here but climate change will increasingly feature as part of the discussions moving forward. (Maria Delgado)
Helen de Witt is a curator and lecturer specialising in artists’ film and independent cinema. Previously Head of Cinemas at the BFI, she is a programmer of the BFI London Film Festival’s Experimental section of artists’ film. Helen is a lecturer in Film Studies at UCL and Birkbeck University of London and a visiting lecturer at the National Film and Television School. She has published in several film magazines and websites including Sight & Sound, BFI, Animate Projects, Club Des Femmes, and the Journal of Film Preservation and contributed to a number of books on artists’ film.
Maria M. Delgado is an academic, curator, and critic. She has been collaborating with the BFI London Film Festival since 1997 and has also undertaken curatorial and advisory work for the BFI, the ICA, and the London Spanish Film Festival. She writes regularly on film for Sight & Sound. She is the Vice Principal for Research and Knowledge Exchange at The Royal Central School of Speech and Drama, University of London.
Aduke King has programmed shorts for film festivals since 2015 and for the BFI London Film Festival since 2017. She is currently focused on creating new space in distribution at Other Parties Film Company.
Sarah Lutton has been working with the BFI London Film Festival since 1998. She is Programme Advisor for the LFF’s Nordic selection. Initially moving into film exhibition from a background in academia, Sarah is currently a freelance film programming and research consultant working with organisations and companies including BAFTA, BFI Southbank, UK Film, and the British Council Film Department.
Leigh Singer is a film journalist, video essayist, and programmer, advising on the BFI London Film Festival Laugh strand since 2013 and now also focusing on US independent film. He was previously the Feature programmer for LOCO, the London Comedy Film Festival and is a Film Programmer for the Red Sea International Film Festival. His written and audio-visual journalism has featured in Sight & Sound, the BFI online, Little White Lies, Indiewire, BBCi, The Guardian, and more. He teaches academic video essay work, including a video essay module on the Film Studies, Programming and Curation MA course at the National Film and Television School.