If a theatrical film and a streaming film are one and the same, why should you go to the cinema? That’s what news’s culture commentator asks in a comment on the dispute over whether the Amanda prize should only promote films that go on the big screen. The Norwegian Film Institute (NFI) works to promote Norwegian film, regardless of where the film is shown. For that reason, we left the Amanda committee last week. We want a national film award to reflect the film’s qualities rather than which platform shows it first. We would like more people to see more films at the cinema, and believe a wider national film award can contribute to this. By withdrawing from the committee for the cinema award, we want to open a larger discussion about what a national film award should contain. Our mandate is platform neutral. This has been decided cross-politically in the Storting. In our regulation for dissemination, it is stated that we grant a grant to a national film award to promote Norwegian film and the film’s position with the public. Developments in recent years have created a need to assess the extent to which this is met through a pure cinema price. This position has been interpreted as us choosing streaming over cinema, or that we generally give in to the needs of international streaming giants. It is neither what we want, nor what we do. The Norwegian Film Institute supports cinema, and the cinema as the premier screening arena for film. The cinema is the most important cultural meeting place for movie experiences, and one of the most inclusive cultural arenas we have. This is the answer to Hobbelstad’s question. We would prefer that all films be shown in cinemas, including those financed by streaming channels. The Norwegian Film Institute does not grant funding to projects where the streaming players own all the rights. In a European context, NFI goes the furthest in protecting the independent producer. In this way, we contribute to strengthening the position of Norwegian producers in negotiations with the streaming players. Ideally, a Norwegian producer negotiates a period of screening in cinemas in Norway. For the streaming players, it is unfortunately rare that the possibility of a local price is enough to motivate screening in the Norwegian cinema market. It is a little different when it comes to an Oscar. A national film award should be relevant, create commitment and contribute to strengthening Norwegian film as a whole. The relevance should not only be high for the industry, but also for the public. When NFI allocates public funds through our grant schemes, it must be with the aim of also strengthening the public’s interest in Norwegian film, and the public’s understanding that politicians choose to allocate funds to Norwegian film. Then the price should also include films that the public sees, regardless of where it takes place. If the population’s relationship with Norwegian films is strong, people will probably want to see more films, more Norwegian films – and visit the cinema more often than twice a year, which is the average for ticket buyers today. Many people watch films and series several times a week, and NFI believes it is an advantage if they can choose Norwegian – even in the evenings when they are sitting at home on the sofa. The revolution that the film field has undergone in recent years has meant that audiences worldwide have access to all the best content, through subscriptions they can use from home. In this competition picture, Norwegian film does a formidable job! We should be proud of this, and celebrate the success together. Although the feature film Troll is a historic peak for audience interest in a Norwegian film, with over 100 million plays on Netflix, there are also several other examples. The success that Norwegian films achieve with the streaming services does not come at the expense of cinema visits for Norwegian films so far. After the first eight months of the year, visits to Norwegian films this year were 36 per cent higher than in the years before the pandemic. Norwegian film is important for the cinemas, and we will help to support this in the future, even if market forces work in the opposite direction. Cinemas are now in a situation where fewer international films are released on the market. In order to create results for their owners, halls and screening times are prioritized strongly, in favor of the very strongest audience magnets. While the smaller titles necessarily get less space. It is true, as news’s commentator points out, that the Norwegian Film Institute is also concerned with those films that will not have room in the cinemas in the future, and which will find their way to the public through a streaming platform. A narrow film on a Norwegian scale can hit a large international niche. The film Vikingulven had less than 8,000 visits to Norwegian cinemas last autumn, but spent four weeks on Netflix’s global non-English top 10 list. So films that have limited hits with cinema audiences in the future can still find their audience through streaming channels. A national film award should bring together the entire film field, which can celebrate its successes together. It should reward artistry and craftsmanship, regardless of the form of distribution. In front of an audience that both loves and watches Norwegian films. We would like to have the discussions about the form in which this should take place open with a broad film field, and an opinion that cares about the film. Not in a closed committee for a cinema award. That is why we withdrew from the Amanda Committee. Because film is best when seen. Also read:
ttn-69
The award for the film – Expression
