>> Catalog 2013

Juror
Philip Cheah

[Juror’s Statement]

Have you ever wondered about how globalization is an insidious force that compells everything in its path to conform? Over the last decade, it seems clearer that even the new art cinema has been globalized. Cinematic cliches and formulas have become required practices in art films across the world, from the Philippines to Kazakhstan and Latin America to Europe. Different cultures, but the same formalistic language—slo-mo ambient rhythms, long meaningful takes, and absurdist, yet poetic moments are just some of the familiar tropes.

Part of the reason for this can be traced to how the film industry has used the agricultural model in harvesting new films. With fixed funding quotas and contracts designed to protect the national interests of funders, filmmakers are sometimes under the illusion that they are independent when they fight their way in, only to agree to these terms.

Today’s highly organized farming system shields itself against market volatility by being highly mechanized with high subsidies. In a similar way, the film farming system ensures that nationally funded products are supported by nationally funded film festivals, picked up for distribution by domestic companies, and distributed at a high price to external markets, even to the filmmaker’s country of origin.

A globalized film market economy flattens the diversity that informs so much of culture. It’s enough to make you wonder where the heart of cinema has gone to.

As Murakami Haruki reminds us in his book, 1Q84, “There is nothing in this world that never takes a step outside a person’s heart.”

Or as Bob Dylan sings on Maggie’s Farm, “I try my best / To be just like I am / But everybody wants you / To be just like them.”