It’s been 15 years since José Luis Rebordinos took over the San Sebastián Film Festival, transforming it from a local celebration of cinema into one of the leading international film events while retaining a strong eye for new talent and regional cinema. Now the time has come to pass on his prominent position to his longtime colleague and deputy director Maialen Beloki. So how does Rebordinos feel about his final festival edition? On the first day of the festival, the acclaimed film historian and cultural figure spoke with Lidanoir about the changing festival landscape, wanting his last festival as director to go as usual, and the necessitx and limits of political positioning.
Lida Bach: After 15 years as artistic director of San Sebastián, this is your last edition. How do you feel about this final event and to pass on the position after such a long time?
José Luis Rebordinos: For me, it’s a normal edition because it’s just a normal thing to finish a job. I will move on and work on new things, probably with Spanish and Latin American cinema. To be the director of the San Sebastián Film Festival, you need a lot of energy. I’m getting older, and after having been the director for so many years, I think it’s necessary to have a younger man or woman—in this case, a woman—to do this kind of work. Personally, I prefer to develop and do different things. Change is a normal part of life.
LB: During your time as director, San Sebastián has grown from a more locally focused festival into an international film event. In retrospect, how do you feel about your achievements?
JLR: It’s not only my work; it’s the work of a team. I’m very happy with our work. We have improved the industry activities a lot, that is probably the most important thing we have done. It’s very important to have an international dimension. We now have a co-production forum with Latin America and Europe, as well as a new and very important investor conference. These kinds of things change the festival. At the same time, we are now a festival with activities throughout the year. We have a film school, a project residence, and different other initiatives. The festival has changed a lot in these ways.
LB: It feels as though many international festivals are currently at a moment of change. Sundance is moving from Park City to Boulder. The Berlinale changed its artistic direction two years ago, Annecy has a new artistic director, and DOK Leipzig has also changed its artistic director. Do you feel this is connected to the current situation film festivals face, both politically and financially?
JLR: I don’t know. That could be something for the new director to solve. The world and the cinema sphere are changing a lot. We are here in a small place, the Basque Country, which is normally very stable. Because of that, we don’t need that much innovation. But every year there are more festivals competing with us.
For that reason, the new director will probably have to change some things. But the best thing about this festival for me is its stability. The public institutions support the festival. We don’t have problems. They give us money. It’s a very good situation for us at the moment.
LB: You already mentioned the word “competition.” This is something I’d like to explore. Do international film festivals cooperate, or is it a mix of cooperation and competition?
JLR: It’s a bit of both. I have a very good relationship with Thierry Frémaux is a friend. I also have a very good relationship with Alberto Barbera. We often talk about films. At the same time, it’s true that we have to compete because we need world premieres and European premieres for our rules. We cooperate in many areas, but every year, there are more situations in which festivals compete for films. Berlin takes a lot of films from Sundance. San Sebastian on the other hand takes films from Telluride and Toronto.
It’s good for the films. Probably, in the next few years, only two or three festivals will have major world premieres. The other festivals will form a circuit. For example, The Debut screens at Telluride, Toronto, San Sebastián, Zurich, London. Five festivals. And that’s okay for the film and for its promotion. I’m sure that, little by little, this is how it will become in general.
LB: It’s said that major productions shun festivals because of the idea of a 3- or 4-day-window of audience attention for each film. When this is spent during a festival, the audience has already moved on to the next big thing by the time the film actually opens theatrically. Do you share that view?
JLR: That would create a serious problem for festivals. Admittedly, the day-to-day situation is not so great for us, since it can be difficult to have films at a festival when they have only a single day for their premiere. The release window is indeed another problem. Sometimes films have only two or three weeks between their festival premiere, their cinema release, and their arrival on a platform. That changes things a lot.
This year, Venice has had films from the studios and the major streaming portals. Little by little, that is becoming a new situation. People of my generation expected films like Digger, the new film by Iñárritu, or the new Aaron Sorkin film to be at festivals. Because this is where they would not ally belong. This year, that’s not the case.
It’s a new situation, but we don’t know what the future will be. Everything is changing very quickly. The world is changing every day, and cinema is changing with it. For the new director, I think it could be a very complicated cinema world. Fifteen years ago, when I started as a director, it was different.
LB: One general development seems to be that most of the major film festivals, apart from Sundance, struggle to attract star attendance, while smaller festivals are getting more and more prominent guests. Stars seem to enjoy going to these more low-key events. Why would you say that is?
JLR: That is indeed true, but could change very easily. At the moment, the issue with stars is that they have a lot of work with their platforms and films. When they have a little time, they understandably want to spend it with their family and friends. It was different when I first started. It was very easy to have stars come to promote their films.
At the same time, some stars prefer to be at festivals without press conferences and interviews, because every day it becomes more complicated to speak about politics and the current situation in the world. For them, it’s tricky to speak about these things. It’s easier for them to go to a small festival. If they don’t want to speak to the press there, no problem. In Venice, they have to attend the press conference. In San Sebastián, too.
LB: Would you say that, in a time as politically charged and contentious as today, film festivals will sooner or later have to take a political position?
JLR: We have a political position. For us, we have to speak about human rights. At this moment, the Israeli government is killing civilians in Palestine. We have to say it. We have to say it through films, and we have to say it with words. We are very clear about that.
LB: Do you think other festivals should also take such a position? Fore sample, the Berlinale has been criticized for actively avoiding and suppressing political discussions.
JLR: I want to speak out, but for me personally, when people don’t want to address certain conflicts, that’s also okay. Nobody can force anybody to say anything. It’s only human to be afraid. For me it’s not an issue if the Berlinale doesn’t want to comment. I value freedom very much. I don’t like people telling other people what they have to do. I can say my opinion, no problem. But if you don’t want to, that’s okay.
LB: Fair enough. But let’s just note that it’s actually the Berlinale that is pushing artists and press to not make political statements, rather than being pushed to do anything. Another challenge is the advance of AI. Venice screened for the first time a film largely generated by AI. Is that something that could be accepted at San Sebastián, as well?
JLR: If the film is good, why not? The important thing is to know that the film was made with artificial intelligence.
LB: So as long as it’s clearly stated that a film was made with AI, it’s not a problem?
JLR: Yes. You have to know that it was made with AI, but it’s not a problem.
LB: So you don’t feel a film has to be made by human beings?
JLR: Behind a film made with artificial intelligence there are always human beings. This year I watched a film made entirely with artificial intelligence. It was very bad, and for that reason we didn’t take it. Exactly. Artificial intelligence is not a problem. The problem is how you use it. Our selection committee has been seeing films that use artificial intelligence for years. For example, Avatar uses AI.
LB: But Avatar didn’t use AI to generate the whole film, including dialogue and plot. What about the press coverage? An increasing number of press don’t write what they publish as film reviews, they only write ChatGPT prompts. Someone could publish half a dozen reviews and features a day just by generating them via AI. Does San Sebastián scrutinize a applicants output when considering them for press accreditation?
JLR: We can’t know what will happen in the future …
LB: It’s already happening right now. Look at the coverage for Venice. Even renowned magazines are full of AI slop and I’m personally painfully aware of many self-proclaimed film critics churning out reviews with ChatGPT while the editors apparently don’t mind. So does the festival check whether applicants for press accreditation are genuinely writing or just publishing ChatGPT-generated stuff?
JLR: When it’s happening, we need to regulate it.
LB: It’s happening everywhere.
JLR: We don’t have anyone here doing that, as far as we know. Do you know of anyone who does?
LB: As a matter of fact, yes. Even in several highly regarded magazines. Regarding Venice, some outlets had almost exclusively ChatGPT-generated reviews.
JLR: That is certainly a problem. People doing that should not be accredited, that’s very clear. I would never accredit them.
LB: Just two more questions. What makes this festival edition in your eyes special?
JLR: That its regardless just a regular edition. Last year was really good for us. The films change, but the frame stays the same. For my last edition I want everything to run as usual. The program stands out with its wide variation of film forms and styles. We love popular cinema, but at the same time we love arthouse. And we love to have glamour.
San Sebastián is a Frankenstein monster! I like to say that because we have, in the best sense, an average audience, lots of ordinary people in the cinemas. We have local press, the Spanish press, and international press. For all of them we have to program different things. That’s why it’s a Frankenstein monster. All the big festivals are a little like this. Venice, Berlin, Cannes—they don’t have only one single identity. They are made of various qualities. At a smaller festival, it’s possible to have a much clearer line. Locarno or Rotterdam, for example. But the really big festivals are usually all Frankenstein monsters.
LB: Thank you for the interview!