Why Film Festivals No Longer Protect Great Cinema

1. Film Festivals Were Once the Gatekeepers of Cinematic Art

The golden age of film festivals—from the 1950s through the early 2000s—was a period when radical artistic visions found recognition. These festivals launched the careers of some of cinema’s most uncompromising auteurs:

• Federico Fellini, Andrei Tarkovsky, and Michelangelo Antonioni were championed at Venice.
• Ingmar Bergman and Abbas Kiarostami were elevated by Cannes.
• Theo Angelopoulos and Béla Tarr gained international recognition through Berlin.

During this time, a film’s artistic merit was prioritized over its commercial viability. Festivals were a space where audiences and critics could encounter challenging, poetic, and philosophical cinema—films that would never find a place in Hollywood or mainstream theaters.

2. The Shift Toward Market-Driven Programming

Over the past two decades, film festivals have increasingly catered to the film industry rather than protecting cinema as art. Several factors have contributed to this shift:

A. The Rise of Festival Distribution Deals

Today, festivals are no longer just about celebrating artistic vision—they are about selling films to distributors.

• At Cannes, Sundance, and TIFF, major studios and streaming platforms compete to buy rights to films, turning festivals into marketplaces rather than curatorial spaces.
• As a result, films that are easier to market—those with recognizable stars, topical political themes, or sentimental narratives—are given priority over formally innovative or philosophically complex works.

B. The Influence of Corporate Sponsorship

Many major festivals now rely heavily on corporate funding, and sponsors influence which films are selected, promoted, and awarded.

• Cannes is backed by luxury brands and industry insiders who favor films that generate media buzz.
• TIFF and Sundance are heavily tied to the North American market, meaning that films must appeal to U.S. distributors to be prioritized.
• Venice and Berlin have become more politically cautious, selecting films that align with broader cultural trends rather than purely artistic value.

C. The Algorithmic Influence of Streaming Platforms

With Netflix, Amazon, and Apple now major players in festival distribution, the artistic integrity of the selection process has further eroded.

• Many films premiering at Venice or Cannes are already pre-sold to streaming platforms, meaning their selection is part of a marketing strategy rather than a discovery process.

Festivals now function more as launchpads for streaming releases rather than spaces for the true exploration of cinematic language.

3. The Decline of Cinematic Radicalism at Festivals

Once, film festivals were known for shocking, challenging, and provoking audiences. But today, their selections are increasingly safe, predictable, and formulaic.

• In the 1960s and 70s, festivals introduced the world to films like Pier Paolo Pasolini’s Salò, or the 120 Days of Sodom and Rainer Werner Fassbinder’s radical political dramas.
• In the 1990s, Cannes awarded films like Theo Angelopoulos’ Eternity and a Day—a slow, poetic meditation on time and history.
• But in the 2020s, the Palme d’Or is often awarded to films with clear industry backing, commercial viability, or trending sociopolitical themes.

The loss of cinematic radicalism means that filmmakers who truly push boundaries are often excluded from the conversation entirely.

4. Why This Matters for the Future of Cinema

If even the most prestigious film festivals are no longer protecting cinema as an uncompromised art form, where does that leave filmmakers who refuse to conform?

• Filmmakers who prioritize form, philosophy, and experimentation are increasingly without platforms for recognition.
• Audiences looking for more than just well-crafted entertainment are left with nowhere to turn.
• Cinema risks being permanently absorbed into the content economy, where artistic integrity is sacrificed for marketability.

If festivals no longer defend high-art cinema, new structures must emerge to take their place.

5. The Cinema Sanctum: An Alternative to the Festival Model

The Cinema Sanctum exists because the traditional institutions have failed.

We do not seek to showcase films for industry buyers or distributors.

We do not select films based on market trends, topicality, or industry networking.

We exist to preserve and commission films based purely on their artistic merit.

Rather than conforming to the commercialized festival system, The Cinema Sanctum will:

Curate films based on their form, philosophy, and artistic innovation—not their commercial potential.

Create an alternative patronage system, where filmmakers can work free from industrial constraints.

Host exclusive screenings in private settings, where cinema can be experienced with reverence and engagement.

Conclusion: A New Future for Cinematic Art

The era when festivals served as true sanctuaries for uncompromised cinema is over. Their absorption into the industry means that new structures must arise to protect what film was always meant to be—an art form on par with literature, painting, and music.

If you believe cinema deserves an alternative, we invite you to step inside.