The structure has to be changed radically

Zoltán Kőrösi, president of the Hungarian Motion Picture Foundation

filminhungary: What was the most important development in Hungary’s film industry over the past years?

Zoltán Kőrösi: The development can be mostly described by quantitative characteristics: the quantity of the film industry is four or five times bigger than before. It is also important to mention that there has been such a development of the film infrastructure in Budapest and in its surroundings that now we find here one of the most important studio and service concentrations. The reason of this is without any doubt the financial possibilities given by the cinema law and the well trained but cheap human resource available. The third would be the well organized logistics of these studios.

fih: In your opinion what is the biggest achievement of the past 5 years and what tasks do you still have ahead of you?

Z.K.: The biggest achievement of the past 5 years is undoubtedly the application of the cinema law and through this the increase of the film industry in Hungary. Our tasks in fact come from this situation. As now in the region several countries offer the same advantages to productions we have to think on the next steps, on the development. Beside we have to dedicate a lot of energy on the creation of a National Film Strategy. We have to systematically produce films which present the contents of the national cultural heritage and which by their quality make a good impression on Hungary. And of course are capable to bring back Hungarian spectators into cinemas.
We will have to radically change the public support of Hungarian films. Until now the state has financed 25-30 feature films a year which is – I have to state – financially unsustainable. We will launch about 15 films a year, but hopefully with better conditions than until now.

fih: Do you plan to support more the distribution of films in Hungary and also of Hungarian films?

Z.K.: Putting more money into the system is not a solution in itself and we are not in position to do this. The structure has to be changed radically based on digitalisation. Using the successful European examples we have to revive those communal places, cultural centres of villages and small towns, libraries where through the digital technique the films will able to reach the Hungarian spectators again. This is the most urgent task. Personally I am also sure that the support of the distribution of Hungarian films has also to be changed.

fih: How important are in your view the co-productions in the development of Hungary’s film industry, and what collaboration opportunities do you see with neighbouring countries?

Z.K.: There is only one path in front of the Hungarian film: the European co-production. I think that both those who try to implement overseas strategies in Europe and those who try to develop national film strategies which are based only on their own intellectual and financial power are wrong. There is no question that on a European horizon lies the future of Hungarian film culture: those national contents, specifics should be presented which can reach a European audience too.

fih: What changes do you plan in the support of co-productions?

We consider very important the co-productions however we have to b more severe on this issue: I have to admit that we have discovered in the practice of previous years several unreal, fake co-productions. This will not be tolerated any more. On the other hand in my view Hungary has been intolerably passive in the past years on the European co-production market, this is why we plan to strengthen on personal and conceptional level our functioning. We plan to develop a system based on such a collaboration which connects us more closely to the European regional film funds.

fih: What is the role of film in a country’s cultural identity?

Z.K.: Hungary is a country with a strong film tradition but this respect has weakened in the last years. The taste of the Hungarian audience has changed due to changes in the traditional forms of distribution and due to the invasion of American films. All this is reflected in the film’s prestige as an art and as an industry. We have to work here and now in a way to renew the connection between Hungarian films and their audience and to support such productions which are able to bring back the spectators to the cinemas.

fih: Can the success of Hungarian films help not only the film industry but also the country’s reputation?

Z.K.: Traditionally cinema is considered as part of a country’s image – Hungary makes no exception on this regard. Even more, I have to say that this has been overrated lately, as whilst the number of cinemagoers has decreased in the past years, the foreign festival successes made a lot of people in the Hungarian film industry think that the problem is not so big, that things will come back to normal by themselves. However our experience shows that film is still the channel through which people create very fast an image for themselves about a country, so we have to pay attention on this.