.png)
Venice Film Festival artistic director Alberto Barbera spoke candidly Tuesday about the political pressures surrounding this year’s edition, while making clear that the fest has no intention of shying away from controversy.
Speaking to Variety at the press cocktail on the Lido ahead of the 83rd edition, Barbera said it was “almost normal” that Venice was being pressed to take a political position given the number of films in the lineup touching on Gaza, Palestine, Ukraine and other contentious subjects.
“There are several films that can start controversies or, at the very least, provoke very strong political reactions,” Barbera said. “They ask whether the festival — and especially the Biennale — is going to take very clear and explicit political positions. What we always say is that neither the Biennale nor the festival will make political declarations in order to take sides.”
His comments came a day after Venice reinstated its jury press conference amid some backlash and as artists and activists, including Venice4Palestine, have called on the Biennale to take a stronger position on the war in Gaza.
“We are a space for freedom of expression. Our role is to safeguard freedom of expression for everyone, for the artists, and to safeguard the confrontation between artists and the public, the critics and people in general,“ said Barbera. “We will never take an explicit political position. It doesn’t make any sense.”
Barbera also firmly denied that the absence of Israeli films from this year’s lineup reflected a boycott, saying Venice received only one Israeli submission and chose not to invite it.
“No, not at all. Never,” he said. “We have no prejudice against anyone anywhere in the world. If there had been a Russian film, an Israeli film of good quality, we would undoubtedly have invited it.”
He added that Venice would have been prepared to face the political backlash that might have followed.
Barbera also said the festival almost selected Vincent Gallo’s latest film, “Golden State Killer” starring James Franco, which Barbera revealed nearly made the lineup.
“We told him, ‘We like the film very much. We know it is a film that is going to divide the public, but we are ready to face a complicated situation,’” Barbera said. Venice offered the film an out-of-competition berth, but Gallo ultimately declined because he wanted to compete for the Golden Lion. Asked whether Franco’s presence was a concern, Barbera said it was not, adding that the issue was the provocative nature of the film itself.
Barbera, who has selected Roman Polanski’s and Woody Allen’s movies in recent years, said Venice could get away with these bold choices where other festivals would be plagued by a widespread scandal due to “the prestige of the Biennale and the credibility that the Biennale has gained over the years” through its defense of artistic freedom “without ever taking a political side.”
Asked whether Allen might return with his next movie, which he’s about to shoot in Madrid, Barbera quipped: “It depend how good his next film will be! We’ll see. Maybe.”
He also rejected the idea that Hollywood studios were retreating from Venice, saying several major U.S. titles simply were not ready in time, including films from Aaron Sorkin and David Fincher.
“We know the situation in Hollywood. We know the situation of the studios. They are in difficulty,” he said, pointing to mergers and shifting production and distribution strategies.
Still, Barbera predicted the studios would return, calling Venice “a very good promotional opportunity.”
Venice opens Wednesday with “Ink,“ Danny Boyle’s drama about the birth of Rupert Murdoch’s tabloid empire, starring Jack O’Connell, Guy Pearce and Claire Foy.
Why does everyone seem to want Venice to take a political position this year?
Because we had Berlin, obviously, with all the problems between the government, Palestine, the pro-Palestinian protests and all of that. Poor Wim Wenders was basically trapped by the press conference. At Cannes, a little less, because there weren’t really films that were politically very sensitive. Here, we have a lot of films. We have four films dealing with Gaza and Palestine. We have the problems of Ukraine. We have Elon Musk. There are several films that can start controversies or, at the very least, provoke very strong political reactions. So I would say it is almost normal that people expect something. They ask whether the festival — and especially the Biennale — is going to take very clear and explicit political positions. What we always say is that neither the Biennale nor the festival will make political declarations in order to take sides. Obviously, that is not what we do.
But they are actually asking you to do that?
Yes, they are asking us. For example, you know that the pro-Palestinian groups sent a document — the letter — asking for an official pro-Palestinian declaration and all of that. But after all, we are a space for freedom of expression. We invite films. We understand that there will be discussions, debates and everything that comes with that. Our role is to safeguard freedom of expression for everyone, for the artists, and to safeguard the confrontation between artists and the public, the critics and people in general. We will never take an explicit political position. It doesn’t make any sense.
But at the same time, I think it is clear what our position is, because through the program, through the programming of the festival and through the films that we invite, it is clear what we are doing and what kind of space we want the festival to be.
But you don’t have any Israeli films this year, do you?
No.
Why is that?
First of all, because we received only one Israeli film. One single Israeli submission. We didn’t like it enough, so we decided not to invite it. And for the first time, we didn’t receive any other proposals for Israeli films. I don’t know why.
So there is no boycott?
No, not at all. Never. It is absolutely important to say that we have no prejudice against anyone anywhere in the world. If there had been a Russian film, an Israeli film of good quality, we would undoubtedly have invited it. And we were ready to face the political reaction that would have been predictable. Because if we had had an Israeli film, obviously the pro-Palestinian groups could have launched an international appeal to boycott the Israeli film and everything around it. That would have been horrible, but we were ready to face that situation.
At one point, apparently you almost took the Vincent Gallo film with James Franco. What happened there?
Yes and Vincent told us in the end that he preferred that we not do anything. He only wanted to come if he was in competition.
Really?
We told him, “We like the film very much. We know it is a film that is going to divide the public, but we are ready to face a complicated situation.” But not in competition, because we didn’t think the profile of the film would benefit from the competition. In the end, we discussed it a lot — a lot, for a long time — and finally he said: “No, I prefer not to come.”
Was it a film that would have created controversy because of the film itself, or because of Vincent Gallo and James Franco?
No, because of the film. Because of the subject.
Because it is about a serial killer? Because it makes the serial killer sympathetic?
No, but you know, with Vincent Gallo there is always an approach that is, let’s say, troubling. There is always something unsettling in the way he approaches a subject.
But James Franco as well — wasn’t that a concern?
No. We didn’t care about that. Because it has already been several years since James Franco fell somewhat off the radar. He has started making films again in Italy recently. There are at least two films that have come out without any particular negative reaction toward him. So we were not concerned because of his presence in the film. That wasn’t the issue for us.
It seems that at Venice you can get away with things that at Cannes would immediately spark a huge backlash from journalists, the industry and everyone else. Why do you think Venice can do that?
Why Venice? I think because of the prestige of the Biennale and the credibility that the Biennale has gained over the years through its international positioning and through decisions that people have appreciated. It has built this credibility through its defense of artistic freedom and everything that goes with that, without ever taking a political side.
You have previously had Polanski, you have had Woody Allen. Could Woody Allen come back here with his next film?
It depends how good his next film will be! We’ll see. Maybe.
There are a lot of French and Italian films and filmmakers coming this year, but there are fewer Americans. Do you think the Americans will come back?
I think they will. The problem was that there simply weren’t films for Venice. The only film that was ready was Iñárritu’s film with Tom Cruise (“Digger”). And they had the right to decide not to show the film at a festival, to release the film more or less everywhere in the world and to play on the surprise and on Tom Cruise’s ability to bring in an audience. It is a shame, obviously. I would have loved to have the film. But that was really the only film that was available, because the other films weren’t ready. Sorkin had to reshoot scenes in August, so his film (“The Social Reckoning”) wasn’t ready. David Fincher was delayed in post-production (with “The Further Mis-Adventures of Cliff Booth”). There were simply no other films available for Venice.
Are the studios also afraid of going to festivals like Venice because the critical reaction can be so tough?
We know the situation in Hollywood. We know the situation of the studios. They are in difficulty. They are going through mergers. We don’t know how all of that is going to end. They are also rethinking their production strategies and their distribution strategies for films. So it is not a very good moment. There simply weren’t films ready at this particular moment. But I am sure that in the future the festival will continue to be an extraordinary opportunity for the promotion of films.
But it’s expensive to come to Venice.
It is not expensive. It depends, obviously, but if you have a film that costs $200 million and the studio is spending $5 million or much more on promoting the film, then coming to Venice or Cannes might cost around $1 million. Not more than that. So it is a very good promotional opportunity. I am sure they will come back.
English (US) ·