Journal of Film Preservation - FIAF

de las retrospectivas, en especial en
el contexto de un debate muy actual:
¿retrospectiva completa o retrospectiva
selectiva? Para iluminar la discusión el
autor examina sobre todo las recientes
experiencias de Viena, Toronto y
Copenhague.
También discute sobre la producción
nacional y sobre el lugar que se
le asigna en los programas de las
cinematecas (Londres, Toronto,
Copenhague) y asimismo sobre la
cuestión, a menudo controvertida,
de las series temáticas y de las series
llamadas «geográficas», es decir,
consagradas a un solo país y que,
para bien o para mal, en general se
organizan en colaboración con las
embajadas y los servicios culturales del
país seleccionado.
Además se encaran cuestiones
más generales relacionadas con la
planificación, desde el equilibrio de
los programas hasta la identificación
del público al que están destinados,
lo cual abarca la periodicidad del
programa impreso, la repetición de
las sesiones (a veces durante un lapso
The delegates at the FIAF Congress in
1948 visiting Nordisk film studios.
argument that one never expects a pedagogical framework from the
Royal Theatre, insisting that it would cease to exist if it presented plays by
the Danish/Norwegian playwright Ludwig Holberg in a series. Ib Monty
also says that Ulrichsen, on principle, did not want to programme films
that he himself had already seen. However, an important distinction of
modern cinematheque practice is that the films shown are placed within
a context. Ulrich Gregor, who in 1963 co-founded Freunde der Deutschen
Kinemathek, said in 1972 in relation to the principle of FDK:
”What mattered was to provide specific education and information,
which meant not to isolate films, but to present the individual
work as part of a larger picture… Films, in this model, were not
to be presented as just singular works of art, but as products of a
medium, informed by specific factors – political, social, economic
factors, factors of artistic tradition, or the very refusal of such
traditions.” (Strathaus, p. 3)
Continuing this practice, the cinematheques often invite guests – directors,
film critics, film historians – to introduce the films, and organize events and
debates on historical and political film subjects related to the programme.
DFI/Cinematheque develops 12-14 special events per month. These events
have become increasingly important in order to maintain and attract an
audience. Gwen Deglise from the American Cinematheque in Los Angeles
emphasizes that “Showing a film is not enough”. Thus, many cinematheques
consider cutting back on the number of films shown in exchange for further
contextualization of the films, thereby creating an image for themselves
in relation to commercial cinemas. Geoff Andrew, head of programming
at BFI Southbank (long known as the NFT, or National Film Theatre) in
London, points out a different purpose for this practice: “We are trying
to expand peoples’ view of what a film is. The usual attitude is that film is
comedy or action. There is very little awareness that film can be anything
other than that, and that even if
a film is recorded in Mandarin,
Portuguese, or Swahili and has
subtitles, it doesn’t have to be
pretentious and weird.” Andrew
adds that whether because of
globalization or an increased
weariness of Hollywood’s
formulaic films, we are today
watching films from countries we
haven’t been aware of before. “So
when some pronounce that film is
dead, it’s because they don’t look
far enough out into the world.”
More cinematheques attach an
increased importance to their role
in defending film as an art form
and contributing to a democratic
debate. They emphasize that
cinematheques must be a critical and ethical tool – as expressed in the
mission statement of the Austrian Film Museum:
”The Film Museum is opposed to a reduction of film and culture in
9 Journal of Film Preservation / 81 / 2009