The Amazon launch of the Vilsmaier legacy The Boandlkramer brings Bavarian cinemas into trouble and raises once more the question of the purpose of the cinema windows
Of Dunja Bialas
The Boandlkramer is death in the old Bavarian folk estate. Joseph Vilsmaier has his last film The Boandlkramer and eternal love called, a few months after completion he blessed the temporal in February 2020. Naturally, it is no longer up to him to determine the fate of his film. The film was originally planned to be released in theaters last December, but that was postponed until February. And then all-inclusive for the first half of the year. But when at the end of April still nothing happened and no cinema opening was in sight, screenwriter Bully Herbig announced the start on Amazon Prime.
The exclusive online start acts like a bat of the Vilsmaier legacy. From Friday, Vilsmaier will be sent to the shipping giant, while cinema operators across the country still fondly call it the Sepp. For the cinemas The Boandlkramer available as a one-off event in February 2022, as a cinema commemorative event on the anniversary of Vilsmaier’s death. But that’s about it with the cinema screenings. Unlike, for example, the streaming provider Netflix, which repeatedly makes parallel film exploitation possible in the cinema, Amazon does not seem to cooperate with the cinema operators. Or is it the production company? After the editorial deadline, Leonine responded to the request from artechock as follows: [Es] no further screenings are planned on our part.
There is no Lex Corona
For Bavarian cinemas, a Vilsmaier film always has the character of a folk festival with blockbuster potential. The rejection hits the cinemas in the country to the marrow, in Munich also the Sendlinger Tor film theater. It has to worry about the rental agreement and a pending rumination suit, but has been promising its return to gaming for weeks with one hand-painted by Ren Birker Boandlkramer– poster on. The skipping of the cinemas just at the moment when they can reopen could be dismissed with stupid, but is not a trivial offense. Boandlkramer was funded with almost one million euros by the FilmFernsehFonds (FFF) Bayern. With the funding contract, the contractor undertakes to make a theatrical release. Production manager Fred Kogler has therefore also announced that the taxpayers will be repaid.
The matter remains problematic. Because the 900,000 euros in funding were available to make the film. With this, the production company also entered into a recovery obligation, which Corona will not override. When asked, the FFF Bayern confirms that there is no Lex Corona in its house, all contracts remain valid in their original form. To repay the grant due to partial non-compliance with the contract obscures the view of the broken commitment. The film funding cannot be a temporary bridging loan, a cheap loan that also brings cultural prestige: the film was recently awarded the script prize for Ulrich Limmer, Marcus H. Rosenmller and Michael Bully Herbig at the Bavarian Film Prize. In addition, the BR and ARD Degeto have already acquired the television license – they will now throw Amazon in front of the Fe.
But the never-ending corona deep sleep that those politically responsible in Bavaria had over the culture is also partly to blame for the Amazon sale. Had there been an announced, plannable and adhered to the lead time for the cinema opening, for example in Switzerland or France, where the opening of the culture was scheduled for a realistic time regardless of the incidence figures, the production might still have planned the film for the cinema . The core of the problem is that the corona policy is persistently on sight, making it impossible for everyone involved – production, distribution, cinemas, PR agencies, press – to plan.
Shortening of the blocking period
Not ruled out that the Boandlkramer-The case only marks the beginning of a major restructuring. The cinema associations are still insisting on the exploitation window and blocking periods: The regulation of the Filmfundungsanstalt therefore stipulates that a film must be reserved for the cinemas for six months after it has started before it can be viewed on the stream. However, the Association of Film Distributors provides in its Paper on the FFG amendment firmly: The traditional exploitation cascade for cinema films is history. It is called for the cinema window to be shortened to three months by the end of 2023, regardless of the pandemic.
Proponents of the curtailment of the curfew argue: the film carousel was turning faster and faster even before the pandemic, and films were difficult to hold in the cinema. Indeed, smaller films in particular struggled to find suitable cinemas. In addition, there are clear supply needs in the country, unlike in France, where there is a cinema in every town. A visualization – and that’s what it’s about, not film exploitation! – However, underrepresented films on channels other than the cinema are strictly forbidden, even if the cinema is not available. The Main Association of Film Theaters (HDF) would like to go one step further and calls for the blocking times to be extended to international films and sanctioning of shortening: films must therefore buy themselves out of the exploitation chain if they want to be in the stream earlier.
Admittedly, similar thoughts can occur with Boandlkramer– Come on, come. The cinemas, such as the Sendlinger Tor film theater in Munich, but also the PR and press agencies have made advance payments for the cinema release that has been postponed again and again. The Amazon giant can now sit cheaply in the attention nest that has been made. An agency employee who does not want to be named speaks of an existence-threatening loss of income. Here, compensation payments from Leonine could indeed be appropriate, as well as compensation from the cinemas for the failure. On the other hand, it would help all parties – the film, the cinemas and above all the audience – if there was no rigid contract with the streaming company.
Visibility instead of film exploitation
For other film productions that basically stick to agreements, the embargo should not be an artificial corset. Because when the recycling carousel picks up speed again with the opening of the cinema, the situation will worsen again. There is a risk of a film jam until the system collapses. Distributors are already looking at a pile of film titles that have not been launched, other international titles will follow, including the long-awaited ones such as the new James Bond. The cinemas will hardly have room for a proper evaluation, they too will go to their knees under the inquiries of the distributors. Thus, under certain circumstances, the cinemas could even be used if the blocking periods or even the evaluation cascade and media chronology could be kept more flexible.
But that does not mean that from now on only top dogs like Leonine will be allowed to rule. There is a risk that if the rule is changed, the smaller films, which are not making much money, will be pushed into the stream. That could shift the weight dangerously and also put the smaller cinemas in distress. The situation remains tricky. Only if cinemas have the opportunity to receive funding as cultural venues can the market at this point pave new paths in a fair and satisfactory way. Not that Boandlkramer knocks at the cinemas at the end of the day.
– .
