Some films you watch at home on the sofa. You see some films at the cinema. Some films you watch at home on the sofa after they have gone to the cinema. But it’s all movies, right? Everyone should be able to compete to win the Amanda prize, Norway’s most famous film award? Not? This is the question that is now leading to friction in the Norwegian film industry. This week, news was able to report that the Norwegian Film Institute is ending its collaboration with the Amanda prize. The reason was that Tonje Hardersen, head of the film festival in Haugesund and thus of the Amanda committee, had come out and said that “Amanda will promote the film that goes on the big screen”. DEFENDS AWARDS FOR THE CINEMA: Tonje Hardersen heads the Film Festival in Haugesund. Photo: Rosa Irén Villalobos / news In order to be nominated for the Amanda prize, a film must have been shown in at least ten cinemas, and in two of the big cities. This means that Netflix and Viaplay productions such as “Troll” and “Gulltransporten”, which can only be seen via streaming, did not qualify. This probably worries the Norwegian Film Institute, and it’s not just because the audience might be surprised that popular Norwegian films don’t exist for the Amanda jury. Several Norwegian films, perhaps especially those made for an adult audience who are not necessarily looking for crash-bang-bang, do not go particularly well in cinemas. It’s not inconceivable that more of these films could be guided kindly towards a streaming release rather than a theatrical release in the future. In that case, it is important for the Norwegian Film Institute, which supports these films, that they are not treated as second-rate. NOT SECOND RANKING: Head of the Norwegian Film Institute, Kjersti Mo, is probably concerned that films that go straight to streaming should not be treated worse than others. Photo: NFI Seen in that way, it should be obvious to let the streaming films get into the heat of the award juries. But then it’s not quite that simple either. On the one hand, a cinema film and a streaming film are the same: They are narratives with sound and moving images, which will draw you into a story. On the other hand, they are two direct competitors. For many years, the major streaming services have worked hard and purposefully to erase the distinction between the film experience at the cinema and the film experience on the sofa. They have lobbied to close the “streaming window”, i.e. the time that must elapse from a cinema premiere until the film can become part of a streaming library. They have thrown millions at renowned filmmakers such as Jane Campion (“The Power of the Dog”), Alfonso Cuarón (“Roma”) and Martin Scorsese (“The Irishman”), to get into the festivals and the major award ceremonies. WANTED IN: Netflix has long invested heavily in ambitious films about Martin Scorsese’s “The Irishman”, with Joe Pesci and Robert De Niro, in order to enter the film festivals and award ceremonies. Photo: Netflix It’s about making inroads into what used to be the exclusive brands of the big film studios and film producers, and showing that they don’t need to be all-powerful. It must be said that these are exclusive brands the film studios have not exactly looked after very well. The only films that are now made on big budgets are in practice superhero films or films based on universes that the public already knows. And the success of streaming services has had many positive side effects. Narrower films are no longer dependent on the favor of cinemas to find an audience. People who struggle to get to the cinema, because they are financially strapped or because caring duties or illness prevent them, get an almost complete offer where they are. BIG BET: Netflix bet hard on Benedict Cumberbatch and “The Power of the Dog”, which went to cinemas in addition to being streamed. Jane Campion won the Oscar for Best Director for the film. Photo: KIRSTY GRIFFIN / NETFLIX But the battle is fundamental: Is film something that should first and foremost be made for an attentive audience, together in the dark of the cinema – or is it the smaller screens, in the well-lit living rooms, which will henceforth be the main arena? What is lost then? The streaming services seem to think that this is already the case, and the latest in-house productions for Netflix, such as the action comedy “Red Notice”, indicate that they are not exactly skilful with images and backgrounds. These films have stars in the foreground, but otherwise look like First Price products. It is a cultural warning light that flashes if the majority no longer feel that you get something different and more when you go to the cinema, compared to staying at home. Or at least not something different enough. BENT OUT: Before Bong Joon Ho made his international breakthrough with “Parasite”, he guested at the Cannes Film Festival with the Netflix-financed “Okja”. The audience booed when the Netflix logo was shown. Photo: Netflix / Netflix Why should one go to the cinema at all? What is the rationale for the local cinema to keep going? The deadly combination of streaming services and pandemic led to the death of cinema in many countries. It is not without reason that those who are happy with the cinema film wonder whether it will have a future at all. Whether composing images for the big screen, not for the TV or the phone, is a dying art form. I was at the Cannes Film Festival in 2017, the year the festival had taken the controversial step of inviting two Netflix-produced films into the heat: Bong Joon Ho’s “Okja” and Noah Baumbach’s “The Meyerowitz Stories”. Already during the festival’s first press conference, jury chairman Pedro Almodóvar said that he could not imagine giving the festival’s top prize, the Palme d’Or, to a film that could not be seen on the big screen. “The first time you see a movie, I think the way you see it is crucial,” he said. “It shouldn’t be on a screen that’s smaller than the chair you’re sitting on.” CRITICAL: When the legendary filmmaker Pedro Almodóvar was jury chairman during the Cannes Film Festival, he was skeptical about awarding awards to films that had not been shown in cinemas. Photo: AFP When the films were shown to audiences in Cannes, they were greeted with loud boos the moment the Netflix logo flashed across the screen. A short time later, the festival changed the regulations back, so only films with a cinema premiere could participate. The Oscars, which relaxed the requirement for cinema premieres during the pandemic, are now tightening it again. The result is, so far, a slightly funny arrangement where the streaming services dutifully show their films in cinemas, for a week or two, so that they can qualify for the awards. The question is whether it will last. Another solution is going to force itself. But it is not difficult to understand those who try to hold back the storming young elephant, to make sure that the cinema film, which does not have the same powers as before, is not left dying by the side of the road.
ttn-69
If a theatrical film and a streaming film are one and the same, why should you go to the cinema? – Speech
