The Kerala Chalachitra Academy has said that the row over films submitted to the Malayalam Cinema Today category of the 28th International Film Festival of Kerala is unwarranted as all the entries were screened before the selection committee. A senior Academy official said the films were downloaded from the links submitted by filmmakers using a third party software to ensure seamless screening.
A controversy had broken out after four filmmakers claimed, citing analytics from streaming platform Vimeo, that the links (some with download rights disabled) submitted by them were never opened or played. The filmmakers also flagged the possibility of piracy in case the organisers had downloaded the films despite no such rights being granted.
“All the films submitted were screened in the Academy’s theatre. We downloaded the films using third-party software to avoid buffering issues. The films are sent so that they can be screened before the selection committee. We downloaded them to fulfil that purpose and make that process smoother. We understand the concern of the producers and the filmmakers and we ensured that all the files are deleted immediately after screening. We have done this in good faith only,” said the IFFK official.
Shiju Balagopalan, director of film Eraan, who first raised the allegation, quoting a mail from Vimeo technical support said it is impossible to download a video that has disabled the option and even if a third-party software is used the analytics will show it as ‘unknown’.
OP Suresh, a member of the selection committee for Malayalam Cinema Today category, said they had watched all the films screened before them by the Academy. “We watch the films that are screened before us. As committee members we are not downloading any film nor do we know about the format or the agreement between the filmmaker and the Academy. The academy invited us, they showed the films, and our job was to select 14 films for the Malayalam Cinema Today category,” he said. All the films were screened between October 1 and October 15, 2023.
The committee besides poet OP Suresh had filmmakers VM Vinu, Krishnendu Kalesh, screenwriter Tara Ramanujan and actor Arun Cherukavil as members. OP Suresh in an earlier post on Facebook, denying the allegations, had said selection was tough because of the large number of entries. Out of the 14 films 12 are Kerala premier, he said. Ten filmmakers are debutants.
After Shiju Balagopalan made the allegation, three other filmmakers Mohammed Sadiq, Christon Joseph and Gireesh PC Palam expressed similar concerns. Kerala Chalachitra Academy gave an explanation saying they downloaded the movies which is why the analytics show zero watch hours.
The directors who raised the allegations also questioned how the committee watched 149 movies within a period of 15 days and whether the Academy had the right to download the movies without permission from the film’s producer or director.
“I don’t know how many films were submitted. We watched 149 films as a group of five members and selected them after discussion,” said OP Suresh. As per the Academy guidelines for selection committee there is no need to watch a film in its entirety if the members feel so,
“We watched most of the films completely. Some movies were skipped after 20 to 30 minutes because of the lack of cinematic elements, or if they had been viewed earlier by the panel members either in theatre or OTT. Most films that were skipped were watched earlier either in theatre or OTT. We watched some movies twice to make decisions,” said Suresh, when asked how they could watch 149 movies within 15 days.
Independent filmmakers, who made their movies with a limited budget, consider IFFK as a huge platform to showcase their work. A main advantage is that they can send uncensored films to IFFK and they need not spend money on censoring. There is no entry fee for IFFK, and the audience response will help them get theatres or additional markets. Compared to other film festivals IFFK is more friendly to the independent filmmakers. But now they have concerns over the transparency of film selection.
“The expenses of submitting a film to IFFK is negligible compared to other festivals. We can directly reach a Malayali audience and would open other opportunities. If they reject our films that is fine, but they can’t reject them without watching a film,” said Mohmmad Sadiq, one of the filmmakers who raised the allegation. He had submitted the YouTube link of his movie The Steering but had disabled the download option.
“I was sure that my film was skipped because I had not provided the download option”, Mohammad Sadiq said.
Gireesh PC Palam, another filmmaker who raised the allegation, said for independent filmmakers, IFFK is the only option to reach out to people. “Because in our movies the actors would be new faces, we cannot reach people through theatre. If a movie is selected in IFFK and it gets positive reviews, we will get that reach,” said Gireesh.
Christon Joseph, another director who raised a similar allegation. said he had purposefully disabled the download option of Vimeo, because such allegations were there before. “I wanted to check whether they watched my film or not. I noticed my analytics and found out that they did not,” Christon said.
Shiju Balagopalan said people misunderstood his intention and it affected him. “I got several messages that said I was jealous because my film was not selected. I consider the jury’s decision as final. This is not the core issue. All of these made me mentally down and I don’t know whether I will do the next film or not. Now I understand why people are silent regarding these kinds of issues,” he said.