I NTERNATIONAL A CCLAIM :

T HE ROLE ( S ) OF THE I NTERNATIONAL

F ILM F ESTIVAL IN S UPPORTING
E MERGING W OMEN ’ S C INEMA

T ESS V AN H EMERT
B ACHELOR OF C REATIVE I NDUSTRIES ( HONS )

Submitted in fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of the Doctor of Philosophy

Film, Screen and Animation

School of Media, Entertainment and Creative Arts

Creative Industries Faculty
Queensland University of Technology

2013
 S UPERVISORS

Dr Vivienne Muller

Dr Sean Maher

Dr Bree Hadley

_________________________________________________________________________

3
 K EYWORDS

Emerging women filmmakers, feminism, film festival, film festival network, festival city,
feminine sensibility, transnational cinema.

_________________________________________________________________________

4
 A BSTRACT

International Film Festivals act as important sites for the exhibition of contemporary
world cinema. Film festivals represent an increasingly transnational film culture, where
audiences, filmmakers, distributors, press, critics and academics come together from all
over the world to discover new films, network with one another and debate about the
past, present and future of cinema.

This research project investigates the role that international film festivals play within the
wider international film industry, with a specific focus on emerging women filmmakers. It
therefore explores the arena of contemporary women‟s cinema at its intersection with the
international film festival industry. The significance and original contribution of the
research is its intervention in the growing field of film festival studies through a specific
investigation of how international film festivals support emerging women filmmakers. The
positioning of the research at the intersection of feminist film theory and festival research
within the broader context of transnational cinema allows the examination of each
festival, the attending filmmakers and their films to be addressed within a more refined
and nuanced lens.

A core method for the thesis is the close textual analysis of particular emerging women
filmmakers‟ films which are screened at the respective festivals. The research also
utilises the qualitative research strategies of the case study and the interview to “seek to
understand the context or setting of the participants through visiting this context and
gathering information personally” (Creswell 2003, 9). The textual analysis is used in
dialogue with the interviews and the participant observational data gathering to provide a
related context for understanding these films and their cultural meanings, both personally
for the filmmaker and transnationally across the festival circuit.

The focus of the case studies is the Brisbane International Film Festival, the International
Film Festival Rotterdam and the Toronto International Film Festival. These three festivals
were chosen for their distinct geographical locations in the Asia Pacific, Europe and
North America, as well as for their varying size and influence on the international film
festival circuit. Specifically, I investigate the reasons behind why the organisers of a
particular festival have chosen a certain woman‟s film, how it is then packaged or
displayed within the programme, and how all of this impacts on the filmmaker herself.
The focus of my research is to investigate film festivals and their „real-life‟ applications

_________________________________________________________________________

5
and benefits for the filmmakers being supported, both through the exhibition of their films
and through their attendance as festival guests.

The research finds that the current generation of emerging women filmmakers has
varying levels of experience and success at negotiating the international film festival
circuit. Each of the three festivals examined include and promote the films of emerging
women filmmakers through a range of strategies, such as specific programming strands
dedicated to showcasing emerging talent, financial support through festival funds,
providing visibility within the programme, exposure to international audiences and
networking opportunities with industry professionals and other filmmakers. Furthermore,
the films produced by the emerging women filmmakers revealed a strong focus on
women‟s perspectives and experiences, which were explored through the interweaving
of particular aesthetic and cinematographic conventions.

_________________________________________________________________________

6
 T ABLE OF C ONTENTS

Supervisors ........................................................................................................................... 3

Keywords .............................................................................................................................. 4

Abstract ................................................................................................................................. 5

Table of Contents .................................................................................................................. 7

List of Figures & Tables....................................................................................................... 11

List of Abbreviations ............................................................................................................ 12

Glossary of Key Terms ........................................................................................................ 13

Preface................................................................................................................................ 15

Statement of Original Authorship ......................................................................................... 16

Acknowledgements ............................................................................................................. 17

Chapter One: Introduction ................................................................................................... 19

Films, Festivals and International Cinema .................................................................... 20

The Field of Film Festival Research ............................................................................. 22

Why Emerging Women Filmmakers? ........................................................................... 23

Research Question ...................................................................................................... 25

Theoretical Framework................................................................................................. 26

Methodologies ................................................................................................................. 27

Research Methods ....................................................................................................... 28

Case Studies: Design & Framework ............................................................................. 30

Interviews ..................................................................................................................... 32

Textual Analysis ........................................................................................................... 33

Festival as Text ............................................................................................................ 34

My Position as Researcher .......................................................................................... 36

Chapter Overview ........................................................................................................ 37

Conclusion ................................................................................................................... 39

Chapter Two: Literature Review .......................................................................................... 41

Transnational Cinema Theory .......................................................................................... 42

_________________________________________________________________________

7
 Origins: From Third Cinema to Transnational Cinema.................................................. 45

Diasporic Cinema......................................................................................................... 49

Transnational Audiences.............................................................................................. 50

The International Film Festival ......................................................................................... 52

Film Festival Network ................................................................................................... 53

Film Festival Host Cities............................................................................................... 58

Film Festival Programming .......................................................................................... 60

The Film Festival Environment ..................................................................................... 64

Festival Films ............................................................................................................... 66

Feminist Film Theory ....................................................................................................... 69

Imagining a new space for Women‟s Cinema in a Transnational Context .................... 72

Conclusion ................................................................................................................... 74

Chapter Three: Brisbane International Film Festival (2009-2010) ....................................... 75

Introduction .................................................................................................................. 75

Context and History of BIFF ......................................................................................... 76

Festival Dates – Temporal location in Festival Circuit .................................................. 77

Festival Venues – Spatial Location within the City ....................................................... 78

BIFF 2009: Interview with Director, Anne Demy-Geroe ................................................ 79

Past Programming of Women‟s Cinema ...................................................................... 83

A Change in Direction .................................................................................................. 86

BIFF 2010: Interview with Director, Richard Moore ...................................................... 88

Queensland‟s Film Culture ........................................................................................... 88

The Festival Year ......................................................................................................... 90

Planning the Programme ............................................................................................. 92

BIFF Films 2009 – Textual Analysis & Filmmaker Interviews ....................................... 95

BIFF Films 2010 – Textual Analysis & Filmmaker Interviews ..................................... 103

Conclusion ................................................................................................................. 112

Chapter Four: International Film Festival Rotterdam (2010-2011) ..................................... 115

Introduction ................................................................................................................ 115

_________________________________________________________________________

8
 Context and History of IFFR ....................................................................................... 115

Festival Dates – Temporal location in Festival Circuit ................................................ 116

Festival Venues – Spatial location within the City ....................................................... 118

Tiger Awards Competition .......................................................................................... 120

Hubert Bals Fund ....................................................................................................... 121

The Programme ......................................................................................................... 123

Emerging Women Filmmakers: Developing Nations ................................................... 126

Interviews with the Programmers: Gertjan Zuilhof ...................................................... 131

Programming African cinema ..................................................................................... 133

Emerging Women Filmmakers: Developed Nations ................................................... 139

Interview with the Programmers: Gerwin Tamsma ..................................................... 139

Visibility of Emerging Filmmakers ............................................................................... 140

The critical function of the festival – panels, workshops and discussions ................... 145

Conclusion ................................................................................................................. 147

Chapter Five: Toronto International Film Festival (2010) ................................................... 148

Introduction ................................................................................................................ 148

Context and History of TIFF ....................................................................................... 149

Programming Women‟s Cinema ................................................................................. 150

TIFF and the Festival Circuit ...................................................................................... 151

TIFF and the City ....................................................................................................... 153

Environment of Festivity ............................................................................................. 155

The Programme ......................................................................................................... 156

Programming Strategies and Support for Emerging Filmmakers ................................ 160

TIFF Films 2010 – Textual Analysis & Filmmaker Interviews ...................................... 162

Conclusion ................................................................................................................. 173

Chapter Six: International Film Festivals as Crucial Platforms for Emerging Women‟s
Cinema.............................................................................................................................. 175

Politics of Participation: Visibility of Women Filmmakers at Film Festivals ..................... 176

Under-representation of Women Filmmakers ............................................................. 180

Emerging Voices: Contemporary Women Filmmakers and a Feminine Sensibility ......... 183
_________________________________________________________________________

9
 Politics of Programming: How have the Film Festivals supported Emerging Women
Filmmakers? .................................................................................................................. 190

Brisbane International Film Festival ........................................................................... 190

Toronto International Film Festival ............................................................................. 192

International Film Festival Rotterdam ......................................................................... 193

Approaches for providing festival visibility .................................................................. 195

Conclusion ................................................................................................................. 196

Chapter Seven: Findings and Recommendations ............................................................. 198

Future Development of Festivals and Cities ............................................................... 200

Programming Film Festivals ....................................................................................... 201

Recommendations for Emerging Women Filmmakers................................................ 202

A Feminine Aesthetic? ............................................................................................... 203

Chapter Eight: Conclusion ................................................................................................ 206

Filmography ...................................................................................................................... 210

References ....................................................................................................................... 215

Appendices ....................................................................................................................... 231

Appendix One: Ethical Clearance Certificate ................................................................. 231

Appendix Two: Draft Interview Questions ...................................................................... 233

Appendix Three: List of Interviews Conducted ............................................................... 236

Appendix Four: Brisbane International Film Festival Venue Map ................................... 238

Appendix Five: International Film Festival Rotterdam Venue Map ................................. 239

Appendix Six: Toronto International Film Festival Venue Map ....................................... 240

Appendix Seven: Film Festival Catalogue ..................................................................... 241

_________________________________________________________________________

10
 L IST OF F IGURES & T ABLES

Figures

No. Title Page

1 Theoretical Framework 26

2 Methodological Approach 29

3 Methodological Framework for Festival Analysis 36

4 Third Cinema Model 48

5 The Film Festival Network 57

Tables

No. Title Page

1 Characteristics of Transnational Films 44

2 Types of Festival Films 68

3 Characteristics of Films by Women Filmmakers 70

4 BIFF Films 2009 95

5 BIFF Films 2010 103

6 IFFR Films 2010 123

7 IFFR Films 2011 124

8. TIFF Programme Sections 2010 156

9. TIFF Films 2010 160

_________________________________________________________________________

11
 L IST OF A BBREVIATIONS

APSA Asia Pacific Screen Awards

BIFF Brisbane International Film Festival

HBF Hubert Bals Fund

IFFR International Film Festival Rotterdam

TIFF Toronto International Film Festival

WMM Women Make Movies

WFIF Women and Film International Festival

_________________________________________________________________________

12
 G LOSSARY OF K EY T ERMS

Emerging woman filmmaker

A woman filmmaker in the early stages of her career, usually with a first or
second feature film.

Women’s Cinema

„Women‟s Cinema‟ is a contested term, generally referring to a collective body of

women‟s films, as theorised by feminist film theorists from the 1970s onwards.
Butler states that the term suggests, without clarity, “films that might be made by,
addressed to, or concerned with women, or all three” and that „Women‟s Cinema‟
“traverses and negotiates cinematic and cultural traditions and critical and
political debates” (2002, 1-2).

Transnational Cinema

Transnational cinema theory primarily addresses a global shift in films that were
once easily categorised as belonging to a national cinema, toward films that are a
product of several nations. Ezra and Rowden (2006, 1) state that “the
transnational can be understood as the global forces that link people or
institutions across nations”.

Transnational Film
The product of transnational cinema, transnational films can be recognised by
some or all of their practical, financial, aesthetic and narrative characteristics. The
production and distribution markers of a transnational film may include funding
from several countries or international funding bodies, sometimes as an official
co-production. They also typically feature locally specific stories that have the
ability to transcend national borders. Such films are often strongly linked to
questions of identity and displaced or diasporic peoples.

Diasporic Cinema

Diasporic cinema is fundamentally linked from its position of displacement or

exile, to the concept of an origin or homeland (Naficy 1999, 18-20). This cinema
is made for or particularly appeals to diasporic audiences living outside their
country of birth who seek to maintain contact with their homeland. Naficy states
that diasporic cinema does not so much yearn for a return to the homeland, but
rather, nurtures a „collective memory‟ of an idealised homeland, without the
physical return (Naficy 2006, 114). Diasporic films often thematically explore this
sense of longing to return to the country of birth, or expose the tension between
the nation and the diaspora.
_________________________________________________________________________

13
Third Cinema

In distinguishing itself politically and aesthetically from Hollywood and European

cinemas, Third Cinema is often categorised for its contentious political and social
commentary, establishing it as a „cinema of opposition‟ (Crofts 2002, 32). Third
Cinema is a politicised cinema as envisioned by theorists such as Solanas and
Getino (1976), Armes (1987), Dissanayake and Guneratne (2003) and Stam
(2003).

Third World Cinema

A cinema emerging from developing countries that may or may not be politicised
cinema. “In relation to cinema, the term „Third World‟ is empowering in that it calls
attention to the collectively vast cinematic productions of Asia, Africa, Latin
America and of minoritarian cinema in the First World” (Shohat and Stam 1994,
27). It is important to recognise the term is more relevant from a historical
perspective than a contemporary one.

_________________________________________________________________________

14
 P REFACE

Early findings of this research were published in the following journals:

Yeates, Helen, Margaret McVeigh and Tess Van Hemert. 2011. "From Ethnocentrism to
Transculturalism: A Film Studies Pedagogical Journey." Cultural Studies Review
17 (2): 71-99.
http://epress.lib.uts.edu.au/journals/index.php/csrj/article/view/2008/2484.

Van Hemert, Tess. 2011. "Searching for a Feminist Voice: Film Festivals and negotiating
the tension between expectation and intent." Ejournalist 11 (1).
http://ejournalist.com.au/v11n1/VanHemert.pdf.

_________________________________________________________________________

15
 S TATEMENT OF O RIGINAL A UTHORSHIP

The work contained in this thesis has not been previously submitted to meet
requirements for an award at this or any other higher education institution. To the best of
my knowledge and belief, the thesis contains no material previously published or written
by another person except where due reference is made.

Signature: ____________________

Date: ________________________

_________________________________________________________________________

16
 A CKNOWLEDGEMENTS

This research project began with a love of film festivals and a curiosity about the roles of
women filmmakers participating in them. I have been extremely fortunate to travel to
festivals around the world in pursuing this curiosity, and have been rewarded with a
wealth of stories personally shared by the filmmakers and industry professionals that I
have met.

Firstly, I would like to thank my supervisors for their ongoing support and
encouragement. To Adjunct Professor Helen Yeates, thank you for your guidance and
critical feedback in shaping this research, particularly in its formative stages. To Dr Sean
Maher, thank you for your enthusiasm in taking on this project at the end of its second
year, and for your support and belief in the value of this research. To Dr Bree Hadley,
thank you for your incisive feedback and guidance in developing and refining the data
and findings of my research. Thank you also for the considerable support you have
provided in the final stages of completing this thesis. Finally, to Dr Vivienne Muller, your
steadfast support, encouragement and belief in this project, particularly in the final year,
has been invaluable.

To the Film Festival Research Network, in particular, Skadi Loist and Dr Marijke De
Valck, thank you for providing a much needed space for the collaboration and discussion
of the exciting and emerging field of film festival research. My thanks and appreciation
also goes to Dr Liz Czach, for your support of the project and assistance in gaining
access to the Toronto International Film Festival.

Conducting this research would not have been possible without the fundamental,
ongoing support from the Brisbane International Film Festival, the International Film
Festival Rotterdam and the Toronto International Film Festival. In particular, I would like
to thank the festival organisers from both Rotterdam and Toronto, for generously
providing the press and industry accreditation that provided crucial access to the
festivals and attending filmmakers.

To the Festival Directors, programmers and industry professionals who very kindly
participated in interviews, thank you for your keen interest in the research and for the
insightful comments and advice for emerging filmmakers that you offered. Specifically, I
would like to thank Piers Handling, the Director and CEO of TIFF, Gertjan Zuilhof and
Gerwin Tamsma, Programmers from IFFR, Anne Demy-Geroe and Richard Moore, past
Directors of BIFF, and Debra Zimmerman, Director of Women Make Movies.
_________________________________________________________________________

17
To the amazing women filmmakers I have met over the past four years, thank you for the
wonderful spirit of generosity and enthusiasm in which you shared with me your
experiences. Thank you for your honesty, and for sharing your passion for storytelling
and filmmaking. The stories of your films are at the heart of this research.

The path to completing a PhD is certainly not always smooth, and I would like to thank
my wonderful friends for their unwavering ability to provide distractions, laughter and
moments of partial sanity. Thanks to Nino, Steph, Ali, Karissa, Flo and Clarke. Special
thanks to my PhD companions, Liz, Kate and Ari, I couldn‟t have done it without you.

Finally and most significantly, heartfelt thanks to my brother Jordan and my parents, Tom
and Meta. Your unwavering love and support have given me the strength and
determination to continue, particularly in moments of adversity. Special thanks to my
Mum in particular, for countless hours of support while I was editing, rewriting and
polishing. Thank you for always being there, right to the very end.

_________________________________________________________________________

18
 C HAPTER O NE : I NTRODUCTION
At this moment somewhere in the world, in a dimly lit theatre, an audience waits with
anticipation as a film festival commences. The attraction of this communal experience is
in its difference; the film festival provides the spectator with the chance to participate in
an „imagined community‟, to engage with a film in a critical, creative and celebratory
environment (Anderson 2006; Iordanova 2010). The magic of the cinema lies in this
ability to transport audiences to new places, to discover the unfamiliar and its potential to
foster understanding from a new place of looking:

Cinema, with its distinctly dream-like state of reception, induces a vivid but
imaginary mode of participatory observation. The possibility of losing oneself,
temporarily, of “going native” in the confines of a movie theatre, offers its own
compelling fascination (Nichols 1994a, 17).

The international film festival circuit facilitates global flows of films across the world.
Ruoff supports Nichols observation, stating that, “Whether celebrations of film as an art,
affirmations of cultural identity, or markets, festivals enhance the shared, collective
dimensions of cinema” (2012,17). Festivals provide audiences with the opportunity to
discover new trends and voices in international cinema, and filmmakers with the ability to
share their stories with a diverse, global audience. The circuit also constitutes an
international workplace for media and industry delegates, who elevate chosen films to
international acclaim through their approval.

For emerging women filmmakers, who are the focus of this study, film festivals provide a
vital platform to showcase their work through screenings, question and answer sessions
with the audience, festival publicity and industry networking. However, the contribution of
film festivals to global film culture as a whole, and more specifically, to the careers of the
filmmakers who participate, is less well understood. Czach‟s (2004) influential article,
“Film Festivals, Programming and the Building of a National Cinema”, attempts to
address this gap in understanding, through considering how festivals contribute to the
building of a national cinema and also how they function within a global film context.
Czach argues that, as film festivals continue to thrive, the “success of individual films and
filmmakers requires serious consideration” (2004, 1).This dissertation responds to
Czach‟s call, by investigating the specific approaches of individual festivals in facilitating
the visibility and success of emerging women filmmakers. The research focuses on the
mainstream festival circuit (as opposed to women‟s film festivals) as the central festival
_________________________________________________________________________

19
circuit represents a significant turning point for emerging women filmmakers in advancing
and sustaining their long-term careers. It therefore explores the arena of contemporary
women‟s filmmaking at its intersection with the international film festival industry.

As an emergent field of study, film festivals have most commonly been examined
through individual case studies. Important research on the history and proliferation of
festivals, the creation of a festival network and the intervention of film festivals in national
cinemas has thus far been the predominant focus for scholars. This study contributes to
the growing field of festival research by examining three festivals of varying scale and
reputation, Toronto, Rotterdam and Brisbane and examines to what extent these
festivals impact on the careers of emerging women filmmakers. These three festivals
have been selected to represent a cross-section of the international film festival circuit,
with the expectation that each festival will have different means of providing support and
visibility for emerging women filmmakers. Furthermore, the unique relationship between
each film festival and its host city and the specific festival identity that this cultivates,
contributes to the particular approach of a festival in its programming strategies,
audience reception and international reputation.

F ILMS , F ESTIVALS AND I NTERNATIONAL C I NEMA

As events positioned on a global stage, international film festivals form part of
transnational cinema because they facilitate borderless flows of films and filmmakers
from one festival to the next. Contemporary filmmakers are increasingly working outside
of their country of origin and many emerging filmmakers attract funding from multiple
international sources. Film festivals act as a conduit between locally specific filmmaking
and global cinema consumption:

The festival circuit allows the local to circulate globally, within a specific system of
institutional assumptions, priorities, and constraints. Never only or purely local,
festival films nonetheless circulate, in large part, with a cachet of locally inscribed
difference and globally ascribed commonality. They both attest to the uniqueness
of different cultures and specific filmmakers and affirm the underlying qualities of
an „international cinema‟ (Nichols 1994b, 1-2).

Indeed, the films examined in this dissertation are indicative of this contemporary shift
toward transnational flows of filmmaking. Many of the featured emerging women
filmmakers examine their own particular cultural identities in their films in subtle and

_________________________________________________________________________

20
interesting ways, and display evidence of Nichols‟ „locally inscribed difference‟, which
translates into a wider, global appeal.

The history of film studies has been to focus primarily on the language of cinema and to
analyse the film as text, for its constructions of the individual, the nation and society.
However, Julian Stringer‟s festival research calls for film scholars and critics to recognise
the relationship between cinema and the host city (2001). Stringer urges a move away
from speaking about cinema simply in terms of the text and pursuing a further
understanding of cinema “as a set of practices and activities, as well as a set of texts...
which never cease(s) to intervene in society, and which participates in the maintenance,
mutation and subversion of systems of power” (Stringer 2001, 4). He argues that film
festivals establish a distinct identity or “festival image” that is inextricably linked to the
city and community within which it is held. Czach reinforces Stringer‟s call, stating that
“the question of how film festivals and programming mandates contribute to global film
culture, to the life of film festival host cities… requires serious consideration” (2004, 1).
Although many festivals such as Toronto and Rotterdam aspire toward an international
reputation, the local specificity of smaller festivals such as the Brisbane International
Film Festival can be advantageous. In a global film culture that is becoming increasingly
transnational, “novelty is also at a premium, the local and particular also becomes very
valuable” (Stringer 2001, 139). This dissertation, entitled International Acclaim, employs
Stringer‟s theorisation of the film festival, as both a product of and showcase of the host
city, in order to determine how cultivating a distinctive festival identity impacts on the
function of a festival as a platform for emerging women filmmakers.

Festivals provide unique environments in which to screen a film. According to Iordanova,

film festivals serve a range of functions for filmmakers, industry and audience. Firstly,
they are „live‟ events that occur, usually annually, at a specific place and time. The
programming agenda and themes of the festival determine the type of imagined
community and experience in which the filmmakers and audiences engage. Iordanova
argues that film festivals create two aspects of an “imagined community”, specifically
that:

In the „live‟ space of the festival, organisers and audiences form a community, an
actual one, that congregates face to face for the purpose of fostering an
„imagined community‟ that comes live in the act of watching a film and imagining
distant human beings becoming part of one‟s own experiences (Iordanova 2010,
13).

_________________________________________________________________________

21
For diasporic communities, this act of communal engagement is particularly significant.
According to Iordanova and Cheung, film festivals engage communities in shaping
identities and in transcultural mediation, in that they “do mediate; they are sociological
phenomena; they are a factor for the global distribution of film; they are an important tool
of cultural diplomacy...” (2010, 3). For emerging women filmmakers, the opportunity to
screen their films on an international stage can also work toward challenging ingrained
expectations, and provide fresh images of both the individual and the nation for global
audiences to consume. De Valck argues that the greatest benefit of the global
proliferation of film festivals and their subsequent focus on specific festival programming
has been that it has made individual festivals into specialised centres of expertise (De
Valck 2007). From this perspective, film festivals became “cultural gateways that could
legitimise films and filmmakers” (De Valck 2007, 208). Ruoff affirms De Valck‟s
contention, stating that more specifically, “Programmers increasingly fulfill the role of
cultural gatekeepers, who triage world film production, guiding audiences through the
multitudes of movies produced annually” (2012, 3). This positioning within the festival
framework is particularly important for those women filmmakers from emerging film
industries, who need the international recognition of the film festival circuit before they
can be valued as culturally significant in their country of origin. Just as the international
film festival circuit provides an important global platform for films from emerging film
industries, it is also significant in its inclusion of contemporary women‟s cinema.

T HE F IELD OF F ILM F ESTIVAL R ESEARCH

In 1995, the European Coordination of Film Festivals was founded and in its first year
listed seventy-six festivals worldwide. By the year 2000, there were one hundred and
fifty-four festivals recognised across twenty countries (Turan 2002, 2). Since 2000,
numerous film festival guides, created to keep track of this ongoing proliferation, have
listed well over seven hundred festivals worldwide (Gaydos 1998; Stolberg 2000; Gore
2004; Langer 2000; Iordanova and Rhyne 2009). Film festivals have become an integral
part of the broader transnational film industry, providing distribution, funding and
networking opportunities for filmmakers from all over the world.

This research project commenced in early 2009, and grew alongside a burgeoning
international film festival research culture. In late 2008, the Film Festival Research
Network was established by Dutch academic, Marijke De Valck (University of
Amsterdam) and her colleague, Skadi Loist (University of Hamburg). De Valck and Loist
have since launched a website for the research network, which includes a frequently

_________________________________________________________________________

22
updated, annotated bibliography of international publications on film festival research. At
the University of St Andrews, Professor Dina Iordanova founded the Dynamics of World
Cinema Project, which funded substantial research into film festivals. In 2009, Iordanova
also published the first volume of the Film Festival Yearbook series, of which there are
now four editions. This collaborative effort to consolidate festival research and create a
network amongst festival scholars has significantly impacted on both the direction and
positioning of this research.

W HY E MERGING W OMEN F ILMMAKERS ?

Women filmmakers continue to be under-represented in the global film arena. Recent
research conducted on women filmmakers working in the United States found that the
percentage of women working as directors on films screened at film festivals was
substantially higher than the percentage of women working on the top 250 grossing
feature films (24% versus 16%) (Lauzen 2009, 1). Lauzen also found that women
comprised just 22% of directors working on the films appearing at the festivals
considered, and that of those festival films, two thirds were documentaries, with the
remaining third narrative feature films (2009, 1).

Importantly, women filmmakers are specifically made visible at specialised international

women‟s film festivals. Women‟s film festivals date back to the 1970s and recognise the
under-representation of women‟s cinema in mainstream exhibition and privilege the
voices of women through specific programming strategies. Traditionally concerned with
activism, women‟s film festivals are characterised by specific genres such as
generational stories, women‟s rights and tributes to women artists, often in the form of
short films and documentaries. Armatage notes that:

In contradistinction to mainstream festivals, where industry sales and press

coverage are the measures of international standing, women‟s film festivals have
tended to operate within a feminist protocol and thus their programming directives
are distinctive (2009, p84).

While this distinction provides a specific, receptive space for the sharing of women‟s
films, women‟s film festivals attract relatively few distributors and are thus limited in their
capacity to provide widespread visibility for the filmmakers they support. In a recent
keynote address at a German women‟s film festival, festival researcher Skadi Loist
reinforces Armatage‟s point of view, acknowledging that while women‟s film festivals
provide a positive reception, their marginal position on the film festival circuit means that

_________________________________________________________________________

23
these festivals often “lose the competition for premieres and discoveries” (2012, p4).
Loist particularly points toward the emerging generation of women filmmakers in her
observation that “Women filmmakers, who first want to be seen as filmmakers and only
secondly as women, will most likely opt for the larger festival run in hopes for wider
attention” (2012, p4). Therefore, women‟s film festivals serve an important function in
their own right and go some way toward giving women filmmaker‟s a platform to share
their films on an international level. However, the central concern of this research is to
investigate the visibility of emerging women filmmakers within the mainstream context on
the international stage.

Despite their clear under-representation in the film industry, women filmmakers continue
to offer audiences different experiences and images that are told from a specifically
female perspective. Debra Zimmerman, the director of Women Make Movies (a
prominent distributor of women‟s films in the United States), explains the ongoing
importance of experiencing women‟s voices and stories on screen. In recalling one of the
first screenings of a woman‟s film she attended in 1975, she reflected:

I remember sitting at the screening, surrounded by women, and thinking that I

had never had this experience before – I had never seen my experiences
reflected back to me on film... Even now, when I attend screenings of our films, I
still hear people saying the same thing, audiences talking about the power of
realistic portrayals of women (Aufderheide and Zimmerman 2004, 1455-1456).

The women filmmakers examined in this research have produced highly individual and
often intimate representations of their own experiences as women, which have
influenced their approach to characterisation and narrative, regardless of whether they
openly identify as a feminist or not. Certainly, many of the filmmakers interviewed have
not set out to create what is often termed a „women‟s film‟, but through their infusion of
their own individual experiences as women into their approaches to both storytelling and
filmmaking, they have created films with a distinctly woman‟s perspective.

This thesis contributes to the field of contemporary women‟s cinema by placing the
experience of emerging women filmmakers firmly in the centre of the research. Although
many film theorists, critics and festival programmers might argue that there is no longer a
need to foreground an investigation into the dearth of women as filmmakers, the fact
remains that the global film industry remains largely male dominated. Tasker states that,
“…the female filmmaker remains a potent figure whose iconic presence has to do with

_________________________________________________________________________

24
the very possibility of a distinct women‟s cinema. She is significant in terms of her
visibility within a field that remains male dominated” (Tasker 2010, 214).

It is noteworthy here that Caroline Bainbridge has examined the emergence of a

„feminine cinematics‟ in women‟s films produced in the 1990‟s. Bainbridge identifies
characteristics of the „feminine‟ in key films discussed in her book. Using the theories of
Luce Irigaray, Bainbridge suggests that, rather than relegating an analysis of women‟s
films to the position of „Other‟, we should instead be (as Irigaray does), arguing for the
need to “speak the feminine, to articulate it and to give it room for enunciation”
(Bainbridge 2008, 2). While Bainbridge‟s research does not consider the film festival
phenomenon in depth, she agrees that women‟s films “frequently profit from visible
participation in the festival circuit” (2008, 69). She further asserts that the significance of
providing these spaces for screening and the distribution opportunities that can follow,
requires further investigation. Ultimately, Bainbridge argues for more detailed research
into how contemporary women‟s filmmaking practices can be read as distinctly feminine.
Bainbridge‟s approach is considered in this research, particularly in relation to the textual
analysis of the programmed women‟s films. The interweaving of the filmmakers‟ voices
throughout the analysis of their films allows for a more comprehensive and „articulated‟
discussion of contemporary women‟s filmmaking to emerge within the various film
festival contexts.

R ESEARCH Q UESTION
In order to negotiate such a wide yet interconnected theoretical field, the central research
question posed by the dissertation is:

“How do International Film Festivals support emerging women filmmakers?”

Following on from this, three sub questions orientate the research investigation into
addressing the inquiry thus:

1. How do emerging women filmmakers negotiate and attain visibility in the specific
International film festivals that operate in distinct ways in different cities?
2. How does the aesthetic of their films relate to their attempts to gain visibility?
3. How do the producers of the festival facilitate or deflect the attempts by the
emerging women filmmaker to attain visibility?

_________________________________________________________________________

25
 T HEORETICAL F RAMEWORK
The research conducted in International Acclaim is situated in the complex terrain of the
film festival. Although the research does not deal with Transnational cinema specifically,
it does acknowledge and position the transnational space as critical to women
filmmakers working and screening their films within the international film festival circuit.
In this sense, Transnational cinema theory provides the overarching context, within
which the two fields of film festival theory and feminist film theory intersect to provide the
theoretical framework for analysis as exemplified in the following figure.

Figure 1: Theoretical Framework

Transnational cinema theory addresses the recent shift away from clearly defined
„national cinemas‟ towards a more transnational approach to cinema. The role of film
festivals as a mode of film exhibition and promotion has arguably contributed to this shift,
through positioning the film industries of separate nations on a shifting international
stage.

The proliferation of film festivals worldwide is a well-documented phenomenon in terms

of media coverage and marketing/promotion material distributed by the festivals
themselves. However, there is currently a lack of academic research investigating the
relationship these festivals have with the global, transnational film industries, or the role
that they might play in advancing the careers of emerging women filmmakers. This area
of research therefore identifies how festivals function as key institutions within actual film
industries, both nationally and globally. Also examined is how film festivals facilitate the
production side of filmmaking in conjunction with their much more familiar consumption
aspects. Film festivals provide exposure for emerging cinemas and directors, as well as

_________________________________________________________________________

26
opportunities for networking and sourcing future funding. Specifically, the aim of this
research is to investigate how film festivals function as crucially significant platforms for
the advancement of the careers of emerging women filmmakers.

The second area of research for this project incorporates contemporary feminist film
theory, drawing on literature and the discourse surrounding women‟s cinema and women
filmmakers. I have employed feminist film theory as a strategic lens through which the
participation and visibility of the women filmmakers at the specific film festivals can be
investigated.. Many emerging women filmmakers do not identify with the labels of
„feminist‟ or „woman filmmaker‟. Others see filmmaking as a vital platform from which the
voices and stories of their nation‟s women can be heard. The individual opinions and
approaches of the interviewed women filmmakers are investigated in each case study
chapter. The importance of the international film festival to the filmmakers themselves is
an area of research that has not been extensively explored to date. As such, this section
considers both the value of this interwoven approach and of using a feminist lens to
guide the research. The final section of the literature review also considers the inherent
tensions that emerge when using feminist film theory to contextualise contemporary
women filmmakers.

The significance and original contribution of my research is its intervention in the growing
field of film festival studies through a specific investigation of how international film
festivals support emerging women filmmakers. The positioning of the research at the
intersection of feminist film theory and festival research within the broader context of
transnational cinema allows the examination of each festival, the attending filmmakers
and their films to be addressed within a more refined and nuanced lens. It is through the
contemporary re-contextualising of these fields into a framework for analysing the
position of emerging women filmmakers that I aim to make an original contribution to the
currently burgeoning field of film festival culture.

M ETHODOLOGIES
This dissertation is underpinned by the critical approaches developed in cultural studies
and employs qualitative research methods. An integrated methodological approach,
which combines cultural studies with ethnography, allows for an involved, communicative
research process. Ien Ang discusses the merits of combining cultural studies and
qualitative research and states that the strength of this approach is the “bringing together
(of) a variety of perspectives to draw out the multifaceted complexity of a particular
issue… rather than working toward a singular, definitive explanation” (Ang 2008, 230).
_________________________________________________________________________

27
An ethnographic approach to qualitative research combines multiple methods of inquiry
to produce a written account of a particular culture or institution (Gillham 2005, 39).
Observations made by the ethnographer within the research setting must then be put
into context through conducting interviews and collecting additional data and resources.

As an emerging area of global research, film festival scholars have identified a number of
key methodological challenges. These include:

…the difficulty in obtaining necessary material and information due to a lack of

archives or access to the festivals themselves; limitations of research due to
language barriers and limited funding (especially for PhD candidates); problems
around the position of the researcher as insider/outsider to the field, and the
advantages and limitations this positioning brings; research ethics; qualitative
audience research that is missing in film festival studies; the question of how to
actually evaluate a festival programme (from written form vs. knowledge and
access of the films); and the differences between current vs. historical research
(De Valck and Loist 2011, 287-288).

Indeed, these multilayered challenges have required negotiation throughout the course
of this research process, particularly in relation to obtaining access to the festivals, the
dynamic of researcher as insider/outsider, accessing the films after the festival and
consequently finding a valid way of evaluating the films in the festival catalogue.

R ESEARCH M ETHODS
A complex phenomenon such as a film festival cannot be researched thoroughly as a
singular, isolated event; rather it requires a versatile and comprehensive methodological
approach. This study employs several research strategies that facilitate an engaged,
critical cultural analysis of film festivals. The three key triangulated research strategies I
have employed include:

1. Critical textual analysis of films by women filmmakers identified at each of the

festivals
2. Interviews with the emerging women filmmakers and Festival
Directors/Programmers
3. Participant observation/Ethnographic Case Studies of each festival

_________________________________________________________________________

28
 Figure 2: Methodological Approach

A core method for the thesis is the critical textual analysis of the particular emerging
women filmmakers‟ films that are screened at the respective festivals. Textual analysis
posits the centrality of the film text to an examination of how film festivals support and
have the potential to launch the careers of emerging filmmakers. The interviews and the
participant observational data gathering provide a related context for understanding
these films and their cultural meanings, both personally for the filmmaker and
transnationally across the festival circuit. The interview data is used more specifically to
gain an understanding of the filmmakers‟ opinions on a range of issues including the
reception of their film(s), the benefits of attending film festivals, their constructed
representations of women and their thoughts on the validity and/or importance of
continuing to discuss women‟s cinema and women‟s stories on screen.

This research process allows, according to Fabian and De Rooij, for the researcher‟s
presence to make a distinctive mark on the focus of the ethnographic enquiry (2008,
620). The triangulation of research methods as proposed above facilitates an in-depth,
multifaceted approach to the research. Denzin and Lincoln discuss the merits of
methodological triangulation, arguing that:

The combination of multiple methodological practices, empirical materials,

perspectives and observers in a single study is best understood, then, as a
strategy that adds rigor, breadth, complexity, richness and depth to any inquiry
(Denzin and Lincoln 2000, 5).

_________________________________________________________________________

29
Dr Marijke De Valck has applied a similar research model of textual analysis, interviews
and case studies in her recent academic research. De Valck‟s (2006) dissertation,
History and Theory of a European Phenomenon that became a Global Network,
examines both the history and the nature of the contemporary global network of film
festivals. De Valk‟s study is structured around four case studies of International Film
Festivals, and effectively combines textual analysis, interviews and participant
observation to conduct her research (2007, 22). De Valck‟s dissertation is, arguably, the
first comprehensive academic study that addresses historical and methodological
concerns when researching film festivals. Her integrated methodological approach
proved a particularly useful model to examine during the initial stages of this research
and certainly informed my own approach to methodology. However, the methodological
focus of this research diverges from De Valck‟s approach, through situating the analysis
of emerging women filmmakers‟ films at its centre. The programmed films are then
discussed within the broader analysis of the film festival itself as a text, and its strengths
and weaknesses in supporting emerging filmmakers examined.

C ASE S TUDIES : D ESIGN & F RAMEWORK

I have chosen to utilise the qualitative research strategies of the case study and the
interview to “seek to understand the context or setting of the participants through visiting
this context and gathering information personally” (Creswell 2009, 8). The research
method of multiple case studies particularly suits an ethnographic approach because it
incorporates direct observation of the event being studied, as well as interviews with the
people involved in the events. My research question is structured so as to investigate a
critical, comparative relationship between each festival and the filmmakers who attend it.
Robert K. Yin asserts in his book on case study research, that the case study method is
particularly relevant when the research questions asked “seek to explain some present
circumstance (e.g. „How‟ or „why‟ some social phenomenon works)” (2009, 4). He goes
on to state that the purpose of the case study is to investigate a “contemporary
phenomenon in depth and within its real-life context, especially when the boundaries
between phenomenon and context are not clearly evident” (Yin 2009, 18).

The case studies in this dissertation are:

Brisbane International Film Festival (2009 & 2010),

International Film Festival Rotterdam (2010 & 2011)

Toronto International Film Festival (2010)

_________________________________________________________________________

30
Each of the case study festivals was chosen to represent one of the three tiers of festival
hierarchy and given the transnational focus of the research, three distinct geographical
regions: North America through TIFF, representing the largest and most prestigious film
festival; Europe through Rotterdam Film Festival, representing a well respected, medium
sized festival; and the Asia Pacific through BIFF, representing a smaller, yet still
internationally recognised festival in Brisbane, Australia. It was also anticipated that each
of these case study festivals would provide different opportunities and levels of exposure
for attending women filmmakers. For instance, Toronto and Rotterdam have prestigious
reputations on the festival circuit, providing international recognition for films through
festival competitions and world premieres. Although less prestigious, Brisbane provides
more intimate opportunities for filmmakers to interact with audiences and other invited
festival guests. Participation in a smaller festival such as BIFF may also allow emerging
filmmakers to be more visible in the programme through seminars, Question and Answer
sessions (Q&A‟s) and press opportunities. The benefit of a multiple case study approach
is that each festival can be analysed first on its own merits and then comparisons and
conclusions can be drawn from the collective findings. The evidence gleaned from a
multiple case study approach also provides a more compelling argument and ensures
that the study is academically robust. According to Yin, case study methods must also be
developed within a “rich, theoretical framework” (2009, 54).

A central concern of this research involves investigating the binaries of local/global,

emerging/acclaimed and centre/periphery. Aside from their obvious differences regarding
scale, each of the chosen case study festivals cultivates a distinct festival image that is
linked to each festival‟s relationship with the particular city. This festival image is also
projected into the global sphere of the festival circuit, within which individual festivals
must negotiate their position of power and influence. Stringer‟s (2003) concept of
dominant and peripheral festivals is discussed in further detail in the literature review;
however, there is an interesting parallel that emerges here in the form of a triple lens.
Women filmmakers remain fringe players in international cinema, with men located
predominantly at the centre of the industry. Emerging filmmakers (particularly those
working from within the cinemas of developing nations) are also located on the fringes of
global cinema, in relation to the dominant film industries of Hollywood, Europe and the
„First World‟. Furthermore, the festivals chosen for this research also mirror this hierarchy
of dominant/peripheral; with Toronto representing a dominant and central position,
Rotterdam as a specialised but still influential festival, and Brisbane located as a festival

_________________________________________________________________________

31
on the periphery of the network, with a specific but contained reach within the
local/national sphere.

I NTERVIEWS
Gaining access to the research setting is often a challenge for the ethnographic
researcher and film festivals in particular impose strict codes and levels of access for the
public, filmmakers and industry guests. The distinction between the public and private
spaces of the festival can usually only be negotiated with an accredited press or industry
pass. I was fortunate to gain access to both audience and industry sectors of each
festival case study, through gaining press and/or industry accreditation. Accordingly,
over the course of the data collection, I conducted twenty-six interviews with emerging
women filmmakers and festival directors, programmers and industry professionals.1

The emerging women filmmakers interviewed were selected on the basis of their
attendance and availability at the festival. Arguably, those filmmakers in attendance
could be seen to be taking advantage of the opportunity to participate in the festival
environment, network with their peers and industry professionals and thus try to attain
visibility for their films on the festival circuit. All emerging women filmmakers present at
each festival were therefore approached for an interview and I also attended a screening
of their films. The key industry professionals and festival organisers who were
interviewed were specifically chosen for their role in programming each festival and
hence their influence in facilitating or deflecting the attempts of the emerging women
filmmakers to attain visibility.

The interviews conducted were semi-structured with one set of questions for filmmakers,
and another set of questions compiled for the industry professionals. The benefit of this
type of interview lies in its potential for flexibility, which is balanced by structure. Semi-
structured means that the same questions are asked of all participants (within set
groups), the questions go through a process of development and review to ensure their
focus and approximately equivalent interview time is allowed in each case (Gillham
2005, 70). However, the questions are also open-ended and additional questions may be
asked at the discretion of the interviewer if the participant‟s answer requires more
clarification.

1
See Appendix 1 for a detailed table of the interviews conducted. Interview transcripts can be supplied on
request.

_________________________________________________________________________

32
The cultural and linguistic diversity of the participants was a particular challenge to this
research project. A second challenge was posed by the temporal restrictions of the
festival dates, as well as trying to schedule interviews with filmmakers in such a hectic
and time-poor environment. Interviews could only be organised with filmmakers upon
arrival at the festival and a translator assisted several of the participants involved. Some
filmmakers who were unable to participate in an in-person interview responded instead
by email at a later date. The interviews I conducted with the festival directors and
programmers had to be scheduled after the festival had concluded and consequently,
these interviews had to be arranged using a flexible approach. The interviews with
Gertjan Zuilhof and Gerwin Tamsma were conducted via email; I spoke with Piers
Handling over the phone, Debra Zimmerman on Skype and with the two Brisbane
International Film festival directors, Anne Demy-Geroe and Richard Moore, in-person.
The transcripts of the interviews were then analysed for both distinct and common
themes, and quotes and ideas have been used throughout the dissertation to illuminate
key findings and analysis. The primary evidence collected through the interview process
provided significant data for analysis. However, it is important to acknowledge, that the
interview process itself and the data that is subsequently generated provide a particular
type of observation that needs to be paired with other methods of research and analysis
to validate inclusion. Gubrium and Holstein draw attention to this, stating that interview
data has its own „intrinsic properties‟ and that interviews are occasions in which
particular kinds of narratives are enacted (2003, 116). Therefore, the coupling of this
primary interview data with festival observations and textual analysis provides a more
rigorous and holistic approach to data collection in this dissertation.

T EXTUAL A NALYSIS
Critical textual analysis is an important cultural studies methodological strategy that
enables this research to be relevant in a broader cultural context. Specifically, textual
analysis is an essential tool for investigating how the filmmakers construct ideological
representations of women within their films. Many women filmmakers purposefully avoid
the label of „feminist‟ or „woman filmmaker‟. Accordingly, a critical examination of their
approach to exploring their own personal understandings of identity and of feminism
must be investigated, first in the textual nuances of their films, and secondly how these
embedded meanings match their stated ideologies in the interviews.

McKee‟s (2003) definition of textual analysis is useful in clarifying the purpose of textual
analysis within the context of this research. He states that textual analysis “doesn‟t make

_________________________________________________________________________

33
claims about whether the texts are accurate or truthful or show reality... Rather, [it] seeks
to understand the ways in which these forms of representation take place, the
assumptions behind them and the kinds of sense-making about the world that they
reveal” (McKee 2003, 15). Feminist film theorists appropriate the tool of textual analysis
for the specific purpose of a feminist textual critique, which allows for a “theoretically
rigorous analysis of how a film‟s ideological operations constructed the idea of woman
within its textual practices” (McCabe 2004, 17). Certainly, the approach to textual
analysis used here is not to interrogate the validity of the filmmakers‟ claims, but rather to
examine their respective approaches to filmmaking. In particular, I am interested in using
textual analysis to examine how these filmmakers construct their own transnational
identities and infuse their films with a distinctly feminine sensibility that emerges on
screen.

The process of examining the dominant cultural codes and representations of women in
the films of selected women filmmakers allows an understanding of how the films at each
festival are chosen, and thereby accorded „critical capital‟ (Czach 2004). The subsequent
in-person interviews with the women filmmakers provide further information on the ways
in which women filmmakers are made visible within the arena of the festival. I am
particularly interested here in the filmmakers‟ opinions and observations of the festival in
relation to their own careers. It is through this dual approach that I aim to piece together
an understanding of the gendered role of the female filmmaker in the international film
festival milieu. Specifically, I interrogate why the programmers of a festival have chosen
a particular woman‟s film, how it is packaged or displayed within the festival, and how
this impacts on the filmmaker herself. The focus of my research here is to investigate this
specific function of international film festivals and the „real-life‟ applications and benefits
for the filmmakers being supported, both through the exhibition of their films and through
their attendance as festival guests.

F ESTIVAL AS T EXT
As signaled in the introduction, film festival audiences are drawn to the „festival as event‟
through a desire to experience a film within a „rich discursive context‟ (De Valck 2008,
19). Such audiences come equipped with certain beliefs and expectations, which are
applied in the way that they „read‟ the film within the context of the festival. Each element
of the festival experience then, impacts on the way in which a film is framed and
received. Harbord agrees, stating that “contingency, which marks the festival as an
unfolding event whose details are unknowable in advance, affords a singularity to the

_________________________________________________________________________

34
experience: to see a film here and now will be unlike any other time of viewing” (2009,
44). In many ways, the viewing of a film within a festival is similar to attending a live
theatre performance. As with a play or performance, the audience/critic experiences the
event only once, within a certain space, time and context. For instance, recent
publications by the International Federation for Theatre Research re-frame the
performance as „theatrical event‟, within which the context of the event is central to the
research process. A theatrical event is framed as “not only the encounter between a
performance and its audience in a given place at a certain time, but includes also the
complexities of the society in which it takes place” (Sauter 2007, 18).

Van Maanen‟s conceptual framing of theatrical events is particularly useful, and I have
applied it here to the study of film festivals (2004, 243-246). He proposes three main
conceptual frameworks within which a performance or event operates. The first, the
communicative frame organises the experience of the event within a shared field of
perception, namely between the festival programmers and the audience. The second,
the organizational frame, categorises the physical aspects of the event, with a particular
focus on space and time. Finally, the institutional frame contextualizes the event within
the broader framework of the industry.

Therefore, the framework I establish (see Figure 3) positions the festival in its entirety as
a text. Within this framework, reception, meaning making and the emergence of “capital”
are the product of reading a particular set of textual elements. These include the films,
festival events and panels, parties, media attention and audience interaction within the
particular context of time, space and culture. This forms part of the communicative
framework of the festival. The organisational framework positions the physical elements
of the festival. The specific focus I have employed here approaches the festival as text
through an analysis of space (city, venues, layout of city), time (length of festival, relation
to other festivals, programming of events/films), culture (in relation to city, audience,
international guests) and programming (position and times of films, specific themes,
agendas). Finally, the institutional framework situates the individual festival within the
global festival network, and the wider international film industry.

_________________________________________________________________________

35
 Figure 3: Methodological Framework for Festival Analysis

Observations Institutional Frame

Organisational Frame
Interviews

Communicative Frame

Textual
Analysis

Ultimately, this specific framework for analysis allows the research to focus on the
unique encounter of a film within a festival environment, with a specific set of activities
and interactions that take place around it. I argue, therefore, that the films of emerging
women filmmakers, when seen within this context, build international acclaim or critical
capital in a distinctive way.

M Y P OSITION AS R ESEARCHER
Negotiating my position as both an external researcher and as an ethnographer
embedded within the film community is an interesting and ongoing challenge. As an
interviewer and observer at a film festival, it is important to build up a good rapport with
the festival staff and with the filmmakers. My ongoing involvement with the Brisbane
International Film Festival facilitated successful interviews with the previous Artistic
Director, Anne Demy-Geroe2 and the current director, Richard Moore3. Knowledge from
my prior volunteer and work experience at BIFF also informed my participant

2
Anne Demy-Geroe was the Artistic and then Executive Director at the Brisbane International Film Festival
from 1992 until 2010.
3
Richard Moore was the Head of Screen Culture and the Executive Director for the Brisbane International
Film Festival from 2010 to the end of 2012. A new Head of Screen Culture has yet to be announced.

_________________________________________________________________________

36
observations of the festival. My own experience, particularly at BIFF, has added to the
interweaving of richer observations and analysis in the case study chapters. As Gubrium
and Holstein observe, “the complex relationships among field settings, significant social
actors, the practical accomplishment of the research, and the researcher-self are
increasingly recognised as significant to all those who engage in research of a qualitative
nature” (2003, 120). My attendance at both the International Film Festival Rotterdam as
an accredited Press member and the Toronto International Film Festival as an Industry
guest gave me the opportunity to interview numerous international women filmmakers
and also to participate in festival events on a more professional standing. However, it is
the balancing of this internal position with that of the external researcher, who must
critically analyse the festival and the programmed films within a feminist/cultural studies
framework, that was an ongoing, challenging process of negotiation.

C HAPTER O VERVIEW

Film festival scholarship has only recently begun to gain momentum and has largely
been focused on studying film festivals on an individual case study basis or in terms of a
broader film festival network. This dissertation contributes to this burgeoning field
through examining the position of emerging women filmmakers within three international
film festivals – Brisbane, Rotterdam and Toronto. The proposed design of the research
includes seven chapters. The thesis is structured to encompass the three case study
festivals, in order from a local and specific festival (Brisbane) to a specialised festival
(Rotterdam) and finally, to a global and prestigious festival (Toronto). Within each case
study chapter, the approach to examining the films occurs in an inverse manner to the
environment in which they are screened. To elaborate, within the festival context the film
is situated at the centre, with the broader spheres of people, time, space and the festival
environment emanating out from this examination of the film. In each case study, this is
reversed, with a broader analysis of the festival‟s place on the network, within the city
and the film‟s place in the programme then narrowing the focus of the analysis to the
final critical textual analysis of each film.

Chapter Two: Literature Review

A rigorous review of contemporary literature in the fields of transnational film theory,

feminist film theory and film festival literature forms the basis of this literature review
chapter. The fourth section of the literature review considers how these three fields are
woven together to create a substantial framework from within which the films and
filmmakers can be positioned and understood. The fourth section also examines the
_________________________________________________________________________

37
inherent tensions that emerge when using feminist film theory to contextualise
contemporary women filmmakers. The three central chapters of the thesis are structured
in order of festival case study. Each of the case study chapters introduce the festival,
examining briefly factors such as the festivals aims and intentions, history, and
programming structure. I also specifically investigate how each festival is situated
culturally and politically within the film festival network. This broader research and
observation provides a context for the analysis of interviews conducted with filmmakers
and staff. Critical textual analysis of each filmmaker‟s film is examined in combination
with the filmmaker‟s comments. An analysis of each film‟s placement within the festival
programme as well as the film and filmmakers success after the festival are also taken
into account. The case study chapters specifically investigate a critical, comparative
relationship between each festival, the filmmakers who attend and how their films are
packaged within the programme.

Chapter Three: Brisbane International Film Festival (2009 & 2010)

The Brisbane International Film Festival is the primary case study for this research and
provides a local yet specific function within Brisbane and Queensland‟s film culture. The
festival, which was the most easily accessible, was attended three times during the
course of the research and combined interviews, textual analysis of relevant films,
participant observation and some involvement in the festival in the form of film reviews
etc. In 2010, the festival moved from its previous July/August timeslot to be held in mid
November, in conjunction with the Asia Pacific Screen Awards. This important change
was closely observed over the final two years of the study.

Chapter Four: International Film Festival Rotterdam (2010 & 2011)

The International Film Festival Rotterdam, arguably the largest audience film festival in
the world, is the focus of the second case study in this dissertation. IFFR is a prestigious
and widely recognised film festival and specifically supports emerging young filmmakers
through its Signals programme and the Hubert Baals Fund. The IFFR in 2010 and 2011
form the particular focus for this chapter, with twelve interviews conducted with emerging
women filmmakers informing the textual analysis of their films.

Chapter Five: Toronto International Film Festival (2010)

The Toronto International Film Festival is the largest and most acclaimed festival
investigated in this dissertation. As the largest festival in the study, its prestige and
international reputation provide the strongest possibility of success and visibility for
_________________________________________________________________________

38
emerging women filmmakers. I attended the September 2010 TIFF and conducted four
filmmaker interviews, participant observation and textual analysis of programmed
women‟s films. An interview with the festival‟s Executive Director and CEO, Piers
Handling, shapes the discussion and analysis in this chapter.

Chapter Six: International Film Festivals as Crucial Platforms for Emerging

Women’s Cinema

This chapter conducts a thematic analysis of the data from the case study chapters in
order to examine how film festivals function as crucial platforms for emerging women‟s
cinema. The opinions of the filmmakers within the context of each distinct festival
environment are examined closely. Specifically, this chapter analyses the ways each
case study festival has supported the attending women filmmakers and the specific
approaches and strategies of the women filmmakers interviewed in navigating the film
festival network. The three central concepts discussed included the politics of
participation, the emergence of a feminine sensibility and the politics of programming.
The discussion chapter also highlights the emergence of a distinctly feminine aesthetic
that was observed in the films examined.

Chapter Seven: Findings and Recommendations

The findings and recommendations chapter summarises the key findings of the research
and provided recommendations for how to improve support for emerging women
filmmakers within the festival framework. The ongoing tension between contemporary
women‟s cinema and feminist film theory is also addressed.

Chapter Eight: Conclusion

The conclusion summarises the thesis findings and indicates where the research fits
within the contemporary climate of film festival research. It also addresses the key
aspects of the research question to demonstrate that emerging women filmmakers
continue to be underrepresented in the global film industry and that film festivals promote
the filmmakers‟ visibility with varying degrees of success.

C ONCLUSION
The international film festival is a heightened, yet transient event that for ten days each
year celebrates emerging and acclaimed filmmakers and new trends in cinema. When
the curtain falls at the end of those ten days, most of the invited filmmakers will travel on
to the next festival, or return home to (hopefully) work on their next film. A select few will
_________________________________________________________________________

39
have experienced a turning point in their careers, through their participation at the
festival and obtaining visibility for their films. For other filmmakers, the festival will have
been a fleeting experience, and they may never be seen in the international festival
arena again. This research places the experience of emerging women filmmakers at its
centre, and examines the ways individual festivals can support and sometimes launch
the careers of these women on the international stage. The elevation of individual films
and filmmakers to international acclaim is a complex process. As Wong (2011) states,
“For most filmmakers, to be included in a festival and to move into gradually more
exclusive festivals and realms of competition is a long-term process that takes place over
many films” (66). The following chapters analyse the distinct ways each festival
contributes to propelling the careers of emerging women filmmakers.

_________________________________________________________________________

40
 C HAPTER T WO : L ITERATURE R EVIEW
The literature review situates my research question, which examines the relationships
between International Film Festivals and emerging women filmmakers, within the
intersection of two theoretical fields: film festival literature and feminist film theory. The
research is then positioned within the broader theoretical context of Transnational film
theory4.

As an emerging field of study, film festival research is the primary theoretical field within
which the research is positioned. The literature review addresses Transnational film
theory as a key theoretical context within which to position the film festival research and
feminist film theory. Ezra and Rowden (2006, 1) state that “the transnational can be
understood as the global forces that link people or institutions across nations”.
Transnational film theory is a contemporary theoretical approach that emerged from the
shift away from thinking about cinema as linked to the concept of the „nation‟.
International film festivals bring together such films from around the world, many of which
examine transnational identities, and which are (often) products of transnational systems
of cinema. A contribution of the research is the application of this theoretical context to
an analysis of the increasingly global flows of filmmaking by emerging filmmakers
(specifically within the spheres of the film festival circuit).

Although there has been a global proliferation of film festivals in particular in the last ten
years, the academic field of film festival research has only recently begun to gain
momentum. There is currently no research that specifically analyses film festivals to
determine how successful they are in facilitating the work of emerging women
filmmakers. An examination of the emerging field of film festival research forms the
second section of this literature review, with particular attention paid to key theorists in
the field including; Elsaesser (2005), Stringer (2001), Harbord (2002) and De Valck
(2007).

Contemporary feminist film theory is the intersecting theoretical framework that is

employed to position and interpret the analysis of the representation of women at film
festivals and is further applied in the critical textual analysis of their films. This lens raises
questions around how women filmmakers perceive their own work. Is it situated within a
feminist framework? Is it reflective of the specific experiences of women in various
cultural and political contexts? Do the artists see themselves as firstly filmmakers,

4
See Figure 1: Theoretical Framework

_________________________________________________________________________

41
secondly women or are these categories symbiotic? In keeping with the triangulated
theories of enquiry applied to the research question, the structure of the literature review
addresses each in turn. However the emphasis is on how the three theoretical skeins
work together to provide an innovative framing of the field.

Transnational film theory provides the broad theoretical context for the research and film
festival literature provides the framework for the specific focus on festivals and emerging
filmmakers. The final section examines contemporary feminist film theory as a key
analytical lens through which the critical textual analysis of the films can be examined.
Feminist film theory provides a more specific approach to framing the ongoing
importance of a focus on emerging women filmmakers and their cinema.

T RANSNATIONAL C INEMA T HEORY

Yet film... does not float freely above national borders, but attains part of its value
and meaning from its perceived origin and the paths of its circulation. These
paths are located within as well as cutting across national borders; to conceive of
global flows as outside of the nation omits the tension between national and
global economies, the force-field in which film circulates (Harbord 2002, 73).

In an increasingly globalised film and media culture, attempts to situate an international

filmmaker within the realms of a national cinema or cinemas can be problematic. It is
axiomatic that the impact of globalisation on international film industries has been
significant, contributing to globally networked systems of funding, distribution and
exhibition, all of which are highlighted in microcosm at film festivals. This has resulted in
an increase in the number of filmmakers working internationally and has subsequently
produced more sophisticated, global cine literate audiences (Ezra and Rowden 2006, 1-
12). Through the proliferation of film festivals, audiences are now exposed to greater
diversity on screen than ever before.

Transnational cinema theory primarily addresses a global shift in films that were once
easily categorised as belonging to a national cinema, toward films that are a product of
several nations. Although this impact of globalisation on film production is not a new
phenomonen, Ezra and Rowden argue that the term „transnational‟ accounts for the
“conditions of financing, production, distribution and reception of cinema today” (2006,
1). They define the transnational as emerging most obviously in the practical and
financial aspects of filmmaking. Moreover, the increasing circulation of filmmakers and
finances across global film industries is producing films “whose aesthetic and narrative
_________________________________________________________________________

42
dynamics, and even the modes of emotional identification they elicit” are also informed
by the dynamics of a transnational system of cinema (Ezra and Rowden 2006, 1).

It is increasingly commonplace in contemporary world cinema to see a suspension of

clear connections between a film‟s place of production, setting and the nationality of its
filmmaker(s), producers, actors, crew and funding bodies. Ezra and Rowden explain that
“transnational distribution unmoors films from their immediate contexts”, allowing for a
much wider circulation of films and fostering in audiences a kind of „cosmopolitan
citizenship‟ (2006, 10-11). Filmmakers who produce work across and between a number
of countries and cultures are now common. While many of the films addressed in this
research focus on locally specific stories and people, the women filmmakers featured
have studied, worked and lived outside of their country of origin, received funding from
several countries and hope to screen their films in as many countries internationally as
possible. While a sense of national identity and place of origin is often fundamental to
their work, these women filmmakers arguably bring a transnational, rather than a
singularly national perspective to bear in their approach to filmmaking. Transnational
cinema theory also investigates the global forces that link films, filmmakers, audiences
and film industries across nations and borders. Film festivals are sites that facilitate this
process of circulation and flow.

The product of transnational cinema, transnational films can also be recognised by some
or all of their practical, financial, aesthetic and narrative characteristics. The production
and distribution markers of a transnational film may include funding from several
countries or international funding bodies, sometimes as an official co-production. The
„cinematic mobility‟ of a film is often determined by both financial and geopolitical factors,
which can see films with higher production values and greater access to marketing and
distribution networks able to cross national borders and find international recognition
more easily (Ezra and Rowden 2006, 5). Transnational films can also be characterised
by an expectation from the country of origin to attain international acclaim before earning
national recognition. Film festivals function as an important means of global circulation
and recognition for such films.

With greater access to digital technology and international travel, contemporary

filmmakers are increasingly living, studying and working outside of their country of origin.
These filmmakers may come from diverse, multicultural backgrounds and their films
often explore through aesthetic and narrative techniques their lack of a fixed national
identity. Transnational films typically feature locally specific stories that have the ability to
_________________________________________________________________________

43
transcend national borders, and can be strongly linked to questions of identity and
displaced or diasporic peoples. For the purposes of this research, some or all of the
following characteristics may identify a transnational film:
Table 1: Characteristics of Transnational Films

Film Production and Distribution Financing from several

countries/international funding bodies
International acclaim before National
recognition
International exhibition/Global
circulation
International Press and Critical acclaim
International and local crew, cast etc
Filmmaker Working across or between countries
Study/work/live outside country of origin
Shooting films outside country of origin
Character, Story, Setting Search for identity/home/origin
Sense of dislocation or transition
Questions of migration, diaspora
Locally specific story – global
resonance

Transnational cinema theory provides a useful lens through which the festival films of
international filmmakers may be examined, specifically because, “the concept of
transnationalism enables us to better understand the changing ways in which the
contemporary world is being imagined by an increasing number of filmmakers across
genres as a global system rather than as a collection of more or less autonomous
nations” (Ezra and Rowden 2006, 1).The films analysed in this research, which have
been screened within a First World film festival context, display both national and
transnational characteristics and as such, require a critical perspective that considers
both national and international influences. Furthermore, the global nature of the film
festival and its functions within wider, international film industries requires an
understanding of the shift that has occurred away from clearly defined national cinemas.

_________________________________________________________________________

44
 O RIGINS : F ROM T HIRD C INEMA TO T RANS NATIONAL C INEMA 5
Transnational cinema theory has evolved as a critical confluence of various dynamic
factors: for instance, the spread of globalisation, argumentation and unrest from Third
Cinema theorists and filmmakers and, “the impossibility of assigning a fixed national
identity” to much of contemporary cinema (Ezra and Rowden 2006, 1). Third Cinema
theory arose in the 1960‟s in response to worldwide liberation struggles and
decolonisation movements and was essentially a „call-to-arms‟ against social injustice
and post imperial exploitation (Shohat 2006, 39-41). In distinguishing itself politically and
aesthetically from Hollywood and European cinemas, Third Cinema is often categorised
for its contentious political and social commentary, establishing it as a „cinema of
opposition‟ (Crofts 2002, 32). The „three cinemas‟ theory established Third cinema in
juxtaposition with First and Second cinemas. Essentially, the theory was commonly
interpreted as positioning “First cinema... (as) a cinema of entertainment, Second cinema
(as) one of intellect and interiority and the Third (as) one of political radicalism”
(Dissanayake and Guneratne 2003, 10). The edgy political lens synonymous with Third
Cinema films positioned the medium as a potentially powerful tool for triggering social
awareness and change.

However, even from its conception, the notion of Third Cinema has been problematised
by many film theorists as being limited in its failure to account for the significant and
complex differences across „Third World‟ nations, peoples and their cinemas. The
disregard for local specificity, particularly in the theorising of First Cinema film critics, led
not only to a homogenisation of Third Cinema as a whole, but also to preconceived ideas
about the expected content of such films. Recognition of a need for a fluid definition of
Third Cinema theory feeds into more contemporary debates that argue for a shift toward
a more heterogeneous identification of individual filmmakers within the rubric of
transnational cinema. Transnational cinema directs the focus away from clearly
delineated national cinemas toward a more global system of cinema, in which locally
specific stories can transcend national borders.6 Julian Stringer (2001) examines the
flows of transcultural film exhibition, with a specific focus on the temporal and spatial
characteristics of the festival in the city. He suggests that film festivals function as a

5
Parts of this section have been previously published in “From Ethnocentrism to Transculturalism: A Film
Studies Pedagogical Journey” (Cultural Studies Review 2011). These sections have been clearly indicated in
text, and represent my individual contribution to the co-authored paper.

6
Section published (Yeates, McVeigh and Van Hemert 2011, 80)

_________________________________________________________________________

45
place for the “establishment and maintenance of cross-cultural looking relations”, as a
“parliament of national cinemas” (Stringer 2001, 136).

For Third Cinema filmmakers, participation in established Western film festivals can be
somewhat problematic. Although these festivals provide an international platform for
emerging careers, the films (by such filmmakers) are presented as a product of non-
Western cinema that had been „discovered‟ by Western cinema, rather than gaining
recognition in their own right. Indeed, many women filmmakers reject the specific
labelling of being an „Indian filmmaker‟ or an „Iranian filmmaker‟ because they regard
themselves to be global, transnational filmmakers. Stringer confirms this in his research,
stating that there is an underlying (Western) assumption that “non-Western cinemas do
not count historically until they have been recognised by the apex of international media
power, the centre of which is located, by implication, at Western film festivals” (2001,
135).

Internationally, such films form part of the art-house phenomenon in film festival circuits,
which can ultimately position the film and filmmaker as “ethnographic documents of
„other‟ (national) cultures and therefore as representatives of national cinemas” (Desai
2004, 39). To clarify, the term art-house is primarily used as a signifier for non English
language, independent films that are generally expected to appeal to a limited, film
literate audience. Film festival and art-house audiences can unintentionally contribute to
this tension through an expectation that the content of such films will reflect a certain
national or cultural stance. This position of representation as the ethnographic „Other‟
can, therefore, be problematic in assuming that both the filmmaker and the nation they
are deemed to represent, share identical perspectives on what are often highly contested
issues. In order to challenge and even counter this underlying issue, particularly within
the context of interviews with the filmmakers, I will be approaching this research through
a feminist lens that acknowledges the complex intersections between race, gender and
cultural context that is prevalent in contemporary feminist film theory and, at the same
time, in filmmaking practice.

The somewhat outdated existence of the highly debated Third Cinema theory has
prompted a more fluid, global approach to cinema, as distinct national cinemas became
increasingly hard to grasp and define. Third Cinema theory also has failed to take into
account the many and varied origins and approaches of filmmakers both within Third
World Cinemas and within minority cinemas in First World nations. More recently, Post-
Third-Worldist debates have emerged from the works of theorists such as Ella Shohat,

_________________________________________________________________________

46
who argues for highlighting a hitherto-neglected, feminist approach to „Third Cinema‟
films. Shohat establishes the viewpoint that:

In the face of Eurocentric historicizing, the Third World and its diasporas in the
First World have rewritten their own histories, taken control over their own
images, spoken in their own voices, reclaiming and re-accentuating colonialism
and its ramifications in the present in a vast project of remapping and renaming
(Shohat 2006, 2).

Furthermore, Shohat‟s Post-Third-Worldist approach argues for a feminist articulation of

a „contextualized history‟ for women in „specific geographies of identity‟ (2006, 3). This
fascinating rewriting of specific identities and histories for women has moved some way
toward correcting what was a significant silencing of Third Cinema women‟s voices.
Shohat‟s definition of „Post-Third-World‟ does not deny the validity of the Third Worldist
approach within cinema studies, but rather she simultaneously identifies and questions
its contradictions.

In particular, the Post-Third-Worldist debates outlined here, and the emergent

transnational cinema theory intersect in their emphatic move away from Third Cinema‟s
patriarchal ideas of a closed national cinema. Transnational cinema theory favours a
global system of cinema in which locally specific stories transcend national borders. For
instance, Higson‟s critique argues that cultural diversity and cultural specificity in film
culture cannot be confined within the realms of national cinema, simply because the
communities imagined in cinema are much more likely to be either locally specific or
transnational (Higson 2006, 23). The limiting nature of national cinema was not entirely
dismissed by critics; rather, it has been reworked to accommodate a more fluid definition
of the „national‟, which includes feminist, queer, diasporic and transnational identities
(Desai 2004, 4). As Shohat states, “(t)he diasporic and Post-Third-Worldist films… do not
so much reject the „nation‟ as interrogate its repressions and limits, passing nationalist
discourse through the grids of class, gender, sexuality and diasporic identities” (2006,
53)7. Shohat and Stam‟s (1994) collective work, Unthinking Eurocentrism, had earlier
discussed the merits and downfalls of Third Cinema, ultimately proposing a concentric
circle model that denotes a broader structure of understanding in terms of Third Cinema
filmmaking. The fourth circle proposed by Shohat and Stam creates room for diasporic,
hybrid films that contain Third Cinema properties (1994, 28). It will be argued here that
this „fourth circle‟ definition is more helpful to this study, in placing the work of

7
Section published (Yeates, McVeigh and Van Hemert 2011, 81)
_________________________________________________________________________

47
contemporary „Third Cinema‟ filmmakers simultaneously within a specific and a global
context.

Figure 4: Third Cinema Model

(Shohat and Stam 1994, 28)

Thus, transnational cinema is characterised most significantly for its examination of the
relationship between the local and the global. Although transnational cinema as a theory
has been criticised for its propensity to homogenise cultures, there is a general
consensus among critics that it provides a more complex lens through which to view
contemporary global cinema in all its manifestations. For instance, Jigna Desai
contributes to transnational and diasporic film theory debates, supporting the notion of
local/global, stating that, specifically:

South Asian Diasporic cultural production is ideally poised to engage strategically

and intellectually the macrological (i.e., capitalism and imperialism) and the
micrological (i.e., discourses of everyday life) to enact analyses that examine the
mutual constitution of the global and the local (2004, 3).

Such an embedded engagement between local stories and global reception, as well as
the global impact on local filmmaking, clearly delineates an emergent, transnational
system of cinema.8 Moreover, the tendency for transnational theory to categorise film as

8
Section published (Yeates, McVeigh and Van Hemert 2011, 82)

_________________________________________________________________________

48
„global cinema‟ is helpful, in that it provides an international platform for films that would
otherwise not have distribution.

D IASPORIC C INEMA
A transnational and/or diasporic approach enables filmmakers to be contextualised
within a global system of cinema, without homogenizing aspects of local specificity. The
term diaspora, meaning „to scatter‟, implies a “dislocation of place, a loss of culture or a
crisis of identity” (Cheu 2007, 124-125). In a film culture context, diasporic people and
communities are defined as living outside of their country of origin or „homeland‟. Jigna
Desai argues that cinema, in particular, is a significant site of investigation for
transnational and diasporic concepts, both because of its accessibility, and because of
its engagement with globalisation (2004, 4). Ezra and Rowden (2006) argue that it is
through the specific study of diasporic people, identities and politics that a truly
transnational system of cinema begins to emerge. Therefore, contemporary transnational
and diasporic film theories providing a resonating framework within this research to study
emerging women filmmakers.

Diasporic cinema itself is fundamentally linked from its position of displacement or exile,
to the concept of an origin or homeland (Naficy 1999, 18-20). Naficy argues that
diasporic writing often recalls a moment of trauma in the homeland, or reflects on the
trauma of separation or exile. In differentiating diasporic cinema from exilic cinema,
Naficy states that diasporic cinema does not so much yearn for a return to the homeland,
but rather, nurtures a „collective memory‟ of an idealised homeland, without the physical
return (Naficy 2006, 114). The importance of a sense of identity and place of origin in
diasporic film is summarised evocatively by Jodha:

Artistic renditions... enable the collective consciousness of a nation to come to

terms with its own past, to learn its weaknesses but more importantly, the people
have the ability to unearth the buried threads of belonging, threads that can be
held on to and consolidated by future generations (Jodha 2007, 46).

This impetus of diasporic cinema to provide both filmmakers and audiences with a link to
the homeland underpins its importance in situating films at the interstices of culture,
place and identity. An examination of the construction of identity in the diaspora
illuminates significant tensions between diasporic communities and the place of origin or
„homeland‟. As Cheu discusses, diaspora is about the “relentless struggle for identity
formation in a stream of global consciousness” (2007, 126). This tension of identity

_________________________________________________________________________

49
between the diasporic community and the homeland surfaces in many diasporic films,
and the films of many emerging women filmmakers prove to be no exception. The textual
analysis sections of this thesis, which engage with the films of emergent women
filmmakers present at the film festivals, demonstrate that concepts of „home‟ and „away‟
are part of the lived experiences of their subjects.

Much of the debate surrounding the position of the diaspora and diasporic films stems
from contention about whether or not diasporic filmmakers have the authority to
comment on social values deeply embedded within the potent socio-cultural traditions,
such as religion and the patriarchy of the homeland. Many emerging filmmakers face
criticism from both local and international audiences over the content of some of their
films, for what the audiences perceive to be inaccurate or „un-authentic‟ representations
of the homeland. It will be shown in this study how the films of many emerging women
filmmakers frame their own specific and often highly personal perspectives of culture,
family and identity in sensitive and nuanced ways. Anjali Ram‟s (2002, 48) research on
diasporic readings of gender in Popular Indian Cinema found that, “Notions of gender,
home and nation are reconstituted, reimagined and reinterpreted within transnational
contexts”. Indeed, many of the emerging women filmmakers interviewed during the
course of this study demonstrate in their films a contemporary reimagining of their own
identities and relationships to their country of birth.

Both diasporic and local audiences will often criticise diasporic films for betraying an
idealised imaginary of the homeland. Conversely, other diasporic filmmakers are
condemned as being overly nostalgic in their representations. While these criticisms can
be valid, for Jain it fails to take into account the general validity of the view that film often
“indulges in cultural framing with varying degrees of concern for realistic portrayal and
emotional fidelity” (Jain 2007, 55). This notion of cultural framing and the varying
degrees of “authentic representations” increasingly demands that both festival audiences
and programmers rethink their expectations of films labelled as belonging to distinct
national cinemas. The more nuanced and fluid representations of transnational identities
on screen, are an important consideration of this research, and are addressed through
the interviews and the film analysis.

T RANSNATIONAL A UDIENCES
In addition to the debates around the intersections between national, transnational and
diasporic cinema, the worldwide increase in critical, film-literate audiences within the
particular sphere of film festivals presents a complex challenge to emerging transnational
_________________________________________________________________________

50
filmmakers. Reception of their films may differ drastically depending on the social,
political and cultural context of their audiences. Internationally, for instance, such films
form part of the art-house phenomenon in film festival circuits, which can ultimately
position the film and filmmaker as “ethnographic documents of „other‟ (national) cultures
and therefore as representatives of national cinemas” (Desai 2004, 39). This position of
representation can, therefore, be problematic in assuming that both the filmmakers and
the nation they are deemed to represent, share identical perspectives on what are often
highly contested issues.

The reception of their films locally and within the diaspora may also differ greatly, as
images of the homeland, culture and tradition are often hotly debated. Gill Branston
discusses this tension felt by filmmakers as the “burden of representation” (2000, 171).
She explains that the „burden of representation‟ describes the pressure felt by
filmmakers “who feel their images must „stand in for‟ or represent a single group‟s reality”
(2000, 171). This most often stems from a growing awareness of a group or nation‟s
underrepresentation in the global media. According to Branston, “The early stages of
such groups becoming visible in films, in more than derisory or painful ways, is often
when the political weight of „representing‟, „standing in for‟ the invisible truths of a group‟s
experiences is felt most keenly” (2000, 171). Despite this tension, transnational and
diasporic filmmakers, through assuming a position that largely stands in opposition to
popular, mainstream cinema, continue to offer audiences in their country of origin,
significant and alternate perspectives on current social and political issues.

Such debates swirling around the disputed nature of the imaginary homeland highlight
the crucial point that positioning the films of emerging women filmmakers within the
frameworks of Third Cinema, transnational, and diasporic theories is fundamental to a
thorough critical analysis of both context and content. Despite Third Cinema theory being
surpassed by transnational theory, Third Cinema remains a useful index for situating the
new generation of transnational cinema within an established body of socially and
politically significant cinema. Third Cinema theory‟s considerable impact on the more
contemporary theory of transnational cinema is important to consider. By combining what
is effectively a Post-Third-World and transnational approach to the textual analysis my
research aims to mobilise effective tools from each. As Desai (2004, 7) argues, “The
study of the role of cultural politics of film in the production of diasporic affiliations,
identities and politics is crucial to an understanding of transnationalism”. Transnational
and diasporic film studies allow for a more locally and culturally specific approach to
filmmaking, within a global rather than a national system of cinema. Situating the films of
_________________________________________________________________________

51
contemporary women filmmakers within several theoretical frameworks, therefore,
acknowledges the possibilities for a more subtle multiplicity of transnational dialogues
and meanings to emerge.

T HE I NTERNATIONAL F ILM F ESTIVAL

Leaving its mark on select corners of the globe, this caravan of images flows from
location to location, national border to national border, so as to connect exciting
and emergent film industries with the international traffic in cinema (Stringer
2001, 134).

International film festivals provide audiences, filmmakers and film critics worldwide with
the opportunity to engage with what may be considered the most significant, cutting-
edge films of the time, films that may not otherwise find mainstream and high-end
commercial exhibition. For any filmmaker, an invitation to a high profile film festival can
dramatically increase the chances for a film‟s critical success. For audiences, film
festivals present the opportunity to see films from unfamiliar places, to engage in what
Koven describes as an „authentic cultural experience‟, all without leaving one‟s own city
(2008, 3). The function of the film festival as an avenue of exhibition is widely
acknowledged as being an integral part of the global film industry. Less understood is
how festivals actually contribute to global film culture as a whole, and more specifically,
to the careers of the filmmakers who participate in them.

The field of film festival research has only begun to gain momentum as an emerging field
of academic research in the last five to ten years. The formation of the Film Festival
Research Network in late 2008 by Dr Marijke De Valck (University of Amsterdam) and
Skadi Loist (University of Hamburg) has made a significant contribution toward engaging
festival researchers from around the world. The Film Festival Research Network has
resulted in a growing bibliography of festival research as well as numerous successful
conference panels and workshops. However, media and press coverage of film festivals
continue to provide the largest amount of non-academic, printed material available.
Online coverage by film journals such as Senses of Cinema provide annual reports on
the most popular and award-winning films at some of the most acclaimed festivals
worldwide. Within the academic field, the most common form of publication recounts the
history of a particular film festival, often in conjunction with an anniversary or special
event. More recently, specific academically-driven literature has flourished, including
research on festivals and cities (Stringer 2001), festivals and national identity (Czach
2004) and festivals and cinephilia (De Valck and Hagener 2005).
_________________________________________________________________________

52
The role of the film festival in the wider transnational film community is certainly a
complex issue, as yet under-researched. Film festivals were originally established as a
forum for showcasing the best films from national cinemas around the world. However,
as national boundaries became increasingly fluid, the focus of contemporary film
festivals shifted to engage in and facilitate more complex flows of national and
transnational cinema. The functions of film festivals vary widely, from prominent world
events such as Cannes, to locally specific festivals such as the Brisbane International
Film Festival, which provides local audiences with the chance to see films that might not
otherwise find distribution in that particular region.

In her recent publication, Chan (2011) describes the film festival as a “cosmopolitan
space”, whose function encourages audiences to “participate in a kind of concentrated
cultural tour of the world” (253). Chan further argues that the film festival space also
regulates which films are allowed to flow through it, in “accordance with various social,
economic, political and cultural forces” (2011, 253). The inclusion of some films and the
exclusion of others by festival programmers facilitate a global flow of chosen films
throughout the festival circuit. As festival research continues to emerge, an agreed
definition of a „film festival‟ is still being negotiated. The general consensus, however, is
that film festivals act as an “alternative distribution network... providing audiences with
opportunities to enjoy commercially unviable films projected in a communal space”
(Peranson 2008, 37).

Current research on Film Festivals has been published throughout the duration of this
study. Central amongst these have been The Film Festival Yearbook series; The Festival
Circuit (Iordanova and Rhyne 2009), Film Festivals and Imagined Communities
(Iordanova and Cheung 2010) and Film Festivals and East Asia (Iordanova and Cheung
2011). Other recent publications include Cindy Wong‟s Film Festivals: Culture, People
and Power on the Global Screen (2011) and Jeffrey Ruoff‟s Coming Soon to a Festival
Near You: Programming Film Festivals (2012). Marijke De Valck‟s earlier Doctoral thesis
and subsequent book Film Festivals: from European Geopolitics to Global Cinephilia
(2007) and Julian Stringer‟s thesis, Regarding Film Festivals (2003) have also made
significant contributions to this burgeoning field.

F ILM F ESTIVAL N ETWORK

The relationship between prominent international film festivals and smaller, local film
festivals has been predominantly theorised as constituting a film festival „network‟ or
„circuit‟. An examination of the festival network is important for this research in order to
_________________________________________________________________________

53
understand the position of the individual festivals on the broader circuit, and the
subsequent position of power and influence they hold. Prominent film festivals have
greater international exposure, and are therefore more prestigious, but can be difficult for
emerging filmmakers to participate in. Conversely, smaller, local film festivals are more
accessible, but don‟t usually have the same capacity to launch a filmmaker on the
international stage. The flows of films, filmmakers, and industry and press delegates
between dominant, specialised and local film festivals reveal complex links and
relationships. Each individual festival‟s agenda is defined not only by the choice of
programme, but also by the city within which it is located, and its relationships
(spatial/temporal/cultural/political) with other film festivals and industry organisations. As
De Valck explains:

Festivals are not only concerned with films and filmmakers, bestowing them with
cultural value, but also with their own survival. They are constantly redefining
their position in the larger festival network and adapting to transformations (2008,
207).

Festivals legitimise their place on the festival circuit in a number of ways. A prestigious
competition, a focus on audience or celebrity presence, or accreditation by FIAPF
(International Federation of Film Producers‟ Association) all help to define a festival‟s
agenda and differentiate it from other festivals in the network. The relationships between
film festivals and the concept of a festival „network‟ or „circuit‟ has been examined by
many prominent festival theorists, including: Stringer (2003), Elsaesser (2005), De Valck
(2006), Rhyne (2009), Iordanova (2009), Harbord (2009) and Peranson (2008).

Julian Stringer suggests that there are three possible ways of understanding the term
“festival circuit”. Firstly, he describes the circuit in a straightforward manner, as a “closely
linked network of interrelated, interdependent events” (Stringer 2003, 107). He
speculates that there is inequality built into the circuit itself, and that some festivals hold
a higher value for press and industry delegates, while others are “dispensable… some
worth the decision to attend, others not worth investing time and money in” (Stringer
2003, 107). He argues that it is also possible to interpret the festival circuit as a
“metaphor for the geographically uneven development that characterises the world of
international film culture” (Stringer 2003, 108).

Essentially, Stringer suggests that the complex links between contemporary festivals has
established “core-periphery relations” within the circuit. He theorises that the network is
comprised of a “dominant centre (big festivals)” and a range of “subordinate or
_________________________________________________________________________

54
dependent peripheries (little festivals)” (2003, 108). Festival such as Cannes, Toronto
and Sundance would comprise the „dominant centre‟ of the festival network, whereas
festivals such as Brisbane make up the periphery. Stringer‟s theory of
dominant/periphery is certainly useful for conceptualising the complex relationships and
negotiations that occur between the prominent, influential festivals, and smaller festivals,
that (often) depend on programming choices of the larger festivals to the distribute the
same films to local audiences. He goes on to suggest that a more complex and fluid way
of conceptualising the festival circuit is as a:

…socially-produced space unto itself, a unique cultural arena that acts as a

contact zone for the working through of unevenly differentiated power
relationships – not so much a parliament of national film industries as a series of
diverse, sometimes competing, sometimes co-operating, public spheres (Stringer
2003, 109).

Marijke De Valck agrees with Stringer‟s assertion that some festivals assume more
powerful positions on the circuit than others. She proposes an analysis of the spatial and
temporal concentration of festivals, alongside an examination of how the festivals are
embedded within the circuit and festival calendar (De Valck 2007, 214). A spatial
analysis of the film festival circuit reveals, according to De Valck, an “interrelation of the
local with the global; the city with the nation; and the place of the event with the space of
the media” (2007, 214). A temporal analysis brings into consideration the dates on which
the festival is scheduled, and the proximity of that timing to other dominant and/or
influential festivals. De Valck also argues that from a temporal perspective, the festivals
take into account “current affairs (programming as a politics of participation), the latest
discoveries, news value, and historicity, as the oldest festivals continue to rely on their
glorious pasts… to maintain nodal positions on the circuit” (2007, 214).

Certainly, the programming decisions and “latest discoveries” of prominent festivals often
influence the programming choices of the smaller festivals that constitute Stringer‟s
“dependent peripheries” (2003). Ultimately, De Valck maintains that as festivals
continuously redefine their own positions on the circuit, they are required to compromise.
She argues that both a strength and weakness of the festival circuit is that film festivals
are dependent on one another for their survival, but that the “presence of multiple
agendas provides a safe foundation for the network system” which legitimises a film
festivals existence, and that it is the “larger network that guarantees a festival‟s
sustainability” (2007, 207). Both De Valck and Stringers discussions of the festival as a

_________________________________________________________________________

55
network are important here in determining the position of each case study within the
international festival circuit, their position of power and influence, and their subsequent
ability to create visibility for emerging filmmakers.

Mark Peranson‟s article, “First You Get the Power, Then You Get the Money: Two
Models of Film Festivals” (2008), proposes two kinds of festival models within the circuit;
the business festival and the audience festival. The business festival is characterised by
a high budget, a focus on premiere screenings, major corporate sponsorship, high profile
guests and filmmakers, a major competition, a film fund or Third World investment and
some involvement with Hollywood studios. In contrast, Peranson categorises an
audience festival as low budget, less concerned with premieres, limited corporate
sponsorship and a smaller selection of guests, little business presence and a minor or no
competition, no external investment in films and little to no involvement with studios. Of
course, he acknowledges that most film festivals fit somewhere in between these two
models, and that occasionally a festival can move from one model to another, most
commonly expanding from a smaller, audience festival to a more prominent business
model. According to Peranson each of these stakeholders has a vested interest in the
operations of the festival, including the range and type of films included in the
programme. He lists distributors/buyers, sales agents, sponsors, Government, audience,
critics and filmmakers as the key interest groups, and explains that while they are all
interrelated, some stakeholders are of more importance and have more influence
depending on whether a festival fits into a business or audience model (Peranson 2008,
39). Arguably, the role of most international film festivals is to showcase the top films of
that year to audiences in their region. Peranson‟s explanation of the many factors that
influence an individual festival‟s film selection indicates that the circulation of films across
the festival circuit is certainly not uninhibited/straightforward, but is rather, subject to the
„politics of programming‟.

Similarly to Peranson, Ragan Rhyne discusses the key stakeholders responsible for
upholding the festival circuit in his chapter, Film Festival Circuits and Stakeholders
(2009). Rhyne identifies the key participants as being the “filmmakers and studios,
journalists and press agents, professionals and programmers, local cultural councils and
supranational agencies, tourist boards, cinephiles and others – who have particular
interests in seeing the network proliferate” (9). Indeed, it is the movement of people and
films between the festivals, just as much as the positioning of the festivals in relation to
one another, which works to constitute the network as a whole. The following diagram
illustrates the complex relationships between festivals in the network, as well as the
_________________________________________________________________________

56
movement of both films and filmmakers between the different tiers of the festival
network.

Figure 5: The Film Festival Network

Dominant
Festivals

Specialised
Festivals

Local &
Periphery
Festivals

Local Global
al

City Nation

Dominant festivals such as Cannes, Venice and Berlin set the agenda for many of the
peripheral festivals scheduled after them. Local and periphery festivals look to the larger
festivals for the most current programming trends and acquire films through these
channels depending on their festival‟s reputation and their temporal location within the
circuit. The flows of films, filmmakers, programmers, and press and industry delegates
also affect and facilitate the successful continuity of the circuit. Stringer maintains that for
any festival to survive on the festival circuit it must remain competitive on two fronts:
firstly, a sense of stability and continuity, and secondly, the need to expand and remain
_________________________________________________________________________

57
cutting edge (2001, 139). Projecting a unique festival image also helps festivals to build
their reputation and forge a distinct place on the festival circuit. The position of a festival
on the international film festival circuit has direct implications for the attending
filmmakers. Wong (2011) argues that “The ranking of film festivals dictates the added
prestige each film receives through different festivals and awards” (16). A filmmaker
attending a prominent, „A-list‟ festival has a much great chance at attracting international
attention and acclaim for their film than a filmmaker whose film is shown at a local,
peripheral festival. Different types of festivals with varying positions and agenda‟s on the
festival circuit can be beneficial for filmmakers at different stages in their careers. For
emerging filmmakers, screening their film at a local festival can help to build a national
profile first, before (ideally) moving on to attract international attention. Dominant
festivals such as Cannes, Berlin and Toronto work not only toward elevating new
discoveries to international acclaim, but also simultaneously maintain and reinforce the
profiles of internationally recognised auteurs. It is this function of facilitating the flows of
films and filmmakers across the festival circuit that makes the analysis of each festivals
nodal position important to this research. The following section discusses how the unique
relationship between a festival and its host city plays an important role in situating a
festival globally on the film festival network.

F ILM F ESTIVAL H OST C ITIES

The city as subject has long been captured on film, with the now iconic images of Paris,
New York, London and Rome immortalised on the silver screen. It should come as little
surprise, then, that the largest institutions to celebrate film also cultivate a unique
attachment to the cities within which they are staged. The distinct relationship between
the film festival and the city has been theorised most rigorously by Julian Stringer in his
PhD thesis, Regarding Film Festivals (2003), as well as by Janet Harbord, in her book
Film Cultures (2002). Many film festivals are named after the city within which they are
located, rather than the nation. This practice is examined by Stringer (2001, 138), who
argues that it is cities, not national film industries that locate film festivals as nodal points
on the festival circuit. The proliferation of local and specialised film festivals that began in
the 1980‟s and 1990‟s created the impetus for new festivals to find unique ways to
differentiate themselves. One of the consequences of this proliferation was that the city
within which the festival was located became a distinguishing factor of the festival‟s
image. Stringer explains that each festival subsequently “sought to establish a distinct
sense of identity and community – an aura of specialness and uniqueness – through
promoting their film festivals within the terms of a highly competitive global economy”
_________________________________________________________________________

58
(2001, 137). However, it must also be acknowledged that just because a festival and its
city have a successful international reputation, it does not necessarily strengthen the film
industry of that particular nation. Despite this, Stringer states that it is the ambition of
many festivals to “aspire to the status of a global event”, through establishing an
international reputation and carefully considered programming strategies (2001, 139).
Essentially, established festivals are looked to as successful models, in the hope that a
burgeoning film festival might also be able to “bring the world to the city in question,
while simultaneously spreading the reputation of the city in question around the world”
(Stringer 2001, 139).

The relationship between festivals and cities is both reciprocal and dynamic. Cities
benefit from the presence of a successful film festival through an influx of tourism
(usually in off peak season), the potential to strengthen a sense of community and
culture, and the building of a global reputation and recognition. Festivals are similarly
shaped by the cities within which they are located, through the physical location of the
festival within the city, other arts/cultural events that occur at a similar time and also the
season when it is held. Harbord explains how this relationship between the festival and
city is inextricably linked:

Festivals advertise cities, set them in competition, region against region, global
city against global city. More than this, festivals are implicated in the structure,
design and use of cities, are part of the fabric of city life and its annual calendar.
Festivals set a beat to the rhythms of city living wherever they occur, in
competition and connection with other festival events (Harbord 2002, 61).

Harbord‟s description of festivals as being implicated within the fabric of city life is useful,
particularly when conducting an analysis of the visibility of the festival within the city. As
Stringer states, “...film festivals are planned and marketed around a clear sense of
visibility” (2001, 141). A closer examination of festival visibility will be conducted in the
case study chapters of this dissertation, however, the location of the festival to transport
and local infrastructure, cafes and restaurants, museums, art galleries and other cultural
attractions, and the participation (or exclusion) of these elements in marketing and
advertising the festival all contribute to a sense of visibility.

As the local and the particular are increasingly important in differentiating between film
festivals, an individual city‟s “festival image” must be carefully constructed. A film
festival‟s image is interwoven with the city, but is also shaped by its programming
choices, media and critical attention, ability to attract recognised filmmakers and
_________________________________________________________________________

59
celebrities and through its validation as an important festival in the circuit by other festival
industry delegates. Stringer maintains that film festivals that establish distinct festival
images, through careful management of the aforementioned factors, are able to engage
successfully with global/local dynamics. He states that such festivals “suggest the
international dimensions of local film cultures, (and) may produce a genuine local city
identity based around a shared sense of cinephilia and an engagement with dynamic
processes of cultural exchange” (Stringer 2001, 140). It is arguable then, that a festival
with a distinct festival image and agenda is able to more successfully carve out a niche
for itself on the international film festival circuit. A festival with a strong international
profile is therefore also in a better position to provide opportunities and visibility for the
filmmakers it supports. The specific programming choices of a festival contribute
significantly to this definition of a prominent festival identity and agenda. For filmmakers,
the positioning of their film within the programme of a prominent festival can be a crucial
factor in their success.

F ILM F ESTIVAL P ROGRAMMING

Everyone knows that acceptance to a high-profile fest rachets up the chances of
a film‟s success. But few understand the mechanics of the selection process
(Thomson 2003, 47).

Film festivals were originally established as a forum for showcasing the best films from
national cinemas around the world. Commonly associated with notions of European art
house cinema, the function of the international film festival has regularly been pitted
against the mass entertainment model of the Hollywood studio system. Dutch academic
Marijke De Valck traces this history, from the original national cinema approach, to the
shift to thematically-driven festivals, in her Doctoral thesis and subsequent book Film
Festivals: from European Geopolitics to Global Cinephilia (2007). This shift in
programming came as a response to the sudden proliferation of films that could no
longer be associated with a fixed national identity. The traditional model of festival
programming, which was influenced by the preferences of film critics and film historians,
fore-grounded the films of noted auteurs and canons of films from established national
cinemas (Czach, 2004). This model still exists in New Millennium film festival
programming to some extent, through showcases and retrospectives of the work of
eminent filmmakers. However, the abundance of contemporary films that have distinctly
transnational characteristics has meant that festival programmers have had to alter their
focus. The thematic approach to film festival programming groups films together in

_________________________________________________________________________

60
categories such as „emerging‟, „experimental‟ and „political‟ (De Valck 2007, 167).
Although many of the major festivals in Europe have not radically changed their festival
structures, an abundance of smaller festivals have been established to fill the demand
for more specialised programming. From the 1970‟s onwards, programming became a
central focus to ensure festival success.

This focus on programming positioned film festivals as an influential factor in the global
film industry, and as such, festivals began to play a distinct role in the making of auteurs
and the shaping of film history. The term „auteur‟ dates back to the 1920‟s and refers to
the theoretical writings of French film critics (Hayward, 1996, pp31-38). An auteur was
essentially an acclaimed filmmaker whose films were said to bear the distinct signature
or mark of the director. Since the 1920‟s the notion of the auteur has been vigorously
debated, particularly in light of contemporary feminist film theory. In the 1950‟s the
concept of the auteur film shifted to become closely bound with the style or mise en
scene of the film. American film critic Andrew Sarris popularised the field of auteur theory
in the west in the 1960‟s. The theory became integral to contemporary film studies, and
led to the division of „lower‟ popular cinema for the masses from the „higher‟ art house
cinema, and the formation of recognised canons of work from the „great‟ directors (Sarris
1974, 60-63). To an extent, auteur theory still informs the programming decisions of film
festivals. Often festivals will include retrospectives of some of the „great‟ directors, as a
mark of respect and tribute. In this way, film festivals continue to play an important role in
signaling the characteristics of „quality cinema‟. Conversely, the presence of a living
auteur as a guest at a film festival can also contribute to building a lesser-known festivals
reputation and credibility.

The dissolution of a strict focus on national cinema and the emergence of a more
transnational and fluid system of film exhibition and consumption was reflected in the
changing programming strategies of international film festivals. According to De Valck,
festival programming began to focus on two aspects: “cinephiles passion (recognising
new great auteurs and movements) and political sensibility (representing both large
social movements or liberation struggles and personal issues.... gender, race, and
ethnicity)” (2007, 174). This process that facilitated the recognition of a filmmaker from
unknown to auteur was dependent on successful festival acclaim. De Valck explained
that the role of the media in documenting the rise of a filmmaker was crucial. She stated
that “filmmakers could evolve from the discovery phase, in which they were one of the
many “new talents” to the establishment, to becoming “auteurs” with a recognisable
signature that tied their oeuvre together” (De Valck 2007, 176). Most importantly, for a
_________________________________________________________________________

61
filmmaker to reach the status of an auteur, they “need prolonged recognition via
favourable film criticism and festival awards” (De Valck 2007, 176, original emphasis).

The second programming trend that De Valck identified was the result of the French New
Wave in the late 1950s and early 1960s. As well as appropriating the concept of the
auteur, festivals began to chase the notion of the new wave, establishing themselves as
“institutions of discovery”, whose task became to actively select and present current
trends in world cinema (De Valck 2007, 174, original emphasis). Many of the influential
festivals began to engage in what she terms the “dogma of discovery”:

The intentions of the new generation of festival programmers were both sincere
and, in the case of presenting/supporting new, national political cinemas, the
result of a somewhat belated colonial urge to explore (“discover”) the cinematic
hinterlands (De Valck 2007, 179).

This trend in discovering new cinemas was much more transient than the discovery and
acclaim of new auteurs. Once a new cinema had received its portion of attention, the
dominant festivals would compete to be the first to reveal the next new discovery. As
Ruoff (2012) observes, “Authored festival programming is itself an act of film criticism…
Programmers‟ identification of and support for new trends, new waves, new directors and
new films provide the first cut for critics and academics who will later write the history of
cinema” (10). While this trend still exists in contemporary film festival programming, the
voracious appetites of the dominant festivals seem to have slowed a little, and festivals
are instead looking for fresh and slightly more targeted ways to present emerging trends
in cinema.

The increasing focus on political cinema, particularly films from developing nations,
meant that Third cinema filmmakers thus began to find audiences for their films within
the network of international film festivals. This was beneficial, in that through screening
their films within a First World context, filmmakers had access to greater media exposure
and critical and cultural recognition. Acclaim on the international film festival circuit also
helped these filmmakers obtain funding for subsequent films, network with other
filmmakers and industry guests, and sometimes the international attention then lead to
recognition within their country of origin. However, as De Valck states, the “disadvantage
was that some of these filmmakers began to make films for an international (above all
Western) audience and part of the original, local relevance of political cinemas or
aesthetic waves was lost” (2007, 179). The other consequence of this First/Third festival
dichotomy was that because the top films from developing cinemas were screened at the
_________________________________________________________________________

62
dominant, First World film festivals, emerging festivals in Third World countries struggled
to screen their own films.

Felicia Chan also discusses the programming of national cinema at festivals in her
recent article, “The international film festival and the making of a national cinema”
(2011). Chan calls for a closer examination of the discourses that frame programming,
particularly the ways in which film festivals can position such films as “representatives of
a particular national consciousness” (2011, 255). She also calls into question the
continuing role of the film festival circuit in participating in discourses around national
cinema, posing the question, “do nations create cinema, or does cinema create nations?”
(Chan 2011, 255) A simple answer is that film festivals and national cinema maintain a
reciprocal relationship, where festivals continue to seek out the best films from countries
around the world, while at the same time, drawing attention to particular national
cinemas within the discursive frameworks of their programming choices.

More broadly, the programming selections of international film festivals actively frame
films in specific ways. The shift toward thematic and specialised festival programming,
theorised by De Valck as a response to the proliferation of smaller festivals and a
growing need for distinction, meant that film festivals who were previously competing for
the same pool of films each year, now had a more specific focus. De Valck explains that
“new global meanings are attributed to the films by how they are framed and labelled as
a consequence of the programming” (2007, 177). Similarly, Wong (2011) examines how
festivals “negotiate local, national and supranational relations of culture, power and
identity” indicated through programming selections that “…we as audiences and film
scholars will see, what films we respect or neglect, and often, how we read such
cinematic works” (1). The films that are excluded are just as important to consider as
those that are included. Robert Koehler confirms this, stating that:

The heart of the matter is an informed philosophy of cinephilia, a practice, an

essential way of being and approach to cinema that either imbues a festival‟s
programming or doesn‟t. The construction and selection of any section
immediately declares itself as, first of all, a critical statement, for film festival
programming is always and forever in its first phase an act of criticism, and along
with this a declaration of values, comprising two equally important components:
those films that are included, and those films that are left out (Koehler 2009, 82).

A festival‟s programming philosophy can be informed by many external factors ranging

from the personal preferences of the festival programmers and directors to maintaining
_________________________________________________________________________

63
the interests of private and/or Government sponsors. Liz Czach argues that the
preferences of the festival programmers themselves are strongly implicated in the overall
agenda of a film festival. She states that as its core, festival programming is about
“tastemaking – on an individual, national and international level” (Czach 2004, 84). The
individual tastes and personalities of festival programmers can account for the initial
selection of films that are collected for initial consideration in the programme. The
selection of films may then depend on the larger discourses within which that particular
festival operates, such as their own national cinema and the specific, thematic
programming directions of the festival. The importance of programming must not be
overlooked as a significant influence in the distribution and circulation of films across the
festival network.

T HE F ILM F ESTIVAL E NVIRONMENT

The environment of festivity and cinephilia in which films are screened differentiate the
experience of viewing a film at a film festival from a regular commercial screening.
Carefully curated programming sections guide audiences through extensive catalogues
of the latest films from around the world. Festivals also provide audiences with the
unique opportunity to engage with a film on a more critical level, through discussions with
the filmmaker and other experts that they may not normally have access to at a regular
screening. De Valck explains that film festivals have played an important role in assisting
audiences to make new discoveries and refine their cinematic tastes: “At film festivals
one can immerse oneself in cinephile peer communities and take advantage of all the
expert selections, discussion and film reviews. Festivals, in other words, not only make a
variety of films available, they also frame the films in a rich discursive context” (De Valck
2008, 19). Czach, who also recognises that for many films, festivals provide their only
avenue for exhibition, further elaborates on the “rich discursive context” to which De
Valck refers. Czach states that the benefits for audiences are that “Film festivals present
a seductive return to classical cinephilia with their promise of a unique, unrepeatable
experience”, which she explains offer a rare and limited opportunity to view these films
before they disappear (Czach 2010, 141).

As discussed above, Stringer (2001) argues that festivals are planned and marketed
around a clear sense of visibility. How, then, are the films embedded within the
programme made visible, and subsequently, how do those filmmakers go on to find
international recognition? It is, arguably, the combination of many small but significant
factors, including the meeting of filmmakers, press and industry in one place at a specific

_________________________________________________________________________

64
time, the media coverage the festival receives and the time pressures of the event that
intensify the festival experience. De Valck argues that these factors:

…contribute to that special festival atmosphere where expectations, buzz and

exclusivity inevitably lead to an implosion of the event into cultural value for films
and filmmakers. The embedding of the festival within the larger network, then,
ensures that this value can transcend the confinement of the individual event.
The media provide global exposure, while films and filmmakers can travel from
festival to festival to acquire more exposure and prestige. The festivals are, as
indicated, sites of passage, locations from where filmmakers can be inaugurated
into the festival network that may be of vital importance to them throughout their
careers (De Valck 2007, 214).

It is certainly recognised that success on the international film festival circuit can lead to
ongoing opportunities and international acclaim for an emerging filmmaker. However, the
ways that a film and its filmmaker gain such acclaim are less widely understood.

De Valck acknowledges that the power of the festival circuit, “lies in its constitution as a
chain of temporary exhibition venues along which films can travel and accumulate value
that will enable and/or support theatrical release or simply support the exposure to
festival audiences” (De Valck and Hagener 2005, 101). Liz Czach extends on this
argument, by discussing the ways in which individual films can accrue recognition on the
festival circuit. According to Czach, films that were acclaimed at festivals bore a mark of
quality that afforded them international repute. Czach termed this mark of quality „critical
capital‟, which refers to “the value that a film accrues through its success in the festival
circuit. Through approval of the tastemakers – festival programmers and critics – the film
attains a level of distinction above its unselected peers” (2004, 82). Any film‟s „critical
capital‟ would therefore also depend on the status of the festival in which it was
screened, the film‟s place in the festival programme, audience numbers and critical and
popular attention by the press and film community. She further explains that, “If critical
capital is accrued from being selected for a prestigious festival, further distinctions are
determined through the film‟s placement within the festival structure” (Czach 2004, 82).

Thomas Elsaesser also discusses the value addition process of the festival, stating that
obtaining critical/cultural capital is of vital importance, particularly for unknown
filmmakers. However, Elsaesser acknowledges that there is a limited amount of critical
capital to be appointed. He states that “a film comes to a festival, in order to be
catapulted beyond the festival. It wants to enter into distribution, critical discourse and
_________________________________________________________________________

65
the various exhibition outlets” and that it is this process that regulates whether the
filmmaker goes on to make another film (Eslaesser 2005, 87). This process of appointing
value to selected films across the festival circuit also works to strengthen and validate
the position of the festival within the network. Elsaesser goes on to argue that with every
prize a festival awards, it “confirms its own importance”, which goes on not only to
increase the value of the prize, but also to confer value onto the festival itself (2005, 97).

What both of these authors refer to is what English coins the “prestige economy” (2005).
The prestige economy investigates the dramatic rise in prize giving over the past
century, and particularly examines questions of cultural power, status and prestige.
When referring to film festivals, English speaks of “cinematic prestige”, which, as a
relatively new form of cultural capital, is strongly linked to the festival city. He argues that
the film festival has emerged “not only as a firmly located cultural event, but as a cultural
event that is all about location” (2005, 283).

The proliferation of competitions at many of the dominant festivals in the network further
supports English‟s claim of an increasing dependence on the economy of cultural
prestige. For English, the “consecration of “world culture”, including world cinema, has
tended to redraw the maps of cultural competition and cultural prestige in ways that
diminish the importance of nations, charting new paths of trade between (the) local and
global” (English 2005, 291). These discussions about how films at festivals accrue value
and critical acclaim reveal that filmmakers need to become increasingly aware of how to
best target their films for festival success. Emerging filmmakers must have a clear
understanding of the type and size of festival their film is suited for, have some
knowledge of the business side of the festival and come to each event with a strategic
plan of what they wish to achieve, be it distribution, networking or finding a sales agent.
Of course, attaining “cinematic prestige” for a film arguably comes down to luck and
timing just as much as strategic planning. But for young filmmakers, having an
understanding of the „business‟ of film festivals is crucial.

F ESTIVAL F ILMS
One of the consequences of the proliferation of contemporary film festivals has been the
emergence of what many theorists term the “festival film”. Julian Stringer examines the
notion of the “festival film” in his doctoral thesis. Stringer claims that there are two types
of films screened at festivals, namely that “on the one hand, the term festival film is often
used simply as a means to classify films exhibited at festivals. On the other hand, it
works on occasion to identify titles assumed to be produced for festivals” (Stringer 2003,
_________________________________________________________________________

66
143, original emphasis). Within the contemporary film festival context, high profile, well-
funded festivals are further complicating the notion of a “festival film” by providing
funding for films themselves, particularly for filmmakers from developing nations. Festival
funds such as Rotterdam‟s Hubert Bals Fund actively finance projects they deem to be of
particular cultural or artistic worth, thus directly intervening in the types of films available
for programming within the festival circuit. De Valck agrees with Stringer‟s assertion,
stating that:

Many film festivals nowadays look beyond the programming and evaluation of
finished products and demand a say in which films are artistically interesting
before they are made; with these funds the festivals, in fact, influence which films
will be realised and what (type of) films will be on the market for their and other
festival programmers to choose from. This development adds a whole new layer
of meaning to the label “festival film,” as these films are not only predominantly
produced for the festival circuit, but also partially by (and with the cultural
approval of) the festival circuit (De Valck 2007, 181, original emphasis).

In the case of emerging filmmakers, it can further be argued that their films might sit
somewhere between Stringer and De Valck‟s definitions. Many of the filmmakers
interviewed for this study, many of whom did not receive direct funding from a film
festival, did not necessarily create a film that might be classified as produced for or by
the festival circuit. Rather, these emerging filmmakers, conscious of the importance of
film festivals in providing the most likely exhibition opportunities, arguably created their
films with the festival circuit firmly in mind. Informed by Stringer (2003) and De Valck‟s
(2007) discussion, the following table clarifies the three main types of films programmed
at festivals and will be referred to in the following case study chapters through the
discussion of individual films.

_________________________________________________________________________

67
 Table 2: Types of Festival Films

Un-solicited Films submitted to the festival for consideration in the

Films screened at
programme
Festival
Films selected from the global pool by programmers

Film made for Films submitted to selected festivals - made by filmmakers with a
Festival distinct/predetermined festival strategy

Select films are funded by Film Festival Funds

Often these films are from developing nations
Made with the cultural and artistic approval of the festival
Film made by Funding can be provided for script development, production, post-
Festival production, distribution and exhibition
Festivals actively intervene in the films they find interesting before they are
finished
Determines the types of films available on festival circuit

Arguably, the success of a film at an international film festival hinges on the filmmaker‟s
ability to create a film that is local in origin, but universal in its resonance and appeal.
Film festivals are often the only means of exhibition and promotion for such films and
usually it is only after a film has gained international recognition that the filmmaker can
gain some support within her country of origin. Film festival theory is utilised within my
research as a theoretical link between my analysis of the case study festivals and wider
discourses of international film industries, critical and media attention and film and
festival culture. Film festival theory also provides a means of analysing the participation
and strategy of the women filmmakers at the case study festivals. In order to further
illuminate the relationship between women filmmakers and international film festivals, the
final section of the literature review examines contemporary feminist film theory and its
application within this research.

_________________________________________________________________________

68
 F EMINIST F ILM T HEORY
The political challenge for a feminist cinema is to make visible subjectivities and
perspectives, sensibilities and differences, values and beliefs that have gone
unseen and undefined (Nichols 2010, 429).

Images and representations of women in contemporary cinema and the mass media are
inextricably linked to the Second Wave feminist movement of the 1970‟s and the
resultant burgeoning field of feminist film theory. Such theory emerged in conjunction
with the women‟s liberation movement and has since been charted, contested and
rewritten in an abundance of literature worldwide. Currently, in a supposedly post-
feminist world, both the validity and usefulness of such theories are widely debated,
particularly in Western communities. Contemporary audiences are so accustomed to
images of women in mass media, be they stereotypical or otherwise, that the further
purpose and importance of feminist investigation is somewhat undervalued. However, it
is arguable that many cultures worldwide continue to be flooded with images of women
as proscribed by patriarchal values, thus limiting alternative, more empowering images of
women through mainstream cinema and other artistic means.

Feminist Film theory will be utilised in this research as a means of examining both the
positions and opinions of the women filmmakers interviewed at each festival and to
evaluate the representations of women within their films. The key theorists addressed in
this literature review include; E. Ann Kaplan‟s (1997) investigation of the position of the
“Other”, Thornham (1999) and Gaines (1999) and their theorising of new feminist
positions for filmmakers, bell hooks (1999, 2000) and her discussion of the “oppositional
gaze” and Kuhn‟s (2004) examination of textual negotiations and female spectatorship.
Specifically, I will apply feminist film theory approaches in order to examine how the
women filmmakers infuse their own individual experiences as women into their
filmmaking practice and aesthetic, as well as how they perceive their films within the
broader programming structure of each festival. The following table explains in more
detail how the discussion of the interviews and films will be approached.

_________________________________________________________________________

69
 Table 3: Characteristics of Films by Women Filmmakers

Filmmaker Contextualise Filmmaker‟s opinions of women‟s

cinema and their own place within global film
industry
Examine Filmmaker‟s individual
understandings/identification with feminism
Understand their position in terms of
gender/race/class
Film Text Examine representations of women within the film
text
Search for evidence of a female voice in the
narrative
Contextualise the film and its representations of
women with other film texts from same
region/nation

Approaching the films in this research through textual analysis from a feminist
perspective allows greater insight into the social, cultural and political context of the film‟s
origin. As Kuhn argues, the relationship between textual analysis and contextual enquiry
provides a space for “interrogating anew the relationship between the text, the
institutional and socio-cultural context, and the female spectator/reader” (Kuhn 2004,
37).

Researching emerging women filmmakers within the context of First World film festivals
is certainly a complex undertaking. Early feminist film theories have been criticised for
their tendency to focus solely on the male/female binary with little regard for specific
socio-cultural contexts and issues of race and class (Thornham 1999, 287). This is seen
to be problematic in its propensity to homogenise female audiences and speak on behalf
of all feminists as though they were „white‟. Gaines states that the “male/female
opposition, seemingly so fundamental to feminism, may actually lock us into modes of
analysis which will continually misinterpret the position of many women” (1999, 294).
However, a significant body of work arguing for a specific approach to „non-white‟
feminist theory has since been established. The absence of black women on screen
perpetuated what bell hooks terms the „oppositional gaze‟, essentially a site of resistance
from which “individual black women actively resist the imposition of dominant ways of
knowing and looking” (1999, 317). Filmmakers, particularly from developing nations,
Kaplan surmises, are “producing new ways of seeing, new readings of the past, as well
as new images of inter-racial looking relations. They seek to intervene in the imaginary -
_________________________________________________________________________

70
to change how images are produced - rather than present minorities „as they really are‟”
(1997, 219).

The interrogation of race and gender in feminist film theory has established an
environment in which a multiplicity of voices, from diverse races and cultures, has begun
to emerge. The theoretical position of the spectator has been fore-grounded by feminist
critics, and through a specific focus on the socio-cultural location of filmmakers and
audiences, a more nuanced, in-depth analysis of women‟s reception to such films has
been undertaken (Gledhill 1999; Thornham 1999). For instance, hooks‟ theory of an
„oppositional gaze‟ stems from a perceived lack of black women on screen with whom
audiences could identify. She argues that black female audiences gain agency through
their oppositional reading of white women in film. Critical black female spectatorship
emerges only when there is resistance to culturally dominant/oppressive images. hooks
agrees with Kuhn‟s argument that:

…the acts of analysis, of deconstruction and of reading „against the grain‟ offer
an additional pleasure – the pleasure of resistance, of saying „no‟: not to
„unsophisticated‟ enjoyment, by ourselves and others, of culturally dominant
images, but to the structures of power which ask us to consume them uncritically
and in highly circumscribed ways (Kuhn 1985, 8).

It is this position of analysis and „reading against the grain‟ that is useful in evaluating
emerging women‟s films within a First World film festival context. Such films can be
positioned within festival programmes, though usually unintentionally, as representatives
of “Other” national cinemas. Critically evaluating the positioning of women‟s films within
festival programmes and the visibility that those particular filmmakers are afforded is an
important consideration in this study.

Feminist film theory, in particular the foundational works of Kaplan (1997), Kuhn (2004),
hooks (1999, 2000), Thornham (1999) and Gaines (1999), continue to provide a strong,
critical framework through which to view and position the work of contemporary women
filmmakers within this dissertation. It is clear that in order to examine the films
thoroughly, the relationship between the text and context must be taken into account.
The application of a layered feminist approach to this research is important in gaining a
more sophisticated understanding of the relationship between emerging women
filmmakers and their participation in First World Film Festivals. Filmmaking can be an
intensely political art form, and negotiating this type of ethnographic research, which can
require a careful consideration of issues of gender, race and class, certainly indicates
_________________________________________________________________________

71
that the importance of feminist investigation is not obsolete. Indeed, in an increasingly
transnational film culture, it could be argued that feminism with its new inflections is all
the more relevant globally in the New Millennium.

I MAGINI NG A NEW SPACE FOR W OMEN ’ S C INEMA IN A

T RANSNATIONAL C ONTEXT
Women need to create new „feminist‟ positions appropriate for the present and
the future, building on the struggles of prior generations: the story of women,
resistance, and filmmaking is far from over (Kaplan 2003, 27).

Perhaps one of the most difficult aspects of searching for a female voice in women‟s
films lies in demonstrating whether there is in fact still a need to do so. It can be
challenging to justify the need for a feminist approach to analysing women‟s films when
on a superficial level, it can appear as though we have moved far beyond the 1970‟s
need to reconstruct and/or challenge images of women on screen. Kaplan takes up this
challenge, arguing that:

Although now, as a result of generations of feminist theorising and practices,

women have so many new positions to occupy, some kind of “feminist” stance –
however hard to define, is still essential. As noted above, different generations of
women may understand “feminism” differently, both because the constraints
women endure are different and because prior generations of feminists provided
new perspectives that enabled women to see differently. We need to better
understand each other‟s positions, while agreeing that there is still much to
achieve in terms of gender and racial parity (Kaplan 2003, 25-26).

A more recent publication by Tasker (2010) reinforces Kaplan‟s call to arms. Tasker
discusses the absence of women filmmakers in mainstream media, arguing that a lack of
visibility is an ongoing concern. She questions how often and in which places are
audiences presented with prominent images of successful women filmmakers? Tasker
argues that the current position of women filmmakers is both “marginal and precarious”
and that “given the significance of the figure of the filmmaker within contemporary film
culture, there is a crucial question of the visibility of women filmmakers to be addressed”
(2010, 213-214, original emphasis). This is a further reason why the research focuses on
the visibility of women filmmakers within the mainstream festival circuit, rather than their
participation in women‟s film festivals.

_________________________________________________________________________

72
It has become apparent during the course of this study that there are several aspects of
the research that are problematic or a source of tension. Some filmmakers showcased at
festivals actively privilege the voices and experiences of women in their films as a means
of commenting on pressing cultural and political issues. Other filmmakers do not
subscribe to the label of „feminist‟ or „woman filmmaker‟, even if their respective films
represent a strongly coded woman‟s point of view. Tensions also inevitably arise when
scrutinising women filmmakers from developing nations within a First World film festival
context. The expectations of the researcher, the festival, film critics and audiences
inevitably must be negotiated with the original intentions of the filmmaker. Although a film
may foreground the stories or position of women, the intentions of the filmmaker may not
necessarily have been to create a „women‟s film‟.

Indeed, Kaplan‟s assertion that feminism is understood differently by women of all

generations, cultures and ethnicities is strongly reinforced in the interviews conducted.
As emerging filmmakers, many of the women interviewed explained that they did not set
out to create a film with a political agenda or to tell a story explicitly about women.
Rather, it was important to focus on a story or character that had personal resonance
with their (own) experiences as a woman. Angela Martin suggests that instead of talking
about women‟s films as having a feminist aesthetic or a woman‟s voice, it may be more
productive to look instead at films in terms of a female or feminist authorship. Martin
explains that “...female or feminist authorship tends to be sought in what can be
identifiably linked to the filmmaker (as woman)” (2003, 34). According to Martin, feminist
authorship can be found in a film‟s autobiographical reference, a filmmaker‟s actual
presence in the film and in evidence of a female voice within the narrative (2003, 34).

It has therefore become evident that searching for a female voice or perspective within a
film text requires careful negotiation. My position as a researcher, speaking from a white,
middle class, western, feminist perspective may be seen as being at odds with the
filmmakers I am interviewing. Through a focus on emerging women filmmakers, I am
predominantly speaking to filmmakers from diverse ethnic and social-cultural
backgrounds, with different religious, political and feminist understandings. It is important
to acknowledge this tension as researcher, as Kaplan surmises in her section on
Speaking for the Other, in Women Filmmakers Refocusing (2003). Discussing the work
of theorist and filmmaker Trinj T. Minh-ha, she states that “White filmmakers and critics
have learned the necessity of positioning themselves in relation to their representations
of the „Other‟, and to attempt to see from the Other place, as part of a reconciliation
process” (Kaplan 2003, 21). Kaplan particularly reiterates the importance of asking “who
_________________________________________________________________________

73
can speak for whom, under what conditions and for what purposes” (2003, 21).
Understanding my position and perspective as researcher in the manner that Kaplan
describes, has helped greatly in refining my approach to the data gathering, the textual
analysis and interview components for this thesis.

C ONCLUSION
This literature review has outlined the three main theoretical areas that are significant to
the shaping of my research. A combined approach to diasporic and transnational film
theory is useful in situating the films of emerging women filmmakers within the broader
discourses surrounding contemporary filmmaking. Many emerging filmmakers are now
imagining their connections to both home and the international community in more fluid
and dynamic ways, and this theoretical context takes this into consideration. The
emerging field of film festival research, particularly literature focusing on the festival as
network, the relationship between the festival and its host city, and the politics of
programming film festivals provides a crucial framework within which to situate this
research. Through an examination of current film festival literature, I have outlined the
areas of festival research that are still lacking, and attempted to identify how I will make
an original contribution to this field. Feminist film theory is the second theoretical field
that underpins this research on emerging women filmmakers. Current discussions in the
field indicate both the ongoing need for a focus on the experience of women in the
international film industry, as well as a call for finding new ways of articulating the voice
of the female filmmaker. The aim and further contribution of this dissertation is to place
the experience of emerging women filmmakers at the centre of the research, in order to
examine the current state of women‟s filmmaking within the context of the international
film festival. Essentially, the intersection of these two key theoretical areas within the
wider context of transnational cinema is explored in order to illuminate the critical
significance of film festivals, emerging women filmmakers and the wider film culture.

_________________________________________________________________________

74
 C HAPTER T HREE : B RISBANE I NTERNATIONAL F ILM
F ESTIVAL (2009-2010)
I NTRODUCTION
I want to see different images of women on the screen, different role models,
different stories, and that‟s what I try to do. Then people categorise what I do as
feminist, but that isn‟t necessarily my point of departure (Badoe 2005).

This chapter explores the role of the local film festival and its specific relationship to the
city and community within which it is located. In situating the analysis in this way, it also
takes account of the ways in which female filmmakers can be facilitated at the local and
the global level. Since the proliferation of local film festivals in the 1980‟s and 1990‟s they
have begun to form a third tier of the burgeoning film festival circuit (Stringer 2001), and
one that filmmakers need to take advantage of to find industry, critic and consumer
audiences for their films. Although local film festivals are typically located on the
periphery of the global circuit, they are increasingly playing a key role in showcasing
international films to local audiences. It is argued here that local festivals such as the
Brisbane International Film Festival are designed to appeal to a specific city‟s film culture
and community. As Stringer argues, “cities have sought to establish a distinct sense of
identity and community – an aura of specialness and uniqueness – through promoting
their film festivals within the terms of a highly competitive global economy” (2001, 137).

The focus for this chapter is the Brisbane International Film Festival and its significant
role within Brisbane and Queensland‟s film culture and its outreach to the global. Despite
its local specificity, BIFF has endeavored to build an international reputation, particularly
with influential second tier festivals such as the International Film Festival Rotterdam and
the Berlin International Film Festival. As a local festival, BIFF has the potential to attract
emerging filmmakers from within the city and its surrounds, and provide exposure for
their films within a national framework. However, ongoing changes in the festival‟s
management and programming agenda have caused the focus of the festival to shift and
as such, its ability to support emerging talent has become less clearly delineated.

On the eve of the Brisbane International Film Festival‟s 19th Anniversary in 2010, it was
in the midst of considerable change. Anne Demy-Geroe, the festival‟s Artistic and
Executive Director since BIFF‟s inception in 1992, had recently retired. This case study
charts the shift in BIFF‟s direction and programming from 2009 (Demy-Geroe‟s last
_________________________________________________________________________

75
festival) through to the introduction of the new Director and Head of Screen Queensland,
Richard Moore, in 2010. Some brief observations of the 2011 festival are included
toward the end of the chapter to ensure the study remains current. This chapter initially
examines the context and history of the festival, in order to discuss the central role that
BIFF plays within the film culture of the city and more broadly, within Queensland. The
chapter provides an analysis of the 2009 festival in relation to emergent women
filmmakers based on interviews, participant observation and the actual films screened
during my attendance. An interview with the past Executive Director of BIFF, Anne
Demy-Geroe, outlines the administrative processes and programming choices of the
2009 festival. Significant films by the identified emerging women filmmakers at the 2009
festival are analysed – specifically, Perfect Life (2008) directed by Emily Tang and The
Milk of Sorrow (2009) directed by Claudia Llosa. A short interview conducted with
director, Emily Tang, informs an analysis of the representation of the female characters
in her film, as well as her thoughts on how the film‟s inclusion in a local festival such as
BIFF could be beneficial to her ongoing career. Programming selections from past
festival catalogues that focus on emerging women‟s cinema are also considered in
relation to the festival‟s history of supporting women‟s filmmaking.

The chapter then examines the significant changes that occurred with introduction of the
new Executive Director at the festival in 2010. The impact of Moore‟s new approach to
the festival‟s programming structure, venues, marketing and audience appeal is
examined in relation to the place of the film festival within Brisbane‟s film culture and with
respect to the ways these changes have affected emergent women filmmakers. Key
films by emerging women filmmakers at the 2010 festival, including Little Sparrows
directed by Camille Chen (2010) and Orchids: My Intersex Adventure directed by
Phoebe Hart (2010) are examined in terms of their visibility within the programme as well
as their representations of women‟s perspectives and experiences. Interviews conducted
with these women filmmakers reveal their varying approaches to the film festival circuit,
their experience at BIFF and their understandings of the importance of film festival
participation to their careers.

C ONTEXT AND H ISTORY OF BIFF

The Brisbane International Film Festival is held annually and showcases a diverse range
of feature films, documentaries and short films, as well as animation and experimental
work, children‟s films and retrospectives. Films are selected from a “dynamic and global
palette” and cater for a broad film going audience ("St George Bank Brisbane

_________________________________________________________________________

76
International Film Festival" 2009). Brisbane‟s International Film Festival opened in 1992
and has since been patronised by more than 350,000 filmgoers. BIFF prides itself on a
diverse and internationally celebrated selection of films in its programme each year. The
festival was traditionally scheduled annually in July/August and is typically ten to eleven
days in length. However, as of 2010, BIFF moved to November to screen in conjunction
with the Asia Pacific Screen Awards. The festival‟s primary function is to provide an
exceptional quality International Film Festival for Brisbane‟s film enthusiasts and the
general public. The festival attracts filmmakers, critics and industry professionals both
internationally and Australia wide. BIFF provides avenues for young, local filmmakers
through The Courier Mail‟s Fast Film Competition and also through the Queensland New
Filmmakers Awards. Children from the ages of eight through to eighteen are also catered
for in an offshoot children‟s film festival, Cine Sparks. BIFF‟s major sponsors, (who
provide significant funding), include the Queensland Government and the former Pacific
Film and Television Commission, now known as Screen Australia.

At a general level BIFF can simply be seen as yet another Australian film festival. Upon
close inspection, however, it can be seen to serve a very specific function within
Brisbane and across Queensland‟s film community. While audiences demonstrate widely
eclectic tastes, there is a common expectation that each year BIFF will showcase films at
the forefront of contemporary world cinema, which are not normally accessible through
commercial film outlets. In its twenty years to date, BIFF has established itself as an
institution in Queensland‟s film and festival culture. The eclectic mix of contemporary,
popular, art house, documentary, innovative and historic film selections foster both
cultural understanding and a celebration of diversity so that it truly is a „people‟s festival‟.

F ESTIVAL D ATES – T EMPORAL LOCATION IN F ESTIVAL C IRCUIT

The film festival circuit is defined not only through its hierarchy of A, B and C list
festivals, but also through the spatial and temporal relationships between festivals. The
timing of BIFF in late July/early August up until 2010 coincided with International film
festivals in other Australian capital cities, specifically Sydney (mid June) and Melbourne
(late July). This timing was significant because it allowed the festivals to collaborate
through sharing film prints and international guests. Geographically, as Australia is
isolated from much of the international film festival network, it is important that festivals
within Australia share an element of collaboration as well as remaining competitive.

The traditional timing of the festival in late July/early August also ensured a wide
audience base due to the similar timing of festivals such as the Brisbane Festival and the
_________________________________________________________________________

77
Brisbane Writers Festival. The decision to locate the festival across multiple venues also
enticed a wider range of audiences to participate. In 2010, the festival changed dates to
coincide with the Asia Pacific Screen Awards, held annually on the Gold Coast in
November. According to the incoming Head of Screen Culture, Richard Moore, the
change in dates was a political directive, in an attempt to create stronger links between
the community importance of the festival and the prestige of the awards (Moore 2011).
The challenge of renegotiating BIFF‟s positioning in its new November timeslot has had
consequences, particularly with regard to its relationship with Sydney and Melbourne. At
this early stage, Moore speculates that the relationship between BIFF and APSA
remains artificial, specifically because of a lack of official programming collaboration,
sharing of international guests, marketing of the two events in partnership and the
separate locations in Brisbane and the Gold Coast. However, Moore‟s plan is to position
BIFF as the premiere film event for Queensland that other events in the year lead up to.
Although the new timeslot for the festival will undoubtedly remain a challenge in the next
few years, its separation from Sydney and Melbourne has the future potential to lead to a
more influential and distinctive festival image.

F ESTIVAL V ENUES – S PATIAL L OCATION WITHIN THE C ITY

As a rapidly growing Australian capital city, Brisbane‟s recent commitment to improving
arts and cultural facilities has gone some way toward improving its reputation as a
„cultural backwater‟ in comparison to other Australian cities such as Melbourne and
Sydney. The development of cultural precincts in the centre of the city and a strong
annual calendar of arts and cultural festivals has strengthened cities national profile as a
growing hub for the arts. As Felton (2013) recognises, Brisbane‟s “…recent urban
development within a short period of time has produced a city that now has all the
hallmarks of a „creative city‟ (13).

At the Brisbane International Film Festival in 2006, the Minister for Education and the
Arts, Rod Welford MP, stated that BIFF is truly a people‟s festival, whose function is
“entertaining, inspiring and educating audiences” (Welford 2006). Certainly, the people of
South-East Queensland are continuing to patronise BIFF in ever-increasing numbers. As
BIFF continues to grow in popularity its intrinsic connection to Brisbane as both location
and subject must also strengthen. BIFF‟s primary location since its inception has been at
the heritage listed Regent Cinema in the heart of the city. In recent years, BIFF has also
screened films at the South Bank Cinemas, Palace Centro and Palace Barracks

_________________________________________________________________________

78
Cinemas, and at the Gallery of Modern Art (since its opening in 2006). All of these
locations are within close proximity to the Brisbane CBD.9

The family friendly atmosphere of the South Bank Parklands serves a distinct and
recognisable purpose in Brisbane, thus providing a suitable space for BIFF‟s children‟s
and youth programme. The history and cultural significance of the Regent also served a
specific function in creating a more glamorous and elegant atmosphere for the official
festivities. As Munro recognises, “It‟s the civic responsibility of a festival to really engage
with the city and community within which it resides, so that it‟s not just an elite spaceship
that arrives and disappears, but is very much grounded with lots of appeal” (Munro 2004,
20).

Certainly, during the ten days of BIFF each year, there is a palpable, communal
atmosphere of excitement and festivity amongst the staff, guests and audiences. As
Quinn notes in her article, Arts Festivals and the City, festivals recognise a collective
need to set aside a time and place for communal creativity and celebration and as such,
can be seen as “occasions for expressing collective belonging to a group or place”
(Quinn 2005, 928).

However, in 2010, it was announced that the Regent cinema was to be closed and the
site redeveloped into a high-rise building. The developers were under instruction to save
the heritage-listed foyer, but the four cinemas (including the original Showcase cinema)
were to be destroyed. BIFF‟s main office, also located in this building, was to be moved
to another building within the CBD. The loss of the Regent as the heart of the film festival
is perhaps the greatest challenge BIFF has had to overcome. Moore acknowledged that
the Regent was unquestionably the “spiritual home of the festival” and despite the shift to
new venues in 2010, the new „heart‟ of the festival is yet to be established (Moore 2011).

BIFF 2009: I NTERVIEW WITH D IRECTOR , A NNE D EMY -G EROE

BIFF utilises a carefully planned organisational structure in order to satisfy its diverse
audience demographics. The former Executive Director of the festival, Anne Demy-
Geroe, was responsible for the programming of the entire catalogue of films, although in
recent years she collaborated with a Programme Manager. Although each year the
festival featured a unique theme and focus, the basic structure of BIFF remained the
same. Under Demy-Geroe‟s direction, successful feature films headlined each festival on
opening and closing nights, as well as two or three showcases. The programme also

9
See Appendix Four for BIFF‟s festival venue map.

_________________________________________________________________________

79
included significant sections showcasing current trends in World Cinema, Asia Pacific
Cinema, Australian Cinema and Indigenous Cinema (Colourise BIFF). Demy-Geroe was
also responsible for overseeing the administrative and technical running of the festival,
including sponsorship, publicity, print handling and ticketing. As the founding Artistic
Director since BIFF commenced in 1991, Demy-Geroe‟s role as Artistic Director and
subsequent position as Executive Director had an instrumental impact on shaping the
ongoing role and developing reputation of BIFF within Brisbane‟s film culture and
industry.

In our post festival interview (2009), Anne Demy-Geroe spoke about the process of
planning and programming the festival each year. The „festival year‟ began for her in
September. The first few months were spent with Demy-Geroe attending several
International film festivals including Venice, Pusan, Rotterdam and Berlin. These visits
allowed Demy-Geroe to view current and upcoming films that may be suitable for
inclusion in the new programme. Attending the festivals in person also gave Demy-
Geroe the chance to visit film markets (Berlin) in which she built and maintained BIFF‟s
reputation with the major film distributors. Demy-Geroe stressed the importance of
attending festivals, seeing films in person and interacting with the filmmakers as vital to
building the reputation of BIFF. She stated:

I‟m a big believer in seeing films at festivals rather than waiting for the screeners
afterwards… we‟re a fairly small festival and I think one of the biggest things you
need to do is build your profile with film makers, so that they think not only that
you‟re a good festival to show the film at, but that you actually care about the film
(Demy-Geroe 2009).

Certainly, BIFF‟s reputation within Australian film culture enabled the festival to attract a
range of noted guests each year. Demy-Geroe particularly valued the informal
opportunities at festivals such as drinks and dinners, at which she had the opportunity to
meet and observe filmmakers who might be suitable festival guests. She said that, “I
think the guests are really vital part. I try to get a range of guests; I do try to get a lot of
Australian guests because there‟s nowhere else that Australians will ever get to meet...
those film makers” (Demy-Geroe 2009). Demy-Geroe‟s approach to the pre-festival
networking involved significant time spent travelling, meeting with filmmakers, industry
partners and colleagues and watching a wide range of films which then informed the
trends and themes of the upcoming festival programme.

_________________________________________________________________________

80
Constructing the new programme each year was a lengthy process that began in earnest
in February and depended heavily on the cooperation of distributors to ensure it was
finalised in time. Demy-Geroe explained that each year she began with a programming
grid and a general idea of how many films to include in each section. As the programme
began to take shape, small clusters of films were grouped together to form „programme
hooks‟. These are particularly useful for marketing and promoting specialised sections of
the programme:

I do think that it‟s very important that you start off with some ideas, but that you
are not fixed... This year, for example, we had all those Australian documentaries
on Asia, My Asian Heart and Gandhi’s Children… It just happened to be where
filmmakers were focusing. I‟m sure it wasn‟t really that that was what we
(intended to) select, they just happened to be the films that were around this
year. I think it‟s very important not to impose anything too early (Demy-Geroe
2009).

The decision of where to place a film within the programme and how it will be packaged
is often a choice influenced by a number of factors. Films may be selected to fill a certain
place in the programme because of a common theme, country of origin, particular
aesthetic qualities or distinct social and political content. Many of the films included in the
programme are also only accessible to the public through the festival setting. The limited
capacity surrounding cinema releases in Australia and worldwide, means that film
festivals often provide the only opportunities to see a diverse range of contemporary
cinema.

For young and emerging filmmakers involvement in the festival is paramount, not only for
the networking opportunities but also for the opportunity to be exposed to the variety of
films other emerging filmmakers are producing. As the festival is often the only exhibition
opportunity for many filmmakers, it can become a crucial testing ground for the appeal of
a film. Demy-Geroe explained that often Distributors would contact the festival after a
screening to enquire about the audiences‟ reception of a particular film. BIFF‟s three Jury
awards, FIPRESCI, NETPAC and INTERFAITH10, were also intended to afford
nominated films extra publicity and credibility on the film festival circuit:

10
Each of these awards were judged by a panel of three experts. The FIPRESCI (International Federation of
Film Critics) Award is to promote film art and encourage new and young cinema. The NETPAC (Network for
the Promotion of Asian Cinema) Award is decided by filmmakers, critics, festivals, distributors, exhibitors and
film educators to promote Asian cinema. The INTERFAITH is awarded by three jurors from diverse
religious/spiritual backgrounds to promote humanitarian values in cinema.
_________________________________________________________________________

81
 Filmmakers often talk about the fact that it‟s really important for them because
once a film is screened at certain festivals then people tend to buy it... I think it‟s
also important for the filmmakers if they manage to travel with their films,
because again that‟s a career development thing for them... it‟s a very important
role for festivals to bring together filmmakers from different places. A little local
Brisbane filmmaker might make contact with some more senior person over
dinner at the festival, and that person comes and sees their film, and so it goes
on (Demy-Geroe 2009).

Importantly, the film festival circuit functions to showcase and garner attention for films
from audiences, critics and film scholars. The term „critical capital‟ as applied to festival
films by Czach refers to the “value that a film accrues through its success in the festival
circuit. Through approval of the tastemakers – festival programmers and critics – the film
attains a level of distinction above its unselected peers” (2004, 82). It is this propensity to
gain critical capital on the festival circuit that makes festival participation so crucial to the
success of young and emerging filmmakers. The importance of „critical capital‟ and the
how it is achieved is examined further in this chapter with relation to key films from the
festival.

Each year BIFF‟s programme delves into exploring new arenas of cinema that can be
confronting to western audiences. The idea of the film festival acting as a neutral
environment has been contested in film festival literature and transformed over the
decades. In 1947, a popular British newspaper critic, Dilys Powell (1947) argued in her
article “The Importance of International Film Festivals” that the lasting value of the film
festival was the audience members‟ unique opportunity to detach from their normal
surroundings and contemplate cinema against a neutral background. In contrast, more
recently theorists such as Elsaesser (1996) and Stringer (2001) have argued that, far
from offering a neutral platform for film viewing, film festivals are cultural and political
sites that function as a space of mediation and as a place for the “establishment and
maintenance of cross-cultural looking relations” (Stringer 2001, 134). Demy-Geroe
echoes the views of Elsaeasser and Stringer when she states:

…I think the program‟s quite political and I have very definite thoughts in mind,
and so do most of the other people when we screen films, but I think it‟s very
important that you remain very neutral about that so that people feel they can
come... and see it there and not feel that they‟re going to be pigeon holed into a
position (Demy-Geroe 2009).

_________________________________________________________________________

82
This perspective highlights an interesting tension that a locally specific festival such as
BIFF is required to negotiate. The festival programme has to appeal broadly to the city‟s
audience, in order to attract a diverse demographic and ensure that the festival
continues to serve its function of bringing the „best‟ of world cinema to Brisbane.
However, the personal preferences and politics of any festival‟s programmers are,
always (arguably), embedded in the design and choice of films.

Demy-Geroe‟s careful cultivation of an appropriate programming strategy for Brisbane

audiences is evident also in her approach to crosschecking the programme. She
explained that in the early days of the festival that she was cognisant of how there was
an even greater responsibility to ensure that films represented a wide range of ethnicities
and sexualities:

I think other institutions help you define what your role is. I suppose that initially
when we started BIFF, Brisbane had very little in terms of film culture so I tried to
make it very general and I tried to cover all abeyances... I used to be very
proactive in screening gay and lesbian films, because there was no Queer Film
Festival, but now that that‟s here, you don‟t have to have affirmative action in that
sense – you can stick to films that are completely top quality and if that‟s their
theme, then yes you market them that way (Demy-Geroe 2009).

This approach ensured that a broad and interesting spectrum of films was included in the
festival that explored a range of different perspectives. Despite her belief that BIFF‟s role
had evolved beyond a primary responsibility to ensure diversity and balance in its
programming, Demy-Geroe remained inclusive in her programming of contemporary
developments in women‟s cinema until her departure.

P AST P ROGRAMMING OF W OMEN ’ S C INEMA

As discussed earlier in the literature review, the issues explored in films from developing
nations are sometimes at risk of perpetuating Western ideas about appropriate or
expected narrative content. International Film Festivals provide vital platforms for the
exposure of such films, acting as “prime sites for intensified national and transnational
translations and mistranslations, as well as hailing and haggling over acts of
representation” (Naficy, 2003, p197). There are dangers in relegating the films of
developing nations to be inherently categorised as Third Cinema. Often such films are
deemed to belong to Third Cinema simply because of their lack of funding and
aesthetic/technical expertise or because they are the only accessible, international

_________________________________________________________________________

83
representatives of their country‟s national cinema (Naficy, 2003, p197). Whilst
preconceived notions of Third Cinema from the Western world may place limits on
audience expectation and cause filmmakers to self-censor, it is evident that these films
hold a significant place at international festivals such as BIFF. Not only does festival
exposure provide a platform for cross cultural debate but it also heightens the potential
for Third Cinema films to become a significant vehicle for increasing social, cultural and
political awareness, both within a particular films country of origin and on a global scale.

In 2006, a particular programmatic focus of BIFF was Unveiling Islam: Women, Cinema
and Islam in Iran and Turkey. This section of the catalogue, curated by Demy-Geroe,
had a specific focus on the lives and representation of women in the cinemas of Iran and
Turkey. When asked about the importance of screening women filmmakers‟ films at
festivals, Demy-Geroe stated:

I‟m always happy and I try to keep the balance there but in 2009, I don‟t think that
we should be promoting women‟s films over men‟s films unless they stand up. It
can be interesting if you‟re looking at something – the last time I really did was
when I did the Turkish and Iranian women in the industry and that‟s really
interesting for me. I certainly try to get a number of female directors and if I think
that there‟s not… I cross balance the program. I think that‟s the most important
thing, to be cross checking it in a whole range of ways. You know, gender is
obviously important, the type of contents are important, countries are important,
regions are important – a whole range of things, so it‟s certainly something that I
take into account (Demy-Geroe 2009).

The contemporary representations of women in Turkish and Iranian cinema highlighted

in this particular section of the programme foregrounded their plight to Australian
audiences at a time when interest in Iranian cinema in particular on the festival circuit
was growing. Iranian cinema was a popular programming choice on the international film
festival circuit after it was „discovered‟ by the Toronto International Film Festival in 1992
(Nichols 1994a). Demy-Geroe‟s focus on Iranian and Turkish cinema at this time is a
pertinent indicator of the influence of dominant A-list festivals programming choices on
local film festivals such as BIFF.

An Iranian film that screened at the 2009 festival, About Elly (2009), tells the stories of
women in a manner that has universal appeal. Asgar Farhadi‟s About Elly is set in
modern day Iran and concerns a group of middle class friends who embark on a seaside
holiday together. Elly, a nursery teacher, is persuaded by the mother of one of her
_________________________________________________________________________

84
students to join the group on their holiday. The holiday is really an excuse to set Elly up
with Ahmad, a recent divorcee. When Elly disappears halfway through the film, the group
begins to fabricate lies in a spiraling web of deceit and hidden personal agendas. Demy-
Geroe mentioned this film as a particular „stand-out‟, specifically for its lack of exoticism
in terms of representing the lives led by Iranian women: “I would hope that people would
see that, yes, it had specifically Iranian issues, but it also had issues that were so
universal – the fighting behind lines and all retreating immediately and good intentions
going wrong” (2009). Such decisions to programme BIFF based on the merit of each film
or in response to current filmmaking trends indicate an important diversion away from the
traditional structure of programming a festival based on „national cinemas‟.

The 2007 festival included another significant programming focus entitled, On Being a
Woman in Zimbabwe. Tsitsi Dangarembga, an emerging Zimbabwean filmmaker,
attended the festival for the screening of her four short films. Dangarembga‟s films
arguably represent both Zimbabwe‟s community filmmaking projects and national cinema
simultaneously. In the absence of a fully developed national cinema, Dangarembga‟s
films have been hailed as representative of African cinema whereas in actual fact they
are locally and culturally specific. Two of the four shorts screened in the collection
resulted from a community based, women‟s scriptwriting project she initiated in 2004. A
severe lack of funding, equipment and facilities for training potential women filmmakers
prompted the establishment of a series of narrative workshops. Initially, the workshops
were largely motivational, encouraging women to find the courage to tell the stories that
they felt needed to be told. As Dangarembga stated in a Community Filmmaking seminar
at BIFF, “Women and Indigenous people have not always represented themselves. I
wanted to give voice and skills to the stories that needed to be told” (Dangarembga
2007). Dangarembga‟s comments reinforce Shohat‟s discussion of the need for a
postcolonial, feminist re-writing of history by Third Cinema, diasporic filmmakers. Shohat
reiterates the importance of these women filmmakers taking control of their own images,
“reclaiming and reaccentuating colonialism and its ramifications in the present in a vast
project of remapping and renaming” (Shohat in Ezra and Rowden 2006, 2).

A common preconception that filmmakers from developing nations often face is the
expectation that their film‟s narratives will be limited to discussing the political and social
issues of their nation. Whilst Dangarembga‟s films deal with problematic social issues
such as women living with AIDS and undeclared sexual abuse in schools, they are not
primarily intended to be situated within a political arena. Essentially, Dangarembga‟s
films draw attention to political/social problems as a means of educating the
_________________________________________________________________________

85
Zimbabwean people, using the medium of film as a powerful tool for social awareness
and change. As well as raising awareness and promoting discussion, the four shorts that
comprise On Being a Woman in Zimbabwe are firmly embedded in local culture,
language and customs. Perhaps the most controversial of the four, Kare Kare Zvako
(2005), or Mother’s Day, is based on a traditional Shona folktale that tells of a drought
stricken family whose father kills and eats his wife in order to survive. Song, dance,
locally specific language and ritual enrich the film‟s narrative and the butchering of the
mother figure is a common feature of African folktales. According to Dangarembga, the
film‟s reception internationally was likely to be quite controversial, because whilst
“African audiences will recognise the grotesque features of a folktale and the grim
humour of the mythical world… European audiences are more likely to be shocked”
(cited in Viet-Wild, 2005, 136). Thus, Demy-Geroe‟s inclusion of Zimbabwean
programming strands indicates that whilst she is aware of the need to programme for a
broad general audience, there is room in the festival programme for these more
peripheral but equally important films.

Certainly, Demy-Geroe‟s involvement with the festival since its inception in 1992
contributed to her wealth of knowledge about the tastes and expectations of Brisbane
audiences. BIFF also maintained a strong critical function under Demy-Geroe‟s direction,
with tailored introductions of films before screenings, essays on key programming
strands included in the catalogue, panels on new directions in filmmaking and robust
question and answer sessions following screenings. This critical function was further
supported by reviews on films that BIFF commissioned from local film critics. BIFF‟s
function within Queensland‟s film culture was firmly established by the time Demy-Geroe
left in 2009. The festival also had built key connections with other European festivals on
the circuit, particularly Rotterdam and Berlin. However, the changes that ensued
signaled a new direction and festival image for BIFF in 2010.

A C HANGE IN D IRECTION
The change in BIFF‟s leadership, staffing, location and programming agenda has had a
significant and immediate impact on the festival‟s image and its position on the wider
festival circuit. Whereas under Demy-Geroe‟s director the festival maintained strong links
with European art-house festivals and collaborated with its temporal neighbors,
Melbourne and Sydney, the new iteration of BIFF had to forge a new identity. While the
reasons for such dramatic changes are not publicly transparent, the decision to
reposition the festival under the brand of Screen Queensland impacted significantly on
the festival‟s new direction. As Haslam explains, small film festivals are typically “funded
_________________________________________________________________________

86
by two sources: volunteer labor, which often exceeds the value of all other contributions,
and funding from arts councils and other government sources” (Haslam 2004, 50).
BIFF‟s new programming agenda will be discussed in more detail in the following
section; however, it can be argued that the funding of a festival has implications for the
types of films and programming categories that are included. Haslam states that:
When trying to keep a festival alive, there inevitably arise concerns about how to
increase audiences… this is not to say that increasing audiences is not in the
interests of media artists and programmers; it is to suggest that sometimes
pressures to bring in commercial works and celebrities may overshadow any
curatorial values that the festival programmers may aspire to (Haslam 2004, 50).

The previous programming of BIFF, whilst richly layered and framed within a critical
context, was not necessarily financially sustainable, according to the new regime
implemented by Screen Queensland.

Skadi Loist addresses another interesting problem that affects many smaller film
festivals, but one that is not often acknowledged. The precarious nature of working for a
film festival, particularly with regard to the scarcity of full time employment and a
relatively high turnover of festival staff forms the basis of Loist‟s concerns (2011). She
states that this is exacerbated by the fact that “festival organizations are often precarious
entities themselves” which struggle for funding and tend to survive with a minimum of full
time staff and a reliance on volunteers during the most intense periods (2011, 269). In
2009, BIFF lost the majority of its long-term staff, including the Executive Director,
Festival Manager, Programme Manager and many other key administrative and
organizational staff. Loist explains that “whenever a member of the volunteer festival
team leaves it disrupts the fragile mechanism of the festival organization” (2011, 270).
Indeed, the loss of these key staff significantly disrupted not just the organization of
BIFF, but arguably affected its festival identity. Combined with the loss of the Regent
cinema as the home and „heart‟ of the festival, BIFF in 2010 was bound to be very
different.

It is arguable that this loss of accumulated knowledge and skill is akin to the concept of
„corporate memory‟ in business. Many intangible links between the long-term festival
staff who left and the core BIFF audience were also (temporarily) broken. This loss of
continuity, familiarity and word-of-mouth is immeasurable. Nafus and Anderson discuss
the concept of corporate memory and research, citing a term „lieux de memoire‟,
meaning „sites of memory‟, as a place of “remembrance that exist(s) in a social world

_________________________________________________________________________

87
that constantly seeks to get ahead of itself, to “innovate.” These can be literal places,
such as museums and archives, but also, more broadly, festivals, calendar rituals, and
indeed canonical historical accounts” (Nafus and Anderson in Cefkin 2009, 141).
Certainly, the film festival itself acts as a site for the sorting through and archiving of past
and current world cinema. The concept of „festival memory‟ has not been explored in any
depth (to my knowledge), but such significant shifts in festivals such as BIFF, as well as
festivals that are not sustainable, are certainly sites where both festival histories and
identities, and film knowledge itself can be irretrievably lost.

BIFF 2010: I NTERVIEW WITH D IRECTOR , R ICHARD M OORE

Richard Moore, BIFF‟s new Executive Director and Head of Screen Culture, moved to
Brisbane in 2010 fresh from four successful years at the helm of the Melbourne
International Film Festival. Moore was the Executive Director of MIFF from 2007 to 2010
and in that time was responsible for fostering the festival‟s new film investment fund
(MIFF Premiere Fund) and 37 South, MIFF‟s co-financing market. In this time he also
developed and built on MIFF‟s reputation for exciting programming and negotiated the
festival‟s dual image as both a community festival and industry event (Moore 2011).

In our recent interview, Moore spoke about his move from Melbourne to Brisbane, the
challenges of the 2010 festival and some of his future plans for BIFF. 2010 was a year of
immense change for the festival, with a new director, new timeslot, the loss of the core
venue, the Regent cinema, as well as a brand new website and ticketing system. As
BIFF‟s core team of staff under previous director Anne Demy-Geroe had also left the
festival in early 2010, Moore was faced with building a new festival team immediately
upon his arrival. For a well-established festival with a loyal audience, this upheaval of the
festival and its familiar image would certainly prove to be a challenge.

Q UEENSLAND ’ S F ILM C ULTURE

BIFF is the largest international film festival within the state of Queensland in terms of
the amount and variety of films screened and also audience numbers11. At the time of
interview, Moore explained that the most important challenge in the lead up to the 2011
festival would be making the new festival dates work within the wider film industry
calendar, essentially working toward positioning BIFF as the premiere film event at the

11
Other film festivals currently held in Queensland include the West End Film Festival, the Gold Coast Film
Festival, the Brisbane Queer Film Festival and a range of travelling film festivals including the Spanish Film
Festival, the Lavazza Italian Film Festival and the Alliance Francaise French Film Festival, among others.

_________________________________________________________________________

88
end of the year. Moore also made the decision to reconsider the physical scope of BIFF,
containing the festival‟s reach exclusively within the city centre. Previously, events such
as BIFF in the ‘Burbs had held outdoor screenings in the suburbs of Brisbane, in an
attempt to attract suburban as well as inner urban audiences. But Moore believes that
the majority of BIFF‟s audience is drawn from a five-kilometre catchment area around the
centre of the city, and that there is subsequently little need for the festival to screen films
beyond this area.

However, this decision does not necessarily align with the defined role of Screen
Queensland, of which Moore is Head of Screen Culture. According to Screen
Queensland‟s website, its mandate is to “develop and support the local screen industry,
attract production to Queensland, and celebrate an active screen culture across the
State” ("Screen Queensland" 2011). Whilst Moore acknowledged that it was important to
consider the role of Screen Queensland in rural areas outside of the city, the decision to
limit the festival to the city centre, whilst understandable for financial reasons, is a
decision which is not particularly inclusive and perhaps demonstrates at this stage only a
cursory understanding of Brisbane audiences.

Moore is also looking to integrate the Queensland New Filmmakers Awards12 (QNFA)
into the festival and reduce the number of awards down from the current thirty-seven
categories (to a more manageable amount). The re-integration of QNFA back into the
festival will, Moore anticipates, bring each event more prestige. He also intends to review
and simplify the Queensland Short Film Competition in an effort to realign Brisbane‟s
most important events for young filmmakers. Another significant change to the festival in
2010 included the removal of the FIPRESCI, INTERFAITH and NETPAC awards. The
awards, although seen as prestigious, were costly to the festival, as each award required
a panel of international judges be flown in to Brisbane to judge each category of films.
Moore argued that the awards were not of particular significance to Brisbane audiences
and did not impact greatly on the films that won. He stated, however, that these
decisions were “not just change for change‟s sake”; rather he believes that BIFF should
“do a little bit less, in a more simple fashion” (Moore 2011).

BIFF‟s restructured position as a local festival is quite clearly defined by Moore and
Screen Queensland. The festival is positioned as a showcase for both international and
12
The Village Roadshow Studios Queensland New Filmmakers Awards is the biggest Industry sponsored
competition for emerging filmmakers in Australia. The awards are judged on creativity, originality and
technical competence and may be entered by secondary and tertiary students, as well as independent
filmmakers of all ages.

_________________________________________________________________________

89
local filmmaking and draws direct inspiration for its programming choices from national
film festivals (Sydney and Melbourne) and international film festivals (namely Berlin and
Cannes). It is also clearly defined as a city-based festival, with strong links to specific
venues within the centre of the city, as well as being linked temporally to other key film
events on Brisbane‟s industry calendar, such as the Asia Pacific Screen Awards and
QNFA. The many changes that have occurred in the past twelve months have been
challenging, and perhaps not all of the changes have been warranted. As Moore
conceded, “Normally you would change dates on an event like this at your own peril”
(2011).

T HE F ESTIVAL Y EAR
Moore‟s approach to planning the festival year is to start with ideas for retrospectives
and original strands of programming, simply because these often take the longest to
prepare. He travels widely to festivals around the world, most notably to Berlin and
Cannes, to build and promote BIFF‟s image with international distributors and to find
films suitable for the new festival programme. The timing of the larger festivals in the
circuit also influences the selection of films available for programming during the festival,
as well as alerting Moore to potential new trends in world cinema. Moore explained he
also has spotters at festivals around the world who can advise him on other films that
may be suitable for the programme. These include festivals in Texas (South by South
West), Paris (Central European Cinema) and in Spain and Latin America. Moore
conceded that whilst international festival visits were vital to constructing a contemporary
and interesting programme, the travel involved was quite time consuming and meant that
he had to be selective in his choice of festivals. The previous director, Anne Demy-Geroe
attended the International Film Festival Rotterdam as well as Berlin and Venice annually.
However, Moore explained that he no longer attended Rotterdam because he felt that its
programming choices had become “too obscure”:

I used to go to Rotterdam, but I think it‟s not the right fit for Brisbane; I think it‟s a
little bit too obscure perhaps. Having been through it four or five times it got
harder and harder to find films that I thought would connect to an audience
(Moore 2011).

Other considerations that are planned early included thinking about potential festival
guests. Australia‟s relatively isolated geographic location, particularly from Europe, limits
the number of filmmakers willing to travel to BIFF to present their films. Attracting

_________________________________________________________________________

90
Industry guests is similarly challenging, and as such a significant amount of planning
time needs to be dedicated to this task.

In mid-September, just after the Toronto International Film Festival, the programme for
BIFF is finalised. The new timing of the festival in November has meant that BIFF now
has access to the most recent films from festivals such as TIFF, which allows Moore to
show clear distinctions in his programming choices to other Australian film festivals
scheduled earlier in the year. There was understandably a significant amount of
crossover in the 2010 programmes of Melbourne and Brisbane. The limited time
between the festivals and Moore‟s arrival in Brisbane only a few months before BIFF
were valid reasons. However, Moore stated that this would always be the case to a
degree, because “there always is and there always will be (links) and I don‟t make any
apologies for that; I don‟t think it‟s a problem because... essentially you are dealing with
a festival for a local audience who haven‟t seen those films” (Moore 2011). Certainly, in
2011, Moore had the advantage of seeing the programmes of Sydney and Melbourne
well before the final „lock down‟ date for BIFF‟s catalogue. After November 2010, Moore
and his team focused their attention on evaluating the successes and shortcomings of
the 2010 festival in order to begin preparations for 2011. Specifically they were
interested in looking at which films were received well and which failed to attract an
audience. Moore also re-evaluated the size of the festival, at one hundred films, and the
design of the programme sections.

Assessing the success of the festival venues was also a priority13. Moore shifted the
festival‟s venue configuration in 2011 to focus on the „triangle‟ between Tribal Theatre,
Palace Barracks and GoMA. These three venues are within walking distance of one
another and Moore hopes that providing a physical connection between the cinemas will
help to heighten a sense of festival experience and engagement. Harbord‟s description
of festivals as events embedded in the „fabric of city life‟ is reflected here through BIFF‟s
positioning within the social and cultural hub of Brisbane (South Bank) (2002, 61).
Moore‟s hope that the new venue configuration will foster a social and communal
atmosphere for the festival is based on the assumption that a festival should be
contained within a specific physical space in the city. Certainly, the festival‟s previous
hub in the Regent cinema infused the festival with a particular sense of character, and a
specific relationship within the city. The festival was further made visible through the use
of marketing and signage. The unavoidable decision to relocate BIFF to its new venues

13
In 2010, the festival was held at the Palace Barracks cinema, Palace Centro cinema and Tribal Theatre.

_________________________________________________________________________

91
will hopefully be validated in the next few years as the festival re-establishes its new
position within and relationship to the city.

P LANNING THE P ROGRAMME

Moore came to BIFF just a few months after finishing his artistic direction at the 2010
Melbourne International Film Festival. Running two festivals in the space of a few
months inevitably meant that the content of BIFF‟s programme looked remarkably similar
to what was on offer at MIFF. Despite the lack of lead-up time, Moore still made
considerable changes to BIFF‟s programming structure. He stated that “Every new
director that comes in will always object in a sense to what the previous director has
done, and there is... an element of change” (Moore 2011). The festival programme was
streamlined to make for a more accessible catalogue of films. He also made the
deliberate decision to limit the number of morning screenings, with most screenings
starting each day at 2pm. This was intended to attract audiences to afternoon and
evening sessions so that films had more potential to draw larger audiences. Moore
commented in press releases leading up to the festival that he was also trying to attract a
younger audience with a more popular range of films. „Contemplative‟ films that “don‟t
exhibit a sense of humour or filmmakers... who take themselves far too seriously” were
the first to be culled, according to Moore in an article published on the online news
website Brisbane Times (Feeney 2010). The decision to remove many of the serious or
contemplative films from the programme was a somewhat controversial move that
threatened to alienate the festival‟s previously loyal cinephiles. Moore‟s dismissal of
„contemplative‟ films has also arguably affected the inclusion of emerging women
filmmakers in the programme. When comparing the previous festival catalogues to
Moore‟s new programming strategy, there is a marked difference in the types of films
included, specifically a shift away from the type of art house and emerging cinema
screened at other festivals, toward a more commercial and mainstream brand of cinema.

It is also interesting to note that in previous years the festival had received media
coverage from a range of sources, including online articles, newspaper articles and film
reviews by a variety of Brisbane film critics. In 2010, media coverage of the festival was
dominated by the online news website Brisbane Times and in particular by a single
reporter, Katherine Feeney. Brisbane Times did also employ one Brisbane film critic, Des
Partridge, to provide some film reviews. However, the recently retired reviewer, known
for his “stultifying middlebrowness” hinted at the more mainstream approach BIFF was
forging in 2010 (Walmsley-Evans 2010). As an official media partner of the 2010 festival,

_________________________________________________________________________

92
Brisbane Times appeared to hold almost exclusive rights to any media publicity of the
festival and as a result, there was a significant lack of critical material available to
audiences. The critical framework the festival used to cultivate through in-depth question
and answer sessions and industry panels was also lacking. After the festival, several
reviews were published that were quite critical of BIFF‟s new leadership. Tina Kaufman,
a freelance film and media writer, lamented the retirement of Anne Demy-Geroe whose
programming choices were in her view, consistently “rich and challenging” (Kaufman
2010). In a rather more scathing review, Huw Walmsley-Evans described the 2010
programme as “hardly a film festival... but rather „some good films that are on‟” (2010). It
was to be expected that the festival would come under some criticism for the large
number of changes it underwent in 2010. As Moore himself admitted, his approach and
vision for the festival were markedly different to that of the previous director.

Under the festival‟s previous direction, BIFF had built its reputation in part on its strong
focus on Asia Pacific programming. Each year the festival had a dedicated programming
section for Asia Pacific film, alongside a separate section for World Cinema. Moore was
ambivalent about the need for a focus on Asian Pacific cinema and in 2010,
amalgamated Asia Pacific film with World Cinema to create a new programme titled
Around the World in 40 Days. In relation to his decision, he stated that:

I never understood really why, I mean I know the previous director was
particularly wedded to Asian cinema. I‟m not, but I think there‟s a place for it
within the context of an international program and there was a surplus of very
good Asian films made. But I don‟t think it needed its own section, and if I look at
the audience figures in the past few years, the audience numbers probably reflect
that as well… (Moore 2011).

In the past, Moore had also trimmed the Melbourne International Film Festival‟s focus on
Asian film soon after he arrived: “James Hewson who had been the previous director had
really ridden the Korean wave that had happened during his tenure, and had ridden it
very well, but I felt that there was an over emphasis on Asian programming and I think
the Korean wave had certainly died” (Moore 2011). The focus for him at the 2010 BIFF
festival would instead be to increase the number of documentaries and to build solid
programming sections around animation, music films and local Queensland filmmaking.

A significant change to the programme that followed was a substantial focus on

documentary filmmaking. As a former documentary filmmaker himself, Moore argued
that the festival needed more emphasis on documentaries, claiming that “I don‟t think an
_________________________________________________________________________

93
audience makes a distinction between going to see a feature and going to see a
documentary” (Moore 2011). He also suspected that documentaries would be popular
because of the audience demographic of the festival, which predominantly centres on
the inner city:

You know essentially all these festivals are inner city festivals and people who
live in the inner city generally speaking are pretty switched on politically, so they
like issues, they like films with agendas; and they seem to... like the politics
(Moore 2011).

The 2010 programme included a total of seventeen documentaries, as opposed to six in

2009. Moore also programmed a „Soap Box‟ Section, which contained a further eight
films that focused on political and social issues and were also predominantly
documentaries. Audience reaction to the increase in documentaries seems to have been
positive, with seven documentaries voted for in the Showtime Top Ten Awards. Moore‟s
confidence in the popularity of documentaries with Brisbane audiences has thus far been
validated.

However, the addition of a strong focus on animation was not quite as successful. With
two feature length animations and a collection of thirty-one shorts divided into categories
such as International Animation Showcase, the Best of MIAF (Melbourne International
Animation Festival) and 25 Years of Animate Projects, interest in the animation
programme fell well short of expectation. Moore was uncertain of the reasons for its lack
of attendance, but speculated that, “It was a really good program, and a really
contemporary program but it didn‟t really find an audience. I‟m not quite sure why,
maybe we didn‟t market it well or maybe because all those animation students were in
exams at that period of time, because it‟s tough doing it in November...” (Moore 2011).

Moore described his approach to shaping the festival programme as a “mixture of design
and happy accident” (Moore 2011). Often it will come down to a combination of films that
Moore and his spotters have selected as interesting and appropriate, and then
negotiating deals with the distributors of those films as to what is available and what their
plans for the films are. It is increasingly important for film festivals to secure premieres of
films as a way of adding to the prestige of their festival. In 2010, BIFF showcased three
World premieres and twenty-one Australian premieres (BIFF 2010 factsheet). Securing a
premiere screening is often quite difficult, even with Australian films because it is in the
filmmaker‟s interests to be as strategic as possible with their film‟s progress on the
festival circuit. Moore explains that often “you‟re subject to so many vagaries like the
_________________________________________________________________________

94
distributor won‟t agree or they‟ve got other plans for it... So you have to bring all the
forces you can to be able to persuade them to put the film in the programme” (Moore
2011). He felt that it was particularly important to put a focus back on local filmmaking in
his first year of programming, stating that:

I think it‟s important that you really connect with the local filmmakers in my local
community; they are the community. Whether it‟s a doco, or whether its shorts or
whether they‟re features; I mean it‟s not a lot in terms of total volume being made
out of Brisbane. But I think that what is there should be a part of BIFF and if
possible I‟d like the idea that BIFF should be like a platform for launching
Queensland films (Moore 2011).

The next section of the chapter examines the films by emerging women filmmakers
included in both the 2009 and 2010 programming selections.

BIFF F ILMS 2009 – T EXTUAL A NALYSIS & F ILMMAKER I NTERVIEWS

In order to evaluate the effectiveness of a local festival in providing visibility and
opportunities for further inclusion on the festival circuit, the programming choices of the
festival must be examined. The differing approaches of Demy-Geroe and Moore are
evaluated in the final section of the chapter, which presents the films of emerging women
filmmakers programmed in the 2009 and 2010 editions of the festival. Two filmmakers
from each programme are interviewed and their films examined in terms of the alignment
between the stated intentions of the filmmaker and the actual representations in the film.
The following table outlines the interviews conducted and film screenings of women
filmmakers that I attended during the 2009 festival visit. This programme was curated by
the previous festival director, Anne Demy-Geroe.

Table 4: BIFF Films 2009

Programme
Film Filmmaker Country Year Interview
Section

Perfect Life Emily Tang Hong Kong 2008 Asia Pacific Yes

Pandora‟s Yesim Turkey, Belgium, France,

2008 Asia Pacific No
Box Ustaoglu Germany

The Milk of
Claudia Llosa Spain, Quechua 2009 World Cinema No
Sorrow

_________________________________________________________________________

95
 Asghar
About Elly Iran 2009 Asia Pacific No
Farhadi

Gulabi Girish
India 2008 Asia Pacific No
Talkies Kasarvalli

Flowers of Prasanna
Sri Lanka 2008 Asia Pacific No
the Sky Vithanage

Yes Madam, Megan Australian Lens

India, Australia 2008 No
Sir Doneman in Asia

Australian
Blessed Ana Kokkinos Australia 2009 Yes
Cinema

THE MILK OF SORROW

Film Still: The Milk of Sorrow (Claudia Llosa, 2009)

Image sourced from http://www.olivefilms.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/milkofsorrow_2.jpg

An important programming selection of the 2009 festival was the first feature film of
Peruvian filmmaker, Claudia Llosa. In terms of the ways in which the local film festival
can showcase and highlight third cinema issues, The Milk of Sorrow was programmed
alongside a variety of other international films by emerging women filmmakers. Under
the prior direction of Anne Demy-Geroe, international films with a focus on social
activism or that highlighted pertinent social, cultural and political issues were
foregrounded in the programme. Critical discussion of these films was further facilitated
through festival panels and question and answer sessions.

The terrorism that gripped Peru in the 1980‟s and 1990‟s, which left a generation of
women traumatised victims of rape, provides the backdrop for Claudia Llosa‟s
astonishing film, The Milk of Sorrow (2009). In this horrific period in the country‟s history,
guerrillas sought to impose communist rule and in response, the military and police

_________________________________________________________________________

96
committed widespread human rights abuses, shattering the country with war. Llosa‟s
debut feature film boldly questions: how does a generation of women recover from a
violent and traumatised past? How do their daughters live without the fear that the
terrorism might return?

Fausta, the daughter of a rape victim, suffers from what her people call „the frightened
breast‟. The film is based on the idea that the traumatised mother passes the sorrow of
her past on to her infant daughter through the breast milk. Living with the fear inherited
from her mother, Fausta tries to protect herself from also becoming a victim of rape by
inserting a potato deep inside her body. When Fausta‟s mother unexpectedly dies,
Fausta is determined to bury her in her native village. In order to afford the burial, she
accepts a job away from the slums in the wealthy home of a renowned pianist.
Employing Fausta under the guise of a maid, the pianist is actually more interested in
appropriating Fausta‟s heartfelt songs for her new material. Fausta‟s songs provide her
with a renewal of hope and the determination to persevere with her work each day, if
only for the reward of a few pearls as payment. Her unfaltering determination to raise the
money for her mother‟s funeral goes some way toward overcoming her fears. Llosa
never shows the violence committed against this generation of women, but the trauma
and memory lingers beneath the surface of each frame. Indeed, it is her choice not to
show the crimes that reinforces their unspeakable and atrocious nature.

The Milk of Sorrow is a low budget film, with a slow paced, ethnographic style and feel.
The bleak landscape depicts corrugated tin houses amidst endless sand dunes, dust and
stark sunlight. Llosa predominantly uses washed out shades of blue, green and yellow in
the composition of her mise en scene. Light and shadow are manipulated to great effect
to emulate the mood of the characters. The lighting in the pianist‟s house is typically
moody and cast in shadows, yet the lighting during Fausta‟s journey each day through
the dusty streets is quite stark and unforgiving, emphasising her fear of walking alone
and unprotected in public. Fausta is said to have been born without a soul – for it hid
underground out of fear when she was born. At one point in the film Fausta is being
escorted home by the gardener who befriends her, when she explains “In my village you
have to walk very close to the walls. If not, you get caught by the lost souls and could
die”. Llosa consistently uses doors and windows to frame Fausta on the periphery of a
shot, reinforcing both Fausta‟s timid nature and the superstitions of the village. Fausta‟s
haunting songs provide an essential emotional depth to the film and the only insight for
the audience into her innermost thoughts and feelings. Her introverted body language

_________________________________________________________________________

97
and lack of dialogue further highlight her traumatised mental and emotional state. Whilst
the songs she sings to her mother reveal her vulnerability, they are also ultimately her
source of strength and courage.

The representation of women within the film emphasises traditional roles as wives,
mothers and daughters. Marriage is a significant milestone in the lives of the women in
Fausta‟s village and Llosa uses the marriage ceremony and celebrations in an almost
humorous manner to contrast Fausta‟s behaviour with that of her cousin and other girls
in the village. Llosa also uses the potato as a key symbol that contrasts Fausta‟s
experience and identity as a Peruvian woman with that of the other women in her family
and village. At the start of the film it is revealed that Fausta is using a potato as a method
of protection against rape. Her mother had told her that a woman successfully protected
herself against rape using a potato during the days of terrorism. Despite living some
twenty years later, Fausta appropriates this method to help combat the fears passed
down from her mother. In contrast, the potato is used in a pre marital ritual for Fausta‟s
cousin that involves the bride to be peeling a potato in front of the groom and their
families – if the peel is whole and thin the marriage will be blessed. It is interesting that
the potato is used, on the one hand, as a form of protection against men by Fausta, and
in contrast, as a symbol of womanhood, fertility and readiness for marriage.

It is the betrayal of trust by her employer that eventually forces Fausta to overcome her
fears and stand up for herself. Having stolen the songs Fausta sings to her mother, the
pianist drops Fausta alone in the streets and leaves her to fend for herself. This is the
turning point in the film, as Fausta begins to actively make decisions to reclaim her
sense of identity. She returns to the pianist‟s house and takes the pearls she has
rightfully earned. The potato is removed in hospital after she collapses in the street and
is rescued by the gardener. Having claimed her pearls, she finally has the means to
return her mother‟s body to her village of birth. There is a singular moment during this
journey with her mother that is particularly revealing. Fausta is sitting in the back of her
Uncle‟s truck with her cousins and her mother‟s body. She is staring determinedly ahead.
This is the first time in the film that the audience sees her look directly at something. It is
clear in this single shot that she has gained an enormous amount of strength and
courage. The film concludes with a gift left for Fausta by the gardener – a flowering
potato plant. It can be seen literally to represent the start of Fausta‟s healing.

The Milk of Sorrow is fast receiving international acclaim on the international festival
circuit. It recently won the coveted Golden Bear for Best Picture at the Berlin
_________________________________________________________________________

98
International Film Festival in 2009. Director Claudia Llosa stated that she hoped more
women would be encouraged by her success, declaring at the awards ceremony, "This is
for Peru. This is for our country" ("Peruvian film takes top Berlin award). The inclusion of
Llosa‟s film in the 2009 edition of BIFF demonstrates the festival‟s links to emerging
trends on the international film festival circuit. The Milk of Sorrow was screened twice
during the festival, and although its inclusion in the programme did not appear to have
any direct or tangible effects on advancing the profile of the filmmaker internationally, it
did engage with Brisbane audiences at a locally specific level.

PERFECT LIFE

Film Still: Perfect Life (Emily Tang, 2008)

Image sourced from http://dgeneratefilms.com/wp-content/uploads/perfectlife.jpeg

Another emerging filmmaker, Emily Tang, attended BIFF in 2009 for the screening of her
second feature film, Perfect Life (2008). As one of China‟s foremost contemporary
filmmakers, Tang‟s first feature film, Conjugation (2001) was the first Chinese film to
openly address the Tiananmen Square democracy movement and was a prize winner at
the 2001 Locarno International Film Festival. I conducted a short interview with Emily
Tang at BIFF and she commented on the continuing success of Conjugation, stating that
each year she still receives several invitations from festivals worldwide, requesting
permission to screen the film. Perfect Life debuted as an official selection at the Venice
International Film festival and went on to win the Dragons and Tigers Award at the
Vancouver International Film Festival. Perfect Life also received post-production funding
from the Hubert Baals Fund, an integral part of the International Film Festival Rotterdam.

The film observes the parallel stories of two women in a style that is part fictional and
part documentary. Li Yueying is a young woman struggling to cope through a bitter
winter in Shenyang. While Li is seemingly responsible for her younger brother with whom
she lives, she seems confused about the rest of her family. She claims her father is dead
but when speaking to a woman whom the audience assumes is her mother, she
concocts a story that her father wishes to contact the family. Li‟s delusions and capacity
_________________________________________________________________________

99
for self-invention become clearer (to the audience) as the narrative progresses.
Frustrated with being stuck in the dreary Industrial town, Li quits her job in a prosthetics
factory and travels to take up a job as a maid in a rundown hotel. There she finds herself
almost unwillingly seduced by a disabled man, who convinces her to carry a painting for
him to Shenzhen City, South China. It is during this trip that the audience observes Li
reinventing herself once more, as a bride with a would-be future, although it is unclear as
to whether this is real or a figment of her imagination.

The second, documentary thread of the film is introduced in alternating segments. Jenny,
a real woman living in Hong Kong with her two young daughters, is struggling through a
messy divorce. Tang introduces Jenny‟s story in short segments at first, documenting
various aspects of her life, including her job as a dancer for hire in a tacky Hong Kong
dance club. At first Li‟s fictional story is the most prominent but later Jenny‟s story
dominates the narrative. Tang differentiates between the two stories through her distinct
cinematographic choices. The narrative thread is carefully crafted using high definition
video and meticulous shot composition. Tang uses a combination of close, hand-held
shots to portray Li‟s introversion, with longer shots to emphasise her sense of isolation.
The documentary segments are also shot hand-held, but in lower definition. Jenny‟s
story certainly has a more „cinema verite‟ feel, with natural lighting and shooting on
location in stark contrast to the composition of the narrative segments. Jenny‟s
performance is also much more natural and there are moments when she directly
addresses the camera, acknowledging the presence of the audience.

What is most interesting about this unusual combination of fictional narrative and
documentary film is Tang‟s propensity to interrogate how to portray the „real‟ (Kraicer
2009). Welsch states that traditionally, feminist documentaries have facilitated personal
and political conversations amongst women. Specifically, that as “forums of challenge,
inquiry and celebration, feminist documentaries have given women time and space to
speak” (Welsch 1994, 169). During a question and answer session at BIFF 2009, Tang
discussed her choice to combine fiction with reality, stating that she thought the mix of
narrative and documentary was more powerful because the audience could see how the
powerful and touching real life of Jenny could reflect and be seen in parallel to the
fictional life of Li Yueying (BIFF, 2009). The decision to integrate Jenny‟s story as
documentary occurred only after the shooting for the narrative film had concluded. Tang
stated that:

_________________________________________________________________________

100
 After the decision to shoot this way, I didn‟t know whether the audience will like it.
I don‟t know whether it works. But I just want to try. Because I am an independent
film director and I think we should try something new (Tang 2009).

The decision to interweave the two stories proved quite effective, with the audience
invited to imagine the two women‟s lives as existing within one common „story space‟.
The audience is left to ponder the relation between the two women, whose paths cross
fleetingly on a street corner once toward the end of the film. Reference to an identical
wedding photograph that both women hold in their possession at separate points in the
film also provides further intrigue. The portrait initially seems to be of Jenny and her ex-
husband, but later is seen in the possession of Li Yueying. Tang cleverly integrates this
photograph as a linking plot device that encourages the viewer to seek out some
understanding of the connection between Jenny and Li Yueying. However, the
relationship (if any) between the two women is left unresolved.

As an emerging, independent filmmaker, Tang acknowledged the important role that film
festivals have played in her career so far, particularly with regard to screening her films
to a wide audience. She explained that one of her favourite aspects of screening her
films at a film festival was the opportunity to interact with her audience in the form of a
question and answer session (Q&A). She stated that the benefit of the Q&A is that it
provides the opportunity to share her “opinion for the film and for the life with different
audiences from all over the world. That is very important for me…” (Tang 2009).
Certainly, the advantages of the Q&A are much greater than simply just giving the
audience an opportunity to ask the filmmaker questions. These sessions also provide the
filmmaker with a chance to explain their personal motivations behind making the film and
to observe the impact their film has had on the audience.

It became apparent during the interview that Tang‟s participation in film festivals all over
the world gave her the unique opportunity to observe how international audiences were
able to relate to her film‟s story, which was distinctively Chinese. She explained that:

…I think I can understand more about different countries from different film
festivals. The different countries‟ film festivals have different characteristics for
me because you can feel the city‟s taste, the audience‟s tastes, because of the
culture of the city or that country. So you can understand more from a film out of
a film festival (Tang 2009).
The importance of the film festival then for Tang lay in its ability to act as a platform that
facilitated the cross cultural discussion of stories, knowledge and understanding. Tang‟s
_________________________________________________________________________

101
comment also reinforces the idea that the distinct relationship between the festival and
its host city has an impact on the kinds of audiences present at different film festivals,
and thus goes some way toward explaining the differing cultural reactions to her film.

What was particularly interesting in interviewing Emily Tang was her reaction to being
questioned about her perspective and approach as a woman filmmaker. Despite Perfect
Life’s central focus on the stories of lower class Chinese/Hong Kong women, Tang flatly
rejected the notion of her being a women‟s filmmaker. She explained that:

I don‟t think the film will have some difference if it is made by a woman director. I
don't know why people always ask these questions, that do you think your film is
labelled as a woman director because you are a woman. So I don't think that
there is so much of a difference. This is my point of view. I don't know whether
other women or the male directors think that there are some stories that they
don‟t care or they don‟t want to tell and that only the woman shows special
interest. I don‟t know. But for me I never think, I love this story because I am a
woman. I just think… this is a story I like because it shows social problems or
something… and I want to talk about (Tang 2009).

She did concede however, that the personal experiences of a woman came into play
when pursuing a career as a filmmaker:

I think that I take for granted that there is some difference for women directors,
because the woman has to be a mother sometimes…This is my story; after
Conjugation when I was thirty, this was a wonderful age for a director, because
you are… old enough to have life experience. But I have to give birth to my son at
that age, and it took me five years to care for him. That is to say during those five
years, I haven't worked. So I think this is one of difficulties of the woman director
that you have to spend some time for your personal things. For men, they don‟t
need such time, to take a so-called rest (Tang 2009).

Despite the interruption this caused to her career as a filmmaker, Tang realised that this
life experience changed her approach and sensitivity in making films. She explained that
the experience of sacrificing herself to another person caused her to become less
selfish, and thus more generous toward her characters. This rethinking of Tang‟s own
understanding of the „real‟, along with her individual experiences as a women and
mother, had subtle effects on her filmmaking process and emerged through her portrayal
of the two female protagonists in Perfect Life.

_________________________________________________________________________

102
It is important to acknowledge that notions of feminism and feminist approaches to
filmmaking can have very different meanings for different women. Claudia Llosa and
Tsitsi Dangarembga are both filmmakers who privilege the voice of women as a means
of commenting on pertinent social, cultural and political issues. Their films are
confronting, actively foregrounding the plight of the female characters and consequently
encouraging their audiences to consider the films‟ broader comments on the position of
women in their society. Emily Tang‟s Perfect Life centres on the lives of two lower-class
women in China and Hong Kong, yet she firmly rejects the notion of being seen as a
“woman‟s filmmaker”. However, despite this rejection, an analysis of her most recent film
does indicate an awareness and influence of her own individual experiences as a
woman. This initial analysis indicates that there are tensions and constant negotiations
occurring between current feminist film theory, the programming of women‟s films at
festivals and the opinions and intentions of the women filmmakers themselves. In
contrast, the following section examines the films by emerging women filmmakers
programmed in the 2010 festival, directed by Richard Moore.

BIFF F ILMS 2010 – T EXTUAL A NALYSIS & F ILMMAKER I NTERVIEWS

The following table shows the interviews conducted and film screenings of women
filmmakers that I attended during the 2010 festival visit. This programme was curated by
the current festival director, Richard Moore.

Table 5: BIFF Films 2010

Film Filmmaker Country Year Programme Section Interview

I Am You Simone North Australia 2009 Local Heroes No

Orchids:My Intersex
Phoebe Hart Australia 2010 Local Heroes Yes
Adventure

Jucy Louise Alston Australia 2010 Local Heroes No

Camille Yu-Hsiu Around the World in

Little Sparrows Australia 2010 Yes
Chen 40 Films

France, Around the World in

The Wedding Song Karin Albou 2008 No
Tunisia 40 Films

Around the World in

The Wedding Party Amanda Jane Australia 2010 No
40 Films

_________________________________________________________________________

103
 Around the World in
The Actresses Je-yong Lee South Korea 2009 No
40 Films

The Sound of Mumbai: United Late addition to

Sarah McCarthy 2010 Yes
A Musical Kingdom, India Programme

United
Pink Saris Kim Longinotto 2010 Soapbox Yes
Kingdom

LITTLE SPARROWS

Little Sparrows is my voice as a filmmaker, a woman and a mother, and I am

speaking it with urgency and sincerity (Chen, Director‟s Statement).

Film Still: Little Sparrows (Camille Yu-Hsiu Chen, 2010)

Image sourced from http://www.littlesparrowsthemovie.com/#!__gallerys

Yu-Hsiu Camille Chen‟s debut feature film, Little Sparrows (2010a), had its world
premiere at the Sydney International Film Festival in June, 2010. Since then it has been
screened at numerous festivals including; Melbourne International Film Festival (July,
2010), Cinefest Oz in Western Australia (August, 2010), Brisbane International Film
Festival (November, 2010) and was selected for the official competition at the
International Rome Film Festival (October, 2010). Little Sparrows was screened twice
during BIFF in a 2pm timeslot. The session I attended attracted approximately thirty
patrons, and the other session was similarly attended. Chen explained in our interview at
the festival that despite being a small film with a limited budget, she had so far found the
audience responses to Little Sparrows overwhelming.

Little Sparrows is a film about Susan, a mother dying of breast cancer, and the last
Christmas she spends with her three daughters. The narrative is divided into four
chapters, one about her relationship with each daughter, and a final chapter titled Three
Sparrows. Her eldest daughter, Nina, is widowed with two young children. Anna, the
middle daughter, is an actress, trapped in an unhappy marriage and dealing with the
_________________________________________________________________________

104
fallout of her affair. Christine, the youngest daughter, is a medical student coming to
terms with her sexuality. Susan‟s imminent death is revealed at the start of the film, so
that what is really explored is not how to deal with death and grief, but the importance of
inter-generational relationships and the legacy that the mother leaves for her daughters.
Filmed and set in Western Australia, Little Sparrows was shot using a hand held, digital
camera to ensure Chen‟s vision of an intimate and highly personal aesthetic. The actors
improvised the scenes and dialogue extensively before shooting began and many
personal experiences and reflections were shared in the process of developing each
character. As her first feature film, Little Sparrows is highly personal and is drawn from
her own experiences. She stated that, “this was what was boiling inside me, the story
basically reflecting on my experiences up to that point as a woman, as a mother, as a
daughter, as a lover perhaps, and even more so as an artist” (Chen 2010). She
explained that the film was in many ways a reflection of her life, the choices and
mistakes she had made and that she hoped that it came through that “it‟s an honest film
and it was made in a very gutsy way” (Chen 2010).

The film is beautifully shot, with Chen frequently using close up shots of the women‟s
faces to convey both their frailty and courage, and enhance the confessional feel of the
story. The high contrast, bright lighting style reveals every line on Susan‟s face, as a
map of her life and experiences. During a scene in the hospital she is talking to Anna,
and says, “We sort of know my story. It‟s you I‟m looking at. I think you have to learn to
take your battle scars and wear them proudly my dear”. Her concern for her children and
insistence on them recognizing their individual strengths as women culminates in the
final chapter of the film, when she inscribes a permanent reminder of her daughters in a
tattoo of three sparrows in flight across her ribs. Chen, like Llosa, has chosen to use a
symbol, in this case a sparrow, to emphasize both the deep connection between mother
and daughters, but also the inter-generational passing on of knowledge and
understandings particular to their family. In the Milk of Sorrow, the potato is used as a
changing symbol of protection, fertility and then healing which is specific to the
experience of the women in Peruvian culture. For Chen, the sparrow also represents
something specific to the woman‟s experience, with the tattoo acting as both a reclaiming
of her body, invaded by cancer, as well as a personal reminder of her identity as a
mother.

Chen further examines the importance of maternal lineage in Little Sparrows, with Susan
reflecting on the course of her life and connections to her mother. In a voice over during
the scene in the tattoo parlor, Susan says, “It‟s funny when you become a mother. You
_________________________________________________________________________

105
start to think about… Well you start to live the life your parents led. I started to live the
life that my mother had led. And I realized that it was very possibly the life that every
woman led once you have children…” At the time of interview, Chen was already
planning her second feature film, which will also feature women. She said that:

I am working on a second one, again a very – I hate to say this – people do ask
me why do I make these films from a very feminine point of view. I don‟t know
what that means, but I am a woman so you know my work would have the
womanly thing, but instead of using feminine, it‟s a very womanly sensitivity
(Chen 2010).

Certainly, Little Sparrows explores, with great sensitivity, the nuanced relationships
Susan shares with each of her daughters. Chen‟s own experiences as both a mother
and daughter have clearly informed her approach to characterisation. Before her death,
Susan spends time with each of her daughters, talking to them about her life and her
hopes for them once she has gone. These scenes could have easily become
melodramatic, but Chen‟s close direction ensured that what was actually expressed was
quite sensitive and intelligent.

Chen‟s recognition of her films displaying a „womanly sensitivity‟ is significant. Like many
women filmmakers, she resists her work being labeled as feminine or feminist, instead
stating that her films are imbued with this sensitivity simply because she draws from her
own experiences and she herself is a woman. Chen explained that her approach to
directing and working in the film industry was actually quite masculine: “if you get to
know me there‟s actually a very masculine side of me. When I‟m upset, when I‟m
working you know, you have to be a man, you need to behave as a man, and I would
find that the gender division, it doesn‟t apply in the film industry at all” (2010). However,
she explained that despite having a very direct professional approach, in her personal
time her approach to creativity was quite different. She explained that:

When I am quiet, all by myself and I want to understand more about myself, then
yes, my experiences as a woman are very significant, very vivid in my life. And
as an artist you want to explore that, you want to express that, and I can‟t deny it;
but it‟s just who I am and how I am. But do we really need to label it and so
clearly? (Chen 2010).

Chen‟s second feature film will explore a different side to her experiences as a woman:

_________________________________________________________________________

106
 I would like to make something sexy, but not sexy in a way of how it‟s been
portrayed in a lot of contemporary cinema, but actually the sensuality of a
woman... Hopefully, it delicately explores, because what a woman considers
sexy may not be what‟s being portrayed. And that kind of sensuality again is very
much connected to emotion, rather than how much flesh you get to see. Simply
put; something sexy, but it‟s my version of it. I am again, exploring a side of me
that is impulsive, that might not be rational and that‟s unpredictable, it‟s
mysterious, but it is very real (Chen 2010).

Chen‟s use of her own experiences and „womanly sensitivity‟ as the impetus for her
creation of character and the overall tone and mood of her films is important. Lucy
Bolton‟s identification of a similar sensuality and sensitivity in recent films by
internationally acclaimed women filmmakers such as Jane Campion, Sofia Coppola and
Lynne Ramsay are comparable with Chen‟s approach as a director. Bolton observed
that:

…through an immersion in the sensory and the sensual, and through a

feminisation of the language and the space of the films – also through the
acknowledgment of a woman‟s history… the life of a woman is more fully
represented, rather than as a sketch or an abstraction (2011b, 3).

Certainly, the characterisation of Chen‟s female characters and indeed the overall mood
of the film are unmistakably inscribed with Bolton‟s description of a “feminisation” of
language, space and an acknowledgement of Susan‟s history and maternal lineage.
Specifically, this is conveyed through Chen‟s intimate cinematography and use of
confessional voice over.

As an emerging filmmaker, Chen is extremely proactive in the promotion of her film at

film festivals and through all forms of media. In 2008, Chen established her independent
film production company, BolderPictures, with partner Peter Thomas. She explained in
the interview that she was strategic from the beginning about which festivals to approach
with Little Sparrows, and that Sydney and Melbourne were her first priorities. At the
Sydney Film Festival the film was promoted as a „discovery gem‟ by festival director
Clare Stewart and received crucial press and media coverage as a result. Chen was also
enthusiastic about the opportunities film festivals presented for directors to engage with
and receive feedback from their audience. She said that “one of the most encouraging
things about attending film festivals is people not only tell you that they enjoy your film,

_________________________________________________________________________

107
they say I look forward to your next one. And that for me as a film maker, that‟s one of
the most affirming things that someone could tell me” (Chen 2010).

Little Sparrows was selected for official competition at the Rome Film Festival in 2010
and Chen explained that it was her „la dolce vita‟ – her most exciting experience in her
filmmaking career so far. The film received a standing ovation at its red carpet screening
and attracted significant press and media attention. Chen stated that “The experience
itself, it‟s amazing, I think the whole red carpet experience, it gives you the sense to see
how people really value you as a filmmaker and an artist, and it‟s just then the ritual of it,
it‟s pretty cool” (2010). Whilst at the festival Chen was able to sell the US distribution of
the film, as well as gaining important exposure which led to further festival invitations.
Since screening in Rome, Little Sparrows has been nominated for the 2010 IF
Independent Spirit Award and was awarded the 2010 SPAARTAN Award in the
DigiSPAA feature film competition – part of the Screen Producers Association of
Australia‟s annual conference.

Despite Little Sparrows relative success on the festival circuit thus far, Chen conceded
that, while it was not the type of film to attract large audiences or extensive commercial
distribution, but that was not ever her intention. She explained, “When you are making a
film, you don‟t really anticipate the success of the film” and, “I am not making a popular
film... I know that but I know that if I find my audience, the audience will be affected and
moved and will remember it... there is an audience for this kind of work... it‟s just a matter
of who they are and how to find them” (Chen 2010). Certainly, Little Sparrows is a
pertinent example of a local Australian film, by an emerging woman filmmaker, who has
successfully begun to navigate the film festival circuit in order to attract a wide critical
and public audience.

_________________________________________________________________________

108
 O R C H I D S : M Y I NT E R SE X A D V E NT U R E

A good film has the ability to do that... to create change through individuals,
through their perspectives and the way they feel or think about something (Hart
2011).

Film Still: Orchids: My Intersex Adventure (Phoebe Hart, 2010)

Image sourced from http://www.orchids-themovie.com/gallery.html

Another local Brisbane filmmaker programmed at BIFF in 2010 was documentary

filmmaker, Phoebe Hart. Hart‟s autobiographical documentary, Orchids: My Intersex
Adventure (2010), was originally created in fulfillment of her Doctor of Philosophy at the
Queensland University of Technology in 2009. Orchids is about Phoebe and her sister
Bonnie, who were both born with Androgen Insensitivity Syndrome (AIS), which is also
known as intersex. After completing a version of the documentary for her PhD, Phoebe
was awarded funding from the Australian Broadcasting Corporation to refine the film for
commercial screening. Orchids premiered at the Brisbane International Film Festival in
2010, programmed as part of the „soapbox‟ section, which featured „issue‟ films. The
premiere screening at BIFF sold out and the film was voted number one in the Showtime
top ten by Brisbane audiences. Prior to the festival, Orchids won the Australian Teachers
of Media (ATOM) award for Best Documentary. In 2011, Orchids was screened at
Outfest: The Los Angeles Gay and Lesbian Film Festival and Frameline: The San
Francisco LGBT Film Festival.

Orchids had previously been rejected from the Melbourne International Film Festival
when Hart decided to submit to BIFF as well. When Richard Moore moved from MIFF to
BIFF, she thought it was unlikely that he would change his mind, but the film was
accepted after she met with Moore and argued her case. Hart conceded that Orchids is
certainly a „festival film‟, its running time being only sixty minutes, meaning it is not
technically a feature length film or a short. Once the film was accepted into BIFF, Hart
_________________________________________________________________________

109
was very strategic about promoting the premiere of the film as much as possible through
handing out promotional material and through social media. Her hard work paid off, with
Orchids being voted the audience‟s favourite film of the festival.

Hart was somewhat hesitant about the benefits of attending film festivals, specifically
because each festival experience had the potential to be very different. She explained
that some festivals “did it better than others”, in terms of providing filmmakers with
opportunities to meet one another and network. For example, she believed that the
Adelaide Film Festival provided excellent opportunities for all of the guests to get to know
each other through organised dinners, drinks etc. Her experience at BIFF in 2010 was
not so satisfactory, but she speculated that this was due to the vast number of changes
the staff were trying to accommodate and that this was understandable. She explained
that it was important to weigh up the benefits of attending film festivals with the obvious
personal and financial costs when deciding the best festival strategy for your film. It is
important to attend film festivals to raise the profile of your film, but that some festivals
would be more beneficial than others. She stated that “if you get into the top „A‟ list ones
they would be definitely worth it. A lot of the other ones, you know, yes I‟m very happy
for people to see it and for audiences to find it that way, but it ends up costing you
money” (Hart 2011).

Hart‟s documentary was an extensive and emotional journey that took place over the
course of six years. She and her sister, Bonnie, set off on a road trip around Australia to
speak to other intersex people about their experiences and also visited her family home
in a bid to finally get her parents to open up about their shared condition. Orchids was
filmed using a combination of cameras including semi-professional, VHS camcorders
and Super 8, as well as a blend of archival family footage. Hart and her sister faced
many challenges on their adventure, including rising tension in their own relationship.
The resulting documentary incorporates many of the difficult conversations Hart had with
her parents and her sister. She explained “I think that I always knew I wanted to make a
film about it, I was nervous that if I‟d make a film that was autobiographical, and also I
felt a bit exposed... I mean it‟s such a personal subject (Hart 2011).

The combination of a strong autobiographical voice and the confessional tone of the film
are enhanced by Hart‟s inclusion of old family photographs and video footage. Her
fraught relationship with both her sister Bonnie and her mother are developed throughout
the film, as Hart and her family go through the process of unburdening themselves of the
long kept family secret. Phoebe and Bonnie‟s relationship is the most strongly developed

_________________________________________________________________________

110
on screen, with playful shots of their road trip together interwoven with voice overs by
Hart and blunt observations by Bonnie in direct speech to the camera. Bonnie‟s
exuberant and unpredictable nature is expressed through her defiance of her difference
in being an intersex person. Hart is more reflective of the process of exploring what it
means to live with AIS, stating in a voice over during the road trip, “In a way it would be
easy to stay anonymous. After all, most people don‟t even know we exist. But it‟s fun to
be more daring, to stick out from the crowd.” This voice over is complemented by close
up shots of Bonnie‟s feet up on the dashboard, clad in red and white striped socks, and
low angle shots of both sisters as they travel along a dirt road in Phoebe‟s beloved
Kingswood Ute. As the sisters travel around Australia, visiting other friends with intersex
to talk about their experiences, Hart begins to come to terms with the trauma of her own
adolescence and the silence from her parents in refusing to discuss the condition that
two of their three daughters share. Toward the end of the road trip, Hart confesses that
she is now “…happy imagining the future and I‟m starting to feel comfortable with who I
am. I‟m beginning to understand my sister better too. It‟s part of the reason I wanted her
to come with me on this trip, to make up for lost time, I suppose.”

Originally, Hart intended to make a film about the intersex condition without placing
herself at the centre of enquiry. However, as she approached friends and acquaintances
to participate in the film, it became increasingly clear that they would not participate
unless she did too. She explains:

I just thought I would make a film about intersex but I didn‟t know if I‟d make it
about myself. In fact it was probably the last thing I wanted to do and I was
certain that I would be able to find a friend with intersex, because I‟d met a lot of
people by that time with intersex conditions and I thought maybe I‟ll be able to
convince one of them. But every time I asked them they said no. All the people I
asked they were kind of like „oh I‟m not going to do it if you won‟t do it‟...
Everyone was really a bit hesitant about doing it, even in a little sort of role... So
it was quite hard work and I think by putting myself on there I was able to make
them feel comfortable... It seemed like the right thing to do, ethically as well (Hart
2011).

The honesty and openness with which the documentary was made has proven to make it
even more accessible for audiences. Hart‟s preference for the documentary form is
influenced by her interest in coming of age stories and the struggles of young people,
and the way that the documentary form allows a filmmaker to discover something

_________________________________________________________________________

111
“magically ordinary” (Hart 2011). She recalled that after (many of) the film‟s screenings at
various Australian film festivals, she was approached by members of the intersex
community who had come specifically to see the film. Hart explained that films like
Orchids were very much about raising public awareness and encouraging
understanding, that the film had the objective to promote social justice. She stated that
some of the screenings of Orchids were “very healing transformative events, like not only
for me and my family, but for people generally there. It seems like people have
permission to be themselves more kind of thing, you know? And I‟ve sort of seen people
walk out of them and feel like a weight has lifted off their shoulders” (Hart 2011).
Ultimately, Hart found the festival experience highly rewarding:

I do think the screening aspect is kind of magical, you know like it‟s a special
space, they‟ve created a special forum which people go in with their mindset that
they‟re going to see something exceptional or something they wouldn‟t see
otherwise sort of thing.... and that‟s really something to be valued (Hart 2011).

Hart‟s recognition of the unique nature of the festival environment reinforces the notion of
the film festival as a supportive and nurturing space for emerging filmmakers. Orchids
has gone on to screen at numerous other film festivals around the world and the
distribution support of Women Make Movies has contributed significantly to increasing
Hart‟s visibility on the film festival circuit.

Each of the emerging women filmmakers discussed in this chapter attended the
Brisbane International Film Festival as part of the wider promotion of their films on the
international film festival circuit. In particular, Camille Chen and Phoebe Hart went on to
attend prestigious international film festivals and gained recognition as emerging
Australian filmmakers. Although screening their films at BIFF arguably didn‟t increase the
visibility of their films on the international stage, the opportunity to share their films with a
local audience was certainly valuable. In this it gave them opportunity to reflect on their
filmmaking processes and the intimacy of subject matter around female experiences and
relationships which all of them shared.

C ONCLUSION
This chapter has examined the Brisbane International Film Festival over the course of a
significant shift in its festival staff, programming agenda, location within the city and its
position on the global festival circuit. The history of the festival and its previous direction
by Anne Demy-Geroe carved out a distinct identity for BIFF with its focus on Asian

_________________________________________________________________________

112
Pacific cinema and emerging trends from around the world. However, the expense of
maintaining several international juries and a large programme potentially contributed to
this model becoming financially unsustainable. The changes that were administered in
2010 caused an immense amount of the festivals „memory‟ and history to be lost with the
staff (and audience) that left. The incoming director, Richard Moore, had a specific vision
to make the festival attractive to a younger audience and refocus the festivities within the
cultural hub of the city. Moore also implemented significant changes in the agenda and
structure of the festivals programme. The dissolution of the festival‟s focus on Asian
Pacific cinema and any films that were deemed overly „contemplative‟ and not attractive
to a wider audience has had serious implications for the inclusion of emerging women
filmmakers. Although the physical number of women filmmakers with films included in
the programme has not dramatically altered, the cultural diversity of the filmmakers has
been limited greatly, and now predominantly features films from Australia, the United
States and the United Kingdom. Opportunities for attending filmmakers to engage with
one another at festival dinners and events have also been diminished. Several of the
attending filmmakers interviewed in this study acknowledged that although they enjoyed
screening their films at BIFF, other small/local festivals provided better opportunities for
gaining visibility and a more critical environment within which to present their films.

The textual analysis of the included films demonstrates that there are clear tensions and
recurring negotiations between the programming of women‟s films, the intentions of the
women filmmakers and the wider theoretical context of feminist film theory. In the two
different programming approaches, there was relative similarity in the number of
women‟s films included in the programme. However, BIFF‟s original director arguably
fostered a festival environment that was more conducive to supporting and providing
critical discussion around the issues explored in women‟s cinema.

BIFF has the potential to be an important and visible platform for launching
Queensland‟s emerging filmmakers onto the national (and potentially international)
stage. Strengthening the festival‟s links with the Queensland New Filmmakers Awards
would be a significant step in this process. The festival also needs to continue to redefine
a strong and well-defined festival image in order to renegotiate its place in the wider
international film festival network. Moore‟s new focus on documentary is certainly a shift
away from the festival‟s former agenda, but may work well in the long term to forge a
place for BIFF that is distinct from other key film festivals in Australia. BIFF also has an
untapped opportunity to align itself much more closely with the Asia Pacific Screen
Awards. As the APSA‟s continue to strengthen their profile in the southern hemisphere,
_________________________________________________________________________

113
there is enormous potential for BIFF to align itself more strategically with these
prestigious awards. Reinstating a programming section that features a selection of APSA
nominated films would provide Queensland audiences with the opportunity to engage
more directly with both APSA and BIFF. This is an important distinction that could be
pursued alongside the festival‟s new documentary prize, in order to situate BIFF in a
more prominent position on the international film festival circuit. Moore himself
acknowledges that the Brisbane has a „tricky‟ audience, with some people who are very
passionate about film. Ultimately, his goal is to make the festival connect with its
audience, and to give the audience “a renewed passion for the city in a dark room with a
whole lot of people” (Moore 2011). In this period of immense change, BIFF has not yet
reasserted itself as a festival that is distinctly „Brisbane‟ and it does not have specific
support mechanisms in place to enhance the visibility of emerging women filmmakers.
The festival does have the potential to carve out a unique position for itself as a
supporter of both emerging documentary talent and Asian Pacific cinema. However, the
direction that BIFF takes from this point on is yet to be established.

_________________________________________________________________________

114
 C HAPTER F OUR : I NTERNATIONAL F ILM F ESTIVAL
R OTTERDAM (2010-2011)

I NTRODUCTION
The worlds imagined in films by independent… multicultural filmmakers vary greatly,
depending on the specific concerns the filmmaker has, her particular location
(geographical, cultural, political, ethic, historical), and the context of the film‟s making.
What all the films have in common is an attempt to see differently – to see, as far as
possible, outside the constraints of prior Western modes (Kaplan 2003, 199).

This chapter examines the International Film Festival Rotterdam as a second tier, art house
festival with a distinct festival image and influential place on the global festival circuit. The
festival has defined a niche for itself as a leader in promoting new trends in artistic and
experimental cinema, and the festival environment itself is tailored to showcase and support
attending filmmakers. The IFFR has an established reputation for providing significant
support for emerging filmmakers through its programming structure, film fund and individual
guidance during the festival. Moreover, the festival cultivates a vibrant industry environment
in which young filmmakers are encouraged to network and promote their films. The first
section of the chapter examines the strategies the festival has in place for supporting
emerging filmmakers, through an analysis of the programme structure, interviews with two
programmers, Gertjan Zuilhof and Gerwin Tamsma, and direct observations from my
attendance at the festival. I attended the festival in 2010 and again in 2011 as an accredited
press guest and interviewed twelve emerging women filmmakers. Critical analysis of the
films and festival experiences of these attending filmmakers is integrated into the second
half of the chapter. Significant films by emerging women filmmakers programmed in both the
2010 and 2011 festival catalogues include selections from developing nations, such as
Every Day is a Holiday (El-Horr 2008), Women Without Men (Neshat 2009), Sunday School
(Arong 2010), God No Say So (Kornetzky 2010) as well as films from developed nations,
specifically, Vital Signs (Deraspe 2009), Alicia, Go Yonder (Miller 2010) and The Water at
the End of the World (Siero 2010).

C ONTEXT AND H ISTORY OF IFFR

The International Film Festival Rotterdam, held annually over twelve days in late January,
attracts one of the largest audiences of any film festival worldwide. The festival is widely
known for its eclectic programming choices and for its penchant for seeking out films from all

_________________________________________________________________________

115
over the world. Rotterdam showcases promising new talent in its Bright Futures programme,
the films of acclaimed auteurs in Spectrum and explores new trends in cinema in Signals.
Certainly, the “worlds imagined” in the wide variety of films in the Bright Futures programme
attests to the festival‟s reputation for taking risks with emerging film industries and
filmmakers. The festival actively supports the realization of auteur cinema and the expertise
of independent filmmakers, producers and film criticism through its co-production outfit
CineMart and through the financial support of the Hubert Baals Fund ("International Film
Festival Rotterdam" 2010). In 2009, the festival launched an experimental film-funding
project, Cinema Reloaded, which invited the public to buy „coins‟ to contribute to the funding
of their chosen film whilst allowing the contributor to act as a co-producer. Rotterdam
maintains a strong reputation as a cinephiles festival, with particular interest in discovering
new films in Asia and showcasing them to European audiences (Chan 2011, 254).

The festival famously opened as “Film International Rotterdam” to just seventeen spectators
in June 1972 and was labeled as „super-experimental‟. Despite its humble origins, the
festival flourished under the guidance of its first director, Hubert Bals, who was committed to
nurturing new and emerging talent. In 2011, the festival screened two hundred and sixty-
eight films (fiction, documentary, experimental); of which there were forty-three world
premieres ("International Film Festival Rotterdam" 2011). Three hundred and thirty
filmmakers attended the festival and there were over one thousand screenings and festival
events. In 2011, the festival celebrated its fortieth anniversary with an XL edition (roman
numerals for 40), with screenings taking place in forty locations across the city. As one of the
largest audience film festivals in the world, the IFFR attracts hundreds of thousands of
visitors and is the largest public event in the Netherlands ("International Film Festival
Rotterdam Catalogue” 2011). The IFFR is arguably the most prestigious film festival in the
country, competing only for Dutch audiences against the Netherlands Film Festival held
annually in September, and the International Documentary Film Festival Amsterdam (IDFFA)
in November.

F ESTIVAL D ATES – T EMPORAL LOCATION IN F ESTIVAL C IRCUIT

Programmed annually at the end of January, the festival is scheduled between two other
internationally renowned festivals: the Sundance Film Festival (mid to late January) and the
Berlinale (early to mid February). This temporal location means that the IFFR maintains a
prominent position on the festival circuit, with the potential to influence the upcoming
programming choices of smaller niche and local festivals as the year progresses. IFFR
programmer Gertjan Zuilhof agreed that the festival holds a distinct position, stating that:

_________________________________________________________________________

116
 Rotterdam is a rather large event, numbers wise, but also quite a niche event, where
films and filmmakers that might be marginal elsewhere, can feel at home. In terms of
worldwide or commercial impact, it sits comfortably below the biggest events, such
as Cannes or Berlin, but it is big enough to offer more to a certain type of production
than Cannes or Berlin can. So, at best it is the home of the independent, the new and
the different (Zuilhof 2011).

For film industry programmers and professionals, the clustering of Sundance, the IFFR and
Berlinale all within one month of each other provides ample opportunity at the start of the film
year to gauge upcoming programming trends and visit all three festivals in quick succession.
It is possible for each of these festivals to survive alongside one another because each has
a clearly defined identity. Sundance is renowned for fostering independent filmmaking, with
many filmmakers going on to find success outside of the festival network in Hollywood.
Berlin is ranked as an A list festival by FIAPF and has a long history and strong
programming traditions. Although Sundance and Rotterdam are not FIAPF accredited, all
three festivals have successful strategies for programming films each year.

As a response to the competition Rotterdam faces from Berlin and other festivals, a strong
emphasis is placed on artistic, experimental and filmmaker-focused content. The intention is
to clearly differentiate Rotterdam from the high profile red carpet festivals such as Cannes
and Toronto, and positions it as a leader in new cinema trends for smaller, local film
festivals. As the festival‟s director, Rutger Wolfson explains:

What was most striking about travelling to other festivals was realising how clearly
articulated Rotterdam‟s position is. We have a very strong artistic profile, and our
choices aren‟t driven by getting high-profile premieres. It‟s a very open festival, open
to new talent and adventurous filmmaking, and that‟s what makes us very special
(2009).

Rotterdam is not primarily motivated by attracting stars or holding red carpet events, but it
does still place great importance on having a large number of world premieres, and insists
on premiere rights for any films funded through the Hubert Bals Fund.

Despite not being FIAPF accredited, Simon Field, a past director of Rotterdam said that the
IFFR has always been in competition with other prestigious festivals to secure the latest
films and up-and-coming filmmakers. The positioning of the IFFR just after Sundance and
just before Berlin increases the competition between the festivals to attract high profile films
and filmmakers. In a recent interview Field stated that, “the problem with films and

_________________________________________________________________________

117
filmmakers was that often those who went to Sundance were dreaming of Cannes or Berlin
and so would not commit to our programme” (Quandt 2009, 71-72). Berlin has always been
the festival‟s greatest competition, with both festivals often competing to attract the same
films. The proliferation of festivals has meant that this predicament is increasingly replicated
across the international film festival circuit and can be both mutually beneficial as well as
heightening competition between the festivals.

F ESTIVAL V ENUES – S PATIAL LOCATION WITH IN THE C ITY

The IFFR is inextricably linked to the city of Rotterdam. The festival was founded in
Rotterdam during a period of considerable change in the early 1970s that also “included the
establishment of an alternative circuit of art-house cinemas and a specialised distribution
company called Film International” (De Valck 2007, 170). Spatially, Rotterdam as a city is
defined by its harbour. The festival is located in central Rotterdam, an Industrial city that was
almost completely destroyed during World War II. After the war, the city was rebuilt and by
the 1960‟s, the central concern of government and policy makers was re-establishing the
city‟s sense of culture. As De Valck discusses, Amsterdam was already established as “the
national capital of culture, in particular for theatre, music, literature and the fine arts” (2007,
171). It was decided that Rotterdam was to be recognised as a second capital of culture,
focusing on film, architecture, poetry and digital media. Film International was therefore
founded to distribute art-house films across the Netherlands and to initiate an International
film festival in Rotterdam. Funded in part by the city of Rotterdam and the Ministry of Culture,
the IFFR became iconic of the city and “one of the most prestigious cultural events in the
Netherlands” (De Valck 2007, 173).

The De Doelen building is the main festival hub, housing the festival offices, box office and
merchandise, video library, press and industry office and a large meeting space in the foyer
for filmmakers, guests and the public. The De Doelen is located close to the Rotterdam train
station and within walking distance of the Pathe cinemas, the multiplex rented by the IFFR
each year as the main location for screenings14. In my own observations the excitement and
festival atmosphere were certainly most concentrated within the space of the De Doelen
building. The main foyer area, located between the box office and the merchandise was a
constant hive of activity during the festival. There was an interesting permeability in this
space between the meetings of filmmakers, industry and press, alongside the public queuing
for tickets. Unlike a smaller festival where there are fewer guests and so they are less
distinguishable, Rotterdam specifically created the space in the De Doelen foyer where the
14
See Appendix Five for IFFR‟s festival venue map.

_________________________________________________________________________

118
professional side of the festival was accessible and somewhat transparent to the public.
There were separate meeting places and work spaces upstairs, close to the press and
industry desks, where meetings could take place away from the public. Although in my
observations there was still a relatively distinct separation between the industry and public
aspects of the festival, the shared space of the De Doelen foyer contributed significantly to
the „buzz‟ generated by the festival.

During the festival, I also observed a rapid increase in the amount of film posters, postcards
and promotional material that began to build up within the main hub of the festival. There
was a sense that as the festival moved into full swing, the films began to take over: layers of
posters crept across the walls and piles of postcards, business cards and catalogues were
piled high on every available table, counter and window ledge. As the festival expanded to
inhabit the building, the triumphs of successful films, attention seeking ploys of experimental
and controversial films and traces of hurried business meetings were left behind.

The upper levels of the De Doelen hosted the Industry facilities of the festival. This included
the press and industry desks, which were available for accessing press material, arranging
meetings and other festival advice. The video library and rooms for Industry panels were
also located in this area and were consistently busy for the duration of the festival. The video
library was an invaluable resource for busy festival guests, allowing them to view films on
individual computers outside of the specified screening times. The festival staff were also
relatively visible throughout the ten days. I regularly observed the festival director, Rutger
Wolfson, many of the programmers and numerous other festival staff interacting with both
Press and Industry guests and well as with members of the public. This visibility and
dynamic interaction during the festival is important because it validates for both the
filmmakers and the public that the festival values and understands the significance of the
festival environment. The visible support of films and filmmaker by the festival programmers,
particularly in public forums such as introducing films and conducting Q&A‟s is a vital support
mechanism of the function of a film festival.

The festival is also made highly visible in prominent locations around the city. All of the main
cinemas used by the IFFR were clearly advertised with the festival logo and promotional
materials. The Rotterdam Central train station also advertised the festival, with numerous
signs directing the way to the main festival hub. Many of the local cafes and restaurants took
advantage of the festivals presence and advertised special festival menus and deals in a bid
to entice festival guests and audience members inside out of the cold. As the festival is held
in the middle of winter, the freezing temperatures also have an impact on the layout and

_________________________________________________________________________

119
negotiation of festival spaces. For the 40th anniversary of the IFFR in 2011, the festival
screenings took place at forty different locations around the city, reflecting the festivals taste
for the experimental and ambitious, as well as promoting a celebration of film in all of its
many forms. Despite the city‟s industrial feel, there was a definite sense that the IFFR was
both highly visible and celebrated throughout the city during the ten days of the festival. As
De Valck states, “...the festival maintains a special relationship with the city... (and) has a
positive effect on the perception of the city by its citizens as well as among outsiders” (2007,
199).

T IGER A WARDS C OMPETITION

The IFFR‟s commitment to supporting emerging filmmakers is prominently enforced through
the Tiger Awards, the festival‟s competition for first and second feature films. The Tiger
award, of €15,000 Euro, granted each year to three emerging filmmakers, is highly regarded
internationally, and affords winning films with a mark of prestige and “critical capital” (Czach
2004, 82). The division of one third of the programme specifically for first and second feature
filmmakers is a defining strength of the IFFR. As De Valck states, this focus on emerging
talent through the platform of a prestigious festival prize “does confirm the festival‟s position
on the international film festival circuit. It supports the festival image of serving the interests
of these new talents and presenting the world with some of the great auteurs of tomorrow”
(De Valck 2007, 193). The festival also supports both previous Tiger award winners and
emerging new talent through its Tiger DVD label. Each year audiences are able to purchase
selected DVD‟s of previous Tiger Award winners and nominees at the merchandise stores
located throughout the festival. The festival also produces the Daily Tiger, a newspaper
printed in both Dutch and English that presents the daily film schedule, interviews with
filmmakers, programmers and festival staff, as well as focusing on particular programming
strands. The Tiger Award is recognised as prestigious at many international film festivals,
with the exception being the Berlinale, where the Tiger award is not as highly regarded,
perhaps because, as aforementioned, the two festivals are in direct competition with one
another, in terms of festival dates, geographical proximity and interest in attracting the same
films and filmmakers.

Many of the filmmakers who have been previously nominated for the Tiger Awards reflected
on the impact this had on their careers earlier this year during a special strand of the
programme called Return of the Tiger. An emerging Thai director, Anocha Suwichakornpong
won a Tiger award in 2010 for her film Mundane History. She stated that the award “gave me
a lot of opportunities. After Rotterdam, my film was invited to many festivals... Every time it

_________________________________________________________________________

120
went to another festival they always introduced it as a Tiger Award winner from Rotterdam.
Having won the Tiger was a really big deal and opened a lot of doors” (Macnab 2011, 1).
Thus, the value and prestige of the award is two-fold; the IFFR‟s position on the festival
circuit is validated through the recognition that the festival is of a high standard, and in turn,
the filmmaker and their film are marked as “valuable” through their association and
recognition by a prestigious festival. A previous Tiger Award winner from 2009, Tan Chui
Mui, was included in the Return of the Tiger programme in 2011.

H UBERT B ALS F UND

Emerging filmmakers from developing nations are specifically supported by the IFFR through
various types of funding from the Hubert Bals Fund. Bals, the festival‟s founding director,
firmly believed that the festival had a responsibility to nurture emerging talent. The Hubert
Bals Fund was established in 1988 and is the longest running international film fund in the
world. The fund offers support through programmes for script and project development, low-
budget digital production, postproduction and distribution. The profile description of the HBF
on the festival website states that the fund is “designed to bring remarkable or urgent feature
films by innovative and talented filmmakers from developing nations closer to completion”
("Hubert Bals Fund Profile" 2011). Although the financial aspects of a project are taken into
consideration, the content and artistic value of the project is considered the decisive factor in
the final funding decisions. Each year the fund distributes approximately 1.2 million Euros
across two selection rounds, with individual grants ranging between ten and thirty thousand
Euros. The selection criteria for eligible films are quite specific; the filmmaker must be a
citizen who lives and works in a developing country. The DAC-List of developing countries,
as defined by the French-based Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development
(OECD), is used by the IFFR as the basis for this criterion ("DAC List 2009" 2011). The fund
also states that the entry should be “original, authentic and rooted in the culture of the
applicant‟s country” and that it should “contribute to the development of the local film industry
and the local film-making skills” ("Hubert Bals Fund Project Entry" 2011). These selection
criteria are somewhat problematic for several reasons. Firstly, how does one measure the
value and authenticity of a film in its representation of a particular culture, and is it
appropriate that a First World Festival doing the measuring? Secondly, how does a festival
measure how successful a film/filmmaker is in contributing to the development of their local
film industry, and should this be a primary concern for emerging filmmakers?

In her article, “The film festival as producer: Latin American Films and Rotterdam‟s Hubert
Bals Fund” (2011), Miriam Ross acknowledges that “while determinants such as artistic

_________________________________________________________________________

121
value are hard to measure empirically, HBF has attracted a global reputation and is well
known to the filmmakers and producers who interact with the international film festival circuit”
(Ross 2011, 261). The HBF‟s international reputation means that the films that receive
funding are associated with the prestige and „brand‟ of the festival in much the same manner
as the Tiger Awards. Ross argues that the “prestige of the fund means that HBF not only
generates publicity but can also be used by filmmakers to attract further financial support”
(Ross 2011, 261). The application of the HBF logo as a marker on festival posters and DVD
cases signal to both audiences and Industry that the film carries significant value or „critical
capital‟ (Czach 2004). The contribution of the Hubert Bals Fund in supporting cinema from
developing nations is widely acknowledged, because, as Koehler states “without
Rotterdam‟s Hubert Bals fund... a significant number in the global „margins‟ would have been
unable to make films at all” (Koehler 2009, 94).

However, Rotterdam has been criticised for the First World/Third World dichotomy that it
perpetuates through its funding of films only from developing nations. Mark Peranson raises
this pertinent question, asking “why the sudden interest in colonising the Third World through
world cinema funds, which, though certainly valuable, often end up influencing the kind of
film that is made?” (Peranson 2008, 42) Certainly, the strict criteria that the HBF fund
imposes ensure that all funded films must reflect subject matter that is „authentic‟ and
representative of the culture of that particular developing nation. This means that it is almost
impossible for the selected films to be apolitical, and strengthens the idea of the film festival
as „coloniser‟. As discussed in the literature review, film festival audiences often come to a
screening of a film from a particular country with preconceived ideas about the film‟s content,
narrative or aesthetic qualities. Ross argues that this type of intervention by film festivals
complicates their function as a space in which transnational flows of filmmaking are
facilitated, stating that “While much recent film scholarship has highlighted the success of
transnational filmmaking in which numerous national contexts and cultural spaces are
explored on screen, the HBF criteria restrict the opportunities for filmmakers to work outside
their national context” (Ross 2011, 263). It is impossible to predict at this point in time
whether or not support from the Hubert Bals Fund limits filmmakers from developing nations
to making films featuring only „authentic national content‟. While it is agreed by many critics
that the HBF has made an important contribution to the development of cinema in these
countries, this is an important example of the ways in which festivals now actively take part
in not only the screening of world cinema, but also in its funding and development.

_________________________________________________________________________

122
 T HE P ROGRAMME
Rotterdam‟s festival programme is divided into three sections, two of which signpost the
festival‟s interest in supporting new and emergent filmmaking and filmmakers. The Bright
Futures section accommodates emerging filmmakers; auteurs and more established
international filmmakers are featured in the Spectrum section and new trends and
experimental filmmaking in Signals. According to De Valck (2007), the specialisation of
Rotterdam‟s programme stemmed from the „cinephile passions‟ of the original festival
director, Hubert Bals. The result of this distinct vision meant that “The festival developed a
clear image of what types of films and filmmakers it supported and could, by virtue of its
consistent programming, acquire a competitive, nodal position on the international film
festival circuit” (De Valck 2007, 179).

The following tables show the film screenings of emerging women filmmakers attended
during both festival visits in 2010 and 2011.

International Film Festival Rotterdam: 27th January – 7th February 2010

Table 6: IFFR Films 2010

Programme
Film Filmmaker Country Year Interview
Section

Vital Signs Sophie Deraspe Canada 2009 Tiger Awards Yes

France, Germany,
Every Day is a Holiday Dima El-Horr 2008 Bright Future Yes
Lebanon

Europa East Anita Doron Hungary 2010 Bright Future No

Switzerland, Sierra
God No Say So Brigitte Uttar Kornetzky 2010 Bright Future Yes
Leone

Andrea Seligmann Silva &

Separations Netherlands 2010 Bright Future Yes
Mieke Bal

My Tehran for Sale Granaz Moussavi Iran, Australia 2009 Bright Future No

Germany, Austria,
Women without Men Shirin Neshat 2009 Spectrum No
France

Philippines, China, Signals: Where

Sunday School Joanna Vasquez Arong 2010 Yes
Zambia is Africa

Signals: Where
Suwi Musola Cathrine Kaseketi Zambia, Finland 2009 No
is Africa

Signals: Where
Thank you Mama Omelga Mthiyane South Africa 2010 No
is Africa

_________________________________________________________________________

123
No Woman Born & Sarah Signals: Where
Tan Chui Mui Malaysia, South Africa 2010 No
and Omelga is Africa

International Film Festival Rotterdam: 26th January – 6th February 2011

Table 7: IFFR Films 2011

Programme Interview
Film Filmmaker Country Year
Section

Yes
Alicia, Go Yonder Elisa Miller Mexico 2010 Tiger Awards

Year Without a Yes

Tan Chui Mui Malaysia 2010 Return of the Tiger
Summer

Wang Ting, Anocha Yes

Breakfast Lunch
Suwichakornpong, Singapore 2010 Bright Future
Dinner
Kaz Cai

The Day I Atousa Bandeh No

Iran 2011 Bright Future
Dissapeared Ghiasabadi

No
Characters Son Kwang-Ju South Korea 2011 Bright Future

The Water at the Yes

Paula Siero Argentina 2010 Bright Future
End of the World

Brigitte Uttar Switzerland, Sierra No

Imagine, the Sky 2011 Bright Future
Kornetzky Leone

Athina Rachel No
Attenberg Greece 2010 Bright Future
Tsangari

No
My Perestroika Robin Hessman USA, Russia 2010 Bright Future

Yes
Artificial Paradises Yulene Olaizola Mexico 2011 Bright Future

No
Zephyr Belma Bas Turkey 2010 Bright Future

Laura Amelia Guzman Mexico, Dominican No

Jean Gentil 2010 Bright Futures
& Israel Cardenas Republic, Germany

Signals: Raiding Yes

Fire Fly Caroline Kamya Uganda, China 2011
Africa

Chips and Liver Signals: Raiding Yes

Caroline Kamya Uganda, Denmark 2010
Girls Africa

_________________________________________________________________________

124
 Signals: Raiding Yes
Imani Caroline Kamya Uganda, Sweden 2010
Africa

Signals: Raiding No
Li Xia‟s Salon Omelga Mthiyane South Africa, China 2011
Africa

The careful curation of a festival catalogue defines the strategic interests and strengths of a
particular festival. The three main programme sections chosen by the IFFR (Bright Futures,
Signals and Spectrum), clearly reflect the festival‟s focus on “art, avant garde and auteurs”
(De Valck 2007, 165). This type of programme framing also helps to direct potential
audiences toward particular sections. Both the 2010 and 2011 festival catalogues each
featured a diverse range of films by emerging women filmmakers from both developed and
developing countries. During the research, I attended a total of twenty-six screenings of films
by emerging women filmmakers. Of these films, fifteen were programmed in the Bright
Futures programme, seven films were included in the Signals programme on African cinema,
two were in competition for the Tiger Award, one was included in Return of the Tiger and the
final film was programmed as part of Spectrum. The films included were selected from a
range of countries, with many of the films also funded as international co-productions. The
majority of the emerging women filmmakers were programmed within the Bright Futures
section. The grouping of emerging filmmakers together in a dedicated section demonstrates
a significant decision on behalf of the festival to support filmmakers at the start of their
careers, as well as indicating to the IFFR audience that the festival regards these films as
important. As Gerwin Tamsma, one of the festival‟s prominent programmers, recently stated,
the Bright Futures programme encompasses “a wide range of styles, backgrounds, budgets
and subjects, selected for a wide variety of reasons by people with different
tastes...Together, they form our new names for the coming years... they propose what the
current state of filmmaking is” (Tamsma 2011). He argues that the existence of the Bright
Futures programme, and “the emphasis that is placed on the section, also means that the
festival as a whole is focused on emerging talent” (Tamsma 2011).

_________________________________________________________________________

125
 E MERGING W OMEN F ILMMAKERS : D EVELO PING N ATIONS
E V E R Y D A Y I S A H O L I D AY

Film Still: Every Day is a Holiday (Dima El-Horr, 2008)

Image sourced from http://en.unifrance.org/movie/29884/every-day-is-a-holiday/photographs#2

For many emerging filmmakers from developing nations, funding is either nonexistent or so
difficult to obtain from their own funding bodies and governments that financial assistance
from the Hubert Bals Fund is crucial to their films being made and distributed in the first
place. This was the experience of Dima El-Horr, an emerging filmmaker from Lebanon. El-
Horr‟s first feature film, Every Day is a Holiday (Chaque jour est une fête, 2009), is a co-
production between France, Germany and Lebanon that received distribution funding from
the Hubert Bals Fund as a result of its success at the 2010 IFFR. I conducted an interview
with El-Horr during the 2010 festival and she explained that making a film in Lebanon was
extremely difficult, as funding and support from the government were not available.

Every Day is a Holiday had its world premiere at the Toronto International Film Festival in
2009 and has had further screenings in Rome, Dubai and New York. The film follows three
women who board a bus on the Lebanese Day of Liberation to visit their husbands in jail.
When the bus is stopped by a stray bullet, the women form an unlikely friendship as they are
left to find their own way to the jail through the harsh desert. In our interview, El-Horr
explained that the film is a personal story, drawn from her own experiences growing up
during the war in Lebanon. The three main female characters are based on women she
knows and are portrayed as willful and independent. It was important to El-Horr to depict
strong women in this situation, as she states, “I wanted to get away from the serious side of
women, women who are always shown as weak, and under the control of men – which for
me is not true. You have a lot of women who fight for their rights, you know?” (El-Horr
2010).

_________________________________________________________________________

126
El-Horr combines poetic and ethereal moments, such as the newly-wed couple swimming in
the sea still clad in their wedding attire, with stark images of the barren landscape and
villagers fleeing their homes along the dusty stretches of road. The slow yet continuous
movement of the camera also creates a feeling of unease, and El-Horr favors tracking,
panning and wide shots of the landscape to reinforce the dislocation of the women in the
desert. When the driver is shot and the bus runs off the road, the women do not react
hysterically, but calmly move the body and try to start the engine. When they are unable to
restart the bus, they pack up their belongings and set off toward the prison on foot. The three
women are separated from the main group of passengers, and begin to share their personal
stories with each other. Hala (Hiam Abbass) is married to a guard at the prison, Lina (Manal
Khader) is visiting her imprisoned husband to sign for a divorce, and Tamara (Raia Haidar)
was separated from her husband when he was taken to the prison on their wedding day.

The closer the women get to the prison, the more signs of death and danger they encounter.
Abandoned cars, smoldering ruins and the carcasses of animals are strewn along the roads.
El-Horr draws attention to key moments of interaction between the women through her
striking use of mise en scene and cinematography. One particular scene occurs toward the
end of the film, as the three women stop to rest at an abandoned house. Sitting on an old
green couch in front of the crumbling ruins of a stone house, they are framed in a mid-shot
by an archway leading into what was once the dining room, complete with a dusty chandelier
still hanging in the open ruin. Few words are exchanged between the women, but a brief
conversation about which parts of the country they are from strengthens the bond of
independence growing between them.

El-Horr also interweaves moments of magic realism through her juxtaposition of the women
trying to find their way through the desert (in reality) with the imagined freedom of reaching
the ocean. The film begins with Tamara enjoying a briefly intimate moment in the sea with
her new husband before he is taken away by the military. It is unclear whether this moment
is real or imagined, yet the freedom it represents is in stark contrast to the everyday reality of
Tamara‟s life following her wedding. Later in the film, Lina falls asleep in an abandoned truck
on the side of the road, and dreams she is floating in open water amongst bodies clad in
white linen sheets. This metaphor of water is repeated throughout the film, and culminates in
the final scene.

When the women finally arrive at the prison, Hala and Lina discover the bodies of their
husbands amongst the other murdered guards and prisoners, whereas Tamara‟s husband
has disappeared. In a voice over, she explains her need to leave Lebanon, and the final

_________________________________________________________________________

127
scene of the film shows Hala and Lina waiting at the wharf for Tamara to join them, but she
never arrives. In the open ending of the film, El-Horr alludes to the women‟s newfound
independence, despite the trauma they have encountered. The absence of men throughout
the film also reinforces strength of the women. El-Horr believes that the Middle East, often
portrayed on screen as a place of deaths and men absent from their families, forgets to
recognise the strength of the Arab woman. El-Horr describes her characters as “extremely
strong, but they‟re fragile at the same time... they dream of love, they dream of renewal, they
refuse the stagnation, and they are passionate” (El-Horr 2010).

When questioned about the importance of screening women‟s stories, El-Horr explained that
it was very important for her debut film to depict a positive representation of Lebanese
women because it is such a personal story. As a director at the start of her career, El-Horr
felt strongly about telling stories to which she could relate, but did not feel that women
filmmakers should necessarily focus on telling women‟s stories, rather that they should be
sincere and honest in whatever subject matter they portrayed. El-Horr‟s reflection on her
past experiences as a young woman in Lebanon were not intended to be entirely realistic,
instead she valued the fact that her memories of events were just as significant as her
experience at the time. In our interview she expressed that rather than portraying the graphic
nature of war, it was the strength of the women in dealing with a crisis that was most
significant. Just as her reflections on the war were not intended to be entirely realistic, it was
her memory of the events since that was important. She said, “I always say that with cinema
we can have a lot of imagination and it‟s not about reality – so I play with my characters. I
play with the stories, I imagine things... I like to raise the curiosity of the audience. I like to
push them to pain, to feel, to something” (El-Horr 2010).

As an emerging filmmaker, El-Horr‟s participation in International Film Festivals is vital to the

film‟s success. Every Day is a Holiday was screened three times during the festival, with an
early morning, midday and evening screening. El-Horr explained that if she did not make the
festival circuit, her film would not be shown, because in Lebanon there was no financial
support available to directors and so far no interest in screening the film there. The reception
of her film in Rotterdam was quite successful, with two sold-out sessions and close to a full
house on a Monday morning. She stated that “I‟m not going to forget this – my screening
was at 9.30am on Monday, and as you saw the theatre was full and this means a lot... you
feel that there is a big tradition, and people have confidence in what Rotterdam is offering”
(El-Horr 2010).

_________________________________________________________________________

128
El-Horr‟s film is a pertinent example of the important role that the Hubert Bal‟s Fund plays in
supporting filmmakers whose films might otherwise struggle to find distribution. This is one of
the crucial roles of the film festival and the film festival circuit. Since receiving funding from
the HBF, Every Day is a Holiday has gone on to screen at festivals in Germany, London,
Istanbul, Jordan and Lebanon. It then also went on to have a general release in Lebanese
cinemas. Despite the restrictions on the content and aesthetic qualities funded films must
possess, the history of funded films on the HBF website and examples such as El-Horr‟s film
demonstrate the very real impact that this funding is having for emerging filmmakers from
developing countries. The range of funding possibilities offered through the fund also reflects
the relative flexibility of the HBF in its efforts to genuinely support the filmmakers, as
opposed to actively trying to influence/manipulate the kinds of films produced in developing
nations. Three other emerging women filmmakers included in this research received funding
from the Hubert Bals Fund, including Artificial Paradises (2011) by Yulene Olaizola, Year
Without a Summer (2010) by Tan Chui Mui and Zephyr (2010) by Belma Bas.

Produced as an international co-production between France, Lebanon and Germany, and

with additional financial assistance from the Hubert Bals Fund, Every Day is a Holiday can
certainly be considered to be a transnational film. The narrative content, which explores a
renewed search for identity by the women following the war as well as a pervading sense of
dislocation or transition, reinforce the hallmarks of transnational cinema identified in the
literature review. Furthermore, the need to obtain financing from several countries and the
requirement that El-Horr gain international recognition on the festival circuit before receiving
any acknowledgment in Lebanon, indicate that this film clearly meets criteria as a
transnational production.

WOMEN WITHOUT MEN

Film Still: Women Without Men (Shirin Neshat 2009)

Image Sourced From: http://womenwithoutmen.blog.indiepixfilms.com/stills/

Iranian-born visual artist, Shirin Neshat, screened her debut feature film, Women Without
Men, at the IFFR in 2010. Neshat is internationally recognised for her provocative
_________________________________________________________________________

129
explorations of gender relations in Iran, and she applied her distinct visual style in her
approach to mise en scene and cinematography. The film‟s narrative is set in the 1950s and
is based on a novel by Iranian author, Shahrnush Parsipur, and interweaves the stories of
four women living in Iran. Unable to shoot the film in Iran because of its political content,
Neshat had to recreate the streets of Tehran in Casablanca, Morocco. Neshat employs
magical realism in a similar manner to Dima El-Horr, with the four characters finding solace
together in a magical garden.

Neshat‟s use of slow, deliberate camera movements and a de-saturated colour palette work
to create the film‟s striking visual aesthetic. The city streets are sepia toned, and framed in
wide shots with harsh lighting, portraying Iran as a bustling city that women must navigate
with care. The four women lead very different lives: Munis is almost thirty and still lives at
home under the strict guidance of her brother, whose main goal is to arrange marriage for
his sister. However, Munis and her friend, Faezeh, are defiant of tradition, and listen to the
radio in secret and leave the house without permission. Zarin is a prostitute and is openly
vilified by society. Fakhri, a middle aged woman, is married to a respectable military man,
yet she longs to buy a house of her own and leave her inattentive husband.

The four women are drawn together by the house that Fakhri buys when she leaves her
husband. In contrast to the harsh images of the city, the orchard is a sacred place for the
women and Neshat illuminates it in rich colours and textures. The orchard is filled with
gnarled trees, a deep pond and heavy, secretive mist. Neshat has described the orchard as
both a sanctuary and place of exile for the women, where they can escape the expectations
of society and take time to heal (2009).

Women Without Men was an official selection at the Toronto International Film Festival and
the Sundance International Film Festival in 2010, and was awarded the Silver Lion for Best
Director at the Venice Film Festival in 2009. Speaking in an interview following the award,
Neshat stated that she was honoured to have been included in a major international film
festival, given that it was her first feature film ("Women Without Men" 2010). The film is
banned in Iran because of its exploration of political and gender issues and for promoting the
idea of change. Neshat explained that the story appealed to her because of the dichotomy
that existed between poetry and politics, “It sort of follows my way of working, in that it has a
foot in reality, with socio-political issues particular to Iran and yet it really sort of delves into
very mystical, philosophical, timeless issues that transcends Iran” ("Women Without Men"
2010).

_________________________________________________________________________

130
The representation of women in both Every Day is a Holiday and Women Without Men
depict strong female characters, who despite their oppression, find a way to display courage
and independence. Both of these films use magical realism as a way of exploring the
consciousness of their female characters, which gives the audience insight into their
perspective as women. According to Bainbridge, the use of magical realism in many films by
women filmmakers often foregrounds “the potential of fantasy as a tool for making visible
that which is apparently unspeakable/unrepresentable” (2008, 53). The use of this technique
in films from developing nations, such as Iran and Lebanon, allow filmmakers to explore
taboo subjects, which relate to the oppression and experience of women in patriarchal
nations, in intimate and complex ways.

The open endings of both films are appropriate, given the continuing state of unrest in both
Lebanon and Iran, but rather than conveying a sense that there is no solution to the
women‟s situations, leave audiences with a message of hope. Bolton recognises this
propensity of women filmmakers to favor open endings, stating that the characters are “left
with the ambiguous prospects of uncertain futures, but a confidence that those futures can
be of their own making. These directors, then, have found space for the female voice in the
mainstream, negotiating generic constraints and drawing on their conventions in skilful,
knowing ways” (Bolton 2011a, 175). Both Dima El-Horr and Shirin Neshat have created
transnational co-productions that have gained international recognition through their
circulation on the film festival circuit. As women filmmakers from developing nations, access
to international financing and the opportunity to screen their films to audiences around the
world are crucial to developing their careers as emerging filmmakers.

I NTERVIEWS WITH THE P ROGRAMMERS : G ERTJAN Z UILHOF

The IFFR‟s programme is compiled annually by nine programmers from diverse international
backgrounds. Each programmer is responsible for sourcing films from particular regions, or
for different thematic sections of the catalogue. During the course of this research I
interviewed two experienced IFFR programmers: Gertjan Zuilhof and Gerwin Tamsma.
Gertjan Zuilhof has been involved with the festival for twenty years, and is currently
responsible for programming Spectrum, films from North and Southeast Asia, Central and
Southern Africa, and some programming for the Tiger Awards. He is also on the selection
committee for the Hubert Bals Fund. Both interviews were conducted after the festival in
2011.

_________________________________________________________________________

131
Zuilhof was initially involved with the press department at the IFFR, before moving into the
programming of shorts and experimental films and then European territories. Most recently
Zuilhof has been responsible for coordinating a new focus on African filmmaking in the
Signals programme, through Where is Africa and Forget Africa in 2010, and Raiding Africa in
2011. Zuilhof limits his festival visits to Berlin and Cannes in Europe, and Pusan in Asia and
then arranges his own meetings and screenings in Japan and a number of South-East Asian
countries such as the Philippines, Vietnam, Indonesia and Thailand. His approach to
programming is a combination of following the new productions in each territory and for
special programme features; researching, putting together a proposal and discussing it with
the director and other programmers. Zuilhof explained that intuition is important in selecting
films for the festivals and that he keeps searching until he sees something that he didn‟t
expect or that was surprising. He stated that he was not automatically drawn to the films of
experienced filmmakers because they had „proven‟ themselves, nor was he only interested
in the films of unknown directors. Ultimately for Zuilhof the watching of the film always comes
first. When packaging the films within the programme, he explained that the function of the
festival was two-fold, “You choose films that can either bring attention to the festival or films
that need the active promotion of the festival” (Zuilhof 2011).

Zuilhof agreed that the IFFR performs a specific function within the film festival network,
stating that festivals range significantly in their size and subsequent importance. A festival
such as Cannes is “evidently more important for the promotion of cinema and for the
industry... than a small festival in a remote country. In general however, all festivals are
important to spread the notion of cinema as culture or even art” (Zuilhof 2011). Zuilhof
believes that Rotterdam has a unique international role in the festival circuit, particularly due
to the festival‟s production and presentation of world cinema through Cinemart and the
Hubert Bals Fund and the festival‟s support of young filmmakers through the Tiger Awards
competition. He also asserts that the festival plays an important function for international art
house cinema, through screening films that will hopefully be given releases in the
Netherlands later in the year.

According to Zuilhof, Rotterdam‟s support of emerging filmmakers is a distinguishing factor

of the festival. The devotion of the most prestigious part of the programme and the IFFR‟s
Tiger Award for emerging filmmakers is the most obvious form of support. Zuilhof explained
that the filmmakers included in the Bright Futures section benefit from increased publicity, as
well as direct support through consultation meetings and networking opportunities organised
by the festival. Bright Futures plays an important role, because for many filmmakers it is their
“first international platform” (Zuilhof 2011). He stated that the Bright Futures programme
_________________________________________________________________________

132
section, “draws attention to young filmmakers in general, but also to the individual
filmmakers... (and) it creates a possibility to find international contacts that are important for
the rest of their careers” (Zuilhof 2011).

P ROGRAMMING A FRICAN CINEMA

Zuilhof‟s most prominent programming contribution in the last two years has been his focus
on African cinema. The Where is Africa/Forget Africa programme was inspired by a lack of
African cinema in past editions of the festival. The Where is Africa section was curated by
the directors of the Amakula Film Festival in Uganda and presented a broad programme of
both historic and contemporary African cinema. Forget Africa was Zuilhof‟s project, which
took ten international filmmakers to ten different African countries, to make a film in
collaboration with an African filmmaker. Zuilhof travelled to Cameroon, South Africa,
Uganda, Malawi, Tanzania, Zambia, Kenya, Angola, Rwanda, Mozambique and Congo
Brazzaville. Two of the filmmakers involved in the Forget Africa project were emerging
women filmmakers Tan Chui Mui, from Malaysia and Joanna Vasquez Arong, from the
Philippines. Tan Chui Mui travelled to South Africa, where she made two films; No Woman
Born (2010), a short sci-fi film and Sarah and Omelga (2010), another short which explored
racial equality through the stories of two local filmmakers, Sarah Dawson and Omelga
Mthiyane. Joanna Vasquez Arong travelled to Zambia and filmed her short documentary
Sunday School (2010), a collaboration with Zambian documentary filmmaker Musola
Cathrine Kaseketi. Sunday School is a portrait of Kaseketi‟s childhood, and the difficulties
she faced growing up with a handicap in a developing country. Kaseketi‟s own first feature
film, Suwi (2009), was also included in the Where is Africa programme.

SUNDAY SCHOOL

Film Still: Sunday School (Joanna Vasquez Arong, 2010)

Image sourced from http://oldfoolfilms.com/films.php#filmsdetail

Sunday School is Arong‟s third documentary film. She had previously met Gertjan Zuilhof at
the festival for one of her earlier films, and so was selected as one of the filmmakers to travel
_________________________________________________________________________

133
to Africa. Initially she had arranged to do a short documentary on a filmmaker she had met at
the Berlin Talent Campus. However when this arrangement fell through, Arong was
introduced to Zambian documentary filmmaker Kaseketi, who along with her sister and
mother, became the focus of Sunday School. The film had its world premiere at Rotterdam,
although it had been previously screened at the Goteborg International Film Festival
(January 2010) and then after the IFFR at the Amakula Kampala International Film Festival
in Uganda (November 2010). The IFFR programme described the film as an “encounter
between two female filmmakers” and as a “portrait of a life and of a country” ("International
Film Festival Rotterdam Catalogue 2010).

The project turned out to be a unique experience for both of the filmmakers involved. Arong
explained that “I literally just met Musola when I first arrived in Zambia and I started filming
her the following day. So in some ways you‟re kind of filming in the dark because you don‟t
really know her, so it was a learning process there for a while” (Vasquez Arong 2010). She
also faced challenges in filming on the streets because people were quite suspicious of the
cameras. She said that people were afraid and that was not something she had previously
had to deal with, when filming in Beijing, Malaysia or Thailand. The language barrier also
presented an obstacle, as most of the time Arong could not understand the conversations
she was filming. Her initial idea behind the film was to explore the relationship a person has
with their parents and their childhood. She explained that as a result of the filmmaking
process being quite spontaneous and intuitive the film was really made in the editing suite.
Once she had worked with a translator and viewed all of the footage, faith emerged as the
theme that bound the three women together.

When asked about her focus on women in the film, Arong considered that while her intent
had not always been to make films about women, it was certainly her current focus. She
explained that:

I think it‟s a personal thing and as I mentioned earlier I‟m interested in the connection
between childhood and the connection to parents and generations. So, at this point,
yes, I‟m very keen on that... I think I‟m in a stage where I think at least for the next
two or three films, I‟m pretty sure I‟m focusing on women, but I‟m not trying to make a
statement, but I just think there are issues. But it‟s interesting because I showed
some rough cuts of this film to friends back in Beijing, and some comments were oh
it‟s a feminist film. I thought huh? It‟s not a feminist film; I just think they happen to
be women. Of course when you‟re editing, for me at least... and finding a story within
the material, I think you have to find a story that really I can really relate to. So

_________________________________________________________________________

134
 maybe that‟s why, I guess I‟m looking for my own story from my past, and that‟s
why... it‟s easier for me to focus on women at this point (Vasquez Arong 2010).

Indeed, Arong‟s explanation of finding her own connection with the film‟s narrative is
characteristic of many of the emerging women filmmaker interviewed during this research.

Arong also talked about her growing awareness of how to navigate film festivals as an
emerging filmmaker. For her first film, Neo Lounge (2007), she travelled a lot, but with her
second film she was more selective and travelled only to specific festivals. She
acknowledged that her attendance at film festival has broadened her knowledge and
reference points as a filmmaker. She stated that:

For me personally it‟s helped immensely because I tend to work alone, even though
I‟m based in Beijing and I know quite a few independent film makers there. You
know you are trying to work in a little bubble I think, so my first film festival ever was
the Berlin Film Festival... I was so excited to meet all these other film makers from all
over the world and you know, I hadn‟t gone to film school, I didn‟t have the basics to
go there and sitting in classes and just meeting people, getting a lot of tips. It‟s really
changed everything and I think for me your reference of films, your reference points
are much higher (Vasquez Arong 2010).

On both a personal and professional level Arong believes that her attendance at film
festivals helped to clarify her ideas as a filmmaker. The opportunities festivals provide for
talking with other filmmakers and press and industry guests forced her to be able to
articulate clearly the intentions behind her film.

The Forget Africa project is a fascinating example of a film festival/programmers intervention

in local/global filmmaking. In the 2010 catalogue, the programme is introduced with the
following description, through which the intentions of the festival are made clear:

Festival programmer Gertjan Zuilhof took a journey through today‟s Africa, visiting
ten different countries and taking in his wake a different international filmmaker to
each one. They joined his encounters with the local filmmakers and made a film
about their own impressions on the spot. The encounters with local filmmakers from
Angola to Zambia yielded a series of projects, some of which are being presented in
this program under the title Forget Africa. The activities of the international
filmmakers provided several striking cooperative ventures with local filmmakers,
which could be an inspiration for future projects. Working concretely on a small-scale
film production often turned out to be an inspiring and educational experience. It
_________________________________________________________________________

135
 cannot be our intention to leave African cinema alone after this extensive project.
With effective instruments such as the CineMart and the Hubert Bals Fund,
Rotterdam will continue on the path it is now taking ("International Film Festival
Rotterdam Catalogue” 2010).

The use of what is arguably colonial language in the programme description poses an
interesting dilemma for the festival. The festival‟s direct intervention or interaction with
filmmakers from developing nations is positive in that it provides funding and opportunities
for networking for those filmmakers that might not otherwise find exposure. For the
international filmmakers who travelled to the African nations the experience was also a once-
in-a-lifetime opportunity, that had the potential to expand their filmmaking skills and cultural
knowledge. It is also clear that the Forget Africa project is a very specific example of a
festival actively going out and funding cinema for inclusion in the festival, as opposed to
programming world cinema already in circulation. However when examining the use of
language to describe the projects intentions, the First/Third Cinema hierarchy is certainly
reinforced.

In the 2011 festival, the focus on African cinema was reversed, and seven of the African
filmmakers involved in the previous project were taken to China to make short films with the
help of several Chinese or Chinese-speaking Asian filmmakers to act as their mentors and
collaborators. Zuilhof explains in the 2011 catalogue that “Last year it turned out to be an
inspiring experience for the international filmmakers to go to Africa for the first time; the
thought behind this project was that an international experience like this could also be
inspiring for the young African filmmakers” ("International Film Festival Rotterdam
Catalogue” 2011).

China was chosen for several reasons, principally because of China‟s increasing economic
involvement in Africa but also because Zuilhof recognised that the low-budget filmmaking
practices of many Chinese filmmakers would be more relevant and useful for the African
filmmakers than the more expensive approach to filmmaking evident in Europe. Two
emerging African filmmakers, Caroline Kamya from Uganda and Omelga Mthiyane from
South Africa were among the filmmakers chosen to travel to China. Kamya had three films
screen at the 2011 IFFR. Imani (2010) is her first feature film, which is set in Uganda and
was co-produced by Uganda and Sweden. Kamya also directed two short films, Fire Fly
(2011), which was the result of her trip to China, and Chips and Liver Girls (2011), which
was set in Uganda and was co-produced by Uganda and Denmark. All three of Kamya‟s
films were included in the Signals: Raiding Africa section, although Imani and Chips and

_________________________________________________________________________

136
Liver Girls were separate productions from Zuilhof‟s Africa/China project. Omelga Mthiyane‟s
short film, Li Xia’s Salon (2011), which humorously depicts Mthiyane‟s experience navigating
the culture shock of travelling to China, was also included in the Raiding Africa programme.
In the film Mthiyane decides to visit local hairdressing salons and try to find a Chinese
hairdresser who can cut and style her hair. The local stylists have clearly no experience
styling an African woman‟s hair, and the humorous scenes that ensue provide an
entertaining and fresh perspective on navigating a foreign culture and language. The
interactions between Mthiyane and her stylist, Li Xia, reveal to the audience an original and
quite personal story of both the filmmaker and her subjects‟ views on life.

Kamya‟s short Fire Fly is a fairytale narrative that stars a nine-year-old boy, Peng Lui Wei
and his older sister. The film is mostly improvised in a small village and Kamya employs a
documentary feel in her aesthetics. Peng Lui Wei, the “firefly” is a kind of action hero who
must travel around the village performing tasks and asking people for advice. I interviewed
Kamya during the 2011 IFFR and she talked about each of the three films she had screening
at the festival. Imani, her first feature film, is also the first full-length feature to come out of
Uganda. Kamya‟s production company, IVAD productions, was a key factor in her growing
success as a filmmaker. Like Joanna Vasquez Arong, Kamya participated in the Berlin
Talent Campus in 2007 and also placed great importance on the role of festivals as a
platform for launching her films and career. Imani in particular was a great achievement for
both Kamya and Ugandan audiences, as she stated in her behind the scenes trailer, “It‟s
very important for the local audiences to enjoy this film, because it‟s about them. It‟s about
us” (Kamya 2010).

GOD NO SAY SO

Film Still: God No Say So (Brigitte Uttar Kornetzky, 2010)

Image sourced from http://www.kornetzky.ch/godnosayso/GNSSimg1.html

Another filmmaker present at both the 2010 and 2011 editions of the Rotterdam festival was
Swiss filmmaker, Brigitte Uttar Kornetzky. Kornetzky visited Sierra Leone in 2010 for

_________________________________________________________________________

137
approximately ten weeks and captured the footage for what would become two films; God
No Say So (2010) and Imagine, the Sky (2011). God No Say So is a documentary drama
that tells the stories of the survivors of the civil war which occurred from 1997 to 2002. Many
of the victims of the war had their voting hands cut off by rebels whose mantra declared, “the
hand you voted with for the civilian government, you will never vote with again” (website).
The title was inspired by a man in the film, who when asked if he sought revenge against the
rebels, stated simply “God no say so”. As many as four thousand people in Sierra Leone
survived their cruel amputations and Kornetzky explained in our interview that upon meeting
the survivors, she was struck with a responsibility to tell their stories. She was initially on her
way to India when a series of “mysterious reasons” diverted their trip to Africa instead. She
described her experience of arriving in Sierra Leone as having an immediate impact:

You are confronted with a situation where you (are) confronted with war crimes. It‟s
not about you and your creativity, it‟s about facts and these facts are so
overwhelming and so challenging in a way. But immediately, as a filmmaker, you
have a responsibility. You need to do your best. It means, no matter what you do
and how creative you are or not, you have to make a film and bring their message
out (Kornetzky 2010).

The response Kornetzky had from the people in the film was overwhelmingly positive. She
explained that they felt touched to have had their story told, because as it so often happens,
such crimes will be reported in the news, but then will suddenly disappear from the media
again. Kornetzky‟s greatest challenge was deciding which parts of the immense amount of
footage she had captured were going to be used. She explained that finding the „digestible‟
version of what she filmed, whilst remaining accurate in her portrayal of the people‟s stories,
was very difficult. The film had its world premiere at Rotterdam in 2010 and subsequently
went on to screen at other festivals including Sarajevo, Monaco and Beldocs Film Festival in
Belgrade.

Kornetzky‟s second film from Sierra Leone, Imagine, the Sky, is a documentary portrait of
the Milton Margai School for the Blind in Freetown. The students of the school are tried in an
improvised courtroom held in the school, which punishes the students for their
misdemeanours, usually involving food. Imagine, the Sky screened at Rotterdam in 2011, as
well as the Warsaw Film Festival (October 2011) and the International Human Rights
Festival in Albania (September 2011). Both of Kornetzky‟s films were programmed in the
Bright Futures section of the catalogue, but complemented the focus on African cinema in
the Signals programme.

_________________________________________________________________________

138
The exploration and inclusion of African cinema in recent programming of the IFFR indicates
an interesting and contemporary shift in transnational filmmaking practices. The festival‟s
intervention in developing emerging African cinema, as well as experimenting with the
shared filmmaking experiences of African and Chinese filmmakers, demonstrates the IFFR‟s
firm interest in promoting filmmakers from developing nations and playing an active role in
funding new forms of transnational cinema.

Kornetzky, Kamya and Arong each offer festival audiences different and contemporary
representations of Africa on screen. While not all of the emerging women filmmakers
discussed here are of African descent, their films were produced in close collaboration with
African filmmakers and local communities. As discussed in the literature review, dominant
festivals are increasingly intervening in the production of films available on the festival circuit,
through funding films from developing nations that they deem to be of particular cultural or
artistic worth (Stringer 2003; De Valck 2007). Although the IFFR‟s intervention in developing
cinema in Africa can be seen to be somewhat problematic in terms of the types of films that
are produced, festival programmes such as Where is Africa play an important role in
supporting emerging cinema from developing nations.

E MERGING W OMEN F ILMMAKERS : D EVELO PED N ATIONS

I NTERVIEW WITH THE P ROGRAMMERS : G E RWIN T AMSMA
Gerwin Tamsma has been working at the IFFR for approximately fifteen years, during which
time he has worked first as a freelance contributor, editor and researcher for festival
publications before moving into programming in 2000. He is currently responsible for
programming feature films from Latin America, Spain, Portugal, China, Korea, Belgium and
Scandinavia. Tamsma coordinates the Bright Futures section of the programme, as well as
serving on the committees for the Tiger Awards and the Hubert Bals Fund. As Tamsma‟s
approach to programming each year is usually a continuous process, he explained that
“some thematic programme ideas only become reality years after they have sprung to mind”
and that “I watch films often in quite early stages, and really finishing a film may take much
longer than expected by the makers; so I am sure that I will invite some films that I saw last
year for this year‟s festival” (Tamsma 2011). Programming selections are also more firmly
decided upon after the prominent „fall‟ festivals: Venice, Toronto, San Sebastian and Pusan.
Tamsma travels each year to Cannes and varies his visits between other influential festivals
such as BAFICI Buenos Aires, Venice, Pusan, Locarno, San Sebastian, Toronto and
Vancouver. He accepts jury duties on occasion when the programme is of interest and finds
it can be a good way to discover new festivals and industry contacts. For other countries

_________________________________________________________________________

139
within his programming jurisdiction, he explained that it is often more productive to plan a
visit outside of the festival dates and arrange for private meetings and screenings. This is
usually Tamsma‟s approach when visiting China, Belgium, Sweden, Spain and Italy.

According to Tamsma, planning and shaping the programme each year is a combination of
two opposing strategies, the first being to evaluate the previous festival and negotiate
intentions for the coming year with the festival director and the rest of the programming
team. While keeping this in mind, he said “At the same time, we start from scratch, imagining
everything is possible, and (that) everything can be done in a different way. This blissful
dreaming is corrected and guided by all sorts of practicalities such as budget, getting
funding, making deals with venues or distributors etc” (Tamsma 2011). Once an individual
film or collection of films is chosen, there are several questions that need answering before
the film is packaged within the programme. Tamsma categorised these as intrinsic aspects,
including; “Is the film made by a young, unknown filmmaker? Could it be accessible for a
wider audience? Would press or buyers be „automatically‟ interested, because of the story or
certain names attached to the film?” and extrinsic aspects such as premiere status,
availability of high profile guests and the negotiation of screening options with the distributor
(Tamsma 2011). Of the film screenings I attended during the 2010 and 2011 festivals, twelve
films were World premieres, three were International premieres and two were European
premieres. Most of the films were scheduled for three to four public screenings, with at least
one evening screening to attract a larger audience. In most cases the filmmaker was also
present at the festival and a question and answer session was conducted after every
screening where possible. Tamsma emphasised that the invitation of guests and filmmakers
was a defining characteristic of a film festival and that without their presence it is reduced to
simply a series of film screenings. He explained that it is “the meeting of audiences, both
professional and public, that makes the distinction. More and more, it has also become a
mutual support: we support the filmmakers by showing their work; they support us by making
the effort to come to Rotterdam... it is also their support to film as something important”
(Tamsma 2011).

V ISIBILITY OF E MERGING F ILMMAKERS

The IFFR has clear strategies in place to enhance the visibility of emerging filmmakers within
the broad context of the festival. The dedication of the Bright Futures programme,
specifically for showcasing the films of emerging filmmakers is the most prominent form of
support. The festival‟s daily paper, the Tiger, also features interviews with filmmakers from
the Bright Futures section, particularly filmmakers nominated for the festival‟s Tiger award.

_________________________________________________________________________

140
The Tiger Award is also specifically awarded to emerging filmmakers, and the prestige of
this award holds significant value on the international festival stage. The IFFR also supports
individual filmmakers through consultations during the festival to give advice and help
filmmakers devise a strategy for obtaining distribution and exhibition for their films. During
the festival, emerging filmmakers are further encouraged to network with established
filmmakers and invited industry and press guests at official festival functions and activities.
Tamsma was adamant about the IFFR‟s prominent role in supporting emerging filmmakers,
stating that:

Rotterdam has historically always had a central place for new filmmakers. Over the
years, it has „developed‟ several „tools‟, such as CineMart, the Hubert Bals Fund, a
competition for first or second features, the Rotterdam Lab (an event where emerging
producers can get acquainted with certain elements of independent film industry,
etc). But primarily, I feel, IFFR‟s support comes from the fact that we take filmmakers
seriously (Tamsma 2011).

Certainly, the overwhelming response from the interviewed filmmakers was that Rotterdam
was a festival that encouraged and supported its emerging talent. The following films by
filmmakers from First Cinema countries are further examples of emerging female filmmakers
who participated in and benefited from their attendance at the festival.

VITAL SIGNS
Real people and real stories have always fascinated me and are still my primary
source of inspiration (Deraspe 2009).

Film Still: Vital Signs (Sophie Deraspe, 2009

Image sourced from http://filmssiamois.com/en/vital-signs/media

Sophie Deraspe‟s second feature film, Vital Signs (2010), was nominated in the Tiger
Awards competition in 2010. The film was inspired by a woman Deraspe met who
_________________________________________________________________________

141
volunteered in a palliative care ward. Deraspe was struck by the intensity of the emotions
and relationships being experienced between the people who were dying and their relatives,
and decided to conduct further research. She proceeded to spend time in a palliative care
ward herself and conducted informal interviews with both patients and their families. This
experience was shared with the lead actress of the film, Marie-Helene Bellavance. In our
interview at the 2010 edition of the festival, Deraspe explained that the film started out
exploring death, but ended up being just as much a reflection on life. The narrative features
a young woman, Simone, who begins to devote all of her time to helping the frail patients in
palliative care following the death of her own grandmother. Simone‟s dedication gradually
begins to become obsessive, as she devotes more of her time to the ward. The relationships
she develops with the patients are vivid and honest and the film‟s aesthetics reflect
Deraspe‟s background in documentary filmmaking.

Deraspe explained that Simone stops what she is doing in every other aspect of her life and
concentrates solely on the patients, “She encounters different characters who are dying, but
perhaps are dying the way that they lived... in a different way, each of them. And actually I
think she discovers life” (Deraspe 2010). Deraspe uses a hand-held camera to create an
observational style of cinematography that captures the intimate moments between Simone
and the patients she cares for. As the patients come to terms with their mortality, moments
of silence and contemplation raise interesting questions around the often unspoken subject
of how to comfort the dying. The film employs mostly diegetic sound and natural, low key
lighting to create a realistic, documentary style aesthetic. The inevitability of the patients‟ fate
is contrasted with small moments of irreverent humour and understanding, such as a young
girl trying to wear her grandmother‟s false teeth, and an aging rock band entertaining the
palliative care ward at a Christmas party. Deraspe also frequently uses medium and close
up shots of faces, expressions and hands, in a similar manner to Camille Chen‟s approach
to cinematography in Little Sparrows. In both Deraspe and Chen‟s films, the process of dying
and leaving loved ones is framed as an intimate and individual experience.

Vital Signs is Deraspe‟s second feature film and was screened five times during the festival.
As a Tiger Award nominee, her film received exposure through the festival in the Daily Tiger
newspaper and she had the opportunity to network with other Tiger nominees and Industry
guests. Deraspe discovered the need for a festival strategy following the completion of her
first film, Discovering Victor Pellerin (2006). She learnt that “there‟s a strategy with festivals,
you want to have your premiere in a festival that has a good market and a good visibility” but
she didn‟t know that at the time of her first film (Deraspe 2010). Discovering Victor Pellerin
had good festival exposure at approximately twenty festivals, but Deraspe was less selective
_________________________________________________________________________

142
about which of these festival she attended. With Vital Signs, she was much more prepared
to be strategic about where the film premiered and its „festival career‟ from that point on.

ALICIA, GO YONDER
For we are all Alicia, five women who decided to open up and talk about their
feelings. This film is a voyage to the depths of our inner worlds (Miller 2010, 16).

Film Still: Alicia, Go Yonder (Elisa Miller, 2010)

Image sourced from http://www.filmfestivalrotterdam.com/en/films/vete-m-s-lejos-alicia/

Another emerging young filmmaker, Elisa Miller, was also in attendance at the festival in
2011. Similarly to Deraspe, Miller was also aware of the benefits of the festival circuit in
launching her film. Elisa Miller‟s short film Watching it Rain (2006) won a Golden Palm at the
Cannes Film Festival. Her first feature film, Alicia, Go Yonder (2010), had its international
premiere at the IFFR in 2011. The film was screened in competition for the Tiger Award.
Miller was actually working on another film intended to be her first feature with funding from
the Hubert Bals Fund when she was struck with an impulsive idea for another film instead.
Miller collaborated with actress Sofia Espinosa and camerawoman Maria Jose Secco to
create a film about a nineteen-year-old girl‟s feelings about leaving home for the first time.
The three women shared their own thoughts, diary entries and experiences to piece together
the character of Alicia, who leaves home in Mexico to travel to Buenos Aires to become a
trapeze artist. Alicia travels further to the southernmost part of Argentina as she grapples
with feelings of loneliness and isolation. The film was spontaneously shot in just a few
months and was a collaborative and largely unrehearsed process.

Miller was very aware of the benefits of screening her film within the environment of a film
festival. She felt that Rotterdam provided a protected and safe environment for young
filmmakers and that the audience really cared about the films and made an effort to
understand them. She described the festival as having a „cinephile atmosphere‟ and that it
was a fantastic place to network with other young filmmakers. Miller also commented on the
_________________________________________________________________________

143
festivals interest in screening many types of films with different screening possibilities. She
felt that the IFFR was “really open to different cinemas and different movies, so it‟s really
supporting...” (Miller 2011). Ultimately she felt that the IFFR helped her to situate her film
alongside the work of other emerging filmmakers and to figure out screening and distribution
possibilities for the film after the festival. She explained, “I feel like... these kinds of festivals
help to locate the film where it should go. And I think my film got really landed in soft hands
here. I really think it‟s a festival that appreciates other narratives and other ways of people‟s
shooting and other ways of thinking, and they help you see where you can fit in”(Miller
2011). Alicia, Go Yonder was nominated in the Tiger Awards competition, an honour that
was not lost on Miller. She recognised the potential for wider recognition of her film, stating
enthusiastically that “Rotterdam... take(s) filmmakers and launches them to the world, with
the stamp of the Tiger on your back. Like, Go! So that‟s a really great thing for a filmmaker”
(Miller 2011).

THE WATER AT THE END OF THE WORLD

Film Still: The Water at the end of the World (Paula Siero, 2010)
Image sourced from http://www.filmfestivalrotterdam.com/en/films/el-agua-del-fin-del-mundo/

Paula Siero‟s debut feature film, The Water at the End of the World (El agua del fin del
mundo, 2010) had its international premiere in the Bright Futures programme in 2011. The
film shares the story of two sisters, Laura and Adriana. Adriana has been diagnosed with a
terminal illness, but she is stubbornly determined to resist death. Laura works in a pizza
shop, trying to scrape together enough money to support them both. She meets an alcoholic
accordion player, Martin, with whom she starts a relationship. Adriana wants to go on a trip
with her sister before she dies; she wants to travel to the end of the world. Siero‟s
contemplative film incorporates vivid cinematography and an emotive portrayal of the sisters‟
relationship. Siero was unsure of the film‟s suitability for festival submission, but approached
Rotterdam anyway and was successful. She said that the festival screenings had been very
successful and that Rotterdam‟s environment of festivity was very appealing for a young

_________________________________________________________________________

144
filmmaker. The film‟s narrative is personal and specifically local, and Siero was unsure if the
film would have universal appeal. She stated that, “It‟s a very local story. But I was really
astonished and happy about the reception… People thanked me for the film and they were
touched by the film. That‟s what I wanted”.

Sophie Deraspe, Elisa Miller and Paula Sierro are all examples of contemporary, emerging
women filmmakers who are providing festival audiences with personal, local stories with
international appeal. Their approach to storytelling is not obviously linked to portraying
authentic representations of their country of origin; instead they are presenting audiences
with fresh, transnational perspectives that portray their identities as much as global citizens
as belonging to a particular national identity. These emerging women filmmakers all include
strong female protagonists in their films, but have not set out to make films with an overt
feminist agenda. Instead, their own sensibilities and perspectives as women inform their
characters, Simone, Alicia, and Laura. Both Deraspe and Sierro deal with characters facing
terminal illnesses in their narratives, and arguably explore the experiences of these young
women from a noticeably female perspective. Bolton discusses an emergence of female
protagonists, in the films of women filmmakers, who are “unusual in their occupation of
screen space and time” (2011b). She observes that the emphasis is placed on the
character‟s interiority, and that “As a group of films, they offer something new and original in
terms of the representation of female consciousness, and suggest various ways of engaging
responses on the part of the spectator” (Bolton 2011b, 1). Indeed, many of the films by
emerging filmmakers discussed in this chapter support Bolton‟s observations, through their
representations of women‟s experiences and consciousness explored with a distinctly
feminine sensibility.

T HE CRITICAL FUNCTION OF THE FESTIVAL – PANELS , WORKSHO PS AND

DISCUSSIONS

During my visit to the 2011 festival, I attended a number of Industry panels including Film
Festivals: Who needs them?, Dress for the Job: Getting your film noticed and making the
most of a Festival and a panel between filmmakers and the Hubert Bals Fund called In
Conversation with HBF. These industry panels, scheduled across the ten days of the
festival, were open to all invited filmmakers and press and industry guests. Attendance at the
three panels was consistent, with many of the emerging women filmmakers I interviewed
present at the panels.

The panel entitled, Film Festivals: Who needs them? raised some pertinent questions about
the proliferation and current role of festivals within the international film industry. The panel
_________________________________________________________________________

145
consisted of three prominent international programmers; Gerwin Tamsma (IFFR), Marie
Pierre (Venice Film Festival), Michelle Carey (Melbourne International Film Festival) and the
director of the Viennale, Hans Hurch. Convened by film journalist and critic, Nick Roddick,
the panel members discussed their opinions on the function of film festivals in general and
how they perceive the value of their own festivals in particular. One of the suggested ways to
provide visibility and support for emerging filmmakers is to align their films, thematically or
through programming, with better-known filmmakers. The panel members also emphasized
that festival audiences have different expectations to that of a commercial audience, and that
festivals had to deal with the fact that film festivals are often the only places where particular
types of films are screened. Including these expected films within the programme, as well as
actively cultivating an audience for a film were listed as important concerns for festival
programmers. Media and Industry professionals are becoming increasingly strategic about
their festival attendance, as a result of the continuing proliferation of festivals across the
network. Therefore, it was concluded that whilst filmmakers, audiences and professionals all
still „needed‟ film festivals, it was the important responsibility of the festival organisers to
maintain a balance between catering for the interests of these individual groups.

A second panel, Dress for the Job: Getting your film noticed and making the most of a
Festival, gave helpful advice for emerging filmmakers learning to navigate the festival circuit.
The panel members included Paolo Moretti (Venice Film Festival), filmmaker Nicolas Pereda
and sales agent Sandro Fiorin (Figa Films). The panel‟s suggestions to inexperienced
filmmakers included:

Research different festivals and find the right fit for your film
Come to the festival with plans for your next project
Know your programmer, be resourceful, capitalize on people you meet
Find the right festival for your film to premiere – don‟t be seduced by red carpets
Consider premiering at a smaller festival – you might get more exposure and then be
noticed by the larger festivals
Have a website to promote the film and yourself
Ask the programmer what the festival is offering you (flights/accommodation/invited
guests etc)
Bring screener copies of the film
Contact your national film commission – make them aware of your film
Make sure your film is included in your sales agents catalogue
Be proactive and stay involved at all times
_________________________________________________________________________

146
Many of the emerging women filmmakers interviewed in this research took advantage of
attending this industry panel during the festival. Panels such as this offer crucial support and
guidance for emerging filmmakers, and Rotterdam is particularly proactive in providing this
kind of added support.

C ONCLUSION
This chapter has examined the International Film Festival Rotterdam over two years, 2010
and 2011. The IFFR is a specialised festival with a prominent and influential international
profile. Known for its programming of art house, experimental and auteur films, the IFFR is a
leading European film festival with a distinct festival identity. The legacy of the festival‟s
founding director, Hubert Bals, continues to underpin the IFFR‟s approach to programming.
The IFFR provides crucial support for filmmakers from developing nations through its Hubert
Bals Fund, and this chapter has examined several emerging women filmmakers from
developing nations who have successfully completed their films with the help of this financial
support. The dedication of the main Tiger Awards competition and the specialised Bright
Futures section of the programme reinforce the festival‟s commitment to supporting
emerging talent. Furthermore, the IFFR has other strategies in place, such as individual
filmmaker consultations, festival networking events and industry panels, to encourage
attending filmmakers to use their festival experience to their advantage.

Rotterdam clearly differentiates itself from the larger festivals on the circuit. As De Valck
observes, the festival provides a space where “filmmakers and film lovers continue to meet
in a familial setting that is characterised by an aversion to the glamour that dominates the
festivals in Cannes, Berlin and Venice” (2007, 201). Rotterdam is very much a festival
dedicated to its audience and its filmmakers. The women interviewed here spoke of a range
of benefits that they felt they gained through their attendance at the festival. Dima El-Horr
would have been unable to screen her film without the financial support of the Hubert Bals
Fund, and as a result of her attendance at the festival, went on to gain recognition both
internationally and within the Lebanese film industry. For others, such as Joanna Vasquez-
Arong and Elisa Miller, the opportunity helped them to situate themselves alongside the work
of other emerging filmmakers. Other important benefits included meeting other filmmakers,
networking with industry professionals, learning how to negotiate the festival circuit and
gaining visibility for their films. For emerging women filmmakers, the advantages of being
selected in the IFFR‟s programme have the potential to extend well beyond the ten days of
the festival each year.

_________________________________________________________________________

147
 C HAPTER F IVE : T ORONTO I NTERNATIONAL F ILM
F ESTIVAL (2010)
I NTRODUCTION
The festival takes place in dreamtime. It becomes its own universe, a centrifuge
of filmgoers on urgent missions of discovery. It‟s a shared experience, but
strangely private. No one‟s festival is the same. You bombard yourself with
images morning to night until the movies swim together. Running on no sleep,
you occasionally find yourself dropping off in the dark, surfing a REM state
between subtitles. And as you navigate the programming maze, it‟s like gambling
or pinball. There are slumps and streaks (Johnson 2000, 285).

This chapter examines the function of a prominent, A-list festival, the Toronto
International Film Festival, in its support of emerging women filmmakers. TIFF is one of
the largest and most powerful non-competitive festivals on the international film festival
circuit. Each year the festival is characterised by the glamour of its celebrity presence,
internationally acclaimed filmmakers and huge audience attendance. TIFF elevates the
profiles of selected filmmakers to global recognition through its successful combination of
a diverse and committed audience, and a strong press and industry presence.

The festival‟s relationship to the city of Toronto was reinforced in 2010 with the opening
of a purpose built home, the TIFF Bell Lightbox. The enormity of the festival‟s size poses
a challenge for emerging filmmakers, who can struggle to gain visibility amongst
hundreds of competing films. However, when a new discovery is promoted by the
festival‟s programmers, as happened to emerging filmmaker, Sarah McCarthy, a
filmmaker can go from unknown to acclaimed in a matter of days. McCarthy‟s experience
at TIFF and the success of her film, The Sound of Mumbai: A Musical (2010), will be
foregrounded in this chapter as an example of the festival‟s potential to launch the
careers of emerging filmmakers. As Roger Ebert once observed, “...you can go to
Toronto with a film nobody has heard of and leave with a success on your hands” (Polak
2003, 55). An interview conducted with TIFF‟s Executive Director and CEO, Piers
Handling, is interwoven throughout this chapter to shape the analysis of the festival‟s
relationship to the city, its position on the film festival circuit, programming structure and
support mechanisms for emerging filmmakers. In the second half of the chapter, key
films by emerging women filmmakers are discussed and an analysis of the visibility of
emerging filmmakers is informed by interviews conducted with several women
filmmakers present at the festival.15 The experience of these emerging women
filmmakers is contrasted with an interview conducted with acclaimed documentary
filmmaker, Kim Longinotto. Longinotto‟s successful career has been due in part to her
participation on the international festival circuit, and a discussion of her experiences
provides a counterpoint to her less experienced peers. Essentially, it is demonstrated
throughout this chapter that TIFF has achieved the goal of many festivals; that is, to
“aspire to the status of a global event, both through the implementation of their
programming strategies and through the establishment of an international reach and
reputation” (Stringer 2001, 139). TIFF‟s prominent position on the film festival circuit
allows it to attract global media attention, celebrities, high profile industry delegates and
international funding. This positions the festival as a highly visible and significant
platform for exposing the work of emerging women filmmakers.

C ONTEXT AND H ISTORY OF TIFF

The Toronto International Film Festival is held annually in September and showcases
over three hundred films from all over the world. TIFF has a prestigious reputation on the
film festival circuit and is held in the same high regard as other A-list festivals such as
Cannes, Berlin and Venice. TIFF serves two distinct purposes within the Canadian film
industry. Firstly, TIFF is an audience film festival, catering to more than 500 000 people
during its eleven days. Parallel to the audience festival, TIFF welcomes hundreds of
international press and industry delegates, who congregate to network, buy films for
distribution and discover new trends and emerging talents in international cinema. 2010
was a particularly significant year for TIFF, with the festival celebrating its 35th
anniversary with the opening of a spectacular, purpose-built building in the centre of the
city, the TIFF Bell Lightbox. The expansion of the festival into such a prominent location
ensures that the TIFF image and brand maintains a distinct profile within the city for 365
days of the year. Furthermore, the strength of the festival‟s relationship to the city of
Toronto secures its dominant place on the film festival circuit. As a more commercial film
festival, TIFF also maintains strong connections to Hollywood and its positioning on the
festival circuit at the beginning of the summer awards season is a crucial factor in the
ongoing success of this festival.

15 th th
I attended the Toronto International Film Festival in 2010 from the 9 to the 19 of September. I was
granted an Industry pass, which gave me access to Press and Industry screenings, the filmmakers‟ lounge
and other Industry information and functions. During the course of the festival I attended thirteen screenings
of emerging women filmmakers‟ films. These were all Press and Industry screenings, as it was difficult to
obtain tickets for many of the public screenings, which were already sold out.

_________________________________________________________________________

149
The Toronto International Film Festival is considered the premiere film festival in North
America. The festival was founded in 1976 as a „Festival of Festivals‟, to bring together
the best films from film festivals around the world in a showcase for Canadian audiences.
Renamed the Toronto International Film Festival in 1995, TIFF has grown to be an
integral part of the film festival circuit. The festival has a clearly projected understanding
of its function within the Canadian film industry and the wider festival circuit. In the 2010
catalogue, the festival explained that the secret to its success is due to:

...Its unique combination of two parallel events: one for a large public audience
passionate about film and one for the world‟s press and industry. The festival also
prides itself on being the launching pad for both big films headed for awards
season and art house cinema from around the world ("Toronto International Film
Festival Catalogue 2010, 4).

Since its inception, the festival has expanded to include the TIFF Cinemateque and Film
Reference Library (1990), a Film Circuit for exhibiting independent and Canadian films in
cities across Canada (1994), the Sprockets film festival for children (1998), Talk Cinema
(now Reel Talk) – a weekly film preview with critical discussions (1999) and Canada‟s
Top Ten (2001), a programme designed to pay tribute to the best Canadian films of the
year. The expansion of TIFF to include programmed activities throughout the year
reinforces the festival‟s intentions to maintain a prominent agenda both within Toronto
itself, and also in the wider Canadian film industry. Czach (2004) claims that prior to the
introduction of major festivals in Canada, such as Vancouver and Toronto, Canadian
cinema suffered from a lack of screening opportunities. TIFF‟s critical and popular
support of established and emerging Canadian talent has fostered “crucial critical, public
and industry interest in Canadian films” (Czach 2004, 81).

P ROGRAMMING W OMEN ’ S C INEMA

Toronto‟s history of supporting women filmmakers began in 1973 with the organisation of
the Women and Film International Festival (WFIF), a ten day celebration of 182 films “by
and about women” (Johnson 2000, 12). Several key organisers of WFIF went on to
assume core roles in the Toronto International Film Festival, including Anne Mackenzie
who became TIFF‟s first managing director, Linda Beath, TIFF‟s first programme
manager, and Kay Armatage, a key member of TIFF‟s programming team from 1982. In
his book, Brave Films, Wild Nights: 25 Years of Festival Fever (2000), published to
celebrate the 25th anniversary of TIFF, Brian Johnson argues that with the Women and
Film event, the foundations of the festival were established.
_________________________________________________________________________

150
Kay Armatage, TIFF programmer from 1982 to 2004, has had a significant impact on the
representation of women‟s cinema at the festival. In her recent book chapter, Material
Effects: Fashions in Feminist Programming (2009), she reflects on her strategies as a
feminist programmer and the outcomes she observed over her years at the festival. One
of her foremost concerns was ensuring a strong representation of women‟s films in her
programming, stating that during the mid 1990s in particular, her festival selections
averaged at least fifty percent women directors. Armatage also expressed that it was
extremely beneficial for attending women filmmakers to be introduced to important
programmers and key women press, and so over the years she developed a core group
of knowledgeable and well-networked contacts. She found that her approach to
programming could have significant flow-on effects for other women working in the film
industry: specifically, that “over the course of my work with TIFF, the most far-reaching
interventions I made on a regular basis were in the debates around representations of
female sexuality and censorship law” (Armatage 2009, 101).

Armatage particularly recalls the screening of Sally Potter‟s film Orlando (1992) as a
turning point for the festival‟s programming of women‟s cinema. Following its success at
the Venice Film Festival, the four-hundred-seat screening at TIFF was quickly sold out.
Armatage said that the success of Orlando through mainstream recognition signalled a
change in the previously women-only receptions at TIFF. She explained that, “suddenly
they were effective in feminist power-brokerage rather than minoritarian social
gatherings. For a time at least, powerful women were in the ascendancy” (Armatage
2009, 100). When Armatage left the festival in 2004, she had achieved an exceptional
feat, the TIFF programme boasted films from many of the most acclaimed international
women filmmakers, as well as a healthy selection of emerging talent. Armatage‟s
recollections on her approach and successes as a feminist programmer are important,
given that the statements of many current programmers at mainstream festivals reveal
that they do not necessarily set out to select films with a particular political or social
agenda in mind. TIFF‟s contemporary festival programming structure does not feature a
specific section for showcasing the work of women filmmakers; however, the current
programming team of nineteen is made up of nine female programmers, which would
hopefully indicate a balanced approach in selecting a diverse range of films.

TIFF AND THE F ESTIVAL C IRCUIT

Scheduled early in September, the Toronto International Film Festival occupies a
prominent place on the international film calendar at the start of awards season. The

_________________________________________________________________________

151
festival is regularly touted as one of the top film festivals, alongside Cannes, Venice and
Berlin. Diana Sanchez, one of TIFF‟s current programmers, describes the role of the
festival as:

…one of the most important launching pads for films on the international circuit.
Apart from finding distribution, films are also seen by programmers from many
other festivals and it‟s an important way for the films to get an exposure that few
venues can offer (Brooks 2011, 5).

TIFF occupies a unique place on the festival circuit, as a dominant, audience-based

festival, with no official competition. As discussed previously, Mark Peranson‟s
examination of audience versus business festivals indicates that most commonly,
successful business festivals boast a major competition (2008, 38). When considering
Peranson‟s model of a business festival, TIFF matches most of the categories. It is
premiere oriented and high budget; it has major corporate sponsorship, high profile
guests and Hollywood studio involvement. However, unlike other business festivals such
as Cannes, Berlin and, arguably, Rotterdam, TIFF does not have an official competition,
or a film fund that invests in the cinema of developing nations. TIFF‟s CEO and
Executive Director, Piers Handling, explained that the festival‟s global reputation has
grown to the point that TIFF is now offered the films of acclaimed auteurs on a
preferential basis.

The festival‟s clearly defined position on the festival circuit can be attributed to a strategic
choice of dates, geographical location and a lack of direct competitors amongst other
North American film festivals. Handling explained that TIFF‟s priority, almost from its
foundation, was to aspire to the status of a major, global festival. He believes that at the
time the festival was founded, “... there was the need for a major North American festival
to match the big three European festivals; Cannes, Berlin and Venice, and there was a
need for a significantly sized North American festival” (Handling 2011). Geographically,
the Vancouver International Film Festival, scheduled annually at the end of
September/early October, is TIFF‟s closest competitor. VIFF was first held in 1982 and
has carved out a niche for itself as the largest showcase of Canadian cinema in the
world, and also for its focus on East Asian cinema. However, VIFF‟s audience is
significantly smaller than Toronto and it does not place such importance on premieres
and the presence of stars. According to Handling, TIFF‟s spatial and temporal positioning
on the festival circuit, as well as its increasingly powerful reputation, positions it as

_________________________________________________________________________

152
“...almost the mid-Atlantic bridge between the rest of the world and the American market
place” (2011).

Furthermore, the festival‟s close links with Hollywood and the awards season are directly
related to its temporal location on the international film industry calendar. Originally, TIFF
was scheduled for October, but early on the festival organisers decided to shift the dates
to the beginning of September instead. Handling explained that at the time, no one really
understood how important those dates would become, because thirty-five years ago the
film release schedules were very different. What the original organisers unintentionally
ensured was that the festival was timed perfectly at the start of the fall season and could
therefore contribute to launching the feature films that gained Golden Globe and Oscar
nominations. This fortunate positioning at the start of awards season, has “worked to our
immense benefit when it comes to persuading the studios in particular, who thirty-five
years ago were extremely anti-festival” (Handling 2011). According to Handling, TIFF‟s
now prominent reputation has persuaded a shift in the attitude of the major studios,
which have come to see the value of film festivals in a very strategic way.

Therefore, the Toronto International Film Festival has carved out a distinct and influential
niche for itself, both within the Canadian film industry, on the film festival circuit and
through its links with the major Hollywood studios. It is through this powerful position that
the festival continues to assert its agenda of celebrating the films of international auteurs,
emerging filmmakers and some commercial productions. TIFF‟s cultivation of a well-
defined festival image is a significant reason for its ongoing success. Indeed, a high
profile festival such as Toronto engages with both the city and nation within which it is
held, and with the wider international film community on a number of levels. Harbord
discusses these far reaching effects of a film festival as an “event that spills out into the
business of international travel and tourism, the culture of pleasure versus business, of
entertainment versus art, where the local infrastructure of the festival site impinges on
the definition of the event” (Harbord 2002, 65).

TIFF AND THE C ITY

Toronto is a city with no obvious physical distinction, and until very recently no
obvious architectural landmarks... Essentially flat and featureless, Toronto sits on
the edge of Lake Ontario, a vista from which it has long been separated, first by
extensive railway tracks and now by an elevated highway and an ever-growing
wall of high-rise condominiums (Pevere et al. 2009, xi).

_________________________________________________________________________

153
The Toronto International Film Festival‟s longstanding relationship with the city has been
examined most recently in a publication celebrating the festival‟s 35th anniversary, titled
Toronto on Film (Pevere et al. 2009). As a city with no particularly iconic locations, it
does not immediately conjure for audiences a distinct festival-city image. Pevere
describes Toronto as a “white-bread, rather dull metropolis for most of the last century,”
but this changed dramatically in the 1980s, when “a new wave of immigrants washed
over the city, turning it into a dynamic, multicultural hodgepodge” (2009, xii). When Piers
Handling arrived at the festival as a programmer in 1982, he could feel that the city was
changing. He observed that there was “an immense Chinese community, a Caribbean
community, large ex-European communities... Poles, former Yugoslavia, Spanish,
German, French... the UK, even Scandinavian” (Handling 2011). This diversity in the
festival‟s audience became a source of pride and importance for TIFF, because as
Handling described, outside of the festival, approximately ninety-five percent of what is
screened in Canada is commercial American cinema. Once the festival‟s programmers
realised that these diverse communities were not seeing films from their countries of
origin, TIFF‟s programming agenda was tailored to accommodate this. It is this attention
to the changing population of the city that Handling attributes toward the festival‟s overall
success.

Stringer‟s call to examine the spatial logistics of film festivals through their dynamic
relationship to the city is particularly relevant when analysing the Toronto International
Film Festival. Since the completion of the Bell Lightbox in September 2010, the festival
has come to occupy a central place in downtown Toronto16. The challenge that TIFF
faces with the introduction of its year-round home is redefining and claiming its new
space within the city and subsequently projecting this image within the wider festival
network. A recent comment by Robert Koehler recognised that meeting the “demands of
maintaining a multimillion dollar complex may swamp the cinephilic priorities of not just
TIFF – which is after all just ten days out of an entire year – but the year-long TIFF
program...” (Porton 2010, 2). Certainly, the festival will need to be strategic in how it
integrates the festival and its other annual activities into its new home. TIFF‟s CEO and
Executive Director, Piers Handling, commented in the 2010 festival catalogue that the
opening of the Bell Lightbox “marks the culmination of a decade‟s work” and that the
move into a permanent home would ensure that the “impact and excitement of the ten-

16
See Appendix Six for TIFF‟s festival venue map.

_________________________________________________________________________

154
day Festival will extend to programming activities throughout the year” ("Toronto
International Film Festival Catalogue” 2010, 3).

E NVIRONMENT OF F ESTIVITY
A prominent feature of the Toronto International Film Festival is its emphasis on red
carpet premieres, glamorous parties and celebrities. The „buzz‟ generated during the
eleven days of the festival is heightened by the intensity of the press coverage produced
both by the festival itself and through the international media presence. In his discussion
of „cinematic prestige‟, English comments on the generation of hype and festival buzz in
relation to the festival setting. He observes that:

Festivals have sought to capitalise on the glamour and status of their host cities,
for example by using publicity shots in which the spectacle of the cinema itself is
framed or redoubled in the spectacle of its consumption by an urban crowd
against an urban (or resort-town) backdrop (English 2005, 285).

TIFF‟s constant profile in the local and international media throughout the eleven days of
the festival is punctuated by a focus on attending celebrities and red carpet premieres.
Visually, the spectacle of TIFF aligns it more closely with the glamour of Hollywood than
with the predominantly cinephile-focused European Art-house festivals.

Czach discusses Toronto‟s penchant for the red carpet, explaining that there is an
assumption, particularly by critics of the festival, that “where stardom is celebrated, the
importance of film wanes” (2010, 141). Cannes Film Festival often faces similar criticism,
which as arguably the most influential film festival in the world is largely an industry,
rather than audience event. The benefit of a festival the enormity of Cannes, is that “by
virtue of its sheer size and importance, Cannes is able to shape the film world – setting
agendas, influencing other festivals, unearthing new talent, and propelling selected
directors to global attention” (Corless and Darke 2007, 2).

Given the scale, „buzz‟ and combination of prestige and Hollywood style glamour that
has come to characterise the festival, I would suggest that Toronto finds itself in a
similarly powerful and influential position. Corless and Darke propose that the tension
that exists between cinephile and celebrity need not be so problematic, that in fact “there
is a case to be made that the „sizzle‟ added to Cannes by the big Hollywood stars – the
marquee value, the massive crowds, the sheer column inches – is of benefit to everyone,
especially to the related exposure of lesser-known auteurs” (2007, 5). The importance of
generating „buzz‟ around a film in a festival context is that it captures the attention of

_________________________________________________________________________

155
audiences, press and industry. Burgess examines the notion of „buzz‟ in her doctoral
thesis, and finds that each festival year, „buzz‟ “builds across the tiers of world,
international and local premieres... only to disperse in anticipation of a new festival
season replete with fresh discoveries” (2008, 146). In addition, the ways in which
particular films are framed within specific programming structures also contributes to the
movement of films globally across the network, with those chosen films elevated through
the conferral of critical acclaim.

T HE P ROGRAMME
Pier‟s Handling‟s approach to programming the festival includes annual visits to key
festivals and countries on the international circuit. These include attending Sundance
and Berlin at the start of the year, a trip to the studios in Los Angeles in March/April,
Cannes in May and then back to Europe in June/July to visit London, Paris, Rome,
Munich and Warsaw. Handling‟s programming role has shifted substantially over the
course of his time at the festival. Up until 2003, his responsibilities included overseeing
the entire festival programme, and he was actively involved in selecting films. Since
2003, he is now the CEO and co-director of the festival, alongside Cameron Bailey, and
has more administrative and organisational responsibilities, with a less hands-on role in
programming. While his visits to other festivals have been cut back, he still attends Berlin
and Cannes each year as well as a concentrated sixteen-day screening trip to Europe.
Over the course of the sixteen days, he watches approximately one hundred feature
films. TIFF‟s co-director, Cameron Bailey, is now largely responsible for the logistical
coordination of scheduling films and dealing with sales agents, producers and
distributors. Handling is still involved in the programming of Gala screenings, opening
and closing night, and overseeing the general scope of the catalogue.

The festival‟s annual programme follows a set structure, with each iteration of the festival
highlighting new trends and themes. Programme sections within the 2010 catalogue
included:

Table 8: TIFF Programme Sections 2010

Programme Section Description

Gala Presentations High profile films – red carpet events

Masters International auteurs

Special Presentations „Crowd Pleasing‟ films by well-known directors

_________________________________________________________________________

156
 TIFF For Free Celebrating 35 years of the best of the festival

Discovery Emerging International Filmmakers

Real to Reel Documentaries

Vanguard Innovative filmmaking

Sprockets Family Zone Best of international family cinema

Mavericks Conversations with leaders in film

City to City Focus on global cities (2010 – Istanbul)

Contemporary World Cinema Trends in Global Cinema

Canadian Open Vault Special screenings of restored Canadian films

Canada First Emerging Canadian Filmmakers

Short Cuts Canada Short documentary, animation & narrative films

Visions Poetic films with a radical & innovative approach

Wavelengths Film as Art

Future Projections Moving Image projects in Toronto

Midnight Madness „Weird & wonderful films from misfit directors‟

Selecting films for each section of the festival programme is guided by specific
considerations. In our interview, Handling outlined his strategy for overseeing the
programming of the festival, explaining that he was looking to fill the following categories:

World premieres and North American premieres

Films screened in Toronto for the first time

Big films for Gala sections – attract crowds to fill 2000 seats

Studio films with celebrity/star attraction

International films by auteur filmmakers

New discoveries from emerging cinemas/filmmakers

He stated that with the continuing proliferation of film festivals, it was important for TIFF
to be aware of its competition. Attracting high profile world premieres is a priority,
because the international media pay particular attention to those films. Logistically, the

_________________________________________________________________________

157
larger films have to be programmed to fill the 2000 seat cinemas, whilst the „new
discoveries‟ of emerging filmmakers are allocated to the smaller cinemas of 150-200
seats. Handling and Bailey are generally responsible for sourcing the larger films for
Gala screenings and world premieres, as well as arranging for the films of auteurs that
have an established reputation and history with the festival. The other programmers
have specialty knowledge of particular regions of cinema, and are thus responsible for
sourcing new discoveries and more experimental programming selections.

Aesthetically, Handling looks for films that treat the medium visually, essentially using
“film as film” (2011). He wants to see films that show creativity or films that demonstrate
a smart approach to conventional narrative storytelling. Films that are heavily content-
oriented, dealing with serious social issues are important, but he is also looking for art
cinema and films that appeal to the festivals large, mainstream audience. Handling said
that he was also very conscious of the festival‟s responsibility to be representative of
international production. A concerted effort is also made to reach into territories to which
audiences have never been exposed, for instance, films from Mali, Croatia or
Macedonia. However, Handling stated that such films had to be up to „festival standard‟
in order to be able to attract an international audience. Ultimately, he believes that TIFF
is positioned within the festival network as a festival that sets trends and is cutting edge.
Perhaps this accounts for the lower number of films by emerging women filmmakers
included in the programme. Handling also claims that TIFF‟s programming history has
contributed to the „discovery‟ of major, auteur filmmakers, including John Woo, Wong Kar
Wai, Krzystof Kieslowski, Michael Moore and Todd Solondz.

Harbord‟s discussion of the „anxiety concerning scale‟ is linked not just to the expanding
presence of the festival within the city, but also to the growth in the quantity and quality
of a festival‟s programme (Harbord 2002). Peranson agrees with this concern, cautioning
that “the larger a festival gets, the more weakly it is able to define its own space”
(Peranson 2008, 41). There is certainly a tension that festivals must negotiate between
growing the programme to attract a wider audience base, whilst remaining focused
enough on its original agenda so that the festival does not become irrelevant or
undefined.

As a festival with one of the largest audiences in the world, TIFF has a growing need to
programme in an eclectic and diverse manner. On the other hand, an increasing
emphasis on galas and world premieres has the potential to direct attention away from
the smaller, yet equally deserving films. Simon Field, former director of the International

_________________________________________________________________________

158
Film Festival Rotterdam, comments on this concerning trend in a recent interview. He
believes that this tendency to focus on the visible, “commercial” tier of the festival tends
to sideline the discussion of more “marginal films” (Quandt 2009, 57). While these
concerns are certainly valid, it must also be acknowledged that the global media
attention that TIFF attracts through its focus on high profile films can facilitate a
„trickledown‟ effect. The emphasis placed on films by acclaimed auteurs draws press,
industry buyers and programmers from across the world. The presence of these
influential films at the festival is also beneficial to the unknown filmmakers, whose films
will ideally find exposure amongst the more prominent films in the schedule. Field
explains that in Rotterdam, the programmers refer to this as the „sandwich process‟,
essentially using “bigger films to get audiences to support your festival and its smaller –
but equally important – films” (Quandt 2009, 56-57). According to Field, the larger films
act as a support system. He states that:

You need the profile in the press, which comes with the big films and the films
that are being sold to local distributors. They become a rationale that drives the
festival, at all sorts of levels: they are the films the audiences often want to see,
they represent the interests of the studios and the independents; they are, sadly,
what the press wants to cover. The danger is that the balance begins to shift.
How do you keep that balance? (Quandt 2009, 56-57)

TIFF‟s programming agenda combines a strong presence of auteur and more

commercial films in order to facilitate the inclusion of emerging and experimental
filmmakers. In 2010, sixty-five countries were represented in TIFF‟s programme, with
screenings of two hundred and sixty-eight feature films. Of the features screened, sixty-
one were the first films of emerging filmmakers. Approximately seventeen of these
emerging filmmakers are women.17 TIFF‟s programming structure specifically caters for
emerging filmmakers through its Discovery section.

17
Most of the emerging women filmmakers‟ films were included in the Discovery programme. Short films by
women filmmakers were not included in this analysis.

_________________________________________________________________________

159
 P ROGRAMMING S TRATEGIES AND S UPPORT FOR E MERGING
F ILMMAKERS
The following table shows the interviews conducted and film screenings of women
filmmakers that I attended during the 2010 festival visit.

Table 9: TIFF Films 2010

Programme
Film Filmmaker Country Year Interview
Selection

The Sleeping Catherine

France 2010 Masters No
Beauty Breillat

Special
Mumbai Diaries Kiran Rao India 2009 No
Presentation

Denmark, Special
In a Better World Susanne Bier 2010 No
Sweden Presentation

The Place in France, Burkina

Sarah Bouyain 2010 Discovery Yes
Between Faso

Athina Rachel
Attenberg Greece 2010 Discovery No
Tsangari

Look, Stranger Arielle Javitch USA 2010 Discovery No

Zephyr Belma Bas Turkey 2010 Discovery No

Pink Saris Kim Longinotto United Kingdom 2010 Real to Reel Yes

The Sound of Sarah United

2010 Real to Reel Yes
Mumbai: A Musical McCarthy Kingdom, India

Turkey, France,
10 to 11 Pelin Esmer 2009 City to City No
Germany

Contemporary
Jucy Louise Alston Australia 2010 No
World Cinema

Hong Kong, Contemporary

All About Love Ann Hui 2010 No
China World Cinema

Contemporary
Blessed Events Isabelle Stever Germany 2010 Yes
World Cinema

_________________________________________________________________________

160
The festival has support measures in place to draw attention to emerging filmmakers.
The Discovery section of the programme is the most visible. TIFF also foregrounds the
films of emerging Canadian filmmakers through its Canada First programme. The festival
programme positions films so as to draw attention to them in specific ways. Framing a
film within the context of „World Cinema‟ or a section devoted to emerging talent directs
the expectations of both audiences and press in the manner in which the film is then
received. The preferences of individual festival programmers also contribute to the
foregrounding of particular films over others. Handling stated that the Discovery section
is very important in providing exposure for new talent. He explained that, “those are
where many of the true discoveries are found. So just by sectioning off that particular
programme in our festival; it‟s sending out a signal to everyone – our audience as well as
the media and industry professionals” (Handling 2011).

Because TIFF is such a large festival, emerging filmmakers in attendance must come
prepared with a festival strategy. Handling said that usually, most of the young
filmmakers arrive at the festival with a support team, for example their producer, a sales
agent and a publicist. If a filmmaker arrives at the festival without this support, the sales
and industry office are able to facilitate meetings with sales agents and publicists to help
the filmmaker promote their film. Handling has observed a shift in the way that
filmmakers must now approach their festival attendance. He attributes this partially to the
introduction of sales agents and a proliferation of state film organisations. These
organisations are at the festival every year, to provide support and guidance to attending
filmmakers from their region. In order to facilitate the distributors attending the festival,
TIFF provides a comprehensive list with the rights availability of every film scheduled in
the programme.

Handling stated that there is now a business to attending festivals. The majority of young
filmmakers also realise this and are much more strategic about their festival choice and
preparation. Ultimately, high-profile festivals such as Cannes, Toronto and Sundance are
the first places the buyers and other festival programmers look to find out about the
latest trends and up-and-coming filmmakers. According to Handling, the industry guests
of the festival are “so rigorous in terms of covering the ground, they‟re not leaving any
stone unturned. Because they know that if there‟s something, and some hot films can
definitely be first time filmmakers... they‟ve got their eye out for that” (2011). TIFF‟s
programmers are also aware of the agenda of the filmmakers they have invited to the
festival, and are able to provide support and networking opportunities if needed.

_________________________________________________________________________

161
 TIFF F ILMS 2010 – T EXTUAL A NALYSIS & F ILMMAKER I NTERVIEWS
The following films by women filmmakers were programmed at the festival in 2010.

PINK SARIS

It‟s a strange thing about India. If we were all equal and didn‟t believe in
untouchability, our country wouldn‟t be in the mess it‟s in today. Things won‟t
change overnight. We have to wake people up (Sampat Pal, Pink Saris 2010).

Film Still: Pink Saris (Kim Longinotto, 2010)

Image sourced from http://www.wmm.com/advscripts/imgdown.asp?recordid=789

Kim Longinotto is an internationally acclaimed documentary filmmaker who is “renowned

for creating extraordinary human portraits and tackling controversial topics with
sensitivity and compassion” (Pink Saris Press Kit, 2010). Her most recent film, Pink Saris
(2010), was programmed in the Real to Reel documentary section at TIFF in 2010. Pink
Saris documents the story of women‟s rights activist, Sampat Pal and her gang of
followers, the „Pink Saris‟ or Gulabi Gang. Sampat Pal is famous throughout India for her
„no-nonsense‟ stance against the abuse of women, particularly issues such as child
marriages, abuse and the killing of female babies. I conducted an interview with
Longinotto during the 2010 festival to find out how her experiences at film festivals have
helped to shape her career. Longinotto‟s interview is included in this chapter as a
counterpoint to the interviews with emerging women filmmakers. Her films have won
international acclaim and awards at festivals all over the world, including the World
Cinema Jury Prize in Documentary at the Sundance Film Festival for her documentary
Rough Aunties (2008). Some of her other acclaimed films include Sisters in Law (2005),
which won a Peabody Award and two Cannes awards, The Day I Will Never Forget
(2003), winner of an Amnesty International DOEN Award at IDFA and Best Doc UK
Spotlight at Hot Docs and her BAFTA award winning Divorce Iranian Style (1998).
_________________________________________________________________________

162
Longinotto was most recently presented with a Hot Doc‟s Outstanding Achievement
Award in 2010. Pink Saris has been no exception, winning the Special Jury Prize at the
Sheffield Documentary Film Festival, Best Documentary at the Abu Dhabi International
Film Festival, the Amnesty Award at the CPH:DOX (Copenhagen Documentary Film
Festival) and a High Commendation for Best Documentary Feature Film at the Asia
Pacific Screen Awards.

Pink Saris follows the stories of four young „untouchable‟ women dealing with crisis
situations in Uttar Pradesh, Northern India. Sampat Pal, the charismatic and formidable
leader of the Pink Saris gang, has become something of a celebrity and summons the
Pink Saris and groups of local villagers when she is trying to solve a dispute. The Pink
Saris are more of a spectacle now, summoned more frequently for press opportunities
than direct involvement in Sampat‟s activism. Draped in vivid pink and chanting “Long
live the Gulabi Gang”, the group is made up of hundreds of lower caste women who fight
against tradition. Longinotto explained that she initially thought the Pink Saris would have
more of a central focus in the film. What actually eventuated was a portrait of Sampat
herself, as an inspirational but deeply flawed woman with her own brand of justice. One
of Sampat‟s many memorable lines in the film, “When a man does wrong, give him a
beating” became a mantra of the Gulabi Gang.

The first story is of a young „untouchable‟ girl, Rekha, whose boyfriend of two years, from
a higher caste, has left her alone and three months pregnant. The boy‟s father refuses to
let the pair marry, but Rekha‟s life is in danger as many families kill their unwed pregnant
daughters. Sampat goes to the boy and his father and demands justice for the girl,
insisting that the pair should marry despite their different in caste. Sampat herself was
married at the age of eight or nine, and endured abuse from her in-laws before being
forced out of her village. Her husband still lives with their grandchildren nearby, but
Sampat now lives with her partner Babuji, who also features in the film. Their relationship
is somewhat scandalous, as Sampat is from one of the lowest castes in India, while
Babuji, an educated man, is from the highest.

Longinotto explained that despite being well known for her documentaries on women in
developing countries, the processing of filming in India was more difficult and confronting
than she had expected. She said that:

I was expecting it to be tough, but in fact it was much tougher than I expected
because the culture was quite tough. The girls we met were just, well the
youngest one must be about thirteen, and the oldest one is about 18, so they‟re
_________________________________________________________________________

163
 teenagers really, but the eighteen year old has been married for ten years, and
they were sort of a mixture of this very young pure at heart... there was
something so lovely about them and (also) very, very old. You know, the girl who
is on the little postcard, it moves me when I look at her because she‟s eighteen
and she‟s got two children, the oldest one must be about 6 or 7 and she must
have got pregnant so young. And she‟s just not had a childhood, so it‟s not
anything that I was prepared for really (Longinotto 2010).

She tried to make the filming process as unobtrusive as possible and explained that
because the girls were in the midst of a crisis, they soon forgot about the cameras.
Sampat herself was quite used to the attention, having dealt regularly with both local and
international media and film crews. There are several moments in the film however,
when it is obvious to the viewer that the girls are aware of being filmed. A particularly
difficult moment is when Rekha asks Kim on camera if she can take her with her back to
London. Longinotto was able to organise for the girls featured in the film to accompany
her to the screening of Pink Saris at the Sheffield Documentary Film Festival.

Longinotto believes that she captured Sampat at a turning point in her life. Whereas in
the beginning Sampat would involve the Pink Saris in making decisions and resolving
disputes, she is now so aware of her importance as an activist and figure in the media
that she relies mostly on the threat of their presence to persuade people of her power.
Longinotto stated that:

Now it‟s all Sampat... it‟s her, and she‟s becoming this figure and she doesn‟t
need them anymore, she just has to threaten to get the Pink Saris and they get
brought together over social opportunity for the local press and then she can say
to the police, “look I‟m in the papers”... who knows what she‟s going to become
but it‟s not an illiterate rural woman, she‟s not part of Pink Saris anymore. So I
think I got to her just in time, I don‟t think you could make a film like that about her
now (Longinotto 2010).

As the film follows Sampat through the stories of the other three young women, it
becomes increasingly clear that Sampat‟s own distressing past is influencing how she
handles the present. Her good intentions toward helping the girls deal with their own
difficult situations are marred by the fact that she had no one to help her when she was
faced with a similar situation. The sheer number of women asking for her help also
appears to burden Sampat with a responsibility greater than one woman alone can
handle.
_________________________________________________________________________

164
Longinotto‟s penchant for chronicling the stories of defiant women in oppressive
situations reflects her own personal belief that local and personal stories can go some
way toward affecting change in global audiences. Her decision to film women like
Sampat is a response to what she feels is a culture in documentary filmmaking to “film
victims” (Longinotto 2010). In the interview, she explained that the tendency to film
victims without agency, where a voice over explains their predicament and the women
are not the protagonists of their own story, was for her problematic. She explained that:

I don‟t really want to watch victims, even though some of the girls in Pink Saris,
you could say that they have been victims with their circumstances, but we‟re
meeting them at a moment when they‟re trying to change, you know, which is
why I love them so much. I think they are so brave (Longinotto 2010).

Rather than searching for issues that need representation, Longinotto is far more
interested in finding stories when looking for an idea for her next film. She stated that she
is looking for change, and hope, and stories where “the women in the film are breaking
out of tradition” (2010).

Film festivals have played an important part in Longinotto‟s career to date. The
recognition and critical acclaim she has accrued through screening her films on the
festival circuit is evident through the numerous festival awards and commendations she
has received. She acknowledged that despite her experience travelling to festivals for
many of her films it was still difficult to know which festivals were most suitable.
Longinotto has been represented by the non-profit production, distribution and exhibition
organisation, Women Make Movies, for much of her career. She relies on the guidance
of WMM in selecting festivals to submit her films to, but agreed that it was necessary to
be strategic because every festival wants the rights to a films premiere. Often she found
she selected festivals on instinct, as well as returning to festivals that had previously
been successful screening options for her earlier films. In the instance of Australian film
festivals, she stated that she usually chose Sydney or Melbourne Film Festival, but in
2010 was contacted by the Brisbane International Film Festival and decided to take a
risk. The film had two screenings at BIFF in 2010; however Longinotto was not present
at the festival herself.

Perhaps the most important aspect of negotiating film festivals that Longinotto stressed
was knowing how many festival screenings were useful, and when to stop. She said that
when she first began visiting film festivals as an emerging filmmaker, they would often
demand that she attend for a certain length of time and be available for a proscribed
_________________________________________________________________________

165
number of question and answer sessions. As a young filmmaker, she explained that it
was difficult to know which festival was going to be useful, and which festivals simply
wanted you present for Q & A sessions but were not of much value in terms of
networking and industry opportunities. Now that Longinotto is an acclaimed and well-
known filmmaker, her festival visits are structured around press and industry meetings
and are organised largely by Women Make Movies18. She warned that unless a
filmmaker learned how to be selective, there was the potential to “spend all (of) your life
in festivals and (be) spending and you‟re not earning any money... and then you‟re not
making another film” (Longinotto 2010). She was overall very positive about the benefits
of attending festivals, saying that Toronto in particular was a “brilliant festival”. She said
that having a plan for during the festival was important, because “you think okay I‟m
doing stuff... which will be good for the film and I know why I‟m here” (Longinotto 2010).
Pink Saris screened three times during the festival and Longinotto particularly enjoyed
the question and answer sessions with the audience, stating that the cinemas were full
and most of the attendees stayed to hear her speak. Overall, she thought that TIFF
provided an invaluable opportunity to screen her film to a large and receptive audience,
because even though “Toronto, for example, is a really film place, I think it would be
almost impossible to have a big cinema like that one – a big cinema and have it full“
(Longinotto 2010). Despite her considerable experience, Longinotto continues to
appreciate the advantages of screening her films within the festival environment and her
ongoing success and international acclaim can certainly be attributed to participation on
the film festival circuit.

T H E S O U N D O F M U M B A I : A M U SI C AL

Film Still: The Sound of Mumbai: A Musical (Sarah McCarthy, 2010)

Image sourced from http://soundofmumbaimovie.com/photos.html

18
Women Make Movies is a prominent distribution company for women‟s cinema based in New York

_________________________________________________________________________

166
Australian born, British-based filmmaker, Sarah McCarthy, screened her third
documentary, The Sound of Mumbai: A Musical (2010) in the Real to Reel programme at
TIFF in 2010. The documentary was filmed in the slums of Mumbai and followed a group
of children rehearsing for a performance with the Bombay Chamber Orchestra. The
juxtaposition of songs from The Sound of Music with images of the children‟s everyday
lives in the slums foregrounded tensions between the different castes within India, as
well as the difficulty of a middle class, white filmmaker and her crew coming into a poor
area to make a film and then leaving again. The film was selected by TIFF programmer,
Thom Powers, who called it the “sleeper hit” of the festival. The coverage the film
received during the festival as a result of Powers praise was immense and culminated in
a bidding war between HBO and Oprah Winfrey‟s Network (OWN). McCarthy was also
offered cash to make a trailer of her next film, purely off the back of the press hype at
TIFF.

The Sound of Mumbai: A Musical was programmed for two audience and two press and
industry screenings during the festival. Since screening at TIFF, the film has been
presented at festivals in Mumbai, New York, Los Angeles, Sydney and Brisbane. The
film focuses on the stories of the children, particularly the charisma and optimism of
eleven-year-old Ashish. Ashish lives with his family in a tiny shelter in the slums and
sees his chance to sing a solo piece as an opportunity to change his life. McCarthy uses
a hand-held camera to explore the chaotic streets of Mumbai and juxtaposes the
colourful yet poverty-stricken lives of Ashish and his classmates with voice-overs by
John Waters, the conductor, and other wealthy benefactors of the Bombay Chamber
Orchestra. Iconic songs from The Sound of Music are interwoven throughout the film and
McCarthy delights in juxtaposing the enthusiasm and wonder of the children with the
pomp and ceremony of the Orchestra building and its members. During the children‟s
first visit to the theatre for rehearsal, McCarthy humorously cuts from an interview with
Jini, one of the organisers of the concert, talking about the wonderful opportunity the
children are being given, to shots of the children exploring the building. As Jini reminds
the audience that despite the generosity of the orchestra in reaching out to the children,
“we do insist on a certain standard”, the children can barely contain their excitement over
seeing a flushing toilet for the first time in their lives. Scenes such as this lighten the
mood during the film but also draw attention to the ongoing tension caused by the
enduring class divides in India.

_________________________________________________________________________

167
This tension is further explored when Ashish tries to make friends with a girl called
Kimberley, who despite being of a similar age, has grown up in an affluent family.
Kimberley is obnoxiously well spoken and has been raised with a healthy sense of
entitlement, proclaiming that one day when she grows up, she will be a doctor or a
lawyer or a scientist, “something really important”. What becomes clear through Ashish‟s
interactions with Kimberley is, unsurprisingly, his more realistic worldview in comparison
to her naivety. A particularly touching scene depicts Ashish talking to a parrot in a cage.
Despite his sympathy for the parrot‟s distress at being confined, he placates it, saying “I
can‟t let you free. They will shout at me. Enjoy your life inside this cage.” Ashish‟s
comments to the parrot cleverly mirror the remarks made by Jini, who is pleased to be
able to bring some joy to the children‟s lives, but ultimately is not interested how they
might escape the cycle of poverty in which they are stuck.

As the film progresses, McCarthy begins to focus more on the inevitable crisis the
children will face once the concert is over and their normal lives resume. The children
place such high stakes on the possible outcomes of the performance, including attracting
sponsors for their education and being able to financially help their families, that the
consequences of the film become clear. McCarthy admitted that she struggled with
feelings of guilt and responsibility after the completion of the film, and has since thrown
her efforts into raising money to help the children and their families. She explained that:

It‟s been so hard... the film is very much about what happens next, after the
concert and so obviously the number one goal of the film is to try and fulfill the
expectations that the concert failed to. And you know I got back from the slums
to London, just felt so guilty about the huge difference in my lifestyle and theirs,
and the only way I could make that okay was to kind of pursue as ferociously and
tenaciously as the film making processes the charity campaign... I have a realistic
idea about what the film can do, and I‟m very much trying to embed it in existing
campaigns (McCarthy 2010).

Since completing the film, she has been back to Mumbai to show the children the
finished product. The children‟s response was one of delight, although she was worried
about their reaction, particularly because it might present them with “a point of view on
life that maybe they hadn‟t thought about before” (McCarthy 2010). McCarthy also faced
challenges during the six-week shoot in Mumbai, with many of the locals suspicious of
the presence of a camera crew. Interestingly, she felt that this was partially due to the
recent success of Slumdog Millionaire (2008). She said that, “trying to get anything done

_________________________________________________________________________

168
in India is hard work, like filming in the slums is particularly full on and the whole
Slumdog Millionaire thing – you know like there is an awareness there... there was a lot
of bad press around Danny Boyle and Slumdog Millionaire,” and resistance and curiosity
about the film was dealt with daily during the filming (McCarthy 2010).

Overall, McCarthy was very positive about her experience at the festival, stating that the
“value and impact” that the film has had in Toronto was incredible. She agreed that as an
emerging filmmaker, attending festivals with a film was crucial. She said that “I think
they‟re absolutely key to be honest, I really do” (McCarthy 2010). The potential to
establish relationships with other filmmakers and industry professionals in a more
relaxed setting was of particular importance. Interacting with the audience was another
experience McCarthy enjoyed, despite it being “intense and nerve racking” as young
filmmaker (McCarthy 2010). She felt that audiences in Toronto were particularly
encouraging and engaged. However, she was also aware that it was advantageous to be
strategic about which festivals she attended, stating that “there‟s a limit to how many film
festivals I want to do, because they‟re so exhausting, like I just want to get on and make
another film. I suck at the promotion part of it. I much prefer the filmmaking part!”
(McCarthy 2010).

As an emerging documentary talent, McCarthy‟s experience at TIFF demonstrates the

power an influential film festival can generate in launching the career of a new or
unknown filmmaker onto the international stage. She explained that “Toronto is such a
huge turning point for me, like my film was literally picked out of a slush pile by Thom
Powers, and as soon as he did and started talking to the press about it being the sleeper
hit of the festival, things started to happen” (McCarthy 2010). McCarthy was also
approached by the well-known documentary filmmaker, Morgan Spurlock, to participate
in a film he was making about directors‟ experiences at the TIFF. The resulting film,
Committed: the Toronto International Film Festival (2010) follows four filmmakers as they
navigate the chaos of the festival with their films. McCarthy‟s film had its world premiere
at Toronto and she described her first major festival experience as:

...particularly intense, because I had a film crew following me around the whole
time. It was crazy. Morgan Spurlock called me up before Toronto and I was like
“you want to do what?” and he was like, “I want to make a film about directors‟
experiences in Toronto, do you want to be in it?”... So my first film festival
compounded by Morgan Spurlock following me around was really full on, but you

_________________________________________________________________________

169
 know it just opened a whole new world and getting funding for my next film has
been so much easier (McCarthy 2010).

McCarthy‟s experience is certainly among the most successful of the filmmakers

interviewed for this research. She went to the festival relatively unknown, without much
of an idea of how to use the festival to her advantage to best promote her film. The
“critical capital” that her film accrued as a result of its success at the festival marked
McCarthy as an emerging talent (Czach 2004). Aside from the immediate and tangible
benefits of her success at Toronto, the media coverage and interest generated in her as
a director will hopefully have ongoing value in establishing her reputation and filmmaking
career.

THE PLACE IN BETWEEN

Film Still: The Place In Between (Sarah Bouyain, 2010)

Image sourced from http://www.sarahbouyain.fr/sarahbouyain/accueil.html

Sarah Bouyain‟s first feature film, The Place in Between (2010), was programmed in the
Discovery section at TIFF in 2010. The film is a personal story for Bouyain. Born to a
French mother and a Burkinabe father, Bouyain explores the disconnection she feels
with her family in Burkina Faso, particularly the sometimes painful experience of having
to justify her African identity. After the death of her father, Bouyain decided the best way
to explore her identity would be to learn the language, Dioula, and travel to visit her
family in Burkina Faso. The central character in The Place In Between, Amy or Aminata,
struggles with a similar search for identity when she leaves France to travel to Burkina
Faso to find her estranged mother. Amy‟s story is juxtaposed with that of Mariam, a
middle aged Burkinabe woman working as a cleaner in Paris. Amy and Mariam‟s stories
become increasingly related as the film progresses. In the press kit for her film, Bouyain
explains that:

_________________________________________________________________________

170
 My method of filmmaking more resembles auto-fiction. I use a lot of what are my
actual experiences in my stories... In general, the question of being mixed-race,
of living in that place in between is one that is very pertinent... People are closer
in terms of distance but at the same time more distant from each other as far as
communicating goes. The issue of mixed-race is one that we must continue to
question and explore (Bouyain 2010b).

Bouyain uses unobtrusive camera work to observe the interactions between her
characters. The conversations Amy tries to have with her Aunt, Acita, are translated
through the maid. She explains in the press kit that learning Dioula was the central
premise for the film. Amy‟s difficulty in understanding her Aunt is magnified for the
audience through the absence of English subtitles. Meanwhile in Paris, Mariam, whom
we assume is Amy‟s estranged mother, begins to teach a friend Dioula, because she is
hoping to adopt a child from Burkina Faso. Bouyain interweaves these subtle tensions
together in a way that situates the audience alongside Amy, to experience the
disconnection of feeling stuck “in the place in between”. The film‟s exploration of this
“place in between” reinforces Cheu‟s observation that diasporic cinema often tends to
investigate the “dislocation of place, a loss of culture or a crisis of identity” (2007).

Bouyain explained that as a filmmaker and author (she had previously written a novel
exploring similar concepts of her identity), she was interested in examining questions of
identity, maternity and family in her work. The proximity and remoteness of family,
especially when living in separate countries, was of particular interest. She stated that
she wanted to explore “the proximity from the bonds of blood and ties of affection, and
remoteness caused by geographical remoteness, cultural differences (and) the weight of
history” (Bouyain 2010a). As an emerging filmmaker, she did not feel she had a
particular feminist or political message to convey, rather that she wanted to share with an
audience her own personal experiences, and raise questions about them. She stated
that “the film offers several avenues of understanding and it is always interesting to see
what (the) viewers have understood, what they dreamt (and) imagined” (Bouyain 2010a).

As The Place in Between was her first feature film, Bouyain had not yet had much film
festival experience. She did feel that festivals “play a large role in the discovery and the
emergence of new filmmakers” (Bouyain 2010a). Prior to Toronto, her film had been
screened at the Venice Film Festival, Chicago International Film Festival and the
Francophone International Film Festival of Namur. Bouyain acknowledged that film
festivals would certainly play a role in her career, but at this early stage the benefits of

_________________________________________________________________________

171
her participation had not yet come to fruition. She explained that her attendance at
festivals allowed to her set up meetings with other filmmakers to share experiences and
discuss ideas. Other meetings with producers, cinema funds or journalists were also
beneficial for their potential to lead to future funding and networking opportunities. She
stated that as an emerging filmmaker, “is it always good to be „visible‟ and festivals offer
this opportunity” (Bouyain 2010a). According to Bouyain, a festival is an important place
to screen a film because the festival environment encourages both audiences and
industry guests to participate in a broader reflection on “film and its evolution” and that as
a filmmaker attending a festival, she expected to engage in a critical discussion about
cinema (Bouyain 2010a).

The benefits of interacting with an audience were also important to Bouyain, because
although she admitted to being somewhat shy, she was very interested to see how
different audiences reacted to the film. Initially because of the language barriers present
in the film, Bouyain was worried that many of the small moments of humour and
connection between the characters might be lost on a non-francophone audience.
However, after several screenings at Chicago and Toronto, Bouyain was pleased to find
that, despite the language difficulties, the audience was very receptive to the small
moments of humour and many viewers identified with Bouyain‟s experience of emotional
and geographical displacement. Of Toronto‟s audience in particular, she said that “I have
the feeling that the festival public is more attentive, more curious, and more inclined to
take risks in the selection of films”, than the public ordinarily would outside of the film
festival setting (Bouyain 2010a). The Place in Between presents festival audiences with
a different image of Africa from what they might usually expect. Bouyain‟s film is local
and personal in its scope, and depicts a vision of Africa that is not centrally focused on
social or political issues. This alternate, diasporic representation of African cinema by an
emerging filmmaker reinforces Shohat‟s viewpoint that women are “re-claiming and re-
accentuating colonialism” through a feminist articulation of history and identity (2006, 2-
3). In our interview, Bouyain said that she hoped that the:

…Western public will see that there is another Africa than is (usually) shown on
television. An Africa which is neither that of “tribal‟ wars, or other human or
natural disaster, or a high colour postcard Africa. I hope that it will focus mainly
on characters, on their humanity. I also hope that this film will allow the public to
wonder about misconceptions, (and a) sense of belonging or not belonging to a
country (Bouyain 2010a).

_________________________________________________________________________

172
Bouyain‟s examination of her own transnational/diasporic identity made the film
appealing and relatable to an international audience. The questions she raises about
family, particularly communicating across cultural and linguistic barriers, are subtle yet
persistent. This strengthens Jodha‟s argument, that the importance of exploring a sense
of identity and place of origin in diasporic films is that it allows the filmmaker and her
audience to “unearth the buried threads of belonging, threads that can be held onto and
consolidated by future generations” (2007, 46).

The three women filmmakers discussed here all had very different experiences at TIFF
in 2010. Sarah McCarthy‟s unexpected success as an emerging documentary filmmaker
demonstrates the potential of a prestigious festival to help launch a filmmaker‟s career.
As a diasporic emerging filmmaker, Sarah Bouyain‟s film was screened in a supportive
environment to a largely multicultural audience, and although she did not achieve the
same level of success as McCarthy, still benefited from her festival experience through
exposure to the public and other filmmakers and festival guests. Finally, Kim Longinotto‟s
experience at film festivals as an international acclaimed filmmaker demonstrates the
ongoing importance of film festivals in sustaining a filmmaking career.

C ONCLUSION
11 days. 300 films. 300, 000 tickets. What will you see?

(TIFF Festival tagline, 2010)

This chapter has examined the Toronto International Film Festival and its support and
inclusion of emerging women filmmakers in 2010. As one of the largest, non-competitive
film festivals on the international circuit, TIFF has come under criticism from cinephiles
for its burgeoning size (English 2005) and from industry professionals for its refusal to
include an official competition (Quandt 2009). The immense and diverse audience the
festival continues to maintain is testament, however, to TIFF‟s clearly defined agenda
and specific purpose within Toronto and North America. The opening of the festival‟s
permanent home in 2010, the TIFF Bell Lightbox, further reinforced the festival‟s
importance and connection to the city. As Czach observes, TIFF‟s loyal audience is a
key element in its success, and “a significant selling point, then, is that it delivers film-
literate spectators to filmmakers, producers, distributors and sponsors” (2010, 144).
Certainly, for the thousands of press and industry delegates attending the festival each
year, TIFF‟s combination of large audiences, prominent auteurs, celebrities and red
carpet glamour is a potent and highly successful mix. The spectacle and environment of

_________________________________________________________________________

173
festivity that TIFF cultivates holds great potential for invited filmmakers to gain visibility
and success at the festival. Although TIFF no longer maintains a specific focus on
women‟s cinema, the emerging women filmmakers who attended the festival in 2010
experienced varying degrees of achievement in obtaining visibility for their films. Sarah
McCarthy‟s success story is evidence that an unknown filmmaker can rapidly gain the
attention and support of festival audiences, press and industry. The support from festival
programmer Thom Powers and the subsequent press attention her film received were
crucial factors in the acclaim of McCarthy‟s film at TIFF. The Toronto International Film
Festival is a dominant and prestigious power in the global film festival arena. It is
predominantly a „festival of festivals‟ for its audience, but it also plays a significant role in
supporting international auteurs and discovering new trends and filmmakers.

_________________________________________________________________________

174
 C HAPTER S IX : I NTERNATIONAL F ILM F ESTIVALS AS
C RUCIAL P LATFORMS FOR E MERGING W OMEN ’ S C INEMA

This chapter responds to the central research question of the dissertation, through a
thematic analysis of the data explored in the previous chapters. Specifically, the chapter
is structured in response to each of the three following research sub questions. Firstly,
how do emerging women filmmakers negotiate and attain visibility in the specific
International film festivals that operate in distinct ways in different cities? Secondly, how
does the aesthetic of their films relate to their attempts to gain visibility? Finally, how do
the producers of the festival facilitate or deflect the attempts by the emerging women
filmmaker to attain visibility?

The first section of this chapter analyses the politics of participation and the current
visibility and support of emerging women filmmakers at each of the examined case study
festivals. Pertinent comments from the interviews reveal the need for a strategic
approach to festival participation. This section also draws on an interview conducted with
Debra Zimmerman, the Director of Women Make Movies, a non-profit organization that
facilitates the production, promotion, distribution and exhibition of independent films by
and about women ("Women Make Movies" 2012, 61). Zimmerman‟s comments frame a
broader discussion of the state of women‟s filmmaking on an international scale and
provide a context for the discussion of the emerging women filmmakers.

The second section of the chapter provides a focused discussion of the textual and
aesthetic characteristics of the examined films and how these are central to the
filmmakers‟ attempts to gain visibility. Of the films closely analysed in the case study
chapters, many were based on personal experiences, featured female protagonists and
an intimate and evocative visual style. Despite these commonalities, which are
characteristics often attributed to „women‟s films‟, the majority of the interviewed
filmmakers de-emphasised their position as women filmmakers within the context of the
mainstream film festival circuit. This active decision to position themselves as somehow
neutral within the mainstream festival sphere reinforces the importance of paying close
attention to the textual nuances of the films themselves and how this contradicts or
complements the statements and ideological positioning by the filmmakers as revealed
in the festival interviews. The emergence of a feminine, rather than feminist, aesthetic is
identified here as a key finding of the research.

_________________________________________________________________________

175
The third section examines the distinct ways each case study festival has facilitated or
deflected the filmmakers‟ attempts to gain recognition. It also draws comparisons
between the effective strategies already in place and possible areas of improvement.
Each of the three festivals occupy very different positions on the international film festival
circuit. Located on the periphery of the festival circuit, the Brisbane International Film
Festival has been subject to ongoing changes over the course of the research, which
have significantly impacted on the festival‟s ability to support emerging women
filmmakers. BIFF‟s specific function as a small festival with a responsibility to support
local and regional filmmakers is still recognised by the festival‟s organisers. Toronto is
prestigious and commercial, positioning itself as a leader in identifying new trends with
close links to Hollywood. The advantage that TIFF can provide emerging women
filmmakers is exposure to international press and media, strong networking opportunities
with other filmmakers and industry guests, and the chance to accrue „critical capital‟
(Czach 2004) through association with the festival brand. Rotterdam has a clearly
defined festival identity, which is cultivated through a festival environment specific to its
programming strategies and location within the host city. The festival fosters an
intellectual and critical environment for the discussion and celebration of film. Since its
inception, the IFFR has focused specifically on identifying the talents of emerging
filmmakers and supporting them throughout their careers. Of the three case study
festivals investigated in the research, Rotterdam provides the most structured and visible
support for emerging women filmmakers.

P OLITICS OF P ARTICIPATION : V ISIBILITY OF W OMEN F ILMMAKERS

AT F ILM F ESTIVALS
Although emerging filmmakers are not always foregrounded within film festival
programmes, many of the women filmmakers who are aware of this are actively working
to increase the visibility of their films. This section of the discussion addresses the ways
emerging women filmmakers negotiate and attain visibility at the three specific case
study festivals: Brisbane International Film Festival, International Film Festival Rotterdam
and the Toronto International Film Festival.

As discussed in the literature review, the dominant festivals positioned at the centre of
the film festival network “use their power of value addition and agenda setting for a
politics of participation” (De Valck 2007, 211). These festivals have the power to promote
chosen films and filmmakers to international acclaim, based on their artistic, cultural and

_________________________________________________________________________

176
political merit. For any filmmaker, gaining visibility within a film festival programme is
challenging, and is often dependent on the following factors:

Place of film within the programme

Support from a programmer or festival director
Media interest and the generation of „buzz‟ – articles in festival paper, local news
and radio
The strategy of the filmmaker – ability to network, promotion of the film, strategic
choice of festivals and the quality of the film
However, many of these factors are often not within the filmmaker‟s control. As outlined
in the case study chapters, both Rotterdam and Toronto have designated programming
sections for emerging filmmakers. This foregrounding of emerging talent helps
significantly in increasing festival visibility and directing potential audiences to attend
screenings of these films. Additional support from the festival‟s programmer or director is
also invaluable, and can occur through public interviews, press releases, festival events
and other published material.

The emerging women filmmakers interviewed in this research experienced varying levels
of success in promoting their films and building their profile as international filmmakers.
Some of the filmmakers have gone on to screen their films at numerous other festivals,
and become successful within the context of the film festival circuit, gaining a kind of
festival momentum. As an experienced filmmaker who has achieved international
acclaim on the festival circuit, Kim Longinotto‟s experiences at film festivals had both
positive and negative implications for the sustainability of her filmmaking career. She
stated that having a specific festival strategy was essential to a film‟s success and that
she chose appropriate festivals on both instinct and previous experiences of festival
success. The ongoing support of her films by distribution company Women Make Movies
is also an important factor in her international success. Longinotto‟s international
success as a filmmaker and her ability to sustain a career in the industry is inextricably
linked to the recognition and support of her films by a range of different festivals on the
international circuit.

Sarah McCarthy‟s unexpected success at TIFF is perhaps the most prestigious and
visible outcome of the filmmakers included in the research. The positioning of her film,
The Sound of Mumbai: A Musical, within the Discovery section of the programme
provided a particular level of visibility with the festival. This was heightened considerably
_________________________________________________________________________

177
through the specific support of TIFF programmer, Thom Powers. His promotion of the
film as the „sleeper hit‟ of the festival translated to extensive media coverage and
financial and commercial success through the bidding war that ensued between HBO
and Oprah Winfrey‟s Network (OWN). The visibility and success of McCarthy‟s film at
TIFF was documented in Morgan Spurlock‟s film, Committed: The Toronto International
Film Festival (2010). She also received financial support to produce a trailer for her next
film, indicating that her success at the festival also contributed in a direct way to her next
project, and thereby also to the ongoing sustainability of her career as a filmmaker.

Other filmmakers such as Tan Chui Mui, Dima El-Horr, Brigitte Uttar Kornetzky, Shirin
Neshat, Elisa Miller, Camille Chen and Phoebe Hart have also gone on to become
recognised filmmakers within the festival circuit, with their films selected for screening at
festivals across the circuit. Some of these filmmakers, particularly Camille Chen and
Phoebe Hart, have been proactive and engaged with the festival circuit as a business
from their first festival submission. Prior to shooting Little Sparrows, Chen established
her own production company, and prioritised certain festivals that she thought were
suitable choices for her film. Following the success of Little Sparrows in Sydney,
Melbourne, Brisbane and Perth, Chen travelled to international festivals around the
world, building her reputation as an emerging talent. Her use of social media to promote
the film and inform audiences of upcoming festival screenings, as well as her active
engagement with audiences, press and industry delegates at these festivals, has
contributed significantly toward building her profile as a filmmaker. Chen experienced
particular success at the world premiere of the film at the Sydney Film Festival (2010)
where it was promoted by the festival director as a new discovery, and later at the
International Rome Film Festival (2010), where her film was officially selected in
competition. As a result of her successful attendance at the festival in Rome, Chen
secured distribution for the film in the United States. In her interview, Chen was
pragmatic about the possibilities for international success, stating that due to the content
and type of film she had created, essentially a female-centric and intimate drama, she
did not expect to attain extensive commercial distribution. She did however draw
encouragement from the positive audience and critical reception of her film on the
festival circuit, particularly interest in her next project, which indicates the possibility of
ongoing success for her as a filmmaker beyond the success of Little Sparrows. Chen‟s
determined approach to gaining visibility for her film at a range of different festivals
provides an important example for emerging women filmmakers looking to maximize
their festival experience.
_________________________________________________________________________

178
Phoebe Hart‟s film, Orchids: My Intersex Adventure, has also been successfully
recognised on the international film festival circuit. Hart‟s film is distributed by Women
Make Movies and she uses similar methods to Chen, such as the use of social media
and extensive marketing, to promote her film and maintain contact with her audience.
She used a similarly pragmatic approach to devising her film festival strategy,
recognizing the value of attending particular festivals over others. Hart‟s attendance at
the Brisbane International Film Festival was not as valuable in terms of networking
opportunities and critical engagement with her film as her experience at a similar festival
in Perth, Australia. She differentiated between the strong potential for an A-list festival to
provide exposure for a film, as opposed to the gamble that emerging filmmakers often
took when screening their film at festivals on the periphery of the festival circuit.
Attending a range of smaller festivals often only resulted in a film being screened for an
additional local audience, rather than providing the more immediate and tangible benefits
an emerging filmmaker might be seeking in terms of networking, press and funding
opportunities.

McCarthy, Chen and Hart represent the most proactive filmmakers examined in this
research in terms of their engagement and success on the festival circuit. However,
several other interviewed filmmakers recognised a range of additional benefits as a
result of their attendance at the International Film Festival Rotterdam. Joanna Vasquez
Arong attended the IFFR in 2010 with her film, Sunday School. Although Arong did not
achieve the same degree of visibility and success as filmmakers such as McCarthy, the
benefit to her of attending the festival was the opportunity to meet other emerging
filmmakers and immerse herself in the critical and supportive environment of the festival.
Sophie Deraspe‟s film, Vital Signs, was nominated in the category for the IFFR‟s Tiger
award for emerging filmmakers. Deraspe had some previous experience on the festival
circuit with her first film, Discovering Victor Pellerin, and was more strategic in her
selection of festivals for her second feature. She recognised the importance for an
emerging director to ensure that the world premiere of her/his film was at a well known
festival that provided good visibility to audiences, press, industry delegates and
programmers from other festivals. Sarah Bouyain attended the IFFR with her first
feature, and was primarily interested in gauging how an international audience would
respond to the personal narrative of her film, The Place In Between. She explored
questions of her own diasporic identity as a French, Burkinabe woman and was
interested in how a festival audience might relate to her exploration of the themes of
_________________________________________________________________________

179
dislocation and geographical remoteness from her family. Indeed, this concern regarding
the reception of the content of a film was shared by another emerging woman filmmaker,
Dima El Horr. El Horr‟s film, Every Day is a Holiday, achieved critical recognition on the
festival circuit that went on to secure a release for the film within her country of origin,
Lebanon. The importance of a supportive festival screening environment was as
significant for these filmmakers as it was to achieve recognition and visibility for their
films on the festival circuit. Hart also acknowledged that the sensitive and personal topic
of her documentary benefitted from the unique nature of the festival environment, stating
that the screenings were healing and transformative events for both herself and some
audience members. Elisa Miller, whose film, Alicia Go Yonder, was nominated for the
Tiger Award, stated that the IFFR provided „a protected and safe environment for young
filmmakers‟ and that the festival cultivated a „cinephile atmosphere‟ that helped
filmmakers locate their film within the films of other emerging filmmakers and new trends
in international cinema.

U NDER - REPRESENTATION OF W OMEN F ILMMAKERS

There continues to be a pervasive under-representation of women filmmakers in the
international film industry. According to Debra Zimmerman, there is a clear disparity
between the number of female students undertaking training in film school (at least fifty
percent), to the number of women who go on to become filmmakers (2011). Zimmerman
explains that the representation of women filmmakers at film festivals is, in a best-case
scenario, approximately twenty-five percent of the programme. The actual percentage of
women filmmakers included in the average festival programme is much lower.
Zimmerman states that there is rarely open discussion in the industry about the dearth of
women filmmakers, with the exception being when a woman is nominated for an
Academy Award. The interviews I conducted with the festival programmers and directors
of Brisbane, Rotterdam and Toronto film festivals revealed two clear findings. Firstly, the
positions of power at film festivals, such as the Director and programming team, remain
overwhelmingly male dominated, and secondly, there is a general belief amongst those
interviewed that there is no longer a need to actively programme women‟s films to
address their under-representation. Furthermore, many of the filmmakers interviewed for
this research have expressed their own desire not to be labeled as a „feminist‟ filmmaker,
but to have their films received in the manner that they intended. This preference on the
part of the filmmakers to speak about their approach to narrative or aesthetic rather than
their position as women in the industry reinforces the position of festival programmers to
focus on the quality of the film over the position of the filmmaker.
_________________________________________________________________________

180
The argument for programming films based on their artistic, technical and socio-cultural
merit should allow (theoretically) for an equal playing field for both male and female
directors. Perhaps, as Zimmerman concedes, the continuing under-representation of
women‟s films at festivals has more to do with the personal programming preferences of
those in charge, but that the consequence of this programming is that those in charge
are usually men. She states that:

I think that men are interested in very different kinds of film than women are.
Sometimes I think… if I was a man and I was in control, I would want my images
to be seen up there on the screen. I just don‟t think they respond to women‟s
images and women‟s films in the same way (Zimmerman 2011).

Essentially, Zimmerman believes that the problem stems from the fact that films
depicting women‟s perspectives and issues are no longer considered topical. The
funding available for festival films further reinforces this gender disparity. Ongoing
research due to be published in 2012 for the fortieth anniversary of Women Make Movies
reveals that funding patterns for filmmakers favor films directed by men, with male
protagonists (Zimmerman 2011). Women making films about women receive the least
amount of funding. This trend demonstrates that the subject of the film is integral to the
funding process, and that films directed by women with a feminine approach to narrative
are arguably at a disadvantage from their inception.

Despite the continuing disparity between male and female filmmakers, the emerging
women filmmakers interviewed for this research expressed their own individual
experiences and strategic approaches to negotiating the film festival circuit. Distribution
companies like Women Make Movies monitor their inclusion in international film festivals.
Zimmerman explained that a significant number of women‟s films picked up for
distribution and exhibition purposes by WMM are found on the festival circuit. She has
approximately twenty international film festivals whose programme she monitors each
year, including Toronto, Berlin, Sundance and major documentary film festivals such as
HotDocs in Sheffield and SilverDocs in Los Angeles. Zimmerman does not attend
Rotterdam, despite her interest in its programming selections, because it‟s timing
immediately after Sundance is too close for her to manage. Clearly however, the role of
film festivals in furthering the careers of emergent women filmmakers is not to be
underestimated. Film festival selections make up a substantial number of films acquired
for distribution by Zimmerman, and thus remain an integral factor in the global
distribution and consumption of women‟s cinema.

_________________________________________________________________________

181
Many of the emerging women filmmakers who participated in this project expressed an
interest in knowing its outcome, primarily because there is little industry discussion that
occurs on the topic of equal representation of women both within the festival circuit and
in the wider, global film industry. Furthermore, the filmmakers were also happy to be
interviewed simply about their experience as young and emerging filmmakers. It became
quite apparent over the course of this research that there is a lack of opportunities for
emerging filmmakers to network with one another and to find information about how to
approach launching their films on the festival circuit. Organisations such as Women
Make Movies facilitate workshops on how to tailor your film for festivals, and the IFFR
has annual panels during the festival for filmmakers to attend. However, these types of
panels and workshops are usually only available to filmmakers once they have overcome
the hurdle of being invited to a festival in the first place.

Certainly, one of the anticipated outcomes of this research was to conduct a specific
investigation of the current state of contemporary women‟s filmmaking within the
international film festival arena, and to provide a collective analysis of women
filmmakers‟ experiences and strategies. This research has positioned the analysis of
emerging women filmmakers‟ films within both theoretical and industrial contexts.
Bainbridge argues that in order to “chart a feminine cinematics… it seems essential to
consider how elements of women‟s films are constructed in the context of their
production and direction and how, following on from these processes of mediation, they
are deciphered in the contexts of reception and consumption” (Bainbridge 2008, 61).
This comment highlights the significance of the critical textual analysis as a key
component of this research, since it is the selection and programming of the films that
forms the basis for the women‟s participation and attempts to gain visibility at the actual
festivals.

The overwhelming response from the emerging women filmmakers interviewed in this
research indicated that film festivals are integral to building their careers as directors.
Some of the filmmakers were more experienced and thus had better strategies for
navigating the festival experience, while others were attending a festival for the first time.
Although there are currently some support systems in place which guide first-time
filmmakers through the process of submitting their films and attaining visibility at
festivals, this research has found that the filmmakers themselves need to be proactive
and involved at every stage if they are to become successful. Bainbridge observes that
women filmmakers situated within the dominant paradigm of global cinema “must work
from within to trouble perceptions and assumptions, and to disrupt the normative
_________________________________________________________________________

182
practices of the industry” (2008, 68). The experiences of the filmmakers in this research
suggest that these women are aware that they are operating within what remains a
predominantly masculine industry, but through their „troubling‟ of both audience and
industry expectations “move beyond a mere theoretical jamming of the machinery and
takes the form of an embodied re-articulation of it. As such, it draws attention to the
„practicable‟ of the scene of filmmaking and helps to inscribe specifically feminine
gestures within it” (Bainbridge 2008, 68). What emerges from this re-articulation are the
films of a new generation of women filmmakers, whose individual perspectives are
revealed in fresh and nuanced ways, particularly through their choice of narrative and
characterisation.

E MERGING V OICES : C ONTEMPORARY W OMEN F ILMMAKERS AND A

F EMININE S ENSIBILITY
Feminist films, individually and together, make visible worlds we may think we
have already seen but which have, in fact, never been seen in quite this way
before (Nichols 2010, 431).

A new generation of women filmmakers is emerging on the International Film Festival

stage. Their productions are both sophisticated and groundbreaking, often drawing from
personal stories with a strong focus on women‟s perspectives. Some of these
predominantly local stories are finding international resonance with festival audiences,
through their nuanced and contemporary explorations of memory, family and identity.
The films are infused with an individual and distinctly feminine perspective, which is often
explored through the interweaving of interesting cinematographic conventions such as
magic realism, symbolism and an ethnographic/documentary style aesthetic. This
section of the discussion examines the narrative and aesthetic approaches of the
emerging women filmmakers and considers these textual elements in relation to the
discussion raised in the interviews. A combined analysis of the interview data and textual
analysis is important in determining how the filmmakers position themselves within the
festival framework.

The critical textual analysis revealed strong ties to family relationships and in particular,
an inherent return to focusing on matriarchal lineage. Virginia Woolf once famously
declared, “We think back through our mothers if we are women” (1992, 99). Helene
Cixous also recognised the significance of women expressing the self when she
commanded them in „The Laugh of the Medusa‟, “Write yourself. Your body must be

_________________________________________________________________________

183
heard” (Cixous, Cohen and Cohen 1976, 880). The „body‟ is at once both personal and
social; one exists always in relation to the other, and for many women the „other‟ is often
the larger community of women in their lives. A recurring narrative thread in many of the
films, including The Milk of Sorrow (Llosa 2008), Thank you Mama (Mythiyane 2010),
The Place in Between (Bouyain 2010), Zephyr (Bas 2010), Little Sparrows (Chen 2010),
The Wedding Song (Albou 2008) and The Water at the End of the World (Siero 2010)
examined relationships between mothers, daughters, sisters and close female friends. In
several of the interviews, there was a definite sense that the women drew on their
experiences of maternal relationships and their own roles as mothers, sisters and
daughters and that this arguably contributed to the emergence of a feminine, rather than
feminist, sensibility in their filmmaking.

Little Sparrows is a clear example of a film that features female protagonists and
explores questions of maternal lineage. Filmmaker Camille Chen was particularly
forthcoming in her interview about the way her own experiences as a woman and a
mother informed both the creation of her characters and the overall tone and aesthetic of
Little Sparrows. Chen recognised that her filmmaking style inherently displayed what she
termed a „womanly sensitivity‟, particularly because the subject manner was intimate and
personal. Her use of symbolism and a clear focus on the connections between the
mother and her daughters reinforce Bolton‟s observation that many films by women
filmmakers tend to immerse their audiences in a sensory and sensual experience,
through a particular feminization of language and space (2011b, 3).

Pink Saris, Every Day is a Holiday and The Milk of Sorrow also include a predominantly
female cast and focus on the struggle of women in harsh conditions in patriarchal
societies (India, Lebanon and Peru). Only El Horr‟s story was informed by her personal
experiences, while Longinotto and Llosa were more objective about the stories they
portrayed. These three filmmakers were not reluctant to depict strong representations of
women in their films. El Horr was interested in breaking the often one-dimensional
portrayal of women in Lebanon. Llosa‟s film similarly depicts her female characters
reclaiming agency in the face of war and brutality at the hands of men. El Horr and Llosa
both utilise aspects of magic realism and poetic visual style to create emotional depth
and escape for their characters. Alternatively, Longinotto‟s film uses a hand held,
documentary aesthetic to depict the real circumstances of the women in India. Shirin
Neshat‟s debut feature film, Women Without Men, is similar in its visual style and
narrative construction to Every Day is a Holiday. Neshat, who identifies as a feminist,
_________________________________________________________________________

184
foregrounds provocative explorations of gender relations in Iran, which are developed
through her distinctive visual style. Magic realism is also employed in her film to depict
intimate moments of escape for her female characters. Despite its local specificity,
Neshat‟s film appealed to international audiences for its exploration of philosophical and
socio-political issues. Overall, the aforementioned filmmakers all directly expressed that
part of the intention of their films was to draw attention to the issues faced by their
female protagonists. These films similarly capture their main characters in a moment of
change, specifically in their attempts to reclaim agency of their lives, mostly in the
absence of men.

Emerging women filmmakers from developing nations, such as Dima El-Horr (Lebanon)
and Shirin Neshat (Iran), interweave moments of magic realism throughout their
narratives in order to explore contentious issues pertaining to women living in societies
still entrenched in patriarchal rule. Bainbridge states that the gaze constructed through
the use of magic realism:
…attempts to extend itself through the narrative in order to reach the „limits‟ of
gender and its representation… Such a way of looking inflects the structuration of
meaning in the film, suggesting that this elaborate nod to the realm of the magical
is politically inflected and aimed at reconstructing patterns of viewing,
identification and meaning-making… As spectators, we are called upon to read
the film through fantasies that centralize the importance of the feminine
(Bainbridge 2008, 54).

Many of these films continue to be banned from screening within their country of origin,
yet despite this, crucially, the images, stories and representations are able to be shared
with international audiences and expressed through a distinctly female voice. Perhaps
most importantly, these films also place the experience of women at the centre of the
frame.

The textual analysis also revealed explorations of personal identity and its links to the
local, national and transnational. These themes were particularly evident in The Place in
Between (Bouyain 2010), Every Day is a Holiday (El-Horr 2008), Separations (Seligman
and Bal 2010), The Day I Disappeared (Ghiasabadi 2011), The Water at the End of the
World (Siero 2010), Alicia, Go Yonder (Miller 2010) and Artificial Paradises (Olaizola
2011). Additionally, these films all depict strong female characters embarking on
journeys of personal discovery.

_________________________________________________________________________

185
As discussed in the literature review, characteristics of transnational films include a
sense of dislocation or transition and a search for identity and home. Often, transnational
films depict a locally specific story that has global resonance for festival audiences.
Every Day is a Holiday was produced as an international co-production between France,
Lebanon and Germany, with additional financial assistance from the Hubert Bals Fund
(IFFR). The film can also be considered transnational due to its narrative content, which
explores a renewed search for identity by the three women following the war. The
aesthetic choices made by the filmmaker reinforce this pervading sense of dislocation, a
characteristic of transnational cinema. International recognition on the film festival circuit
also helped El Horr secure national recognition through a general cinema release in
Lebanon.

The Place in Between explores the diasporic experience of filmmaker Sarah Bouyain.
Bouyain, born to a French mother and Burkinabe father, examines the disconnection she
feels with her family in Burkina Faso and the painful experience of having to justify her
African identity. The film employs a documentary style aesthetic and foregrounds the
female protagonist‟s sense of disconnection through her struggle to communicate with
her African family without the ability to speak the language. The audience is positioned to
experience this frustration through an absence of English subtitles in the scenes where
Amy tries to speak with her family. Bouyain‟s interest in exploring the effect of
geographical dislocation from family and her own diasporic identity positions the film as a
clear example of diasporic cinema.

The Water at the End of the World, Alicia, Go Yonder and Artificial Paradises also
foreground narratives of personal journey‟s and discovery. Siero‟s film features the
relationship between two sisters as they deal with the onset of a terminal illness. The
story is based on the filmmaker‟s personal experience and focuses on the journey the
sisters take together that both strengthens their familial bond and facilitates a sense of
healing. Alicia, Go Yonder features a female protagonist leaving home for the first time.
The narrative was a collaboration between the director, the leading actress and the
director of photography and was a combination of their own experiences as young
women. Similarly, Artificial Paradises is also informed by the filmmaker‟s personal
experiences and depicts a young woman on a journey of personal discovery.

The textual analysis of the aforementioned films reveals that the stories told by these
emerging women filmmakers are indeed influenced by personal experiences, are locally
specific, and often involve the main female protagonist questioning or re-defining her

_________________________________________________________________________

186
identity. Just as the narratives of these films depict the local and transnational in
increasingly fluid ways, many of the emerging women filmmakers also identify as global
citizens, and live and make films outside their country of birth. As Ezra and Rowden have
argued, the transnational films of these women filmmakers emerge most clearly “in the
interstices between the local and the global” (Ezra and Rowden 2006, 4).

Evidence of a strong female voice and feminine sensibility has emerged in the majority of
films examined in this research. Swiss filmmaker, Brigitte Uttar Kornetzky, said that while
she does not believe there is a clear way to differentiate between a film by a male
filmmaker as opposed to a female filmmaker, she does believe that a feminine sensibility
is evident in the films of many women. She stated that “I think there is something in their
approach which is just… very sensitive, sensible – they feel more, they‟re territorial
without anticipating what they have to expect, they‟re more open” (Kornetzky 2010).
Another filmmaker, Sarah Bouyain, felt that her films spoke predominantly of female
lineage and descent. She said “Femininity is a strange "object" to me that I turn in all
directions without much knowing what it is, but that interests me and which I think has a
big place in my artistic work but to more… unconscious levels than the question of
cultural identity. I have a kind of fascination for certain female figures” (Bouyain 2010a).
Acclaimed filmmaker, Kim Longinotto said that throughout her career she has been
questioned about the content of her films, specifically why they always feature women.
Her response is simply, why not?

Emerging women filmmakers are often referred to in the media and festival publications
as „feminist filmmakers‟ and their films are examined for evidence of a strong female
voice or political statement. However, the interviews conducted in this study have
revealed that the overwhelming majority of emerging women filmmakers prefer not to
directly or outwardly align themselves with feminism. The reasons are manifold and
revealing. A central issue stems from a perceived stigma associated with the label of
„feminist‟. While the content of many of their films undeniably tell stories from a female
perspective, the aesthetic, narrative and political intentions of the filmmaker herself may
not directly support a feminist reading. Zimmerman explains that “there is still a lot of
discrimination against feminists and against women… a lot of young women feel like,
“I‟m not going to align myself because maybe it will make it more difficult…” (2011).

Bainbridge‟s (2008) examination of acclaimed female directors such as Sally Potter,

Jane Campion and Samira Makhmalbaf reveal that many established directors also
resist the „feminist‟ label. She states that one of the key themes that emerge from her
_________________________________________________________________________

187
interviews is whether being a female filmmaker makes a difference to these directors.
The adamant rebuttal of the „feminist‟ label by both acclaimed and emerging women
filmmakers is attributed by Bainbridge to an insistence that their films are not to be seen
as advocating “any kind of gender-based political action” (2008, 72). Bainbridge reports
that the interviews she conducted disclose a:

…conscious refusal of a particular mode of femininity defined with reference to a

feminism that seems threatening and all-encompassing… There is a sense here
of aspiring to a normative mode of femininity that is able to speak itself without
suffering the burden of an overtly politicised set of expectations (2008, 73).

Similarly, the interviews and textual analysis of key films conducted in this research have
revealed that the majority of the contemporary women filmmakers have not created films
with overt feminist or political messages. I would argue that what has emerged, as a
common characteristic of many of the films, is the presence of a transnational, feminine
aesthetic. This aesthetic is developed through the use of particular cinematic techniques
and themes that are identified as commonalities in the films examined. These include an
interwoven approach to ethnographic/documentary styles, the use of magic realism and
symbolism, and an exploration of themes such as identity, space, inter-generational
relationships and experiences specific to women.

The importance of a collective analysis of contemporary women‟s films that could be

positioned as „aspiring to a normative mode of femininity‟ is reinforced by Nichols (2010).
The textual analysis conducted has revealed common themes and characteristics,
including a focus on family relationships (particularly the maternal lineage between
mothers, daughters and sisters), and explorations of personal identity and its links to the
local, national and transnational. Nichols‟ assertion that women filmmakers make visible
new images and interpretations of the familiar, confirm the two primary findings of this
research.

While the majority of the interviewed women filmmakers did not openly identify as
feminists, the critical textual analysis of their films, in conjunction with their stated
intentions, demonstrate evidence of a range of different understandings of feminism.
Their personal experiences as women inform the creation of strong female protagonists
and a particular visual style and aesthetic in their films. Some of the more experienced
filmmakers do acknowledge this, whereas many of the younger filmmakers appearing on
the festival circuit with their first film strongly reject the label of „woman filmmaker‟ for fear
of being marginalized on the mainstream festival circuit. This finding reinforces Kaplan‟s
_________________________________________________________________________

188
assertion that feminism is increasingly “understood differently by women of all
generations, cultures and ethnicities” (2003, 25-26).

Nichols argues that the contours of a feminist aesthetic are marked by the filmmaker‟s
ability to “establish a space and voice of one‟s own” and that when a filmmaker achieves
this, they make possible “a cinema of one‟s own” (Nichols 2010, 430). Certainly, the
feminine sensibility and the new implicit and nuanced representations of national and
transnational identities conveyed in the examined films indicate that contemporary
women filmmakers are re-imagining their relationship to both their homes and their
identities (the local) as global, creative practitioners. These emerging women filmmakers
are projecting an identity that aligns with Bainbridge‟s discussion of a “normative mode of
femininity” (2008, 73). As Zimmerman also recognises, these women understandably
wish to be seen as filmmakers first, and any evidence of a feminine sensibility within their
films emerges because they are women, not because they have an overt, feminist
agenda. Bainbridge describes this emerging trend as:

…femininity providing the ground for new structures of working within cinema,
allowing women directors to transcend the perceived constraints of femininity in
order to produce work that evokes a certain sensibility of female subjectivity
(2008, 73-74).

She argues that this collaborative approach to filmmaking allows women filmmakers to
avoid the constraints and expectations of politically defined cinema, in order to
“…express something more fundamental. Something more feminine” (Bainbridge 2008,
74). This is not to argue that the films of contemporary women filmmakers do not
subscribe to or fit within traditional feminist film theory paradigms, but rather that through
establishing a “space and voice of one‟s own”, these women are collectively contributing
to a contemporary feminist cinema that is informed by and builds on its traditional
foundations.

Cinema is a space in which new voices can articulate that which has previously
remained unspoken. Film festivals facilitate this discussion with audiences and
international press and industry guests. The emerging women filmmakers examined here
are describing their own experiences and “circles of possibility, creating their own
uniquely defined spaces for engagement with the machineries of cinema in order to
articulate their work” (Bainbridge 2008, 68). The specific approach of each of the case

_________________________________________________________________________

189
study festivals in supporting and promoting the films of emerging women filmmakers is
summarised in the following section.

P OLITICS OF P ROGRAMMING : H OW HAVE THE F ILM F ESTIVALS

SUPPORTED E MERGING W OMEN F ILMMAKERS ?
Film festivals include and promote the films of all emerging filmmakers in their
programmes in specific ways. Emerging filmmakers are a valuable part of many film
festivals, for the fresh perspectives they bring to audiences and the hope that the host
festival will be the first to programme a new discovery or emerging trend in international
cinema. It has been argued in the case study chapters of this dissertation that each
individual film festival supports emerging filmmakers through the implementation of
particular strategies. This section examines the ways in which the producers of the
festivals facilitate or deflect the attempts of emerging women filmmakers to attain
visibility and go on to build a sustainable career.

B RISBANE I NTERNATIONAL F ILM F ESTIVAL

Chapter Three examined the Brisbane International Film Festival, held annually in
Brisbane, Australia, for its support of emerging women filmmakers. During 2009-2010
the festival underwent a period of immense change. The shift in festival dates from July
to November, the introduction of new Festival Director and Head of Screen Culture,
Richard Moore, and the loss of the Regent Cinema, the festival‟s home since its
inception, were the most significant changes BIFF experienced. Understandably, these
changes had a profound impact on BIFF‟s structure, agenda and festival image, which
had negative implications for the festival‟s ability to support emerging women filmmakers.

Position on Festival Circuit

As a locally specific festival circulating on the periphery of the international film festival
network, BIFF‟s primary function is to present a selection of international cinema to local
audiences. The festival‟s position on the wider festival circuit is defined by other similar
festivals in Australian capital cities, as well as with the industry event, the Asia Pacific
Screen Awards. The festival has the potential to support Brisbane filmmakers and
strengthen their profile within Queensland and Australia. The recent inclusion of the BIFF
Docs prize for documentary filmmaking was a clear attempt to reassert the festival‟s
position, particularly within the Australian festival circuit. BIFF‟s reach and reputation on
the festival circuit does not realistically extend beyond Australian festivals at this point in

_________________________________________________________________________

190
time. The festival‟s profile within Australia is shifting, primarily due to its new dates and
its new focus on documentary filmmaking. BIFF remains an integral part of the
Queensland film industry, and fulfills its responsibility in bringing films to Brisbane
audiences that would not otherwise be accessible through general cinema release.
Renewed strengthening of BIFF‟s collaboration with the international film festival circuit,
particularly through a focus on Asia Pacific film, would assist in defining the festival‟s
new identity.

Relationship to Host City

BIFF is Brisbane‟s only international film festival. The lack of competition should facilitate
a direct connection between the festival, the city and the community. However, the
festival‟s ongoing changes and current lack of significant connection to the city arguably
contributes to a lack of strong identity and therefore reduced ability to support emerging
women filmmakers. In order to more wholly connect with the city of Brisbane, BIFF
needs to develop its brand identity and connection to the community, as well as building
consistency across each iteration of the festival. As a small festival with a specific
obligation to local audiences, BIFF cannot remain a transient event, as Munro cautions
that (the festival) must not be “an elite spaceship that arrives and disappears, but is very
much grounded with lots of appeal” ( 2004, 20).

Programming strategies

The festival‟s original director, Anne Demy-Geroe, had a global vision for the festival
which was demonstrated by her careful inclusion of a wide selection of international
films, awards and a strong understanding of BIFF‟s relationships with other festivals such
as Berlin and Rotterdam. Her successor, Richard Moore, pared back the scope and
range of the programmes to predominantly target a younger, inner city audience. At
smaller festivals such as BIFF, the programming structure and selection is restricted by
the individual tastes of the festival director and a small programming team. Moore‟s
stated focus was on increasing audience numbers by providing entertainment and
minimising „contemplative films‟ included in the programme. This programming
approach, which is similar to the Toronto model, had serious implications for the
inclusion of emerging women filmmakers in the festival. Specifically, as identified in the
textual analysis, many of the films by women filmmakers are not created for mass
entertainment and therefore may not be considered for inclusion in the programme. In
contradiction to Moore‟s stated approach, however, documentary films with a social and
political agenda were highlighted in the 2010 and 2011 programmes. Some Australian
_________________________________________________________________________

191
and international women filmmakers, such as Phoebe Hart, Kim Longinotto and Sarah
McCarthy, were able to attain some visibility within this programming category in 2010.
However, in its current form, the festival is unable to provide specific and tangible
support for emerging women filmmakers.

T ORONTO I NTERNATIONAL F ILM F ESTIVAL

The Toronto International Film Festival was the focus of study in Chapter Five. As an A-
list festival with an international profile, TIFF is known for its emphasis on world
premieres, red carpets and high profile filmmakers. The festival attracts international
media attention and has the ability to propel a filmmaker from unknown to acclaimed
status in a matter of days.
Position on Festival Circuit
Toronto is prestigious and commercialised, positioning itself as a leader in identifying
new trends with close links to Hollywood. TIFF is considered to be an A List festival,
alongside Cannes, Sundance and Berlin. Despite its position as one of the most
influential film festivals in the world, TIFF maintains its focus on audience, and does not
have an official competition. Inclusion in the festival programme is seen as a mark of
prestige and „critical capital‟ for filmmakers. For this reason, the festival does not need an
official competition to further define its brand.
Relationship to Host City
TIFF cultivates a festival environment specific to its programming strategies and city
location. Specifically, TIFF values celebrity presence and audience attendance, so
festival visibility on the streets of Toronto through red carpet events, galas and world
premieres is a fundamental part of the festival‟s identity. The festival has a strategic
media presence and is publicized across the city in highly visible ways. The media
attention which the festival generates extends beyond the confines of the city and
attracts attention for chosen films across the international festival circuit. The “cinematic
prestige” described by English as a relatively new form of cultural capital, is inextricably
linked to the festival city. He argues that the film festival has emerged “not only as a
firmly located cultural event, but as a cultural event that is all about location” (2005, 283).
TIFF‟s clearly defined festival identity, which is enhanced by its strong media presence,
is reinforced by its permanent home in the centre of Toronto, in the TIFF Bell Lightbox. In
addition, the festival‟s programming strategy was designed from its inception, to be
inclusive of the different cultural groups that comprised the city‟s demographic.

_________________________________________________________________________

192
 Programming Strategies
TIFF has always demonstrated a very clear direction in its programming strategies and
position of influence as the premiere North American film festival on the international
circuit. The festival‟s programming team includes curators who specialise in films from
different cultural and geographical regions. This ensures a more inclusive and robust
approach to programming, which improves the possibilities for the films of emerging
women filmmakers to be included. TIFF has a focus on discovering new talent, with the
expectation that these filmmakers may go on to be the next generation of international
auteurs. The festival supports emerging filmmakers through two specific programming
sections: Discovery and Canada First. The Discovery section draws attention to
emerging international filmmakers, while the Canada First programme specifically
supports emerging filmmakers from within the country. Attending filmmakers can take
advantage of networking opportunities organised through the Sales and Industry office,
and the festival‟s programmers are expected to provide support for the filmmakers in
their particular sections. Success stories such as the experience of emerging filmmaker,
Sarah McCarthy, clearly demonstrate that the support of a festival programmer coupled
with a determined filmmaker, position TIFF as a festival with the potential to launch and
shape women filmmakers‟ careers.

I NTERNATIONAL F ILM F ESTIVAL R OTTERDAM

Chapter Four examined the International Film Festival Rotterdam, which provides
significant support for emerging women filmmakers. Rotterdam cultivates a distinct
festival identity, through its programming strategies and location within the host city. The
festival fosters an intellectual and critical environment for the discussion and celebration
of film. IFFR has built its reputation on identifying talented emerging filmmakers and
continuing to support them throughout their careers. Rotterdam provides the most
structured and visible support for emerging women filmmakers of the three case study
festivals.
Position on Festival Circuit
IFFR has a clearly defined position as a niche festival on the international festival circuit.
Its closest temporal competition is Berlin, which occupies a similarly prestigious position
on the circuit. However, Rotterdam distinguishes itself through its focus on art house,
experimental and emerging films. The festival does not generate the same degree of
international media coverage as TIFF, but does attract international film media including
film critics and journalists, academics and programmers from other festivals. It also
generates its own media publicity through the Daily Tiger paper and YouTube channel.
_________________________________________________________________________

193
This is significant because the festival has a degree of control over which films and
filmmakers are the recipients of targeted media exposure.
Relationship to Host City
The IFFR was established with the specific intention of foregrounding Rotterdam as a
competing capital of culture with Amsterdam. The festival is scheduled during winter,
which creates an intimate festival environment as all events are held indoors. This
minimizes the division between filmmakers, industry guests and audience. Rotterdam‟s
celebration of its 40th anniversary by programming films and events in forty locations
shows a clear link between the festival and the host city. It demonstrates significant
engagement with local spaces and careful consideration of programming strategies. In
turn, the scheduling of film screenings in a range of intimate and commercial spaces
attracted a wide audience demographic and provided a more diverse range of
possibilities for the inclusion of emerging women filmmakers within the programme.
Programming Strategies
Since its inception, the IFFR has maintained a strong focus on discovering and nurturing
emerging filmmakers. Similarly to TIFF, Rotterdam utilises a specialised programming
team which enhances the possibilities for emerging women filmmakers to have their films
included in the festival. The festival‟s dedication of the Bright Futures section of its
programme, as well as the celebration of emerging talent through the Tiger Awards
competition, provide clear visibility for all emerging filmmakers within the festival
environment. The Tiger Awards are a defining programming component of the festival
and are recognised as prestigious at other dominant festivals on the international circuit.
Past winners of the award have gone on to make other successful films, promoting
career longevity. The IFFR provides further support for emerging women filmmakers
from developing nations through the Hubert Bals Fund. Although specific in its funding
criteria, the HBF provides important support for eligible filmmakers who often struggle to
attract financing for their films in their country of origin. The IFFR also supports attending
filmmakers through providing networking opportunities, festival drinks/dinners and
filmmaking and industry panels throughout the duration of the event. All emerging
filmmakers are invited to attend individual meetings with festival staff to talk about
distribution possibilities, sales rights availability and to devise a film festival strategy. This
tangible and significant guidance on the part of the festival ensures that each filmmaker
is supported and is able to gain insight into the „business‟ of film festivals.

_________________________________________________________________________

194
 A PPROACHES FOR PROVID ING FESTIVAL VISIBIL ITY
Film festivals support emerging filmmakers through the exposure they provide both
within the context of their individual programmes and more broadly across the festival
network. Programming sections dedicated to showcasing the work of emerging
filmmakers, such as Rotterdam‟s Bright Futures and Toronto‟s Discovery section,
foreground emerging talent and provide much needed visibility within the festival context.
Other small but significant ways of providing festival visibility include distributing
promotional material for the films and drawing attention to particular filmmakers through
interviews in festival publications and via local newspapers and radio. Public support of a
film through programmer introductions and question and answer sessions with the
filmmakers heighten awareness and exposure and provide support for the filmmaker
within the festival context. Additionally, networking events and opportunities to meet
other emerging and established filmmakers and press and industry delegates are a
fundamental part of festival attendance for emerging filmmakers.

Furthermore, some festivals provide tangible support for emerging women filmmakers
through various kinds of pre and post-production funding, which, as discussed in the
literature review, can impact the kinds of films being produced. These „festival films‟ are
often from developing nations (as in the case of Rotterdam‟s Hubert Bals Fund) and are
influenced not only in their narrative content and depictions of national „authenticity‟ but
are also circulated across the festival circuit in strategic and pre-determined ways. Whilst
the supplementary funding support of some international film festivals can be
problematic in its propensity to limit the kinds of films available on the international
circuit, the active engagement of festivals with emerging and under-funded cinemas has
also had very positive effects on the careers of individual women filmmakers.

The position of a festival within the wider film festival network also impacts on the
success and visibility of individual filmmakers. Prominent festivals with a clear
programming agenda have the ability to act as a global platform, which can launch
locally specific films to an international audience. De Valck argues that film festivals
function as “sites of passage” which have the potential to inaugurate filmmakers into the
international festival network, “which may be of vital importance to them throughout their
careers” (De Valck 2007, 214). De Valck weighs the benefits and drawbacks of
filmmakers participating in the festival circuit, finding that on the one hand, the festival
network offers a safe environment for vulnerable films that need to be appreciated for
their cultural and artistic (but not necessarily monetary) value, but on the other hand,

_________________________________________________________________________

195
such films and filmmakers can become so embedded within the festival circuit that other
distribution opportunities for the film become restricted (De Valck 2007, 204-205). She
concludes that:

...the condition of the film festival network is ambiguous. One the one hand, film
festivals provide global exhibition opportunities and exposure for many wonderful
films that would probably fail to find an audience otherwise. On the other hand,
they have not resulted in the creation of stable, financially-independent industries
for such films, and have, arguably, even prohibited initiatives for economic
independence. The international film festival circuit is self-sustainable, but the
future of most of the films and filmmakers that pass through its channels remains
highly uncertain (De Valck 2007, 205).

The ongoing success of the emerging women filmmakers interviewed in this research
has certainly been difficult to gauge. As De Valck (2007) suggests, the volatile
environment of the festival circuit proves successful only for a handful of attending
filmmakers. The analysis conducted on each of the three case study festivals has
revealed that the politics of programming is influenced by a number of internal and
external factors. The decisions about how to shape a festival‟s programme and where
each film is placed arguably impacts on the visibility of specific films within the broader
festival context.

C ONCLUSION
This chapter has conducted a thematic analysis of the data in response to the central
research questions of the dissertation. The first section addressed the various ways
individual women filmmakers themselves gained visibility within the case study festivals.
Networking, active participation and a festival strategy were commonly used approaches
by individual women filmmakers who were successful in gaining visibility. The second
section focused on the critical textual analysis, which revealed similar themes and
aesthetic elements in the programmed films. These included explorations of memory,
family and identity, through a combination of filmic techniques such as magic realism,
symbolism and documentary filmmaking. The final section analysed the individual
approaches of the case study festivals in supporting and providing visibility to emerging
women filmmakers.

Each film festival was examined in terms of its capacity to provide active support to the
filmmakers included in its programme. Women whose films were programmed in each

_________________________________________________________________________

196
festival were included because of their status as emerging filmmakers, as
representatives of the cinemas of developing nations (new festival discoveries) or for
their form, for example, documentaries. The combined analysis of the approaches of the
women filmmakers to gain visibility, the content and subsequent programming of their
films, and the strategies of inclusion by each festival revealed varying degrees of
success in the ways international film festivals support emerging women filmmakers.
Festivals have the potential to assist individual filmmakers to refine their strategies for
visibility within the specific context of the individual festival environment as well as more
broadly on the international festival circuit. Overall, the festivals examined did not display
a wide range of strategies to specifically facilitate the visibility of emerging women
filmmakers. It may be that film festivals who regularly review their strategies for
supporting emerging filmmakers may be better positioned to provide targeted support.
Recommendations for specific strategies to increase this support of emerging women
filmmakers as well as the key findings of the research are discussed in the following
chapter.

_________________________________________________________________________

197
 C HAPTER S EVEN : F INDINGS AND R ECOMMENDATIONS
As the function of festivals in discovering, circulating and bestowing acclaim on films and
filmmakers becomes further understood by festival researchers and programmers, the
question of the continuing underrepresentation and lack of visibility of women filmmakers
on the mainstream festival circuit grows in urgency and importance. This research
dissertation has found that while the three case study festivals, BIFF, TIFF and IFFR,
provide various levels of support for emerging filmmakers in a general capacity, there is
little specific support of emerging women filmmakers. Film festivals play a significant role
in international film distribution and exhibition. They are the first port of call for any
emerging filmmaker in gaining visibility for their films and building a successful and
sustainable career. Therefore, for emerging women filmmakers, gaining visibility on the
film festival circuit is a crucial factor in their success.

In order to investigate the capacity of each case study festival to support emerging
women filmmakers, I applied Van Maanen‟s (2004) conceptual framing of theoretical
events to inform the framework for film festival analysis. Van Maanen‟s application of
communicative, organisational and institutional frameworks was used to position the
festival in its entirety as a text, so that a thorough analysis of the specific ways each
festival provided support to filmmakers could be revealed.

The research revealed that film festivals can facilitate the attempts by women filmmakers
to gain visibility within a variety of ways. Specific programming categories are one of the
most obvious strategies employed by a festival to foreground emerging filmmakers.
Festival competitions and prizes further validated chosen films within the festival
environment and contributed to the accumulation of „critical capital‟ for individual films
across the festival circuit. Exposure to international guests, industry delegates and other
filmmakers afforded attending filmmakers the opportunity to establish important
connections, receive feedback on their work and contextualise their films within broader
industry trends. Publicity generated through local and international media attention
further bolstered the position of individual films within the specific festivals as well as on
the broader festival circuit. The cultivation of a unique festival identity, through a specific
relationship to the host city, helped to foster a particular festival environment which was
closely aligned to programming strategies and the targeted festival audience. The
strategies outlined here denote a best practice model for inclusion and support.
However, the individual festivals investigated employed these strategies to varying levels
of success.
_________________________________________________________________________

198
 BIFF’s ability to support emerging women filmmakers

At the time of study, the Brisbane International film festival does not have the means to
provide specific support for emerging women filmmakers through its programme
structure or funding. The ongoing changes to the festival organization have led to
inconsistency in the festival‟s identity and agenda. Festival organisers need to rebuild a
consistent, recognisable programming structure and festival identity before it can provide
adequate support for attending filmmakers. The establishment of a clear and consistent
programming strategy and a main festival venue must be prioritised in order for BIFF to
re-establish a clear identity and therefore provide better support for local filmmakers.
Additionally, the festival‟s links with the Queensland New Filmmakers Awards could be
strengthened, which would ensure greater support for emerging filmmakers in Brisbane
and Queensland. BIFF also has the potential to align itself more closely with the Asia
Pacific Screen Awards, held annually in November. The festival dates were changed to
schedule BIFF and APSA in close proximity, but thus far there has been no further
alignment through programming APSA films at the festival or sharing invited guests
(despite relocating APSA from the Gold Coast to Brisbane, Australia). As the APSA
Awards continue to grow in international reputation and prestige, there is great potential
for BIFF to reassert its original identity as a champion of Asia Pacific film. BIFF‟s position
as a peripheral festival on the circuit dictates that it must appeal to a broad general
audience in order for it to continue functioning as an international film festival.

TIFF’s Ability to support emerging women filmmakers

The advantage that TIFF can provide emerging women filmmakers is exposure to
international press and media, strong networking opportunities with other filmmakers and
industry guests, and the opportunity to accrue international acclaim. However, the
research has found that emerging women filmmakers attending the festival must be very
proactive in such a highly commercial environment and come equipped with a
predetermined festival strategy; otherwise they are in danger of being overlooked. The
„buzz‟ and media hype generated during the festival can be both beneficial and
overwhelming for emerging filmmakers. Success stories such as the experience of
emerging filmmaker, Sarah McCarthy, clearly demonstrate that the support of a festival
programmer coupled with a determined filmmaker, position TIFF as a festival with the
enormous potential to launch and shape women filmmakers‟ careers.

_________________________________________________________________________

199
 IFFR’s Ability to support emerging women filmmakers

Many of the emerging women filmmakers interviewed in this research commented

specifically on the supportive and celebratory environment that the festival provides, and
were particularly appreciative of the chance to network with their peers. The IFFR
provides further support for emerging women filmmakers through its specific
programming strategies, including the Tiger Awards and the Hubert Bals Fund. The
festival‟s support of emerging filmmakers is further heightened through its specialised,
yet prominent position on the festival circuit. The IFFR‟s focus on art house,
experimental and auteur filmmaking enables the festival to maintain a clear agenda and
distinct international reputation. Of the three festivals examined in this research, the
IFFR provided the most significant and effective support to emerging women filmmakers.

F UTURE D EVELOPMENT OF F ESTIVALS AND C ITIES

A central concern of this research involved investigating the binaries of local/global,
emerging/acclaimed and centre/periphery (Stringer 2003). The festivals chosen for this
research mirror this hierarchy of dominant/peripheral; with Toronto representing a
dominant and central position, Rotterdam as a specialised but still influential festival, and
Brisbane located as a festival on the periphery of the network, with a specific but
contained reach within the local/national sphere. Aside from their obvious differences
regarding scale, each of the chosen case study festivals cultivates a distinct festival
image that is linked to each festival‟s relationship with its host city. This festival image is
also projected into the global sphere of the festival circuit, within which individual
festivals must negotiate their position of power and influence.
In recent years, the expanding size of TIFF and indeed many prominent festivals on the
circuit have been called into question, in what several theorists have explained as
„anxiety surrounding scale‟ (Harbord 2002; Peranson 2008). Harbord states that festival
cities, particularly in late twentieth century, are increasingly characterised by
redevelopment and new, state-of-the-art architecture (2002, 61). Some festival critics
and attendees have raised concerns over the apparently alarming rate at which the
larger festivals like Rotterdam and Toronto are expanding. De Valck discusses the
International Film Festival Rotterdam as a recent example of a rapidly growing festival.
She cites the concerns of a Dutch film critic, Dana Linssen who argued that festival
screenings could occur throughout the year, rather than overloading the festival
programme. Linssen stated that, in her opinion, the programme should be “smaller, more
explicit and more accessible” (De Valck 2005, 98). Harbord argues that maintaining a

_________________________________________________________________________

200
specific festival image and a balanced programme is inextricably linked to the festivals
location within the city. The physical location and scale of the festival, in terms of the
type and proximity of festival venues, means that the “event cannot be separated,
extracted from the context of its geographical location; indeed, the reciprocal relation
between festivals and sites emerges in this discourse of anxiety surrounding scale”
(Harbord 2002, 61). The relationship that each festival cultivates with its host city and the
subsequent position of power and influence the festival occupies on the festival circuit
invariably impacts the success of its attending women filmmakers.

P ROGRAMMING F ILM F ESTIVALS

The women filmmakers interviewed in this research were representative of a diversity of
ethnic and cultural backgrounds. However, of the three festivals, the IFFR‟s
programming included a much wider representation of international cinema from both
developed and developing nations. BIFF‟s current programming model is less diverse
than under the festival‟s previous direction, and focuses more specifically on local
Australian filmmaking and the choices of prominent festivals such as Cannes. As Piers
Handling stated in his interview, pursuing new trends in international cinema is one of
TIFF‟s objectives, however, the festival‟s large scale and focus on showcasing prominent
auteurs limits the potential for emerging filmmakers to gain visibility. While recognising
the differing sizes and agendas of festivals in the circuit, Haslam urges festival
programmers to actively pursue “the voices that have been excluded… the filmmakers
whose contributions have been undervalued, (and) the audiences that have been
ignored or underserved” (2004, 51).

Haslam makes a call to programmers, curators and film festivals, stating that decision
makers must take responsibility and programme as diversely and inclusively as possible.
He argues that film festivals should “attempt to fill the gaps… and not reproduce the
popular programming that already exists” (Haslam 2004, 51). While many film festivals,
particularly locally specific festivals such as BIFF, have a responsibility to include the
current trends in filmmaking for their audience, Haslam‟s argument for greater
individuality and diversity on the festival circuit makes a valid point.

Haslam‟s final curatorial call is for festival directors and programmers to recognise the
function and purpose of their festival. He states that festivals need to have an
understanding of how they participate in and influence local, national and international
spheres of filmmaking, and how this affects the filmmakers. Ultimately, Haslam observes
that festivals must be accountable for their politics of programming, because “…we do
_________________________________________________________________________

201
make choices – of what to screen, of whom and what to bestow awards on, of what to
program in prime-time slots, of how to frame the works we‟ve selected. Each decision
has potentially far-reaching consequences” (2004, 59).

Prominent festivals on the international circuit, such as TIFF and IFFR, have the
potential to launch a filmmaker‟s career and facilitate the circulation of chosen films
around the festival circuit. Wong (2011) observes that, “After a film has found a place in
a festival, film critics, festival programmers, and scholars may extend or curtail its
reputation, distribution, and the career of its director/auteur beyond the festivals…
Positive reception is crucial to the success of young filmmakers, who need to continue to
make films and build their reputations” (101). In the short term, the following
recommendations may be useful considerations for emerging women filmmakers
looking to build a sustainable career.

R ECOMMENDATIONS FOR E MERGING W OMEN F ILMMAKERS

The festival and industry professionals interviewed throughout this research had specific
and helpful advice for emerging filmmakers (particularly women filmmakers) on how best
to promote their films and become successful on the international film festival circuit.
Zimmerman and Handling were particularly forthcoming in their advice for young
filmmakers. Zimmerman suggested that inexperienced directors learn how to navigate
the festival circuit with a short film first, as shorts are usually acceptable for submission
to a wider range of festivals. She also emphasised the importance of making
connections with festival programmers. Indeed, the emerging women filmmakers who
were most successful in this research, particularly Sarah McCarthy and Camille Chen,
were adept at networking with festival staff and were involved with every step of the
process. Zimmerman‟s final piece of advice for emerging filmmakers is to find films
similar to their own, take note of the festivals at which those films were successful, and
then create a very selective list of festivals to target for submission. Piers Handling
observed that the majority of emerging filmmakers now arrived at TIFF with their own
sales agent and publicist. Handling suggested considering the sales rights for the film
prior to the festival, and having a strategy for regions of distribution for which the film
may be suitable. Ultimately he recommended that inexperienced filmmakers surround
themselves with trustworthy and experienced people who could give advice on how to
best approach the festival as a business.

Navigating the film festival circuit can be a daunting task for any emerging filmmaker.
Realistically, many emerging filmmakers whose films are programmed, even at
_________________________________________________________________________

202
prominent festivals like Rotterdam and Toronto, will struggle to sustain a successful
filmmaking career. The highly competitive state of the global film industry means that
there is now a business to attending a festival, and often, only the „lucky‟ or very strategic
filmmakers attain recognition. The distinct value of participation and screening a film
within a festival environment is that there is the potential for individual films to “gain value
both for their regional distinctiveness and for their universal appeal” (Nichols 1994a, 17).
Audiences, press and industry participants benefit from and contribute to this process,
through learning about other parts of the world, and witnessing “the ascendancy of new
artists to international acclaim” (Nichols 1994a). International film festivals therefore
function as crucial platforms for launching and circulating the films of emerging women
filmmakers across the global festival circuit.

A F EMININE A ESTHETIC ?
On the mainstream film festival circuit, directors and programmers no longer privilege the
voices of women filmmakers. Due to specialised film festivals that cater to foregrounding
the stories of marginalised groups, such as human rights film festivals, queer and
women‟s film festivals, many programmers at international film festivals focus specifically
on the narrative and aesthetic content of a film, rather than considering a balanced
gender representation. In effect, the majority of festival directors are male and arguably
less focused on the specific interests of women filmmakers. Of the festival directors
interviewed in this research, all believed there was no longer a need to ensure a good
gender based representation of film included in their programming. This view was shared
by the only female director; Brisbane based Anne Demy-Geroe.

The findings of this research suggested that the majority of women filmmakers
participate in mainstream festivals because they do not want to align themselves
specifically with feminism or the label „woman filmmaker‟. They insist that their films be
accepted for their artistic and narrative content, and not for the perceived
social/political/feminist implications that they might engender. Bainbridge argues that this
viewpoint is consistent with that of established women filmmakers who aspire to a
“normative mode of femininity that is able to speak itself without suffering the burden of
an overtly politicised set of expectations” (2008, 73). Women filmmakers born out of the
1970‟s feminist movement actively avoided mainstream film exhibition and distribution
and foregrounded politicised images of women in their films. Citron argues that
contemporary women filmmakers “enter filmmaking with a kind of self confidence bred of
their age and environment. These women can build on a now visible history of women

_________________________________________________________________________

203
filmmakers” (2012, 178). Despite their confidence and clarity of purpose, the current
generation of emerging women filmmakers is still clearly underrepresented in the global
film industry. The tension between their claims of neutrality and the clear evidence of a
feminine sensibility within their films is fundamentally linked to wider debates about
contemporary understandings of feminism, an ongoing dilemma with no clear resolution.

However, the women filmmakers examined in this research have acknowledged that
their approaches to characterisation and narrative have been influenced by their
individual experiences as women, creating films with a distinctly female perspective. It is
argued here, that what has emerged, as a common characteristic of many of the films, is
the presence of a transnational, feminine aesthetic. Central to this aesthetic is the
representation of strong female protagonists and an emphasis on the character‟s
interiority (Bolton 2011). These narrative traits align with the women filmmakers‟ common
approach to focusing on the ordinary issues facing women living in different societies,
rather than creating characters who are positioned to communicate strong social and
political statements. Indeed, many of the films by emerging filmmakers discussed in the
research support Bolton‟s observations, through their representations of women‟s
experiences and consciousness explored with a distinctly feminine sensibility. Chen
(2010) and Kornetzky (2010) discuss what they term „womanly sensitivity‟, a reference to
their filmmaking style given that the subject matter was intimate, sensitive and personal.

Situating the films of this new generation of filmmakers does not sit comfortably within
feminist film theory. The approaches of these filmmakers is more closely aligned with
the concept of postfeminism, in so far as they acknowledge that their position and
experiences as women are important, but not necessarily central to informing their
voices as filmmakers. Gill argues that,

“What makes a postfeminist sensibility quite different from both pre-feminist

constructions of gender and feminist ones, is that it is clearly a response to
feminism. In this sense, postfeminism articulates a distinctly new sensibility…
Feminist ideas are at the same time articulated and repudiated, expressed and
disavowed” (2012, 146).

Tasker and Negra (2007) agree with Gill‟s position, stating that “postfeminist discourses
rarely express the explicit view that feminist politics should be rejected: rather it is by
virtue of feminism‟s success that it is seen to have been superseded” (5). While
postfeminist discourses do not resolve the tension between the new representations of

_________________________________________________________________________

204
women in film and traditional modes of feminism, the shift that is occurring must be
acknowledged.

In practice, the implications of this research indicate that emerging women filmmakers
wish to be acknowledged for their prowess as filmmakers, not specifically as women or
feminist filmmakers, within the mainstream festival circuit. Their unwillingness to align
with traditional modes of feminism may be condemned by traditional feminist filmmakers
and theorists. However, this does not imply that the films that they produce are any less
valid, nor that the under-representation of these films on the international stage is of any
less concern. Wong recognises that,

…film festivals, especially the powerful ones, allocate major discursive roles to a
selected few. In theory… film festivals are open to all genders, but… men
(straight and gay) outnumber women in all aspects of film festivals (save
audience), except for those festivals that are organised specifically around
women‟s roles or issues” (2011, 163).

It is of paramount importance, then, that both the emerging women filmmakers and the
film festivals recognise the changing position of women filmmakers and devise new ways
of assisting filmmakers to gain visibility and success on the international film festival
circuit.

_________________________________________________________________________

205
 C HAPTER E IGHT : C ONCLUSION
International Acclaim has examined the central roles that international film festivals play
in supporting and developing the careers of emerging women filmmakers. This
dissertation has examined three film festivals of varying size and influence; the Brisbane
International Film Festival, the International Film Festival Rotterdam and the Toronto
International Film Festival. Critical textual analysis, interviews with industry professionals
and emerging women filmmakers and participant observation at each festival provided
the key data for analysis. The literature review focused on three crucial theoretical fields.
Transnational cinema theory provided the overarching context for the research, within
which the two fields of film festival theory and feminist film theory intersected to provide
the theoretical framework for analysis. Chapter Three examined the Brisbane
International Film Festival‟s position as a peripheral festival on the circuit and found that
its role, while locally specific, did not provide specific support for emerging women
filmmakers. The International Film Festival Rotterdam, discussed in Chapter Four,
provided the most specific and tangible support for emerging women filmmakers, through
its specialised programming structure and recognised position on the international circuit.
Chapter Five explored the Toronto International Film Festival and found that it provided
visibility for emerging filmmakers through the Discovery section of its programme and
that its prestigious position on the festival circuit had the potential to propel emerging
filmmakers to international acclaim. Following on from the case study chapters, the
discussion chapter conducted a thematic analysis of the data in order to examine how
film festivals function as crucial platforms for emerging women‟s cinema. The three
central concepts discussed included the politics of participation, the emergence of a
feminine sensibility and the politics of programming. The findings and recommendations
chapter summarised the key findings of the research and provided recommendations for
how to improve support for emerging women filmmakers within the festival framework. It
was further suggested that the tension between contemporary women‟s cinema and
feminist film theory is an ongoing dilemma with no clear resolution.

The central research question, exploring the ways in which festivals can provide support
to emerging women filmmakers, found that that a festival‟s geographical location, size
and agenda are all contributing factors in affording emerging filmmakers a degree of
visibility within their programmes. Each festival cultivates a particular relationship with its
host city, which is closely linked with its distinct identity within the festival circuit. The
_________________________________________________________________________

206
festivals examined also align within the broader theoretical framework of transnational
cinema, in the ways in which they facilitate the circulation of international cinema on the
festival network.

The difference in agenda, scale and prominence of festivals across the network means
that some festivals are better suited to supporting emerging filmmakers than others. The
research has revealed that local festivals such as BIFF have the ability to support
women filmmakers in the early stages of their careers and promote their films within a
local and national context. However, this can only occur if the festival has appropriate
measures in place that give the filmmakers the opportunity to network and discuss their
film with industry, press and audiences. Specialised festivals such as Rotterdam provide
the most practical and effective support for emerging women filmmakers. This is offered
through their implementation of the Hubert Bals fund, workshops and specific festival
networking opportunities, the Bright Future programme for first and second feature films,
and the dedication of the festival‟s Tiger awards to the celebration of emerging global
talent. Prominent, „A-list‟ festivals such as Toronto are the most difficult for emerging
women filmmakers to navigate, but if a filmmaker is successful at a festival like TIFF, the
visibility and acclaim afforded by the immense media and industry attention can launch
their filmmaking careers.

The films examined in this dissertation are indicative of a contemporary shift toward
transnational filmmaking. Many of the featured emerging women filmmakers examine
their own particular cultural identities in their films in subtle and interesting ways, and
display evidence of Nichols‟ „locally inscribed difference‟, and „globally ascribed
commonality‟ (1994b, 1-2). The research has uncovered the importance of the local story
and how festivals enable these highly culturally specific films to transcend national
borders and reach and resonate with global audiences. Many of the transnational stories
that have emerged are evidence that this new generation of emerging women
filmmakers imagine their connections to home in much more fluid ways. The films
produced by the emerging women filmmakers revealed a strong focus on women‟s
perspectives and experiences, which were explored through the interweaving of
particular aesthetic and cinematographic conventions. Essentially, the images produced
are representative of the particular experiences of transnational women filmmakers.

One of the specific aims of this research was to place the contemporary films of
emerging women filmmakers at the centre of the international film festival phenomenon.

_________________________________________________________________________

207
A feminist film theory lens has been employed to “recognise the essential importance of
examining women‟s experience” (Hesse-Biber, Leavy and Yaiser 2004, 3). An
examination of the visibility of emerging women‟s films has found that that are numerous
factors, both on the part of the festival and the filmmaker herself, that contribute to a film
gaining international recognition and acclaim. Specifically, the women filmmakers
negotiate and attain visibility in First World festivals through being proactive in their
festival strategies, engaging with their audiences and networking with festival staff, other
filmmakers and industry professionals. Close textual analysis of the programmed films,
paired with individual filmmaker interviews and broader festival analysis has facilitated
the emergence of richer and more textured findings in this dissertation. The emerging
women filmmakers interviewed were selected on the basis of their attendance and
availability at the festival. Arguably, those filmmakers who were in attendance could be
seen to be taking advantage of the opportunity to participate in the festival environment
and actively working toward attaining visibility for their films on the festival circuit. It has
been the aim of this research not to homogenise the diverse experiences of the
participating women filmmakers but to seek to understand their nuanced and individual
approaches to filmmaking and navigating the international film festival circuit.

To contextualise the thesis findings appropriately, it is important to consider that the aim
of this research was to examine the current state of contemporary women‟s filmmaking
within the international film festival circuit, and to provide a collective analysis of women
filmmakers‟ experiences and strategies. Ideally, further research, ranging from
longitudinal studies on actual filmmakers to comparative studies on funding and
specialist support programs within festivals is needed to properly assess the ongoing
importance of film festivals in supporting and shaping the careers of emerging
filmmakers. The findings of this research also have valuable implications for the wider
film industry, particularly as a guide for film festivals on strategies for including and
supporting emerging filmmakers within their programming. Additionally, further research
could focus on the success of filmmakers beyond the festival circuit.

Since this research project began, a proliferation of film festival research has emerged,
and yet, despite a growing focus on the place of human rights and queer film festivals
(Wong 2011; Iordanova 2012), the place of the woman filmmaker is still largely under-
researched. Women filmmakers continue to be under-represented in the film industry in
general. As Bainbridge argues, women‟s stories need to be valued, and women
filmmakers given room to “speak the feminine, to articulate it and to give it room for
enunciation” (Bainbridge 2008, 2). International film festivals play a significant role in the
_________________________________________________________________________

208
global film industry through their facilitation of an engaged and critical space for
experiencing and discussing cinema. Women filmmakers who manage to access the
international film festival circuit are providing audiences with important voices that
deserve to be recognised and included in the wider discussion of contemporary world
cinema. Critically, these women filmmakers, through their articulation of their own local
stories, told through a female voice, are expressing their own individual perspectives.

The „imagined community‟ fostered at a film festival is at once a heightened, yet transient
experience. Nichols (1994) uses the discovery of Iranian cinema within the international
film festival arena as an example that highlights the power of the festival phenomenon.
At its best, the power of the festival as a collective experience is inimitable. For some
emerging filmmakers, participation on the festival circuit can launch their careers and for
others, it is a fleeting occurrence. Nichols describes the collective experience of festival
goers as a “precarious, ephemeral moment” in which the imaginary coherence of the
audience makes Iranian cinema “no longer mysterious but still less than fully known”
(1994a, 27). Film festivals are an intermediary space:

Hovering, like a spectre, at the boundaries of the festival experience, are those
deep structures and thick descriptions that might restore a sense of the particular
and local to what we have now recruited to the realm of the global (Nichols
1994a, 27).

Film festivals are the crucial sites and events that are then able to recruit this sense of
the local and particular and elevate these women‟s stories into a global film arena,
bringing with it the potential for international acclaim.

_________________________________________________________________________

209
 F ILMOGRAPHY

"The Film Festival Project: Cannes." 2009. The Film Festival Project: Cannes. Australia:
ABC2.

"The Film Festival Project: Sundance." 2009. The Film Festival Project: Sundance.
Australia: ABC2.

"The Film Festival Project: Toronto International Film Festival." 2009. The Film Festival
Project: Toronto International Film Festival. Australia: ABC2.

"The Film Festival Project: Tribeca." 2009. The Film Festival Project: Tribeca. ABC2.

Albou, Karin. 2008. Le chant des mariees (The Wedding Song). France, Tunisia:
Pyramide International.

Alston, Louise. 2010. Jucy. Australia: KCDC/Bunker Productions International.

Bal, Mieke and Andrea Seligmann Silva. 2010. Separations. Netherlands: Seligmann
Silva.

Bas, Belma. 2010. Zefir (Zephyr). Turkey: Filmik Produksiyon.

Bier, Susanne. 2010. Haevnen (In a Better World). Denmark, Sweden: Mongrel Media.

Bouyain, Sarah. 2010. Notre etrangere (The Place in Between). France, Burkina Faso:
Athenaise.

Breillat, Catherine. 2010. La belle endormie. France: Flach Film.

Chen, Camille. 2010. Little Sparrows. Australia: Umedia.

Dangarembga, Tsitsi. 2005. Kare kare zvako (Mother's Day). Zimbabwe: Nyerai Films.

Denis, Claire. 2008. 35 Shots of Rum. France, Germany: Soudaine Compagnie.

_________________________________________________________________________

210
Deraspe, Sophie. 2009. Les Signes Vitaux (Vital Signs). Canada, France: Les Films
Siamos.

Doneman, Megan. 2008. Yes Madam, Sir. Australia, India: Sojourn Films.

Doron, Anita. 2010. Ejszaka, hajnal (Europa East). Hungary: HDV Production.

El-Horr, Dima. 2008. Chaque jour est une fete (Every Day is a Holiday). France,
Germany, Lebanon: Cine-Sud Production, Nikovantastic Film, Orjouane
Productions.

Esmer, Pelin. 2009. 11'e 10 Kala (10 to 11). Turkey, France, Germany: Sinefilm.

Farhadi, Asghar. 2009. About Elly. Iran: Dreamlab.

Ghiasabadi, Atousa Bandeh. 2011. Roozi ke man napadid shodam (The Day I
Disappeared). Iran, Netherlands: A Bandeh.

Hart, Phoebe. 2010. Orchids: My Intersex Adventure. Australia: Hartflicker Moving

Pictures.

Hessman, Robin. 2010. My Perestroika. USA, United Kingdom: Red Square

Productions, Bunglalow Town Productions.

Hui, Ann. 2010. De-Xian-Chao-Fan (All About Love). Hong Kong, China: Class Limited
Productions.

Jane, Amanda. 2010. The Wedding Party. Australia: A Minchin/Jane Production, Brave
Films, Cabbage Films.

Javitch, Arielle. 2010. Look, Stranger. USA: Muskat Filmed Properties.

Jing, Wang., Suwichakornpong, Anocha and Cai, Kaz. 2010. Breakfast, Lunch, Dinner.
Singapore: Wormwood Films.

_________________________________________________________________________

211
Kamya, Caroline. 2010. Imani. Uganda, Sweden: iVAD Productions, Itd.

Kamya, Caroline. 2011. Fire Fly. Uganda, China: iVAD Productions Itd, International Film
Festival Rotterdam.

Kamya, Caroline and Boris Bertram. 2010. Chips and Liver Girls. Denmark, Uganda:
Dead People's Choice Film.

Kasaravalli, Girish. 2008. Gulabi Talkies. India: Basant Productions.

Kaseketi, Musola Cathrine. 2009. Suwi (Faith). Zambia, Finland: Viole Images
Productions, Soundsgood Productions.

Kawase, Naomi. 2010. Genpin. Japan: Kumie Inc.

Kokkinos, Ana. 2009. Blessed. Australia: Blessed Film Productions.

Kornetzky, Brigitte Uttar. 2010. God No Say So. Switzerland, Sierra Leone: Magpie
Dream Pictures.

Kornetzky, Brigitte Uttar. 2011. Imagine, the Sky. Switzerland, Sierra Leone: Magpie
Dream Pictures.

Kwang-Ju, Son. 2011. Characters. South Korea.

Llosa, Claudia. 2009. La teta asustada (The Milk of Sorrow). Spain, Peru: The Match
Factory, Gryphon Entertainment.

Longinotto, Kim. 2010. Pink Saris. United Kingdom: Women Make Movies.

McCarthy, Sarah. 2010. The Sound of Mumbai: A Musical. United Kingdom, India:
Double Bounce Films.

Mehta, Deepa. 1996. Fire. Canada, India: Siren Visual Entertainment.

Mehta, Deepa. 1998. Earth. Canada, India: Madman Cinema, Pinefilm Entertainment.
_________________________________________________________________________

212
Mehta, Deepa. 2005. Water. Canada, India: Mongrel Media.

Miller, Elisa. 2010. Vete mas lejos, Alicia (Alicia, Go Yonder). Mexico: Cine Pantera.

Moussavi, Granaz. 2009. My Tehran for Sale. Iran, Australia: Cyan Films, Vendetta
Films.

Mthiyane, Omelga. 2010. Siyabonga mama (Thank you Mama). South Africa: Mthiyane.

Mthiyane, Omelga. 2011. Li Xia's Salon. South Africa, China: O Films, International Film
Festival Rotterdam.

Mui, Tan Chui. 2010. No Woman Born/Sarah and Omelga. Malaysia, South Africa: Da
Huang Pictures Sdn.

Mui, Tan Chui. 2010. Year Without a Summer. Malaysia: Da Huang Pictures.

Neshat, Shirin. 2009. Zanan bedoone mardan (Women without Men). Germany, Austria,
France: Essential Filmproduktion, Coop99, Parisienne de Production.

North, Simone. 2009. I Am You. Australia: Goldcrest Films.

Olaizola, Yulene. 2011. Paraisos artificiales (Artificial Paradises). Mexico: Interior13

Cine, Hubert Bals Fund.

Rao, Kiran. 2009. Dhobi Ghat (Mumbai Diaries). India: Aamir Khan Productions.

Siero, Paula. 2010. El agua del fin del mundo (The Water at the End of the World).
Argentina: Magma Cine.

Stever, Isabelle. 2010. Gluckliche Fugung (Blessed Events). Germany: Moneypenny

Filmproduktion GmbH.

Tang, Emily. 2001. Conjugation. Hong Kong: Xstream Pictures.

_________________________________________________________________________

213
Tang, Emily. 2008. Perfect Life. Hong Kong, China: Xstream Pictures.

Tsangari, Athina Rachel. 2010. Attenberg. Greece: Haos Film.

Ustaoglu, Yesim. 2008. Pandora's Box. Turkey, Belgium, France, Germany: Ustaoglu
Film Yapim.

Vasquez Arong, Joanna. 2010. Sunday School. Phillipines, China, Zambia: Old Fool
Films.

Vithanage, Prasanna. 2008. Flowers of the Sky. Sri Lanka: Torana Music Box.

Wilson, Juanita. 2010. As If I Am Not There. Ireland, Macedonia, Sweden: Octagon

Films.

_________________________________________________________________________

214
 R EFERENCES

Anderson, Benedict. 2006. Imagined Communities: reflections on the origins and spread
of nationalism. London, New York: Verso.

Ang, Ien. 2008. "Cultural Studies." In The Sage Handbook of Cultural Analysis, edited by
Tony Bennett and John Frow. Los Angeles; London: Sage.

Armatage, Kay. 2009. "Material Effects: Fashions in Feminist Programming." In There

She Goes: Feminist Filmmaking and Beyond, edited by Corinn Columpar and
Sophie Mayer. Detroit: Wayne State University Press.

Aufderheide, Pat and Debra Zimmerman. 2004. "From A to Z: A Conversation on

Women's Filmmaking.” Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society 30 (1).
Accessed 13/07/2012. http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.1086/421889.

Badoe, Yaba. 2005. "Women at Ouagadougou: Yaba Badoe talks to three women
directors at this year's Fepasco." Feminist Africa: Women Mobilised (4).
Accessed 12 July 2011. http://www.feministafrica.org/index.php/women-at-
ouagadougou.

Bainbridge, Caroline. 2008. A Feminine Cinematics: Luce Irigaray, Women and Film.
New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

Bolton, Lucy. 2011a. "Architects of Beauty and the Crypts of Our Bodies: Implications for
Filmmaking and Spectatorship." In Film and Female Consciousness: Irigaray,
Cinema and Thinking Women. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan Ltd.

Bolton, Lucy. 2011b. "Introduction." In Film and Female Consciousness: Irigaray,

Cinema and Thinking Women. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan Ltd.

Bouyain, Sarah. 2010a. Interview with Sarah Bouyain,Toronto International Film Festival
06/01/2010.

Bouyain, Sarah. 2010b. "The Place In Between". In Press Kit.

_________________________________________________________________________

215
Branston, Gill. 2000. Cinema and Cultural Modernity. Buckingham: Open University
Press.

Brooks, Brian. 2011. "Meet the Toronto International Film Festival Programmers: In Their
Own Words." Indiewire. Accessed 06/10/2011.
http://www.indiewire.com/article/toolkit_meet_the_toronto_international_film_festi
val_own_words.

Burgess, Diane Louise. 2008. "Negotiating Value: A Canadian Perspective on the

International Film Festival”, PhD diss., School of Communication, Simon Fraser
University.

Callahan, Vicki, ed. 2010. Reclaiming the Archive: Feminism and Film History. Detroit,
Michigan: Wayne State University Press.

Chan, Felicia. 2011. "The international film festival and the making of a national cinema."
Screen 52 (2): 253-260. Accessed 03/07/2011.
http://screen.oxfordjournals.org/content/52/2/253.full.

Chen, Camille Yu-Hsiu. 2010. Interview with Camille Yu-Hsiu Chen. Brisbane
International Film Festival, 13/01/2010.

Cheu, Hoi F. 2007. Cinematic Howling: Women's Films, Women's Film Theories.
Canada: UBC Press.

Citron, Michelle. 2012. "Women's Film Production: Going Mainstream." In The Gender
and Media Reader, edited by Mary Celeste Kearney. New York and London:
Routledge.

Cixous, Helene, Keith Cohen and Paula Cohen. 1976. "The Laugh of the Medusa."
Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society 1 (4): 875-893. Accessed
01/09/2012. http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.2307/3173239.

Corless, Kieron and Chris Darke. 2007. Cannes: Inside the World's Premier Film
Festival. London: Faber and Faber Limited.
_________________________________________________________________________

216
Creswell, John W. 2009. Research design: qualitative, quantitative, and mixed method
approaches. 3rd ed. Thousand Oaks, California: Sage Publications.
Crofts, Stephen. 2002. "Theoretical Perspectives: Reconceptualising national cinemas "
In Film and Nationalism, edited by A Williams. New Brunswick: Rutgers Uni
Press.

Czach, Liz. 2004. "Film Festivals, Programming, and the Building of a National Cinema."
The Moving Image 4 (1): 76-88. Accessed 10/03/2010.
http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/the_moving_image/v004/4.1czach.html.

Czach, Liz. 2010. "Cinephilia, Stars, and Film Festivals." Cinema Journal 49 (2).
Accessed 06/05/2011.
http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/cinema_journal/v049/49.2.czach.html.

"DAC List 2009." 2011. Accessed 4/08/2011.

http://www.filmfestivalrotterdam.com/Assets/Uploads/Documents/DAC%20List%2
02009%20-%202010.pdf.

Dangarembga, Tsitsi. 2007. Community Filmmaking Seminar. Brisbane International

Film Festival, 05/08/2007.

De Valck, Marijke. 2005. "Drowning in Popcorn at the International Film Festival

Rotterdam?" In Cinephilia: Movies, Love and Memory, edited by Marijke De Valck
and Malte Hagener. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press.

De Valck, Marijke. 2006. "Film Festivals: History and Theory of a European Phenomonen
that became a Global Network, Amsterdam School for Cultural Analysis,
University of Amsterdam.

De Valck, Marijke. 2007. Film Festivals: from European geopolitics to global cinephilia.
Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press.

De Valck, Marijke. 2008. "'Screening' the Future of Film Festivals? A long tale of
convergence and digitization". In Film International.

_________________________________________________________________________

217
De Valck, Marijke and Malte Hagener, eds. 2005. Cinephilia: movies, love and memory.
Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press.

De Valck, Marijke and Skadi Loist. 2011. "What is New in Film Festivals Studies -
Thematic Bibliography on Film Festival Research: Update 2010." In Film Festival
Yearbook 3: Film Festivals and East Asia, edited by Dina Iordanova and Ruby
Cheung. Great Britain: St Andrews Film Studies.

Demy-Geroe, Anne. 2009. Interview with Anne Demy-Geroe. Brisbane International Film
Festival, 02/12/2009.

Denzin, Norman K. and Yvonna S. Lincoln, eds. 2000. The Handbook of Qualitative
Research. Thousand Oaks, California: Sage Publications.

Deraspe, Sophie. 2009. "Vital Signs: The Film." Accessed 16/02/2012.

http://filmssiamois.com/en/vital-signs.

Deraspe, Sophie. 2010. Interview with Sophie Deraspe, International Film Festival
Rotterdam, 31/01/2010.

Desai, Jigna. 2004. Beyond Bollywood: The Cultural Politics of South Asian Diasporic
Film. Great Britain, New York: Routledge.

Dissanayake, Wimal and Anthony R. Guneratne. 2003. Rethinking third cinema. New
York: Routledge.

El-Horr, Dima. 2010. Interview with Dima El-Horr. International Film Festival Rotterdam,
01/02/2010.

Elsaesser, Thomas. 1996. Fassbinder's Germany: History, Identity, Subject. Amsterdam:

Amsterdam University Press.

Elsaesser, Thomas. 2005. European Cinema: Face to Face with Hollywood. Amsterdam:
Amsterdam University Press.

_________________________________________________________________________

218
English, James F. 2005. The Economy of Prestige: Prizes, Awards and the Circulation of
Cultural Value. United States of America: Harvard University Press.

Eslaesser, Thomas. 2005. "National Cinema: Re-Definitions and New Directions." In

European Cinema: Face to Face with Hollywood, pp82-107. Amsterdam:
Amsterdam University Press.

Ezra, Elizabeth and Terry Rowden. 2006. Transnational cinema: the film reader, In
focus--Routledge film readers. London; New York: Routledge.

Fabian, Johannes and Vincent de Rooij. 2008. "Ethnography." In The Sage Handbook of
Cultural Analysis, edited by Tony Bennett and John Frow. Los Angeles, London:
Sage Publications.

Feeney, Katherine. 2010. "Contemplative another word for boring, says new BIFF boss."
Accessed 30/09/2012.
http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/entertainment/movies/contemplative-another-
word-for-boring-says-new-biff-boss-20100921-15l6v.html.

Felton, Emma. 2013. "Working in the Australian suburbs: Creative industries workers‟
adaptation of traditional work spaces." City, Culture and Society 4 (1): 12-20.
Accessed 19/05/2013.
http://www.sciencedirect.com.ezp01.library.qut.edu.au/science/article/pii/S18779
1661200077X.

Gaines, Jane. 1999. "White Privilege and Looking Relations: Race and Gender in
Feminist Film Theory." In Feminist Film Theory: A Reader, edited by Sue
Thornham. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.

Gaydos, Steven. 1998. The Variety Guide to Film Festivals: Perigee Trade.

Gill, Rosalind. 2012. "Postfeminist Media Culture: Elements of a Sensibility." In The

Gender and Media Reader, edited by Mary Celeste Kearney. New York and
London: Routledge.

_________________________________________________________________________

219
Gillham, Bill. 2005. Research Interviewing: the range of techniques. Berkshire, England:
Open University Press.

Gledhill, Christine. 1999. "Pleasurable Negotiations." In Feminist Film Theory: A Reader,

edited by Sue Thornham. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.

Gore, Chris. 2004. The Ultimate Film Festival Survival Guide. 3 ed: Lone Eagle.

Gubrium, Jaber F. and James A. Holstein, eds. 2003. Postmodern interviewing.

Thousand Oaks, California: Sage Publications.

Handling, Piers. 2011. Interview with Piers Handling. Toronto International Film Festival,
11/08/2011.

Harbord, Janet. 2002. Film Cultures. London: SAGE.

Harbord, Janet. 2009. "Film Festivals-Time-Event." In Film Festival Yearbook 1: The

Festival Circuit, edited by Dina Iordanova and Ragan Rhyne. Great Britain: St
Andrews Film Studies.

Hart, Phoebe. 2011. Interview with Phoebe Hart. Brisbane International Film Festival,
28/03/2011.

Haslam, Mark. 2004. "Vision, Authority, Context: Cornerstones of Curation and

Programming." The Moving Image 4 (1). Accessed 15/10/2011.
http://muse.jhu.edu.ezp01.library.qut.edu.au/journals/the_moving_image/v004/4.
1haslam.html.

Hesse-Biber, Sharlene Nagy, Patricia Leavy and Michelle L. Yaiser. 2004. "Feminist
Approaches to Research as a Process: Reconceptualising Epistemology,
Methodology and Method." In Feminist Perspectives on Social Research, edited
by Sharlene Nagy Hesse-Biber and Michelle L. Yaiser. New York, Oxford: Oxford
University Press.

_________________________________________________________________________

220
Higson, Andrew. 2006. "The Limiting Imagination of National Cinema." In Transnational
Cinema: The Film Reader, edited by Elizabeth Ezra and Terry Rowden. London,
New York: Routledge.

hooks, bell. 1999. "The Oppositional Gaze: Black Female Spectators." In Feminist Film
Theory: A Reader, edited by Sue Thornham. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University
Press.

hooks, bell. 2000. Feminist Theory: From Margin to Center. London: Pluto Press.

"Hubert Bals Fund Profile." 2011. Accessed 4/08/2011.

http://www.filmfestivalrotterdam.com/professionals/hubert_bals_fund/hubert_bals
_profile/.

"Hubert Bals Fund Project Entry." 2011. Accessed 4/08/2011.

http://www.filmfestivalrotterdam.com/professionals/hubert_bals_fund/projectentry/
.

"International Film Festival Rotterdam." 2010. Accessed 07/12/2009.

http://www.filmfestivalrotterdam.com/en/.

"International Film Festival Rotterdam." 2011. Accessed 30/01/2011.

http://www.filmfestivalrotterdam.com/en.

"International Film Festival Rotterdam Catalogue. 2010." Image reproduced in

International Film Festival Rotterdam. Rotterdam: Veenman Drukkers.

"International Film Festival Rotterdam Catalogue. 2011." Image reproduced in

International Film Festival Rotterdam. Rotterdam: Veenman Drukkers.

Iordanova, Dina. 2009. "The Film Festival Circuit." In Film Festival Yearbook 1: The
Festival Circuit, edited by Dina Iordanova and Ragan Rhyne. Great Britain: St
Andrews Film Studies.

Iordanova, Dina. 2010. "Mediating Diaspora: Film Festivals and 'Imagined

Communities'." In Film Festival Yearbook 2: Film Festivals and Imagined
_________________________________________________________________________

221
 Communities, edited by Dina Iordanova and Ruby Cheung. Great Britain: St
Andrews Film Studies.

Iordanova, Dina and Ruby Cheung, eds. 2010. Film Festival Yearbook 2: Film Festivals
and Imagined Communities. Great Britain: St Andrews Film Studies.

Iordanova, Dina and Ruby Cheung, eds. 2011. Film Festival Yearbook 3: Film Festivals
and East Asia. Great Britain: St Andrews Film Studies.

Iordanova, Dina and Ragan Rhyne, eds. 2009. Film Festival Yearbook 1: The Festival
Circuit. Great Britain: St Andrews Film Studies, College Gate Press.

Iordanova, Dina and Leshu Torchin, eds. 2012. Film Festival Yearbook 4: Film Festivals
and Activism. Great Britain: St Andrews Film Studies.

Iordanova, Dina and Ragan Rhyne. 2009. "Introduction." In Film Festival Yearbook 1:
The Festival Circuit, edited by Dina Iordanova and Ragan Rhyne. Great Britain:
St Andrews Film Studies.

Jain, Jasbir, ed. 2007. Films, Literature & Culture: Deepa Mehta's Elements Trilogy. New
Dehli: Ratwat Publications.

Jodha, Avinash. 2007. "Packaging India: The Fabric of Deepa Mehta's Cinematic Art." In
Films, Literature & Culture: Deepa Mehta's Elements Trilogy, edited by Jasbir
Jain. New Dehli: Ratwat Publications.

Johnson, Brian. 2000. Brave films, Wild nights: 25 years of Festival Fever. Toronto
Random House Canada.

Kamya, Caroline. 2010. "Imani Movie." Accessed 23/02/2012.

http://www.imanimovie.com/about-the-movie/.

Kaplan, Ann E. 1997. Looking for The Other: Feminism, Film and The Imperial Gaze.
New York, London: Routledge.

_________________________________________________________________________

222
Kaplan, Ann E. 2003. "Women, Film, Resistance: Changing Paradigms." In Women
Filmmakers Refocusing, edited by Jacqueline Levitin, Judith Plessis and Valerie
Raoul, 15. New York and London: Routledge.

Kaufman, Tina. 2010. "BIFF: light blue touchpaper and retire." In Screen Hub. Accessed
9/10/2011.
http://www.screenhub.com.au/news/shownewsarticleG.php?newsID=35196.
Klages, Mary. 2006. Literary theory: a guide for the perplexed. London: Continuum.

Koehler, Robert. 2009. "Cinephilia and Film Festivals." In Dekalog 3: On Film Festivals,
edited by Richard Porton. London: Wallflower Press.

Kornetzky, Brigitte Uttar 2010. Interview with Brigitte Uttar Kornetzky, International Film
Festival Rotterdam, 2/02/2010.

Koven, Mikel J. 2008. "Film Festivals as Spaces of Meaning: Researching Festival

Audiences as Producers of Meaning." Worcestor Papers in English and Cultural
Studies (6). Accessed 19/06/2012.
http://www.worcestor.ac.uk/departments/11560.html.

Kraicer, Shelly. 2009. "The Problem of Representation: Emily Tang's Perfect Life". In
Cinema Scope.

Kuhn, Annette. 1985. The Power of the Image: Essays on Representation and Sexuality.
London, New York: Routledge.

Kuhn, Annette. 2004. "Textual Negotiations: Female Spectatorship and Cultural Studies."
In Feminist Film Studies: Writing the Woman into Cinema, edited by Janet
McCabe. Great Britain: Wallflower Press.

Langer, Adam. 2000. The Film Festival Guide. 2 ed: Chicago Review Press.

Lauzen, Martha M. 2009. Independent Women: Behind the Scenes Representation on

Festival Films. San Diego: Center for the Study of Women in Television and Film,
San Diego State University. Accessed 5/04/2011.
http://womenintvfilm.sdsu.edu/files/Independent_Women_Exec._Summ.pdf.
_________________________________________________________________________

223
Lawrenson, Edward. 2009. "A Simple Plan: An Interview with Rutger Wolfson." Accessed
2/03/2011. http://www.filmfestivalrotterdam.com/professionals/the_festival/news-
2009/interview-rutger-wolfson/.

Loist, Skadi. 2011. "Precarious cultural work: about the organization of (queer) film
festivals." Screen 52 (2): 268-273. Accessed 03/07/2011.
http://screen.oxfordjournals.org/content/52/2/268.full.

Loist, Skadi (2012). “Social Change?! The Status of Women‟s Film Festivals Today.”
I N T E R N AT I O N AL E S F R A U E N F I L M F E S T I V A L D O R T M U N D |K Ö L N 2012 .
Accessed 12/03/2013.
http://www.frauenfilmfestival.eu/fileadmin/Bilder/Downloaddateien/Women_s_Fil
m_Festivals_in_Dialogue_keynote_Skadi_Loist.pdf

Longinotto, Kim. 2010. Interview with Kim Longinotto, Toronto International Film
Festival,17/09/2010.

Macnab, Geoffrey. 2011. "Out of the Past." Accessed 4/08/2011.

http://www.filmfestivalrotterdam.com/professionals/programme/news1/out-of-the-
past/.

Martin, Angela. 2003. "Refocusing Authorship in Women's Filmmaking." In Women

Filmmakers Refocusing, edited by Jacqueline Levitin, Judith Plessis and Valerie
Raoul. New York and London: Routledge.

McCabe, Janet. 2004. Feminist Film Studies: Writing the Woman into Cinema. Great
Britain: Wallflower Press.

McCarthy, Sarah. 2010. Interview with Sarah McCarthy, Brisbane International Film
Festival, 14/10/2010.

McKee, Alan. 2003. Textual analysis: a beginner's guide. London; Thousand Oaks, Calif:
SAGE.

Miller, Elisa. 2010. "Alicia, Go Yonder". In Press Kit.

_________________________________________________________________________

224
Miller, Elisa. 2011. Interview with Elisa Miller, International Film Festival Rotterdam,
29/01/2011.

Moore, Richard. 2011. Interview with Richard Moore. Brisbane International Film
Festival, 3/03/2011.

Munro, K. 2004. "Festivals." In State of the Arts: 18-27.

Naficy, Hamid, ed. 1999. Home, Exile, Homeland: Film, Media and the Politics of Place.
New York: Routledge.

Naficy, Hamid. 2006. "Situating Accented Cinema." In Transnational Cinema: The Film
Reader, edited by Elizabeth Ezra and Terry Rowden. London, New York:
Routledge.

Nichols, Bill. 1994a. "Discovering Form, Inferring Meaning: New Cinemas and the Film
Festival Circuit." Film Quarterly 47 (3): pp. 16-30. Accessed 3/05/2011.
http://SF5MC5TJ5V.search.serialssolutions.com/?sid=CentralSearch:JAT&genre
=article&atitle=Discovering+Form%2C+Inferring+Meaning%3A+New+Cinemas+a
nd+the+Film+Festival+Circuit&volume=47&issue=3&title=Film+Quarterly&issn=0
015-1386&date=1994-04-01&spage=16&aulast=Nichols&aufirst=Bill.

Nichols, Bill. 1994b. "Global Image Consumption in the Age of Late Capitalism." East-
West Film Journal 8 (1): 68-85. Accessed 12/11/2011.
http://web.grinnell.edu/courses/spn/s02/SPN395-01/RAF/RAF04/RAF0414.pdf.

Nichols, Bill. 2010. Engaging Cinema: An Introduction to Film Studies. London, New
York: W.W. Norton & Company Inc.

Peranson, Mark. 2008. "First You Get the Power, Then You Get the Money: Two Models
of Film Festivals." Cineaste 33 (3): 37-43. Accessed 23/04/2010.
http://gateway.library.qut.edu.au/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.asp
x?direct=true&db=anh&AN=32782033&site=ehost-live.

_________________________________________________________________________

225
"Peruvian film takes top Berlin award." ABC News Online. Accessed 15/02/2009.
http://www.abcaustralia.com/news/stories/2009/02/15/2491925.htm?site=news.

Pevere, Geoff, Piers Handling, Matthew Hays, Wyndham Wise, Brenda Longfellow,
Steve Gravestock and Justin D. Edwards, eds. 2009. Toronto on Film. Toronto:
TIFF.

Polak, Kendon. 2003. Interview with Roger Ebert, Inside Entertainment, 55.

Porton, Richard. 2010. "The Toronto International Film Festival at the Crossroads."
Cineaste 36 (1): 32-35. Accessed 9/03/2011.
http://gateway.library.qut.edu.au/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.asp
x?direct=true&db=anh&AN=55609575&site=ehost-live.

Powell, Dilys. 1947. "The Importance of International Film Festivals." Penguin Film
Review 3: 59-61.

Quandt, James. 2009. "The Sandwich Process: Simon Field Talks About Polemics and
Poetry at Film Festivals." In Dekalog 3: On Film Festivals, edited by Richard
Porton. London: Wallflower Press.

Quinn, B. 2005. "Arts Festivals and the City." Urban Studies 42 (5-6): 927-943.

Ram, Anjali. 2002. "Framing the Feminine: Diasporic Readings of Gender in Popular
Indian Cinema." Women's Studies in Communication 25 (1): 25. Accessed
3/10/2009.
http://gateway.library.qut.edu.au/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.asp
x?direct=true&db=afh&AN=7006929&site=ehost-live.

Rhyne, Ragan. 2009. "Film Festival Circuits and Stakeholders." In Film Festival
Yearbook 1: The Festival Circuit, edited by Dina Iordanova and Ragan Rhyne.
Great Britain: St Andrews Film Studies.

Ross, Miriam. 2011. "The film festival as producer: Latin American Films and
Rotterdam's Hubert Bals Fund." Screen 52 (2): 261-267. Accessed 03/07/2011.
http://screen.oxfordjournals.org/content/52/2/261.full.
_________________________________________________________________________

226
Ruoff, Jeffrey. 2012. "Introduction: Programming Film Festivals." In Coming Soon to a
Festival Near You: Programming Film Festivals, edited by Jeffrey Ruoff. Great
Britain: St Andrews Film Studies.

Sarris, Andrew. 1974. "Auteurism Is Alive and Well." Film Quarterly 28 (1): 60-63.
Accessed 10/02/2010. http://www.jstor.org/stable/1211444.

Sauter, Willmar. 2007. "Festivals as Theatrical Events: Building Theories." In

Festivalising! Theatrical Events, Politics and Culture, edited by Temple
Hauptfleisch, Shulamith Lev-Aladgem, Jacqueline Martin, Willmar Sauter and
Henri Schoenmakers. Amsterdam, New York: International Federation of Theatre
Research.

"Screen Queensland." 2011. Accessed 20/07/2011.

http://www.screenqueensland.com.au/.

Shohat, Ella. 2006. "Post-Third-Worldist Culture: Gender, Nation and the Cinema." In
Transnational Cinema: The Film Reader, edited by Elizabeth Ezra and Terry
Rowden. London, New York: Routledge.

Shohat, Ella and Robert Stam. 1994. Unthinking Eurocentrism: multiculturalism and the
media. London; New York: Routledge.

"St George Bank Brisbane International Film Festival." 2009. Accessed 15/10/2009.
http://www.stgeorgebiff.com.au.

Stolberg, Shael. 2000. International Film Festival Guide. 3 ed: Festival Products.

Stringer, Julian. 2001. "Global Cities and the International Film Festival Economy." In
Cinema and the city : film and urban societies in a global context, edited by Mark
Shiel and Tony Fitzmaurice, xxi, 297p. Oxford, U.K; Malden, Mass: Blackwell
Publishers.

Stringer, Julian. 2003. "Regarding Film Festivals.” PhD diss., Department of Comparative
Literature, Indiana University.
_________________________________________________________________________

227
Tamsma, Gerwin. 2011. Interview with Gerwin Tamsma. International Film Festival
Rotterdam, 24/08/2011.

Tang, Emily. 2009. Interview with Emily Tang. Brisbane International Film Festival,
02/08/2009.

Tasker, Yvonne and Diane Negra. 2007. "Introduction: Feminist Politics and Postfeminist
Culture." In Interrogating Postfeminism, edited by Yvonne Tasker and Dianne
Negra. Durham and London: Duke University Press.
Tasker, Yvonne. 2010. "Women Filmmakers, Contemporary Authorship and Feminist
Film Studies." In Reclaiming the Archive: Feminism and Film History, edited by
Vicki Callahan. Detroit, Michigan: Wayne State University Press.

Thomson, Patricia. 2003. "Clutterbusters: Programmers at five leading festivals expound

on heady process of selecting films." Variety. Accessed 18/06/2012.
http://www.variety.com/article/VR1117891042?refCatId=1667.

Thornham, Sue, ed. 1999. Feminist Film Theory: A Reader. Edinburgh: Edinburgh
University Press.

"Toronto International Film Festival Catalogue. 2010." Image reproduced in TIFF.

Toronto.

Turan, Kenneth. 2002. Sundance to Sarajevo: Film Festivals and The World They Made.
Berkeley, Los Angeles, London: University of California Press.

Van Maanen, Hans. 2004. "How Contexts Frame Theatrical Events." In Theatrical
Events: Borders, Dynamics, Frames, edited by Temple Hauptfleisch, Shulamith
Lev-Aladgem, Jacqueline Martin, Willmar Sauter and Henri Schoenmakers.
Amsterdam, New York: International Federation for Theatre Research.

Vasquez Arong, Joanna. 2010. Interview with Joanna Vasquez Arong. International Film
Festival Rotterdam, 3/02/2010.

_________________________________________________________________________

228
Walmsley-Evans, Huw. 2010. "Northern Exposure: What is Brisbane? What is an
International Film Festival?: The 19th Brisbane International Film Festival."
Senses of Cinema (57). Accessed 20/01/2011.
http://www.sensesofcinema.com/2010/festival-reports/northern-exposure-what-is-
brisbane-what-is-an-international-film-festival-the-19th-brisbane-international-film-
festival/.

Welford, R. 2006. "BIFF Returns Bigger and Better in its 15th year." In Brisbane
International Film Festival. Accessed 17/08/2009. http://www.biff.com.au.

Welsch, Janice R. 1994. "Bakhtin, Language and Women's Documentaries." In Multiple

Voices in Feminist Film Criticism, edited by Diane Carson, Linda Dittmar and
Janice R. Welsch. Minneapolis, London: University of Minnesota Press.
"Women Make Movies." 2012. Accessed 06/03/2012.
http://www.wmm.com/about/general_info.shtml.

"Women Without Men." 2010. Accessed 20/08/2012.

http://womenwithoutmen.blog.indiepixfilms.com/.

Wong, Cindy Hing-Yuk. 2011. Film Festivals: Culture, People and Power on the Global
Screen. New Brunswick, New Jersey and London: Rutgers University Press.

Woolf, Virginia. 1992. A Room of One's Own, Three Guineas, edited by Morag Shiach,
World's Classics. Oxford, New York: Oxford University Press.

Yeates, Helen, Margaret McVeigh and Tess Van Hemert. 2011. "From Ethnocentrism to
Transculturalism: A Film Studies Pedagogical Journey." Cultural Studies Review
17 (2): 71-99. Accessed 19/02/2012.
http://epress.lib.uts.edu.au/journals/index.php/csrj/article/view/2008/2484.

Yin, Robert K. 2009. Case Study Research: Design and Methods. 4th ed. Thousand
Oaks, California: Sage Publications.

Zimmerman, Debra. 2011. Interview with Debra Zimmerman. Brisbane, 10/08/2011.

_________________________________________________________________________

229
Zuilhof, Gertjan. 2011. Interview with Gertjan Zuilhof. International Film Festival
Rotterdam, 25/06/2011

_________________________________________________________________________

230
A PPENDICES
A PPENDIX O NE : E THICAL C LEARANCE C ERTIFICATE

_________________________________________________________________________

231
_________________________________________________________________________

232
 A PPENDIX T WO : D RAFT I NTERVIEW Q UESTIONS

Film Festival Professionals

These interview questions are intended as a guide only and may be subject to change
during the course of the research and/or in response to participant’s answers during the
interview process.
Running the Festival

1. Can you tell me about your role in the festival and how it has evolved? How have you seen
the festival change?
2. How does the festival year run for you, from planning through to festival opening?
3. Can you tell me about the travelling that you do throughout the year? Which other film
festivals do you attend?

Programming the Festival

4. How do you go about planning and shaping the programme each year?
5. What might draw you to a particular film or filmmaker?
6. Once you have chosen the films, how do you decide how they are packaged within the
programme?
7. Can you tell me about the importance of having invited guests and filmmakers at the festival
each year?

Impact of Festival

8. What role do you think film festivals play in wider film industry/culture?
9. What about the festival specifically, what role do you feel it plays within the city‟s film culture?
10. Where do you think the festival sits within the broader film festival circuit?

Emerging Filmmakers

11. What role do you think film festivals play in supporting emerging filmmakers?
12. How does the festival support emerging filmmakers?
13. I‟m particularly interested in women‟s cinema from developing nations/cinemas; do you think it
is important that these films are screened in western countries?
14. Do you think that films that reflect social issues have the potential to increase social
awareness/affect change?
15. Do you have any advice for emerging filmmakers learning how to screen their films at
festivals?
16. What do you enjoy most about the festival? What is most important to you that the festival
achieves?
_________________________________________________________________________

233
 Filmmakers

These interview questions are intended as a guide only and may be subject to change
during the course of the research and/or in response to participant’s answers during the
interview process.

1. Can you tell me where you got the idea or inspiration for your film?

2. What sorts of stories interest you as a filmmaker? What do you want to tell?

3. Have you been to many film festivals with your film?

4. How was your film accepted for screening at this festival?

5. Do you think film festivals will play an important role in your career as a filmmaker?

6. Do you think there is something unique or special about seeing a film or screening your own

film within a film festival context?

7. Did you have the opportunity to do much networking with other filmmakers, Industry

representatives at the festival?

8. What do you hope to achieve through your attendance at the festival? Distribution, recognition

for film, contacts within Industry etc

9. Do you think that film festivals play an important role in supporting emerging filmmakers?

10. What sort of reactions has your film received? (Within country of origin? Internationally?)

11. Do you enjoy opportunities to interact with the audience?

12. Do you feel that your films have a focus on women, women‟s stories or portray a woman‟s

point of view?

13. Do you think it is still important for filmmakers or women filmmakers in particular to be telling

the stories of women or privileging their voices on screen?

14. Does screening your film at an International Film Festival impact on its reception or

distribution in your country of origin?

15. An increasing number of films from developing film industries/nations are screening at

Western film festivals. Do you think this is positive, or do you think it can be damaging to the

industry of the films origin?

16. Do you think that films that reflect social issues have the potential to increase social

awareness/affect change?

_________________________________________________________________________

234
17. What do you hope audiences learn or take away with them after seeing your film?

18. Will your film have a DVD release?

_________________________________________________________________________

235
 A PPENDIX T HREE : L IST OF I NTERVIEWS C ONDUCTED

Professional (6)

Name Role Festival Year

Anne Demy-Geroe Director Brisbane International Film Festival 2009

Richard Moore Director Brisbane International Film Festival 2011

Gertjan Zuilhof Programmer International Film Festival Rotterdam 2011

Gerwin Tamsma Programmer International Film Festival Rotterdam 2011

Piers Handling CEO & Executive Director Toronto International Film Festival 2011

Debra Zimmerman Executive Director Women Make Movies (NY) 2011

Filmmakers (19)

Name Film Festival Year

Emily Tang Perfect Life Brisbane International Film Festival 2009

Dima El-Horr Every Day is a Holiday International Film Festival Rotterdam 2010

Sophie Deraspe Vital Signs International Film Festival Rotterdam 2010

Brigitte Uttar Kornetzky God No Say So International Film Festival Rotterdam 2010

Mieke Bal Separations International Film Festival Rotterdam 2010

Joanna Vasquez Arong Sunday School International Film Festival Rotterdam 2010

Sarah Bouyain The Place In Between Toronto International Film Festival 2010

Kim Longinotto Pink Saris Toronto International Film Festival 2010

The Sound of Mumbai: A

Sarah McCarthy Toronto International Film Festival 2010
Musical

Isabelle Stever Blessed Events Toronto International Film Festival 2010

Orchids: My Intersex
Phoebe Hart Brisbane International Film Festival 2010
Adventure

Camille Yu-Hsiu Chen Little Sparrows Brisbane International Film Festival 2010

_________________________________________________________________________

236
 Kaz Cai Breakfast Lunch Dinner International Film Festival Rotterdam 2011

Son Kwang-Ju Characters International Film Festival Rotterdam 2011

The Water at the End of

Paula Siero International Film Festival Rotterdam 2011
the World

Elisa Miller Alicia, Go Yonder International Film Festival Rotterdam 2011

Yulene Olaizola Artificial Paradises International Film Festival Rotterdam 2011

Tan Chui Mui Year Without a Summer International Film Festival Rotterdam 2011

Fire Fly/Imani/Chips and

Caroline Kamya International Film Festival Rotterdam 2011
Liver Girls

_________________________________________________________________________

237
 A PPENDIX F OUR : B RISBANE I NTERNATIONAL F ILM F ESTIVAL V ENUE M AP

Image sourced from: Brisbane International Film Festival Catalogue. 2011. “Venues”. Brisbane. Brisbane International Film Festival. Brochure.

238
 A PPENDIX F IVE : I NT ERNATIONAL F ILM F ESTIVAL
R OTTERDAM V ENUE M AP

Image sourced from: International Film Festival Rotterdam. 2012. "Locations and Venues." Accessed
01/09/2012. http://www.filmfestivalrotterdam.com/professionals/programme/service-
information/locations-venues/locations-venues/.

239
 A PPENDIX S IX : T ORONTO I NTERNATIONAL F ILM F ESTIVAL
V ENUE M AP

Image sourced from: Toronto International Film Festival. 2010. “Festival Village at a glance”. Toronto.
Toronto International Film Festival. Brochure.

240
 A PPENDIX S EVEN : F ILM F ESTIVAL C ATALOGUE

Film Festival Research - Catalogue of Films

Brisbane International Film Festival 30th July - 9th August 2009

Screening
Filmmaker Programme First Screening Audience Public/Press Filmmaker Filmmaker at
Film Filmmaker Country Year Venue/Cinem Date Q&A
Origin Section Feature? Time Number & Industry at Festival Screening
a
31/07/
GoMA A 4pm
Second 2009
Perfect Life Emily Tang Hong Kong Hong Kong 2008 Asia Pacific Public Yes No Yes
feature 2/08/2
Regent 1 8.40pm
009
3/08/2
Turkey, Belgium, Regent 1 2.20pm
Pandora‟s Yesim Fourth 009
Turkey France, 2008 Asia Pacific Public No No No
Box Ustaoglu Feature 6/08/2
Germany Regent 1 9.10pm
009
1/08/2
Regent 3 3pm
The Milk of World Second 009
Claudia Llosa Peru Spain, Quechua 2009 Public No No No
Sorrow Cinema feature 4/08/2
Regent 1 6.40pm
009
First
Yes Madam, Megan Australian 9/08/2
Australia India, Australia 2008 Documenta Regent 1 12pm Public No No No
Sir Doneman Lens in Asia 009
ry

Rotterdam International Film Festival 27th January - 7th February 2010

Screening
Filmmaker Programme First Screening Audience Public/Press Filmmaker Filmmaker at
Film Filmmaker Country Year Venue/Cinem Date Q&A
Origin Section Feature? Time Number & Industry at Festival Screening
a
30/01/
Pathe 6 7.30pm
Every Day is 2010
France,
a Holiday First 1/02/2
Dima El-Horr Lebanon Germany, 2008 Bright Future Cinerama 1 9.30am 3/4 full Public Yes Yes Yes
(Chaque jour Feature 010
Lebanon
est une fete) 6/02/2
Cinerama 3 12.15pm
010
Doelen Willem 1/02/2
2pm 30ppl P&I
Burgerzaal 010
2/02/2
Pathe 4 3.45pm
010
Vital Signs
Sophie Tiger Awards Second 3/02/2
(Les Signes Canada Canada 2009 Pathe 1 9.30pm Yes No No
Deraspe Competition feature 010
Vitaux) Public
5/02/2
Pathe 7 4pm
010
6/02/2
Pathe 1 7pm
010

241
 1/02/2
Cinerama 5 10.30pm
010
God No Say Brigitte Uttar Switzerland, Acclaimed 3/02/2
Switzerland 2010 Bright Future Pathe 2 10.45am Public Yes No Yes
So Kornetzky Sierra Leone filmmaker 010
6/02/2
Venster 2 12pm
010
1/02/2
Pathe 2 7.30pm
Andrea 010
First
Seligmann 2/02/2
Separations Netherlands Netherlands 2010 Bright Future Feature for Cinerama 5 2.30pm 30ppl Public Yes Yes Yes
Silva & Mieke 010
MB
Bal 4/02/2
Lantaren 2 8.15pm
010
5/02/2
Pathe 1 7pm
Women Germany, First 010
Shirin Neshat Iran 2009 Spectrum Public Yes Yes Yes
without Men Austria, France Feature 6/02/2
Pathe 2 1.30pm
010
Schouwburg 4/02/2
Musola Signals: 4.30pm 60ppl
First Kleine Zaal 010
Suwi Cathrine Zambia Zambia, Finland 2009 Where is Public Yes Yes Yes
Feature 6/02/2
Kaseketi Africa Cinerama 7 8pm
010
Schouwburg 4/02/2
Joanna Signals: Third 4.30pm 60ppl
Sunday Phillipines, Kleine Zaal 010
Vasquez Phillipines 2010 Where is Documenta Public Yes Yes Yes
School China, Zambia 6/02/2
Arong Africa ry Cinerama 7 8pm
010
31/01/
Pathe 2 1.30pm
2010
Europa East
Second 1/02/2
(Ejszaka, Anita Doron Hungary Hungary 2010 Bright Future Cinerama 7 5.15pm Public Yes Yes Yes
feature 010
hajnal)
2/02/2
Lantaren 2 9.45am 20ppl
010
Thankyou 3/02/2
Signals: Third KSC 4.45pm
Mama Omelga 010
South Africa South Africa 2010 Where is Documenta Public Yes No No
(Siyabonga Mthiyane 6/02/2
Africa ry Cinerama 7 10.30pm
mama) 010
3/02/2 7.15pm &
GSC & KSC
010 4.45pm
No Woman Signals:
Malaysia, South 2 Previous 5/02/2
Born/Sarah Tan Chui Mui Malaysia 2010 Where is Cinerama 2 5.30pm Public No No
Africa Features 010
& Omelga Africa
Pathe 2 & 6/02/2 7.30pm &
Cinerama 7 010 10.30pm
31/01/
Pathe 5 1.15pm
2010
My Tehran Granaz First 1/02/2
Iran Iran, Australia 2009 Bright Future Pathe 5 9.45pm Public No No
for Sale Moussavi Feature 010
2/02/2
Cinerama 5 12pm
010

242
 Toronto International Film Festival 9th - 19th September 2010

Filmmak
Filmmaker Programme First Screening Screening Audience Public/Press Filmmaker at
Film Filmmaker Country Year Date er at Q&A
Origin Section Feature? Venue/Cinema Time Number & Industry Screening
Festival
The Sleeping
16/0
Beauty Catherine Acclaimed NFB Theatre
France France 2010 Masters 9/20 11.30am 10ppl P&I Yes No No
(La belle Breillat filmmaker (small)
10
endormie)
Mumbai
11/0 1/3 full
Diaries Special First Scotiabank
Kiran Rao India India 2009 9/20 9.45am (seats P&I Yes No No
Presentation Feature Theatre 4
(Dhobi Ghat) 10 392)
In a Better
13/0
World Denmark, Special Acclaimed Scotiabank
Susanne Bier Denmark 2010 9/20 2.30pm 1/2 full P&I Yes No No
Sweden Presentation filmmaker Theatre
(Haevnen) 10
The Place in
14/0
Between France, First Scotiabank
Sarah Bouyain France 2010 Discovery 9/20 12.15pm 10ppl P&I Yes No No
(Notre Burkina Faso Feature Theatre 5
10
etrangere)
12/0
Athina Rachel Second Scotiabank
Attenberg Greece Greece 2010 Discovery 9/20 11.30am 1/3 full P&I No No No
Tsangari feature Theatre 2
10

12/0
Look, First Scotiabank
Arielle Javitch New York USA 2010 Discovery 9/20 9.30am 30ppl P&I No No No
Stranger Feature Theatre
10

Zephyr 11/0
First Scotiabank
Belma Bas Turkey Turkey 2010 Discovery 9/20 12.30pm 20ppl P&I No No No
Feature Theatre 10
(Zefir) 10

13/0
United Acclaimed Scotiabank
Pink Saris Kim Longinotto London 2010 Real to Reel 9/20 9am 20ppl P&I Yes No No
Kingdom filmmaker Theatre 9
10

The Sound United Third 15/0

Sarah Scotiabank
of Mumbai: A Australia Kingdom, 2010 Real to Reel Documenta 9/20 9am 1/3 full P&I Yes No No
McCarthy Theatre 9
Musical India ry 10

10 to 11 Turkey, 13/0
First Scotiabank
Pelin Esmer Istanbul France, 2009 City to City 9/20 12.30pm 15ppl P&I Yes No No
(11‟e 10 Feature Theatre
Germany 10
kala)
12/0
Contemporary Second Scotiabank
Jucy Louise Alston Australia Australia 2010 9/20 2pm 1/3 full P&I Yes No No
World Cinema feature Theatre
10

17/0
All About Hong Kong, Contemporary Acclaimed Scotiabank
Ann Hui China 2010 9/20 9.30am 20ppl P&I No No No
Love China World Cinema filmmaker Theatre
10
Blessed Contemporary Second Scotiabank
Isabelle Stever Germany Germany 2010 Watched Screener copy of film P&I Yes No No
Events World Cinema feature Theatre

243
(Gluckliche
Fugung)

Brisbane International Film Festival 4th - 14th November 2010

Filmmak
Filmmaker Programme First Screening Screening Audience Public/Press Filmmaker at
Film Filmmaker Country Year Date er at Q&A
Origin Section Feature? Venue/Cinema Time Number & Industry Screening
Festival
6/01
200 First
I Am You Simone North Australia Australia Local Heroes Barracks 2 1/20 7pm 180ppl Public Yes Yes Yes
9 Feature
10
6/11/
First Centro 1 5pm Yes Yes Yes
Orchids: My 2010
201 Feature
Intersex Phoebe Hart Australia Australia Local Heroes 12/1 Public
0 Documenta
Adventure Tribal 2 1/20 3.45pm 70ppl Yes No No
ry
10
5/11/
Barracks 1 & 2 7pm
2010
201 Second
Jucy Louise Alston Australia Australia Local Heroes 13/1 Public Yes Yes Yes
0 feature
Barracks 1 1/20 12pm
10
7/11/
Barracks 1 2pm
Around the 2010
Little Camille Yu- 201 First
Australia Australia World in 40 13/1 Public Yes Yes Yes
Sparrows Hsiu Chen 0 Feature
Films Centro 2 1/20 2pm 30ppl
10
The 7/11/
Centro 2 12pm
Wedding Around the 2010
200 Second
Song Karin Albou France France, Tunisia World in 40 10/1 Public No No No
8 feature
(Le chant Films Tribal 1 1/20 4pm 40ppl
des mariées) 10
7/11/
The Around the Centro 2 7pm
201 First 2010
Wedding Amanda Jane Australia Australia World in 40 Public No No No
0 Feature 9/11/
Party Films Tribal 1 4pm 80ppl
2010
The Sound Third 14/1
Sarah United Kingdom, 201 Late addition
of Mumbai: A Australia Documenta Centro 2 1/20 7pm Public Yes Yes Yes
McCarthy India 0 to Programme
Musical ry 10
8/11/
Tribal 2 6pm
2010
201 Acclaimed
Pink Saris Kim Longinotto London United Kingdom Soapbox 13/1 Public No No No
0 filmmaker
Tribal 2 1/20 6.30pm
10

Rotterdam International Film Festival 26th January - 6th February 2011

Public/Pre
Filmmaker Programme First Screening Screening Audience Filmmaker Filmmaker at
Film Filmmaker Country Year Date ss & Q&A
Origin Section Feature? Venue/Cinema Time Number at Festival Screening
Industry
Breakfast One 29/0
Wang Ting China Singapore 2010 Bright Future Pathe 4 1.30pm 300ppl Public Yes Yes Yes
Lunch Previous 1/20

244
 Dinner Feature 11

Anocha One 30/0

Suwichakornp Thailand Previous Pathe 6 1/20 7.15pm
ong Feature 11
Short 4/02/
Kaz Cai Singapore Pathe 5 12.45pm
Filmmaker 2011
28/0
Cinerama 1 1/20 11.45am
11
Atousa
The Day I First 31/0
Bandeh Iran Iran 2011 Bright Future Public Yes Yes Yes
Disappeared Feature Cinerama 7 1/20 9.30am
Ghiasabadi
11
1/02/
LV3 5.15pm
2011
31/0
Pathe 4 1/20 5pm
11
First
Characters Son Kwang-Ju South Korea South Korea 2011 Bright Future 1/02/ Public Yes Yes Yes
Feature LV2 8pm
2011
3/02/
LV2 7.30pm
2011
1/02/
The Water at Pathe 7 6.30pm
2011
the End of
First Schouwburg 2/02/
the World (El Paula Siero Argentina Argentina 2010 Bright Future 4.45pm Public Yes Yes Yes
Feature Grote Zaal 2011
agua del fin
del mundo) 4/02/
Cinerama 5 10.15pm
2011
31/0
Pathe 2 1/20 10am
11
Imagine, the Brigitte Uttar Switzerland, Second
Switzerland 2011 Bright Future 1/02/ Public Yes Yes Yes
Sky Kornetzky Sierra Leone feature LV3 3pm
2011
3/02/
LV6 7pm
2011
30/0
Pathe 4 1/20 4.30pm
11
31/0
Alicia, Go Tiger Awards First Pathe 4 1/20 1.30pm
Elisa Miller Mexico Mexico 2010 Public Yes Yes Yes
Yonder Competition Feature 11
2/02/
Pathe 4 7.30pm
2011
5/02/
Pathe 3 7.15pm
2011
28/0
Cinerama 1 1/20 5pm
11
My Robin First 30/0
USA USA, Russia 2010 Bright Future Public Yes Yes Yes
Perestroika Hessman Feature Cinerama 7 1/20 9.30am
11
5/02/
Pathe 5 12.45pm
2011

245
 1/02/
Pathe 5 3.45pm
2011
Artificial 3/02/
Cinerama 1 5pm
Paradises Yulene First 2011
Mexico Mexico 2011 Bright Future 50ppl Public Yes Yes Yes
(Paraisos Olaizola Feature 4/02/
Pathe 5 3.45pm
artificiales) 2011
5/02/
LV3 9.30am
2011
31/0
Pathe 7 1/20 6.30pm
11
Year Without Return of the Second
Tan Chui Mui Malaysia Malaysia 2010 Doelen 1/02/ Public Yes Yes Yes
a Summer Tiger feature 7.45pm
Jurriaanse Zaal 2011
4/02/
LV5 2pm
2011
31/0
LV3 1/20 9.45pm
Caroline Signals:
Fire Fly Uganda Uganda, China 2011 Short Film 11 40ppl Public Yes Yes Yes
Kamya Raiding Africa
5/02/
Cinerama 2 10.15am
2011
31/0
LV3 1/20 9.45pm
Li Xia's Omelga South Africa, Signals: Short
South Africa 2011 11 40ppl Public No No No
Salon Mthiyane China Raiding Africa Filmmaker
5/02/
Cinerama 2 10.15am
2011
1/02/
Pathe 5 9.45pm
2011
Caroline Uganda, Signals: First 2/02/
Imani Uganda 2010 LV3 10.15pm Public Yes Yes Yes
Kamya Sweden Raiding Africa Feature 2011
5/02/
Cinerama 5 10am
2011
28/0
Doelen
1/20 8pm
Jurriaanse Zaal
11
Athina Rachel Third 30/0
Attenberg Greece Greece 2010 Bright Future Public Yes Yes Yes
Tsangari Feature Pathe 7 1/20 9.30am
11
3/02/
Pathe 2 6.30pm
2011
29/0
Pathe 4 1/20 10.30pm
11
30/0
Cinerama 4 1/20 10.30pm
Zephyr First
Belma Bas Turkey Turkey 2010 Bright Future 11 Public Yes Yes Yes
(Zefir) Feature
31/0
Cinerama 6 1/20 9.45am
11
1/02/
Pathe 1 2pm
2011
Laura Amelia Mexico Mexico, 27/0
Second
Jean Gentil Guzman Dominican Dominican 2010 Bright Future Pathe 6 1/20 7.15pm Public Yes Yes Yes
feature
Israel Republic Republic, 11

246
Cardenas Germany 28/0
Cinerama 6 1/20 12.15pm
11
31/0
Cinerama 6 1/20 2.45pm
11

247