European Films v/s McMovies

Mon, 19 Jul 2010

by Sile Murphy

If you are one of the hundreds of thousands of Europeans to venture to the many multiplex cinemas scattered across European towns and cities this weekend

, chances are you will be attending a major Hollywood motion picture which has cost on average $106 million to produce. 35% of that sum will have gone into the posters, advertising campaigns, newspaper endorsements and general hype, ensuring the ‘chatter’ makes this a ‘do not miss’ film. Perhaps some will attend an art house cinema where an appropriately gritty European film will be shown to an appropriately self-congratulatory audience, pleased with them for simultaneously avoiding the McMovie experience and for supporting a tiny non-profitable industry.

The reality for many European directors and producers is that they actually do not want to remain a purely niche highbrow experience. Yet, commanding even a fraction of the European audience that attend the opening weekend of a US blockbuster can never be realised as they face competition with the massive budget for production and publicity which accompanies a US film. Furthermore, the language barrier makes subtitling, for example, a Spanish film into even three European languages unprofitable considering it does not have the publicity budget to get full cinema release. The director that seeks financial or critical acclaim will have to homogenise his or her creativity in order to meet the criteria that is required for any major studio investment. For the cinema goer the emphasis on film success is measured almost purely on first weekend release takings. As a result, studios become reluctant to take any chances with directors, actors or storylines; creativity is stifled and we are forced to watch bland over hyped conservative films.

In 2007 the European Parliament came forward with a means of addressing these issues while also pushing their cross-cultural agenda through establishing a cinema prize unlike all others. While some small European ‘art houses’ are celebrated in the Canadian Rockies or the beaches of the South of France, here in a modest ceremony in the bureaucratic surroundings of the European Parliament buildings of Strasbourg, surrounded by suited MEPs from 27 member states, a European film is awarded a prize. This achievement provides a genuine opportunity to reach out to millions of EU citizens, uncompromised by risk averse studios and language barriers.

The Lux Prize was first awarded in 2007, the winner, voted by the MEPS from a shortlist of 10, had their film subtitled into the 23 of languages of the member states as well as a subsidy for 35mm print or DVD release. To be considered as a contender for the prize, a film must illuminate the public debate on European integration, offering perspectives from new and old member states. The films chosen as winners and contenders have not shied away from addressing real issues that highlight major flaws in Europe’s concepts of integration. The 2009 winner, Welcome, addresses the brutality of immigrants stuck in the tent city in Calais and reflects Europe’s dire immigration policy. This year’s shortlisted films confront issues such as human trafficking, sex slavery and conflicting notions of what it means to be European.

The process of awarding the prize is not without its criticisms. The purpose-built cinema constructed within the Parliament in Brussels, which can only be attended by MEPs, staff, and accredited visitors to the EP, smacks of an exclusivity that seems to contradict the original spirit of the prize. Also less than half the MEPs even vote on one film. So the process itself is flawed, with leverage probably given to issues affecting larger member states. Changes have been made though and last May 9th, Schuman or Europe day, saw 10 of the films from the last three years, played in UGC cinemas across Europe, opening up both awareness of the issues addressed and of the prize itself.

As Europe clearly struggles to get to grips with its finances, supporting cultural endeavours such as the Lux Prize can be criticised as wasteful. Promoting and protecting cultural diversity and creativity is just as important during an economic downturn if not more so, as it prevents the citizens from becoming just tax payers or just economic statistics. It also gives Europe the opportunity to celebrate what European unity has created, protected and what makes the EU different. As the Union has managed to cross borders with currency and trade why then are Europeans relying more and more on the US for entertainment? That the EU is the biggest economy in the world must mean there exists a massive opportunity for the promotion and celebration of EU culture. Why not profit then?