The summery glamour of the French Riviera, the iconic expanse of the Venice Lido, or the snow-capped mountains of Utah all annually play host to some of the most prestigious and essential events in the world of cinema: film festivals.
This year alone, festivals have seen some incredible selections, moments and achievements. Sean Baker’s Anora, Payal Kapdia’s All We Imagine as Light, Yorgos Larinthimos’ Kinds of Kindness, Jacques Audiard’s Emilia Perez, and Francis Ford Coppola’s Megalopolis were just some of the few standouts at Cannes.
Venice saw another slew of breakouts and ravely reviewed features from the likes of Luca Guadagnino’s Queer, Halina Reijn’s Babygirl, Pedro Almodóvar’s The Room Next Door and Pablo Larrain’s Maria.
There lingers a palpable buzz of anticipation that fills the air before these momentous screenings, crystallising the very essence of what makes festivals so mystifying and unique. The spectacle of glamorous attendees, the flashes of cameras, and the electric energy of an audience eager for the unexpected. All these surround the allure of a typical movie screening.
Gathering annually to recognize outstanding motion pictures, festivals can be sponsored nationally, independently, or by individual experimental groups, each to platform films they deem worthy. Festivals also become the nexus for each branch of the industry to converge as studios, auteurs or aspiring auteurs, performers, critics, and observers all descend on locales to enjoy the selections of the year.
These also provide the stakeholders with opportunities to discuss and deliberate artistic developments in film. Simultaneously, festivals allow distributors and studios or media platforms to purchase projects to market and release under their names globally or locally.
Film festivals of this kind have a long and intriguing history. Held in Venice in 1932, the first of its kind, the Venice Film Festival remains today as one of, if not the most prominent film festivals. Other kinds of film festivals have emerged with their distinct approaches and focus though Venice, like the other major festivals, has remained more broad in its selections.
Certain festivals choose to feature films from a single country while others are aimed at aspiring student filmmakers. Stylised and specialised festivals like those showcasing specific genres including horror or specific themes and subjects are also notable.
Festivals serve not only as platforms to highlight and celebrate the best films of the year but also as crucial catalysts in the evolution of the film landscape. These festivals play a critical role in keeping up with and even innovating changes in technology, trends, and phenomena such as strikes or shutdowns.
Festivals often also serve as testing grounds for new cinematic techniques, immersive technologies like virtual and augmented reality, and innovative storytelling formats. This is especially pertinent in the current decade. As a result, festivals become essential actors in the ongoing development of the entertainment industry.
Festivals’ ability to serve as constant conduits for artistic innovation, industry networking, and the discovery of new cinematic voices also compels us to question their nature.
Additionally, festivals along with other factors like archives, film, society, clubs, classes and gatherings also constitute what scholar Mariam Hanson describes as “discursive horizons.” As elucidated by Cindy Wong, her ideas position cinematic practices within the larger framework of fields that both mirror and influence the processes of modernity.
Also Read
Thus, festivals help construct what is considered respected and renowned in the canon of contemporary cinema. Simultaneously, they also serve as a meeting point for the business of films as commodities.
Despite being mainstays of the cinematic landscape, festivals and their invisible, unparalleled cultural influence compel us to further examine these highly unique phenomena. This comes with the context of witnessing the ever-increasing eminence and power they possess in shaping the trajectory of the landscape. For instance, in 2019, Bong Joon-ho's Parasite won the Palme d'Or at Cannes, single-handedly amplifying its visibility while paving the way for the film’s historic win as the first non-English-language film to win the Academy Award for Best Picture.
It is therefore important to recognise festivals as critical factors even in shaping audience perceptions and tastes in film. Festivals often contribute to a larger consciousness that assigns projects with a position in the public sphere, deciding which films are considered cinematic works and which are consequently neglected.
All this underscores the significance of festivals in the broader media and film world. There is, however, much more to the story. This requires delving deeper into the emergence of the prominent festivals, and their role in shaping public and industry perception.
The ‘Big Five’
An analysis of festivals must begin with a lay of the land. When people think of film festivals, what images do their minds instantly conjure? The answer, for most people, would most likely fall into one or more of the ‘Big Five’ festivals. As the name suggests these are festivals that have, over time, emerged as those garnering the most anticipated premiers, celebrity attendances and press attention. If it's on your ‘for you page’, it's probably from one of them.
Cannes, Venice, Berlin, Sundance, and Toronto are the titular five. While other significant festivals of note are held in New York, Telluride, Austin, London, and Hong Kong, the aforementioned ‘Big Five’ are regarded as the most renowned and respected of all.
Also Read
Hierarchies, however, emerge even within this classification. Initially, film festivals such as those in Cannes, Berlin and Venice, relied heavily on government funding, serving in exchange, as instruments of national soft power and proliferators of state-sponsored narratives and rhetoric. Meanwhile, newer, more independent-focused members of the ‘Big Five’ like Sundance or TIFF have found their rise elsewhere.
Contrarily, the substantial backing also helped solidify the reputations of the former ‘Big Five’ and secure their visibility on the global stage. This also earned them an obvious edge over other festivals that lacked similar resources. Such a transition was primarily driven by their early prestige, drawing upon high-profile premieres and now, legendary filmmakers seeking breakout international success.
Today, some festivals like the International Film Festival of India Goa and the Saudi Film Festival in Saudi Arabia continue to be associated with their state-sponsored rhetoric, while others have adopted an international approach widening the scope of audience engagement and recognition of talent.
As these festivals evolved, so did the inevitable array of celebrity attendees, luxury brands, and media attention, further cementing their status as cultural juggernauts. This was especially noteworthy as this exceeded the realms of cinema and associated fashion and visibility with red carpets and photocalls, becoming synonymous with haute couture.
However, this focus on celebrity and luxury has, at times, overshadowed the underlying intent of celebrating cinematic artistry. Festivals have thus shifted toward focusing on celebrity culture and pomp and circumstance owing to increased media attention. Consequently, smaller festivals and independent films often struggle to compete in an environment dominated by premieres and media frenzy.
Yet, despite these shifts and a perceived dilution of their founding tenets, the Big Five remain unparalleled in their ability to set industry trends, launch careers, and influence the global cinematic landscape— a testament to their enduring appeal and adaptability.
Festivals of the Global South
Understanding the dynamics and nuances of festivals, it becomes evident that the renowned 'Big Five', asserts an invisible pseudo-monopoly within the festival landscape. The increased eminence and media presence that they attract, leave little room for other smaller festivals, especially those organised in the Global South to break out as major destinations for international film lovers.
Festivals in the Global South have a long history, beginning with a little-known "film weeks" in the People's Republic of China between 1949-66. Unlike modern festivals, these highlighted the complex intersectionality of centralised cultural policy, international diplomacy, and ideological/educational initiatives and film with concepts such as Maoist cinéphilia.
Additionally, they were known to be state-sponsored with films imported from all over the world with occasional local showcases. The phenomena of the film weeks were not specific to China, with Soviet Film Week and Asian Film Week being other significant examples.
Also Read
In recent years, the Hong Kong International Film Festival has also emerged as a major destination that highlights and prioritises Asian cinema. Scholar Ruby Cheung argues in an essay that contrary to traditional narratives which link the birth of the festival with a desire to platform art and culture, their emergence was driven by political forces. She asserts that the festival saw "direct and indirect implications of the colonial government and agenda in its formation" like the imposition of colonial narratives in film.
The film festivals of India have also become a major landmark for showcasing the craft and beauty of South Asian cinema. Festivals like the Jaipur International Film Festival, the International Film Festival of Kerala, the Mumbai Women's International Film Festival, and the Calcutta International Cult Films Festival are all well-regarded and popular festivals in the Indian subcontinent.
Many of these festivals centre around certain themes, topics or criteria that are important to South Asian audiences and films. These come in the form of themes like cultural identity, social issues such as gender inequality and caste discrimination, and the region's rich history. Family dynamics, the vibrant flair of Bollywood musicals, and diverse love stories are also central to these showings.
The festivals have also witnessed screenings of major Bollywood movies like English Vinglish, Om Shanti Om and Talaash.
The Festival Network
Now that we’ve established the cinematic festival landscape, we must delve into the intricacies and underlying notions and structures that transform a collection of sporadic annual gatherings into a unified self-functioning festival network. A phenomenon per se, how and what connects the Big Five, the festivals of the global south and the other stakeholders in this network?
The notion of a self-sustaining festival network, as elaborated by Marijke de Valck, professor in film and media studies at Utrecht University, establishes the organisational and competitive dynamics within the realm of film festivals. The festival network conception legitimises the success of festival organisers in establishing vital links with various other entities like European governments, Hollywood studios and city marketers, along with other festivals themselves.
With these connections, festivals experience a surge in the number and nature of agendas put forth coupled with the meteoric rise of parties that benefit from the annual organisation of such events.
This perception of the broader festival landscape and the resulting institutionalisation and global proliferation suggest an interdependence within the festival network. Here, festivals depend on luxury sponsors, host governments and marketers and vice versa. A mutually beneficial PR quid pro quo if you will. International Festivals like the renowned ‘Big Five’, occupy key positions within this network. These festivals, along with the broader network they create, function as interconnected platforms where mutual dependence fosters a symbiotic relationship.
Filmmakers gain exposure and distribution opportunities, while festivals benefit from showcasing diverse, high-quality content. This interdependence extends to industry professionals, critics, and audiences, who all engage in a shared cultural experience that supports the growth and sustainability of the film.
Also Read
By facilitating networking, collaboration, and innovation, festivals ensure that all parties involved are enriched and supported in their endeavours. This is further evidenced by Hollywood’s harnessing of festival platforms as marketing forums for their big-budget productions.
The mutually beneficial relationship at the crux of the festival network extends beyond individual events. This led Marijke de Valck to argue that the interconnected festival network supersedes usual distinctions of festivals such as categorizing them into “auteur” or “national”.
De Valck’s argument almost perceives the network as an entity bigger than its units. Instead, it facilitates a ‘broad analysis of a complex cultural phenomenon without being narrowed down by the biased discourses that have been so essential to the festival phenomenon’s historical development’.
De Valk’s conception also asserts that beyond cinema and filmmakers, festivals are primarily concerned with their survival, in an ever-evolving, erratic media landscape. Festivals are therefore compelled to continually redefine their position within the broader network, highlighting both a strength and pitfalls of the network.
This is because festivals are made reliant on a variety of external actors such as film studios, distributors, sponsors, and even governments in adapting to changes and redefining themselves for their survival, necessitating compromises to be made. Negotiating between these external actors and interests inevitably diminishes the position of festivals and cultural institutions, at times diluting their foundational tenets to accommodate divergent interests, securing their future.
As festivals adapt to changes, they often find themselves making compromises to ensure their survival. For instance, some festivals have shifted to hybrid formats, blending in-person and virtual screenings, to accommodate financial restrictions and reach out to a broader audience. These compromises may venture into nuances within the agenda set by festivals.
Here, while Hollywood and studios have the ability to independently pursue a single agenda i.e. profit maximisation, festivals are restrained by the need to balance diverse, often dissimilar agendas.
Concurrently, the need to juggle multiple agendas provides a stable foundation for the network system as festivals are compelled to take into account the requirements of their various stakeholders. While the existence of financial support is a key prerequisite, it is the widespread support of the larger network, in the form of permits and access from governments or sponsorships from partners that secures a festival’s sustainability.
Festivals, Economics, and the Industry
The establishment of the network now brings us to another fascinating question: How do all the stakeholders actually make money? Or what mutual benefit, financial or otherwise, do they see themselves accruing from such an arrangement?
The answer leads us to a critical fault line within the entertainment industry, that is the divide between the creatives behind the camera, and the institutions seeking to platform and capitalise on quality content, a.k.a. festival organisers and studios. This divide is primarily owing to them being in distinct sections of the industry. While the creatives focus on the quality of storytelling, the capital institutions prioritise profits and thereby lean towards pandering rather than the original intent of filmmakers.
Consequently, filmmakers and festival organisers both participate in the process of festivals for varying reasons with outcomes for both remarkably following similar patterns.
Filmmakers often face financial challenges at festivals, incurring losses from submission and entrance fees with no guaranteed screening or selection fees. Despite this, festivals provide invaluable exposure and publicity, crucial for securing distribution deals. Contrarily, studios attend festivals to acquire films and crucially, scout new talent, earmarking opportunities for aspiring directors to pitch their projects.
Producers then sell these projects to distributors, leading to potentially global cinema releases. Additionally, filmmakers can benefit from winning prizes that come with grants and distribution deals.
From the Archives
Festivals on the other hand, primarily generate revenue through ticket sales for screenings and premieres, supplemented by substantial income from corporate sponsorships and partnerships with major conglomerates. The more prominent the festival within the network, the more competitive and lucrative the sponsorship opportunities become.
Increased competition for philanthropic support and shifting consumer interests, leaning now toward more digestible, easily consumable content, coupled with a diversion of eyeballs from film to other forms of media, have made securing funding challenging. Consequently, in recent times, festivals have received fewer donations from public and private donors. This is further deepening their reliance on corporate sponsorships and leading many to transition into business associations.
Smaller regional festivals often struggle to attract donations as resources are directed towards larger and more renowned festivals. Many also consider festival circuits to be an alternative to traditional distribution mechanisms. Here, the festivals themselves are considered distributors, owing to the number of them and the changing nature of the media market.
Recent trends following Cannes 2024, however, are seeing a resurgence of specialised distributors making domestic deals, finalising nine deals with four projects from the main competition. However, these buyers aren't well-known names like A24, Focus, or IFC. Instead, smaller more niche names like Mubi, Meterograph and Sideshow have now established themselves as major buyers along the festival network.
The declining market here is skewed to the advantage of the newer names. Here, while contemporary challenges at the box office would elicit more conservative instincts of big-name studios, the lower prices of more independent films further spur the smaller studios to solidify their place within the industry.
Speaking to IndieWire, a sales agent added that “most (though not all) of these titles are selling for smaller numbers, reducing the risk.” Adding to this, a distributor shared, “There are several smart, talented companies going after this kind of movie, and I think it’s good for the movies, and it’s good for the ecosystem”.
He noted how the various strands of dealmaking within the festival network were reminiscent of an “old-school Cannes.” Films of varying sizes and scopes are seen as generating equal levels of excitement and competition, with several attracting multiple bidders.
Additionally, it is also worth noting the peculiar place that festivals currently occupy within the media industry in the wake of the writers and actors strike from last year. A year on from the dual strikes, its ripples continue to echo through the landscape of film and television. TIFF and AFM among other fall festivals from last year notedly went on with a looming weary atmosphere, even offering very little in the way of talent packages.
This scarcity of talent packages was particularly evident, as the usual buzz generated by star-studded appearances and high-profile premieres was noticeably diminished. Many productions faced delays, and travel restrictions hindered the participation of international talent. Additionally, studios were cautious about committing to large-scale promotional efforts, further contributing to the low-key nature of these events.
This trend appears to continue, as Brian Welk also argues that Cannes this year offers a post-strike environment that potentially indicates a decline in the usual slew of announcements for projects. “There’s still a lag in the marketplace where stuff isn’t filming; that’s going to affect what’s going on in production right now,” said one domestic sales agent.
Cultural Evolution and Significance
Film festivals have also emerged as significant cultural and economic phenomena in the global cinema landscape. Sociologist and author of ‘Cinema and the Festivalization of Capitalism’, Ann Vogel argues that there have been three phases in the cultural evolution of festivals, the national cinema paradigm, the age of the programmer, and the global diffusion and specialisation of the festival format.
The first phase centred on the promotion and proliferation of national cinema, heavily influenced by governments and trade organisations. The 60s ushered in a wave of protests and a move towards programming independence. The third phase marked the emergence of festival directors and professional management, adeptly navigating the complex interplay between cultural and economic interests.
From the Archives
Throughout these phases, festivals remained key players in cultural policy-making and the construction of national cinema identities and perceptions. The evolution of festivals is thus indicative of broader changes in cinema and cultural policy, while contemporary research highlights their multifaceted roles and the persistent tension between artistic and commercial interests.
Festivals operate as hybrid performances where audiences, journalists, and industry professionals collaboratively generate cultural and economic value. Positioned uniquely within the global cinema landscape, they serve as cultural intermediaries and platforms for artistic and social expression.
Film festival research also often critiques capitalism's impact on cinema and artists. For example, festivals here are seen as instruments of capital or bases for cinema merchants. In stark contrast to their economic value, symbolic value is a critical aspect of festivals. From programming to awards, festivals foster cultural prestige and cinephilia. They become gateways to cultural legitimization, creating a buzz that impacts the industry.
However, there is also an ongoing debate concerning whether the festival network provides a safe environment for vulnerable, avant-garde or divisive films, allowing them to be appreciated on their cultural and artistic terms, free from commercial interests. Contrarily, festivals may present only a pseudo-cure to this conundrum.
They achieve this by keeping filmmakers on the fringes, further embedding them within the insular festival circuit. Here, they become entrenched in the discourse of the fringe festivals but lose the ability to engage with the wider film industry.
Anticipation, and ‘Buzz’
Everyone tunes into festivals because of the buzz. Venice this year had buzz surrounding new projects from the likes of modern auteurs like Luca Guadgnino, Pablo Larrin, Pedro Almodovar Buzz and more.
Sections of X (formerly Twitter) were patiently awaiting the arrival of pop-culture icons like Lady Gaga, Nicole Kidman, Cate Blanchett, Julianne Moore, Tilda Swinton and more. Buzz is a festival’s currency, it indicates the value of the festival in the eyes of the public and the industry. Critically it is also an indicator of a festival’s success or failure to its partners in the festival network.
Driven by rumours and word-of-mouth, buzz is essential for generating symbolic value and influencing economic outcomes such as box office returns. It also confirms festival programmers' selections and enhances a film's market potential. This buzz is crucial in the industry value chain, particularly for independent films, as it boosts consumer demand and content discoverability beyond isolated festival venues.
This raises important questions about the broader market success facilitated by festivals. Film critic and commentator, Deb Verhoeven suggests a more nuanced assessment of a film's impact by incorporating qualitative metrics like screening coverage and commentary, in addition to box office numbers. This approach, which includes film festival screenings, broadens the evaluation of a film’s theatrical presence and cultural exposure.
Simultaneously, social media also plays a critical role in amplifying this reach and generating buzz. For example, films may showcase different social media strategies during and after festivals.
While some distributors transition from focusing on brand identity at festivals to direct promotion during its release, others continue to use festival-related trends and markers such as themed marketing campaigns, exclusive Q&A sessions, or social media-driven 'festival favourite' lists—to maintain momentum even after the festival. This underscores the importance of festivals in launching independent films.
The Future of Festivals
As they have in the past, film festivals of the contemporary period have been forced to adapt to the changing landscape of cinema. In the 21st century alone, this landscape and the role of festivals within it have undergone radical shifts. This has also been accompanied by the changing relationship between the audience and film, which has seen the emergence of various waves and trends in cinema that have ebbed and flowed in popularity.
Presently, a subject of much discourse has been the overarching decline of interest in the art of filmmaking and films themselves. This comes with a decline in theatrical experiences and the rapid rise of streaming services and other forms of more easily digestible content. Major studios also seem to exercise dominance over the streaming industry, owning most streaming services such as HBO Max, Paramount+, etc, giving them an exceedingly inequitable amount of power and signifying a shift in the focus of studios to these streaming services.
From the Archives
Filmmakers' relationships with consumers have also been changing. While established auteurs like Villeneuve, Nolan or Scorsese call upon audiences to experience their works exclusively in theatres, there are swathes of indie artists who have struggled in recent years to have their films seen by anyone at all.
This is where festivals step in, platforming these very directors, who are losing chances at obtaining any exposure in the absence of festivals. This challenge of absence has been looming over the industry since the start of the decade.
We must also remember that although festivals see a convergence of a multitude of elements, in art, commerce, politics, audience engagement, and location, their fundamental constituents are simple and unchanging: the films themselves.
Thus, transitioning from the archaic to the contemporary, from the domestic to the international, and from having been state-sponsored and regulated to largely being more autonomous, festivals for the foreseeable future will continue in their tradition. Our examination of their workings has highlighted not just the diverse approaches to festivals but also the persistent shared goals and culture they have helped create.
Such circumstances envisage a potentially murky future for film festivals as industry networking hubs make it increasingly arduous to create successful, original and independent films. Film festivals, therefore, must now navigate a fine balance between securing their commercial interest, while continuing to excel at the goal of appreciating and furthering the art of making and cinema.
Edited by the Core Editorial Team
Anish Paranjape (he/him) is a student of Political Science and the Associate Editor of Culture at Political Pandora. His research interests encompass global politics and its influence on various landscapes, as well as an interest in film, television, and pop culture.
Disclaimer
Any facts, views or opinions are not intended to malign, criticise and/or disrespect any religion, group, club, organisation, company, or individual.
This article published on this website is solely representative of the author. Neither the editorial staff nor the organisation (Political Pandora) are responsible for the content.
Images in this particular article are taken from external sources and are not a property of Political Pandora. The use of these images are not meant for commercial purposes.
While we strive to present only reliable and accurate information, should you believe that any information present is incorrect or needs to be edited, please feel free to contact us.
References
WONG, CINDY HING-YUK. “History, Structure, and Practice in the Festival World.” Film Festivals: Culture, People, and Power on the Global Screen, Rutgers University Press, 2011, pp. 29–64. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt5hjg83.5. Accessed 29 Dec. 2023.
de Valck, Marijke. “Conclusion: Successful or Safe? The Strengths and Weaknesses of the Film Festival Network.” Film Festivals: From European Geopolitics to Global Cinephilia, Amsterdam University Press, 2007, pp. 203–16. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt46mv45.9. Accessed 11 Sept. 2024.
Welk, Brian. “How Mubi, Metrograph, and Sideshow Became the Biggest Buyers at Cannes.” IndieWire, IndieWire, 29 May 2024, www.indiewire.com/news/business/mubi-metrograph-sideshow-biggest-buyers-cannes-analysis-1235008095/.
Ryan Lattanzio, Anne Thompson. “Why Distributors like Neon and Mubi Won Cannes.” IndieWire, 31 May 2024, www.indiewire.com/video/why-neon-mubi-won-cannes-1235010792/.
Kohn, Eric. “Why No One Knows What the Strike Means for TIFF, Telluride, and Other Fall Film Festivals.” IndieWire, IndieWire, 24 July 2023, www.indiewire.com/features/commentary/tiff-2023-sag-strike-1234886549/.
Vogel, Ann. Cinema and the Festivalization of Capitalism: The Experience-Makers. Brill, 2023.
Vogel, Ann, and Alan Shipman. Film Festivals and the Enrichment Economy: Cultural Value Chains in a Digital Media Age. Springer International Publishing Palgrave Macmillan, 2023.
Dyksterhouse, Landon. “A Look inside the Film Festival Selection Process.” Videomaker, 6 June 2022, www.videomaker.com/a-look-inside-the-film-festival-selection-process/.
Papadimitriou, Lydia, and Jeffrey Ruoff. “Full Article: Film Festivals: Origins and Trajectories.” Film Festivals: Origins and Trajectories, 12 Jan. 2016, www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/17400309.2015.1106686.
Sperling, Nicole. “Sundance, Once a Hotbed for Film Deals, Tries to Find Its Footing.” The New York Times, The New York Times, 26 Jan. 2023, www.nytimes.com/2023/01/26/business/media/sundance-film-business.html.
Donnelly, Michelle. “The History of the Film Festival.” The Script Lab, 31 Mar. 2015, thescriptlab.com/features/news/entertainment/3242-the-history-of-the-film-festival/.
Follows, Stephen. “The Economics of Film Festivals.” Stephen Follows, 6 July 2021, stephenfollows.com/the-economics-of-film-festivals/.
Roxborough, Scott. “Why TIFF and Venice Dealmaking Felt like Business-as-Usual amid the Strikes.” The Hollywood Reporter, The Hollywood Reporter, 21 Sept. 2023, www.hollywoodreporter.com/movies/movie-features/toront-venice-festival-dealmaking-strikes-1235593179/.
Hackl, Cathy. “The Future of the Film Festival.” Forbes, Forbes Magazine, 17 Nov. 2020, www.forbes.com/sites/cathyhackl/2020/11/17/the-future-of-the-film-festival/?sh=544b69be4d8a.
Lang, Brent. “With Actors on Strike, Will Movies Still Score Big Deals at the Toronto Film Festival?” Variety, Variety, 7 Sept. 2023, variety.com/2023/film/news/actors-strike-toronto-film-festival-market-impact-1235714708/.
“Film Festival.” Encyclopædia Britannica, Encyclopædia Britannica, inc., 9 Mar. 2024, www.britannica.com/art/film-festival.
“Submit a Film.” Festival de Cannes, 12 Mar. 2024, www.festival-cannes.com/en/take-part/submit-a-film/.
“Hong Kong International Film Festival.” Asian Film Festivals, 28 May 2023, asianfilmfestivals.com/hong-kong-international-film-festival/.