If you are a returning reader, thank you!
If this is your first time, I hope you enjoy Highly Transmissible, a free daily newsletter about what to watch during quarantine.
The coronavirus lockdown has affected the arts in a profound way, and independent and non-profit cinemas in particular have suffered as they have been forced to close their doors. While the major streaming services, corporate theater chains and film studios will be fine in the long run, for well-loved, local independent theaters, the future is murkier. New York City is home to many landmarks of indie film — from the Quad to the Nitehawk to Film Forum to IFC Center, to name just a few — and they have all struggled. These independent theaters are uniquely dependent on ticket sales, and typically that’s enough to get by. The city is full of film lovers who still value the experience of a picture on the silver screen. With the lockdown, these theaters have lost their single greatest source of income.
However, all is not lost! Independent cinemas have quickly shifted to acting as curators for streaming films from small distributors, and the money spent on streaming rentals provided by the theaters helps to underwrite them. The experience isn’t the same of course, and long-term there’s no way they can outcompete the streaming giants. But for right now, the more cinephiles can do to support these local institutions from their couches, the better off the entire film community will be.
To better understand the challenges facing independent theaters — and to shine a light on the streaming offerings from one of my favorite institutions in the Big Apple — I recently caught up with Elspeth Carroll, associate repertory programmer at Film Forum. Our conversation has been edited for length and clarity.
Q&A with Elspeth Carroll — Film Forum
Benjamin Reeves: How do you see your streaming offerings in relation to what you typically would be doing if the theater were open?
Elspeth Carroll: With the virtual cinema, we’ve been reaching out to a lot of independent distributors with whom we typically work. We are trying to expand and diversify our offerings. In terms of the repertory program, it’s a little more similar to what we would typically offer in the theater. We’re also working on our calendar for when the theater reopens. We’re spending a lot of time figuring out where we can expand and trying to find unusual — but still typical for us — films.
What are the biggest limitations in terms of curating your streaming selection? Is there a sense of freedom without the limits imposed by the number of screens?
To be honest, [the streaming selection] is much more limited than what we would typically offer in the theater, because we don’t really have any limits in the theater. In the theater, we have limits in terms of whether we can get screening materials that are an acceptable quality, but with this we’re working with select distributors, and we’re not showing major studio films. We don’t have limits in terms of the screens, but we have limits in terms of our own reputation and what people trust us to offer. We obviously have to maintain these standards.
In other words, the streaming stock of quality films — so to speak — is more limited than what you might screen in the theater.
Things don’t exist in that medium, and there are many streaming platforms. It’s quite difficult to find something that both exists in that medium and isn’t widely available. All of our films are coming from smaller distributors, and many of them have been recently restored for theatrical runs. I’d say for us, at least, it’s slightly more similar to what we do when we’re booking a long run, except that we can offer things that aren’t strong enough for a week-long theatrical run (which of course doesn’t mean that they’re not wonderful and don’t have an audience).
There’s more diversity in a way, but it really isn’t a replacement for actually being open.
The virtual cinema is really a stopgap, both for us and for these distributors. It’s a way to provide a little income, but it can’t compare to what we would do with the actual theater open. I think we’re all making-do with what we can now. Of course, we’re looking forward to the theater being open.
The timing of all of this is somewhat unfortunate since it’s also Film Forum’s spring fundraising appeal.
With Film Forum, there’s a real sense of continuity — that not something you can say about a lot of cultural institutions — and it’s never really become institutionalized. There’s been an immediacy to it because of that. There are places I can give $50 to and it’s a drop in the bucket, but for Film Forum, ticket sales make up a significant part of our budget and individual donations make up a significant part of our budget. If you’re envisioning what you want the city to look like on the other side of this, you need to decide what you want to be around.
Readers can support Film Forum via their spring appeal here.
Today’s Films:
Elspeth Carroll, associated repertory programmer at Film Forum, gave us an insider’s view on some of their current and upcoming streaming offerings. Here are two of the (many) standouts, which can be streamed via Film Forum for $6.99 each:
Les Choses de la Vie (1970)
Elspeth Carroll: Les Choses de la Vie stars Romy Schneider Michel Piccoli, who just passed away a couple of days ago. It’s moving in and of itself, but it also deals with mortality and memory and the mixing of the conscious and the subconscious. You’re guided by Michel Piccoli’s thoughts throughout it. He goes through this car accident and then the kind of unifying element that’s driving everything is the voice of his thoughts. When he dies this ends, and it is particularly moving now. It was made in the 1970s near the peak of Piccoli’s fame.
Videograms of a Revolution (1992)
Elspeth Carroll: We recently did a retrospective of Romanian cinema with Making Waves, which is a Bucharest-based organization, and this was the first real, expansive retrospective of Romanian cinema in the U.S. Videograms of a Revolution is very interesting for this moment. The film follows the 1989 uprising and fall of Nicolae Ceaușescu. The film is a documentary — or a hybrid — and it draws from TV and amateur video. It’s not only showing this uprising, rather it is a construction of a narrative in real time. It’s interesting now especially because we’re going through this very strange moment and trying to figure out what to make of it and constantly having to construct these narratives. Getting to see that in real time in a film is very special.
Reading List:
The author H.G. Carillo recently died (any of my fellow Knox College graduates may recognize him as a former visiting professor). In death, though, perhaps his greatest story — the complete fabrication of his biography as a Cuban refugee — has unraveled. The Washington Post has the obituary.
There’s a refreshingly contrarian take over at The Atlantic, where Molly Jong-Fast contends that NYC may be back and better than ever after the pandemic subsides. And to be honest (hat tip to readers Robbie and Laura), I’m inclined to agree with her.
Benjamin Reeves is an award-winning screenwriter, journalist and media consultant based in Brooklyn, New York. Follow him on Twitter @bpreeves or write to him at breeves.writer@gmail.com.