An analysis of this year’s Berlinale – from the festival’s awards and key events to its new approach in regards to A-list stars,  in contrast with its traditional role as a springboard for emerging, unconventional filmmakers.

We have reached the end of yet another Berlinale – perhaps the most intensely-anticipated edition of the last three years, as it’s the first without any COVID restrictions since 2020, the year when Carlo Chatrian and his team of curators from Locarno took over the festival’s artistic directorship. An edition not without smaller or bigger controversies, that is ultimately inevitable in the context of such a sprawling festival (with a selection of almost 300 titles this year alone) and such a strong tradition in the continent’s industry. But it was certainly a successful one: amongst critics, entertainment journalists, and industry alike, but also the general audience (for reference, here are the edition’s recently-published figures). A triumph that is the fruit of a strategy that combined both the festival’s role as an important springboard for emerging filmmakers and for those with less conventional approaches, with a new approach in regards to A-list stars, which brought the festival closer to its sisters in the big European festival triad (i.e. Cannes and Venice).

I. A-list stars, protests, and solidarity

This year, the red carpet in front of the Palast was as crowded with household names as can be: Steven Speilberg, Bono, Helen Mirren, John Malkovich, Willem Dafoe, Anne Hathaway, Matt Damon, Peter Dinklage, just to name a few. They were joined by video link by the now-iconic president Volodymyr Zelensky, who held a speech at the festival’s opening ceremony. True to the tradition he has established in his speeches over the past year, Zelensky made allusions to the specific context of the audience that he was addressing: by talking about the Berlin Wall and the Potsdamer Platz, referencing Wim Wenders’ monumental 1987 film, The Wings of Desire.

At the same time, the festival also acted as a discursive springboard for international solidarity and protests: special events were dedicated to condemning the Russian Federation’s invasion of Ukraine (which marked its first anniversary on the second-to-last day of the festival), while multiple flashmobs and speeches drew attention to the brutal suppression of protests and women’s civil rights in Iran (including a moving address by main competition juror Golshifteh Farahani).

Johnnie To, himself a jury member, made statements that could be interpreted as a criticism of China’s intervention in Hong Kong, saying that “cinema is the first to suffer” under totalitarian regimes. Israeli producer Yoav Roeh criticized the recent judicial reforms in Israel that would stifle the work of filmmakers who are critical of Benjamin Netanyahu’s government. (On the other hand, the festival’s failure to mention the tragic earthquakes in Turkey and Syria at its opening ceremony was harshly criticized.)

All of this amounted to extensive press coverage of the festival across worldwide media outlets – an achievement that the former artistic director of the Berlinale, Dieter Kosslick, had long striven to achieve. However, this is not to say that there weren’t any controversies: there were multiple protests around the Palast on the opening night (one organized by Letzte Generation, an environmentalist organization – see main photo; another against Uber – the festival’s new mobility partner, as well as one organized by a cinema workers’ union). The international premiere of a Norwegian animated film that was featured in the Generation section was canceled after an anti-racism association drew attention to the fact that its characters underwent a transformation that heavily resembled blackface; future screenings of the film went forward as scheduled, albeit opening with a disclaimer. (I wondered how it was possible for an uncritical depiction of blackface could get past the Berlinale’s filters and found the news a bit strange – that is, until I saw the film’s promotional images for myself and… the characters really do look like they’re wearing a black-skinned costume.)

II. The Awards

But let’s discuss the list of awards. The fact that the Golden Bear went to a documentary – the second non-fiction film to ever win the festival’s top award, the first being Gianfranco Rossi’s 2016 Fuocoammare – was met with both positive and negative reactions. While the non-fiction community (rightly) saw the award as a reconfirmation of documentary cinema’s crucial role in a world that is shaken by crises and contradictory official narratives, others (like film critic Jessica Kiang) expressed disappointment, opining that other, stronger titles had been ignored and pointing out that all of the top prizes went to films directed by men that are over sixty. (An observation not at all trivial since it comes in the aftermath of the 2021-2022 festival season – when all major European festivals awarded their top prizes to emerging female filmmakers.)

Not having seen Sur L’Adamant – the final competitional film that was screened this year – along with a significant chunk of the competition, it’s hard for me to say whether or not the award is “well-deserved” (and it’s a relative concept, anyways, which depends on both how and how much any critic sees any given competitive selection). What I can indeed note is that the jury chaired by Kristen Stewart, the youngest festival president in Berlinale’s history (along with colleagues like To, Farahani, Carla Simón, and Radu Jude; the latter of which the actress seems to have struck a highly meme-able friendship with), seems to have consciously acted against the currents that were intended to pull them towards a more mainstream-oriented result.

This was certainly surprising for some, not in the least for Nicolas Philibert, the grand winner of the night – who, upon taking the microphone on the stage of the Palast, turned towards the jury and exclaimed “Are you crazy?!”. Just see Jude’s speech, before presenting the Silver Bear for Best Screenplay to Angela Schanelec’s Music, about how the “bookkeepers” of the film industry have historically used screenplays as a means to control the actions and output of filmmakers; a film like Music is precisely the kind that goes against this phenomenon, says Jude, and therefore deserves to be lauded. There were ample options with mainstream credentials in the competition (BlackBerry, Manodrome, or Limbo, for example), but the jury’s choices – Garrel, Petzold, Caneijo, Schanelec – spoke volumes about their position in the question of contemporary cinema: one that is in favor of filmmakers rather than the bookkeepers.

On the other hand, voices that – like Belarusian filmmaker and critic Nikita Lavretski – point out the fact that these choices can also be regarded as canonical are very much in the right, just as they are right in pointing out that the particular ilk of festival-goers who only sets out to watch films from the Forum along with a few titles made by contemporary canonical filmmakers are pretty short-sighted and annoying. (Speaking as someone who can perfectly identify themselves within this observation – to be perfectly honest! –, I can’t help but agree: yes, sometimes we do tend to act like a pesky and expedient little sect, sometimes.)

And although it’s hard for me to offer a comprehensive opinion on what concerns the official competition, it’s clear to me that this was one of the festival’s better editions in the past years: and the lion’s share of its best titles was featured in the Encounters section (Here, Orlando, Samsara and In Water). Still, I do think that there was some deadweight in this section: included works that seemed much better suited to the official competition, but that didn’t make the final cut (The Adults, The Cage is Looking for a Bird, Mummola). But, at least as far as I’m concerned, the Forum remains the most exciting, brave, and bold section of the Berlinale. Which already makes me look forward to the 74th edition with a great deal of enthusiasm.

Flavia Dima

Film critic & journalist. Collaborates with local and international outlets, programs a short film festival - BIEFF, does occasional moderating gigs and is working on a PhD thesis about home movies. At Films in Frame, she writes the monthly editorial - The State of Cinema and is the magazine's main festival reporter.