San Francisco Film Society Oral History Project Interview with ...

paved the way. When we would go to Cannes, there was no question we had much more entrée than we
would have had, because we had the director here and we had established a good relationship.
MARGARITA LANDAZURI: Did you get any ideas from them about operating a festival, or they from
you, that you were able to incorporate?
CLAUDE JARMAN: Not really, because it was so different. I mean, Cannes was just such a different
animal. New York was more like what we do. We all had the same issues. In Cannes, you didn’t have to
raise any money. It was all supported by the government. So money was not an issue. Money was
always an issue with the festivals in this country. But it was interesting to get their thoughts. I think it
really elevated the stature of our Festival.
MARGARITA LANDAZURI: Did you keep up the dialogue?
CLAUDE JARMAN: Definitely. I went to Cannes and I spent a lot of time with the director, and we
were always invited to lots of different activities. I never went to the New York Festival.
MARGARITA LANDAZURI: Really?
CLAUDE JARMAN: No, because we were always, at that point, really deep in preparation for our
event, because it was always two weeks afterwards. So I never went there.
MARGARITA LANDAZURI: Was there any rivalry—for example, with New York, and later, Los
Angeles?
CLAUDE JARMAN: I think Los Angeles, but I don’t think there ever was with New York. I mean,
there was the fact that we came after their event, we didn’t say, “Give us a film, and don’t give it to New
York.” And they never said, “Give it to us, but don’t give it to San Francisco.” That was never an issue.
And of course Cannes was always in May, and that was kind of the kickoff. From there, we sort of fell
in line. I never understood exactly why San Francisco changed that pattern.
77