Dialogue: Dieter Kosslick
Dialogue: Dieter Kosslick
Feb 7, 2006
When Dieter Kosslick took over as director of the Berlin International Film Festival in 2001, the event generally was considered the bronze medalist among Europe's A-list festivals: It lacked the Festival de Cannes' market and pomp and the Venice International Film Festival's location and flair. Scheduled during the city's bitterly cold winter, the Berlinale was considered by many "the big festival you could afford to miss." That is no longer the case, though: The 56th Berlinale will be a festival of superlatives as industry heavyweights, wannabes and hangers-on crowd into Potsdamer Platz. Berlin 2006, already poised to break attendance and other records alongside a newly juiced-up European Film Market, is set to (nearly) rival Cannes on the calendar. The Hollywood Reporter's German bureau chief Scott Roxborough spoke recently with Kosslick to take a look back at the past five years and a peek at where his event plans to go from here.
The Hollywood Reporter: With a bigger European Film Market, more than 100 new companies are set to come to Berlin in 2006. Is that what you had in mind when you took over five years ago?
Dieter Kosslick: Five years ago, we wanted to reposition the festival, and there were several elements we wanted to add. One was to provide a forum for the younger generation; this year, with the fifth edition of the Talent Campus, I think this initiative has been established. It was a similar goal with the World Cinema Fund, where a lot of money is being invested to help newcomers from around the world -- from some of the poorest parts of the world -- make movies. (That it also the case with) the Co-Production Market, which we created to give newcomers a chance to present their projects and, if they find partners, a chance to produce them. But, of course, the biggest and historically most important change this year is the expanded European Film Market; our expectations, in regards to the interest and the participation in the market, have more than been fulfilled. Also, in terms of the "freshness of the produce," we will have a lot of market premieres -- more than ever before. There are a lot of other elements; perhaps most significant has been the cooperation between the various sections of the festival. Looking back, I can proudly say that, together, we have accomplished what we wanted to accomplish. We couldn't have done more, even if we wanted to.
THR: Traditionally, the Berlin festival and the EFM have worked together closely. Will that be possible as the market expands, and is it even desirable to have such close links between a festival and the film business?
Kosslick: Well, they say, "Never change a winning horse midrace." We want to keep a close link between the market and the festival; that's what everyone wants to have wherever you have both a festival and a market, to link the two. We already have this link, so why should we change it? Of course, because of the size, it is clear that other elements will be added -- but the close cooperation between the EFM and the festival will continue. This doesn't mean that we don't want certain companies to come to the market because they don't fit the "festival profile" -- not at all. What we want to establish is a big, high-quality film market, alongside and together with a big, high-quality film festival.
THR: But isn't there a danger of conflict between the film art of the Berlinale and the bottom-line film commerce of the EFM?
Kosslick: Of course, but this isn't a new conflict. If you have 300 films in the market or 600, it is the same issue -- I wouldn't say it is a conflict. I think the duty of a film festival is to represent all the different shades of the film business; there's nothing wrong with having a successful film running in competition! It doesn't have to always be so "culturally important" that no one goes to the theater to see it -- Berlin was never set up that way. We are a public festival, with more than 150,000 "normal" people buying tickets. This means we have a responsibility to show, if not commercial, then at least audience-friendly films -- we have to. We aren't a critics' festival, even if we'll have around 4,000 accredited journalists this year.
THR: Will a bigger EFM mean that companies and films that traditionally have not been seen in the Berlinale can join the lineup?
Kosslick: Naturally, the various aspects of the market should also be found in the festival, and vice versa, but this isn't about individual companies or films -- this is about prototypes of films. A direct connection would be very dangerous, but if you look closely (at the festival lineup), along with the all the big companies that have films represented, there is a very strong independent component. The festival has to remain independent; we can't let ourselves be pressured by the 250 companies that are represented in the market. The important thing is that all these companies feel represented in the festival: If we only showed independent films, then many big companies might say, "Well, this doesn't look like the festival for me" -- and the opposite would also be true. But I think we have achieved this balance. ... We are aware of the dangers that come with a bigger market and with the resultant competition with other markets. The interest in Berlin has grown, the possibilities have grown, and, of course, the pressure has grown, too -- I can't deny that.
The Hollywood Reporter: With a bigger European Film Market, more than 100 new companies are set to come to Berlin in 2006. Is that what you had in mind when you took over five years ago?
Dieter Kosslick: Five years ago, we wanted to reposition the festival, and there were several elements we wanted to add. One was to provide a forum for the younger generation; this year, with the fifth edition of the Talent Campus, I think this initiative has been established. It was a similar goal with the World Cinema Fund, where a lot of money is being invested to help newcomers from around the world -- from some of the poorest parts of the world -- make movies. (That it also the case with) the Co-Production Market, which we created to give newcomers a chance to present their projects and, if they find partners, a chance to produce them. But, of course, the biggest and historically most important change this year is the expanded European Film Market; our expectations, in regards to the interest and the participation in the market, have more than been fulfilled. Also, in terms of the "freshness of the produce," we will have a lot of market premieres -- more than ever before. There are a lot of other elements; perhaps most significant has been the cooperation between the various sections of the festival. Looking back, I can proudly say that, together, we have accomplished what we wanted to accomplish. We couldn't have done more, even if we wanted to.
THR: Traditionally, the Berlin festival and the EFM have worked together closely. Will that be possible as the market expands, and is it even desirable to have such close links between a festival and the film business?
Kosslick: Well, they say, "Never change a winning horse midrace." We want to keep a close link between the market and the festival; that's what everyone wants to have wherever you have both a festival and a market, to link the two. We already have this link, so why should we change it? Of course, because of the size, it is clear that other elements will be added -- but the close cooperation between the EFM and the festival will continue. This doesn't mean that we don't want certain companies to come to the market because they don't fit the "festival profile" -- not at all. What we want to establish is a big, high-quality film market, alongside and together with a big, high-quality film festival.
THR: But isn't there a danger of conflict between the film art of the Berlinale and the bottom-line film commerce of the EFM?
Kosslick: Of course, but this isn't a new conflict. If you have 300 films in the market or 600, it is the same issue -- I wouldn't say it is a conflict. I think the duty of a film festival is to represent all the different shades of the film business; there's nothing wrong with having a successful film running in competition! It doesn't have to always be so "culturally important" that no one goes to the theater to see it -- Berlin was never set up that way. We are a public festival, with more than 150,000 "normal" people buying tickets. This means we have a responsibility to show, if not commercial, then at least audience-friendly films -- we have to. We aren't a critics' festival, even if we'll have around 4,000 accredited journalists this year.
THR: Will a bigger EFM mean that companies and films that traditionally have not been seen in the Berlinale can join the lineup?
Kosslick: Naturally, the various aspects of the market should also be found in the festival, and vice versa, but this isn't about individual companies or films -- this is about prototypes of films. A direct connection would be very dangerous, but if you look closely (at the festival lineup), along with the all the big companies that have films represented, there is a very strong independent component. The festival has to remain independent; we can't let ourselves be pressured by the 250 companies that are represented in the market. The important thing is that all these companies feel represented in the festival: If we only showed independent films, then many big companies might say, "Well, this doesn't look like the festival for me" -- and the opposite would also be true. But I think we have achieved this balance. ... We are aware of the dangers that come with a bigger market and with the resultant competition with other markets. The interest in Berlin has grown, the possibilities have grown, and, of course, the pressure has grown, too -- I can't deny that.
Share on LinkedIn
