Notes from the 83rd Venice Film Festival: When Political Slogans Become Clichés

At the Venice Film Festival, political arguments moved to the forefront before audiences had even seen the films competing for the Golden Lion. The festival’s political and institutional environment became the subject of debate, along with a more uncomfortable question: how much do familiar political truths actually lead to serious examination?

The first major dispute concerned the small number of women directors in the competition. Maggie Gyllenhaal, the festival’s American jury president, noted that only two of the 21 films they would judge were directed by women. She argued that this was not simply a matter of subjective selection. It reflected systemic inequalities that begin with access to financing and continue into decisions about which stories are considered important or artistically significant.

Gyllenhaal also argued that cinema is inevitably political. Her point was not limited to films that address political subjects directly. By bringing other people’s experiences to the screen, she said, cinema creates opportunities for audiences to develop empathy.

Alberto Barbera, the festival’s artistic director, offered a familiar response from the film world: this year’s selection had not produced enough strong films by women directors. The article questions whether selectors can claim to make a neutral choice between good and bad films when directors do not have equal access to financing, production support and the confidence of the industry. That, it suggests, was the basic question Gyllenhaal was raising.

The festival’s political atmosphere was reinforced by George Clooney, who received the Honorary Golden Lion at the opening ceremony. He warned about artificial intelligence’s threat to journalism, the concentration of media ownership in the hands of a few major capital holders and the negative consequences of further corporate mergers. His criticism of a possible Paramount and Warner Bros. merger stood out. The article notes the irony of these remarks appearing alongside “Ink,” a film about the first steps in Rupert Murdoch’s media empire. It ends by asking whether the stars and festival executives who repeat these political messages almost ritually genuinely expect deep change.

“

Cinema is inevitably political.