Cannes Film Festival Director Thierry Frémaux took to the stage on Monday for his traditional meeting with the press on the eve of the opening ceremony.
 
In a sign of the complexity of the times, he was grilled on everything from AI to new Oscar submission rules; selfies; the festival’s gender parity record; steps taken to Berlinale backlash, the Hollywood studios and Fast and Furious.
 
On whether the festival had taken steps to prepare its jury and the film teams on how to deal with thorny political questions in the light of the Berlinale’s rocky ride, Frémaux did not give a direct answer.
 
“The question raised in Berlin is one that regularly comes up at the festival, which for a long time was considered as a very political festival. Is it more or less than before? We’re living in different times, it’s hard to make a comparison,” he said.
 
Frémaux waded in to defend Wenders who found himself at the heart of the Berlinale backlash after he declared at the opening jury conference that filmmakers should “stay out of politics”.
 
“I would like to pay tribute to Wim Wenders because I think he was subjected to criticisms that weren’t really justified. I understood what he wanted to say, but I think people didn’t want to understand what he was saying,” he said.
 
“He wanted to say that the politics should be on the screen. That’s what we say at Cannes…  the festival considers that political questions are primarily those of the artists’ voices and the voices of the artists whose work is being shown.”
 
He said that while filmmakers in Official Selection were free to express or not express their political views if questioned, it was not his job or that of the jury or management to wade in on politics.
 
“We’re in a world partly at war, a world in a fragile state in terms of dialogue between nations. We don’t want to add to the confusion with our analysis of what’s going on… I often say, and I deeply believe this, that art, and cinema in particular, are instruments of peace, even when they are calling for rebellion and freedom.”
 
Gender Parity

He acknowledged that the new rules would avoid a situation such as that of the 2026-26 Oscar cycle in which Jafar Panahi’s It Was Just An Accident ran as France’s candidate rather than for Iran, where his anti-government stance means he is unlikely to ever be the country’s official candidate.
 
Frémaux added it would also open up the possibility of a country with a strong crop of films having more than one film in the running in the category, noting the strong showing for Japan and Spain in Official Selection, with three films each.
 
He downplayed a question on whether the rule change might influence the jury’s decision and sway them towards awarding the Palme d’Or to dissident filmmakers who would benefit from the award, such as Iranian director Asghar Farhadi and Russian director Andrey Zvyagintsev, who are in competition with Parallel Tales and Minotaur this year.
 
“The jury is nine people. There is not one political conscience, there are nine personal positions… It could be there that there is someone on the jury who is extremely politicised. Paul Laverty might be very political, he writes very political films but that perhaps he not like that as a spectator,” he said, referring to the UK writer and longtime Ken Loach collaborator who is in the jury this year.
 
“Cineastes very often like cinema that is different from their own, and not the same as their own… even last year, I won’t reveal the jury’s secret, I never felt that the favorable opinion that ultimately emerged in favor of Jafer Panahi had the slightest the political bias.”
 
AI
 
Frémaux was also asked his opinion on AI, and what implications of the technology for the filmmaking.  
 
“Artificial intelligence is what the electric bicycle is to the bicycle. To ride an electric bicycle, you need to know how to ride a bike,” responded Frémaux. “It’s becoming a bigger subject in cinema. We have to be on our guard, but at the same time understand it a bit,” he said.
 
“The real question is what does it mean for our lives, our existence, our children,” he said. “What are the rules. The Oscars decided recently that an AI character cannot run for the best actor prize. That makes perfect sense.”
 
He likened the current debate around AI to that around the arrival of digital technology and special effects, and move away from celluloid and chemicals, evoking questions around whether films with digitally manipulated images are less authentic that those in the works of F. W. Murnau Murnau, Erich von Stroheim and the Lumière brothers.
 
Frémaux suggested that films made without AI or special effects were a bit like organic wine.
 
He suggested that the last “organic film” was Francis Ford Coppola’s Apocalypse Now, citing the Flight of the Valkyries helicopter attack scene which was shot live on 35mm.
 
“The number of helicopters that we see in the film is the number of helicopters that he had,” said Frémaux, suggesting contemporary directors can now create such scenes with special effects, adding helicopters at will.
 
He addressed rumors ahead of the festival that it had been mulling showing an AI film this year as untrue, saying no such film had ever been submitted for consideration.
 
“If it had been offered to us, we would have watched the film, and what would we have done?
Would it have been important for what it says about the history of cinema or the future of cinema?,” he said, adding that his mind was not made up on what would have been the correct course of action.
 
“What I can say with certainty in relation to artificial intelligence is that we are on the side of the artists, the screenwriters, actors and voice actors. We stand with everyone whose job could be negatively impacted by artificial intelligence. It requires legislation. We need to control this.”