Festival Cinema Has Become Something Else and the Festivals Haven't Noticed

The international film festival circuit, as a working institution, has been doing something specific for most of the last forty years. Cannes, Venice, Berlin, Toronto, and Sundance served as the primary discovery, prestige-validation, and distribution-deal marketplace for the specific category of world cinema that did not have clear commercial prospects in major theatrical markets. A film that premiered at Cannes in 1998 and won a major award could reasonably expect to secure specific theatrical distribution in twenty to thirty markets, generate specific critical attention that would sustain its home-video release, and enter the specific film-historical canon as a recognisable achievement.

That function has, across the last five years, substantially degraded. The festivals still happen. The awards are still awarded. The films are still celebrated in the specific local press of each festival. But the downstream consequences of festival recognition have changed, and the festivals themselves have been slow to acknowledge the change.

I want to try to describe what has shifted.

What the festivals used to do

The specific institutional function of the festival circuit had four main components.

Discovery. The festivals identified specific films and specific directors that the commercial theatrical marketplace would not have found. A Cannes Directors’ Fortnight slot or a Venice Orizzonti selection could launch a specific career (Joanna Hogg, Ari Folman, Yorgos Lanthimos, Céline Sciamma) at a specific scale that the films’ commercial prospects alone would not have supported.

Distribution brokering. The festivals functioned as specific marketplaces where distributors met producers. A specific Cannes screening could generate specific distribution deals across specific territories, with specific advances that would fund the filmmakers’ next work. The specific market structures at Cannes and Berlin were particularly developed as commercial infrastructure.

Prestige validation. The specific festival-award machinery (Palme d’Or, Golden Lion, Grand Jury Prize) conferred specific critical legitimacy that travelled with the film into its downstream markets. A Palme d’Or winner was a specific kind of cultural object that critics, educators, and serious audiences would treat as worth attention regardless of the film’s commercial availability.

Canon formation. The specific films celebrated at the festivals entered the specific film-historical record as major works. The ongoing cycle of festival attention, specific journal writing, academic inclusion, and retrospective screening built the specific canon of contemporary international cinema.

Each of these functions has specifically weakened.

What has changed

Distribution infrastructure has collapsed for small releases. A film that premieres at Cannes in 2024 without a major distributor attached has specifically worse prospects than the same film would have had in 2014. The specific art-house theatrical infrastructure across most markets has contracted substantially. Independent distributors have fewer screens, fewer windows, and less capital for specific acquisitions than they did a decade ago. The specific deals that used to happen at festivals are specifically fewer and specifically smaller.

Streaming has absorbed the specific mid-scale film. Films that would have secured boutique theatrical distribution in 2014 are now, in 2024, being absorbed directly into streaming-service acquisitions. This produces specific revenue for the filmmakers (often more than a theatrical release would have produced) but eliminates the specific cultural presence that the theatrical run used to provide. A film that premieres at Venice and goes directly to a streaming service is, culturally, substantially less visible than the same film released theatrically.

The specific audience for serious international cinema has fragmented. A film that premieres at Cannes in 2024 and secures North American theatrical distribution will, on average, open to substantially smaller specific audiences than the same film would have opened to in 2014. The specific theatrical audience for international art cinema has contracted, partially because of pandemic-era habit shifts, partially because of the specific streaming alternatives, partially because of the specific attention-economy pressures that have reduced all theatrical attendance.

Festivals themselves have become more commercial. The specific programming at Cannes, Venice, and Toronto has increasingly included major Hollywood productions seeking prestige validation for their awards campaigns. Maestro at Venice, Killers of the Flower Moon at Cannes, The Brutalist at Venice. These films would previously have premiered at the specific fall-festival circuit (Telluride, Toronto) in their specific distribution window. They are now claiming specific slots at the primary competition festivals, which displaces smaller work.

The specific canon-formation apparatus has weakened. The specific cycle of critical attention, journal publication, academic engagement, and retrospective programming that used to follow festival success has specifically contracted. Cahiers du cinéma still exists; the specific readership and cultural authority of journals like Cahiers has substantially diminished. Film studies programmes exist; they are specifically smaller and specifically more embattled than they were a decade ago. The specific institutions that carried festival discoveries into the historical record are not operating at previous scale.

What the festivals still do

I do not want to overclaim the decline. Specific functions of the festival circuit continue to operate.

Discovery at the very specific scale. A director like Payal Kapadia (All We Imagine as Light, Cannes Grand Prix 2024) can still be launched by a specific festival appearance. The launch is specifically harder than it was, but it is still possible.

Prestige marker for awards campaigns. The specific Cannes and Venice premieres remain useful marketing tools for Oscars campaigns. The specific studios that bring films to these festivals are using the festival recognition as a specific step in a specific awards-campaign infrastructure that does still function.

International industry gathering. The festivals continue to function as specific convening points where industry figures across territories meet, make deals, and maintain the specific professional networks that international cinema requires. The specific social function of the festivals persists even as the distribution function degrades.

Specific cultural events. The festivals as cultural experiences for the attending audiences (the specific Cannes audience, the specific Venice Lido crowd) continue to provide specific value to those specifically attending. The festivals are still, for the people inside them, significant cultural events.

What has taken over some of the function

Certain adjacent institutions are doing some of the work that the festival circuit used to do.

Streaming curators. Criterion Channel, Mubi, and specific smaller services are doing specific curatorial work that brings international cinema to specific audiences. Mubi in particular has become a specific discovery venue for international art cinema, partially replacing the specific discovery function that the festivals used to perform. The Mubi Podcast and specific Mubi programming choices function as specific curatorial attention.

Specific YouTube ecosystems. Specific YouTube critics and essayists (Every Frame a Painting legacy, specific Criterion video essays, specific contemporary critics) are doing specific canon-formation work that the print-critical ecosystem is no longer providing at scale. This is uneven in quality but is doing specific cultural work.

Specific podcast ecosystems. The Criterion Channel’s podcast, the Kermode-Mayo podcast, specific independent podcasts, specific film criticism podcasts, are doing specific critical work that journalistic outlets are no longer funding. This is partially replacing the specific critical infrastructure that festivals used to feed into.

Letterboxd discovery. The specific Letterboxd community, whatever its aggregate-score problems (which Marcus has written about), is doing specific discovery work for contemporary international cinema. Films that would previously have been discovered through festival coverage are now discovered through Letterboxd friend-graph engagement.

What I am asking the festivals to do

I want the festivals to acknowledge the shift and adapt their programming and infrastructure accordingly. Specifically: more commitment to launching specific smaller international work rather than hosting Hollywood awards campaigns. Specific financial commitment to the filmmakers they launch, not just the specific prestige recognition. Specific coordination with the streaming services that are absorbing the mid-scale film market, to ensure the festival recognition translates into specific downstream cultural presence.

I want the festival press to acknowledge that a Palme d’Or in 2024 does not automatically secure the specific distribution and cultural attention that a Palme d’Or in 1994 secured. The specific coverage should make clear what the recognition does and does not accomplish, so that audiences can calibrate their specific expectations.

I want audiences and critics to specifically seek out films that the festivals launch, rather than waiting for the specific commercial-distribution signal that no longer reliably arrives. If a film won a specific major prize at Cannes 2024 and has not yet reached your local market, that is not a signal that the film is lesser. It is a signal that the specific infrastructure is not working. The response should be to find the film anyway.

The festivals still matter. They matter less mechanically than they used to. Understanding what they now do, and what they have stopped doing, is part of what it takes to engage seriously with contemporary international cinema.

I am watching for Cannes 2026 and Venice 2026 with specific attention to whether the organisers have adapted. The signs so far are mixed.