Ava Cahen, the artistic director of Cannes Critics’ Week, is looking forward to her second festival at the helm of the section for which the film journalist has been a member of the selection committee since 2016.
She talks to Screen about curating the selection, the camaraderie of the small team and the moment when a film takes on a life of its own.
This year’s Critics’ Week will open and close with French films and four out of 11 films are from France. Was this intentional or was there a particularly rich offering of French films this year?
Thierry [Fremaux] said it well during the official selection press conference – “we don’t choose the films, the films choose us.” Cinema is a love story. There are encounters, there are coups de coeur (crushes). It wasn’t a choice of a certain territory – we really just fell in love with these filmmakers, their films, the characters they present, the mise-en-scene.
I’m also editor-in-chief of French Mania and I’m very interested in French cinema. Cannes has always been very international and for the past 62 years, there have always been around three or four films from France. These films show the diversity, the plurality, the eclecticism of French cinema – it’s not just one genre, one form, one tone. I’m thrilled to be be able to showcase these four films that are completely different.
What makes a film an opening night film vs a closing night film vs a special screening or competition title?
It’s really about striking balance on a programming level. First, a selection is made, then we think about the programming. First we fall in love with a film, then we think about how they can exist alongside each other, how we empower them.
It’s great to start off the selection with emotion, with cinema that has feeling. We make our selection based on emotion – then we place these emotions throughout the selection. We’ll start with tears in our eyes with Ama Gloria - I couldn’t have dreamed of a more beautiful opening. And we’ll end with a tragicomedy with No Love Lost, the perfect way to finish this selection this year.
We chose seven films we loved. The competition is very eclectic very international. When you’re a programmer and a critic, the best barometer is the heart. How does it beat how does the skin react, and these films gave us a desire to talk about them.
There are many festivals and various selections even at Cannes. What makes a film a Critics’ Week film ?
It’s very hard to respond to that question because in reality we don’t have a strict list of requirements other than of course for the films to be first and second features. From one year to the next, we wipe the slate clean. We don’t have a defined editorial line. We choose films that move us and then we talk a lot among ourselves on the selection committee. We start screenings in December and we stop in April. We’re a committee made up of critics so we have a passion for talking about films, there are heated debates. It’s the fruits of these discussions that defines our choice, The idea is to create harmony in terms of both the type of film and also representation – in terms of country, characters, genre. We have that in mind, then it’s the films that take on a life of their own.
Last year was your first year at the helm. What makes your new position different than being part of the selection committee?
I live, I eat, I dream, I sleep Critics’ Week . I travel more often to other festivals and to workshops with my team to keep in touch with the industry. What is different is now being the captain of this beautiful, beautiful team. We’re a small team but we really work in solidarity at Critics’ Week. There is a real sense of a collective.
There seems to be a common thread among many of the films in selection, namely motherhood and fatherhood. Was this a curation choice or were there many films about this topic?
It’s a bit of both. The leitmotif is the artistic element. How is a subject transcended by art? First films are often about family - childhood, adolescence, motherhood, fatherhood. The poster this year is a nod to Aftersun, which also deals with fatherhood and family.
With more than half of the films in competition (four out of seven) from female directors and in total (six out of 11), les femmes are well-represented this year. Is this a conscious programming choice or a natural evolution?
We tried to balance everything. The history of cinema was constructed based on several male stories so I’m thrilled that there are magnificent women as well. We are cinephiles and critics so we are sensitive to these stories.
And films can also tell stories about women or be considered “feminist films” without being directed by women.
That’s exactly it. Gender doesn’t mean anything. They are directors who connect us to a story. Inchallah A Boy for example is the portrait of a woman – it’s spectacular. There are female characters like the one in this film that really moved us by their pugnacity, by their luminosity and their unique personalities.
There are several subjects that cinema considered to be taboo for a long time and now filmmakers are dealing with them. Le Ravissement for example, tackles difficult subjects from a friendship to complicated motherhood – it talks about post-partum depression and with a form, a way of storytelling that really knocked us for a loop.
You chose from 1,000 films this year, slightly under the 1,100 from last year. Do you think this is because in this context of post-pandemic “critic-proof” blockbusters, it is harder to get first and second independent features made or is this just a slight dip in submissions?
I don’t really have a global analysis quite yet. Brazil for example is waking up from a period of non-activity under [former president] Bolsonaro. It seems to be territory that is about to show us some great things in the future. Southeast Asia is in great shape – we have a Malaysian film, but also saw films from the Philippines and Thailand. For example, we haven’t seen Malaysia represented for a long time at a major festival and Tiger Stripes is like the lovechild of Julia Ducournau and Apichatpong Weerasethakul.
Belgian cinema always has a place in the hearts of Critics’ Week programmers and we have two Belgian films this year. I don’t have the impression of seeing any territories who have pressed the pause button. Even China, though a bit less and always more shorts because there is no censorship. I didn’t really notice any dip in production value from any regions, it was more seeing some territories wake up after a lull whether it was due to Covid or politics.
No comments yet