Preserve Cinema Heritage or Let it Go

2026-03-17 - 08:05

Listen to the AI generated audio article. Your browser does not support the audio element. This year, the Berlinale Film Festival was more turbulent and scandal-ridden than ever. From the first press conference of the main jury, a public debate erupted after jury president, Wim Wenders, said that filmmakers should “stay out of politics” in response to a question about the Berlinale’s failure to declare support for Palestinians. His answer was followed by further controversial remarks from co-jurors, and the topic snowballed. The debates continued throughout the entire festival. This seemingly apolitical statement, made from the stage of what has long been considered Europe’s most political festival, continued to echo across the country even after the festival ended. It became clear that the German Ministry of Culture intended to dismiss Berlinale director Tricia Tuttle after she appeared in a photograph with a Palestinian flag, perhaps in response to a closing-ceremony speech by Abdallah Alkhatib, director of Chronicles From the Siege, delivered after he accepted an award in one of the festival’s sidebar programs. In his speech, Alkhatib accused the German government of participating in the genocide in Gaza. Amid this turmoil, another important development unfolded, involving Armenia’s cultural heritage and the country’s cultural politics more broadly. The issue was debated just as intensely among international parties connected to, or closely following, the matter. At the European Film Market, held alongside the Berlinale, it was announced that the rights to Artavazd Peleshyan’s films had been acquired by the German production and sales company Co-production Office. The company will oversee the films’ restoration as well as their further distribution. Co-production Office was founded by European producer Philippe Bober, whose films have been repeatedly selected for the main programs at Berlinale and Cannes. His credits include the Palme d’Or-winning works of Ruben Östlund, Triangle of Sadness (2022) and The Square (2017). Bober collaborates with renowned, though occasionally controversial, directors such as Roy Andersson, Sergei Loznitsa, Jessica Hausner, Ilya Khrzhanovskiy, Carlos Reygadas and Ulrich Seidl. In addition to production, the company is involved in the restoration and distribution of classic films. In 2022, Bober visited Armenia for the Golden Apricot International Film Festival, where he was awarded the Parajanov Thaler in recognition of his outstanding contribution to the film industry. The news that Peleshyan’s film rights had been acquired came as an even greater surprise. The filmmaker is known for extreme caution and an unwillingness to share the films with anyone. In response to inquiries, Peleshyan usually says that the films disappeared from the archives in Armenia and Russia and that he does not have copies of the negatives. The situation is further complicated by the fact that Peleshyan does not hold the rights to the films. They were produced during the Soviet years at the Yerevan Studio Hayfilm, as well as studios in Russia and Belarus. This means the rights belong to those studios and, after the collapse of the Soviet Union, to their legal successors. To our knowledge, no legal documents were signed between the director and these studios granting Peleshyan the rights to the films. The situation has become even more complicated in light of the current political situation and sanctions, under which no Western company can sign contracts with or transfer payments to Russian or Belarusian companies. The details of the agreement between the Co-production Office and Artavazd Peleshyan have not been announced. It remains unclear how long the company will hold the rights to the restored films and whether it will share profits from sales with Peleshyan or his family. Similar precedents offer some clues. For example Sergei Parajanov’s The Color of Pomegranates (1969) was restored by Martin Scorsese’s Film Foundation and the Cineteca di Bologna and distributed by the French company mk2; the Film Foundation and the Cineteca received the rights to the restored version for ten years. mk2 shares revenue from screenings with the Foundation and the Cineteca, even when the film is screened in Armenia. In the case of another Armenian classic, Frunze Dovlatyan’s Hello, It’s Me (1965), restored by the National Cinema Fund of Armenia with the support of the All-Armenian Fund, world sales are handled by mk2 and profits from screenings are shared with the Armenian side. Permissions for screenings in Armenia are obtained from the Armenian rights holders, while for international screenings they are handled by mk2. It can therefore be assumed that Peleshyan’s agreement may resemble the model used for The Color of Pomegranates: the Co-production Office could hold exclusive rights to the restored versions for a fixed number of years and later return them to Peleshyan or his family. Alternatively—and perhaps more likely—the company may extend the agreement with the Peleshyan family beyond the initial term. The event carries clear advantages. The films will finally become available in the highest possible quality, and through its extensive network, particularly in Europe, the company will ensure wide distribution. The restored films will likely premiere in the Classics sections of major festivals such as Cannes or Venice before reaching audiences worldwide. There are technical benefits as well. From now on, for a fair price, it will be possible to obtain screening rights, and the company will provide reliable communication and high professional standards. For anyone who has tried to organize even a single Peleshyan screening, often plagued by unrealistic negotiations, double or triple charges, and film copies that invariably surfaced in the worst possible quality, this has long seemed a distant dream. However, the stakes remain high. There is still the risk of further losses to Armenia’s cinematic heritage. The current situation exposes a serious problem: Armenia has no cultural policy to protect its audiovisual and media heritage. Deals like the acquisition of Peleshyan’s films, or the handling of The Color of Pomegranates, read as cultural colonialism, with major Western companies taking control of the country’s most valuable works, often those with the greatest international appeal. In certain circles in Armenia, a lingering mindset holds that outsiders are better equipped to safeguard the country’s heritage, given their greater resources, expertise, and international networks. Meanwhile, Armenia lacks the infrastructure to manage sales or distribution, and the government provides no support, leaving the country’s cinematic legacy almost entirely in foreign hands. Without a clearly defined framework, state support to develop local sales and distribution companies, and support for cinemas in countries facing similar challenges, we risk not only losing control over our cultural heritage but also squandering a powerful tool for cultural influence and economic sustainability. From Et Cetera Reading Labels: In Lieu of an Exhibition Review Not All Films Are About Love Venice 2015 Ten Years On: Creative Resistance and Contemporary Crises “Caucasian Blues”, a Collaboration That Couldn’t Find Its Voice Stereotypical Armenians and Armenian Stereotypes in Film From Artsakh to Gaza, No One Will Be Free Two Films From One Fountain