-
-
Ad Space
(728 x 90)
A fixture since 1969, the Film Society of Lincoln Center proudly calls itself “one of the film world’s most respected and influential arbiters of cinematic trends and discoveries.” So while program director Richard Peña, who’s also chair of the New York Film Festival’s selection committee, may not single-handedly determine what non-Hollywood movies New Yorkers see, his taste and interests do hold sway. And since his appointment in 1988, he’s pissed some people off: Like Times Square, the festival is never “what it used to be.” But Peña isn’t losing sleep over the criticism.
“There are people who run huge film festivals and say, ‘I don’t think it’s my right to choose films. The public should choose films,’ ” Peña remarks. “I think that’s phony, completely dishonest. The public is in no position to figure out what to see—the average moviegoer is overwhelmed.” That may sound autocratic, but he has a point—infinite choice produces paralysis. And Peña does stress we over I: The Film Society employs associate programmers, and the festival’s selections are decided by committee (though Peña makes the first cut that winnows some 1,800 candidates to under 100). He also points out that the Film Society isn’t the only filter in town—there is, after all, BAM, Film Forum and MoMA, among other venerable institutions that regularly program foreign-language, independent and experimental films.
But the Film Society is a high-profile brand, and Peña has been instrumental in shaping its programming for 20 years; some criticisms aren’t going away. It’s fair to ask why, for example, certain countries merit annual showcases while others don’t. “Some of the answer is that we entered into relationships that worked for us,” Peña says. “ ‘Rendez-Vous with French Cinema’ has a loyal audience—there are people I see once a year, but I see them at ten films.” Another part of it, he explains, is having one screen and 52 weeks. The existing annual programs—New York Jewish Film Festival, “Film Comment Selects,” “Rendez-Vous,” “Spanish Cinema Now,” New York African Film Festival, “Human Rights Watch,” “Open Roads: New Italian Cinema”—make up almost half the year, leaving less room for other programming. “As of now, we’re not adding new recurring programs,” says Peña. “In a few years we’ll have a couple of new theaters, and at that point we can talk about it.”
But doesn’t the Film Society have an institutional responsibility to be more representative of the international film landscape? “I understand representative to mean you should have a chart and give the public a survey of what went on in world cinema in a given year: ‘three from this country, two from that one, four from this other,’ ” Peña scoffs. “That’s one way of running a film festival, but it’s no way to run a film festival I want to work on. In this year’s ‘New Directors/New Films,’ we have two Mexican films, two Lebanese films, two Israeli films.… We’re going where we think the energy is.” That philosophy applies to the New York Film Festival, too, critics be damned. In recent years, Peña has screened mainstream fare—such as Mystic River (2003) and No Country for Old Men (2007)—edging out “true” indies from the fest’s 25 slots. “I read in some blog that the New York Film Festival chose to open 2006 with a big commercial hit, The Queen,” he says. “Excuse me: When we saw The Queen, it didn’t have ‘big commercial hit’ written all over it. The idea that it was obvious it would do so well is calling the shots after they’ve happened.” Besides, he adds, “We’re not judging films on their commercial prospects—we’re judging them on their status as works of art. And if, in our opinion, a [studio] film achieves that status, why not show it?”
Whether a movie is “art,” of course, is a matter of individual taste—and Peña sees no problem with that subjectivity. “What else is there?” he asks. “If someone says, ‘Wouldn’t it be great if there were a machine you could put a film into and find out whether it’s good or bad?,’ my response is, ‘There is a machine. It’s called a projector.’ ” He continues, “I like to think my opinions and the opinions of my colleagues are informed, but in the end, it doesn’t get much better than arbitrary. On the other hand, we have a track record, and I think the festival has done a pretty good job over the years of showcasing important filmmakers and movements. If you agree, you stick with us. If you don’t, you don’t.”
Also in Film:
