Cinema of Commoning 2
Symposium, Screenings, Talks
Building Alternative Cinema Networks: New Alliances in Film Distribution and Exhibition

On 5 July 2024, we hosted a panel entitled Building Alternative Cinema Networks: New Alliances in Film Distribution and Exhibition as part of the Cinema of Commoning Symposium. Below is an edited transcript of the conversation.

Panellists from left: Christo Wallers, Nada Bakr, Agnès Salson and Can Sungu (credit: Marvin Girbig).

Networks foster exchange and synergies, create new alliances, and provide support. Cinema of Commoning, for instance, brings together cinema initiatives from different regions of the world, offering a platform for dialogue and exchange. In recent years, other networks have emerged that explore alternative models of cinema and unite initiatives focused on cultural film work. These networks exchange ideas not only about cinema practice, but also about alternative approaches to film production and distribution. What significance do these networks hold for non-commercial cinemas and initiatives, filmmakers and distributors? How can they strengthen cooperation between continents? How can the insights and knowledge from these network meetings be better integrated and have a lasting impact? What has been achieved so far, and what challenges remain?

Christo Wallers, Kino Climates/Star and Shadow (Newcastle, United Kingdom)
Agnès Salson, Cinema Makers/La Forêt Électrique  (Toulouse, France)
Nada Bakr, NAAS Network of Alternative Arab Screens (Berlin, Germany)
Moderation: Can Sungu, SİNEMA TRANSTOPIA/Cinema of Commoning (Berlin, Germany)

Attendees gather for a group discussion at the Cinema of Commoning Symposium (credit Marvin Girbig).

Can Sungu (SİNEMA TRANSTOPIA): Networks certainly foster exchange and synergies, create new alliances and provide support. However, just because something is labeled a network doesn’t necessarily mean it functions like one. The core principle of a network is self-organization; you don’t have a central authority or control mechanism. Responsibility is shared in some way. We all talk about relationships, trust-based transparency, and a sense of belonging—there’s definitely a network mindset at play.

First of all, there are multiple keywords associated with networks that we could explore, but in the context of my role representing Cinema of Commoning, the network aspect of our projects is quite clear. Both Kino Climates and NAAS are networks of cinemas: Kino Climates focuses more on European Geography, while NAAS is transnational, spanning Africa and Asia. I believe that Cinema Makers and Cinema of Commoning share commonalities as well. I wouldn’t say we are a network just yet, but we certainly aspire to be. We started as a festival, which included an editorial aspect and a collectively created film program. Cinema Makers has this book and a desire to bring cinemas together.

What do you think are the reasons for individual partners to participate in your network?  What do they gain and what do they contribute? Terms like transparency, self-organization, belonging, solidarity, manifesto—how important are these concepts to the partners in your network?

Christo Wallers (Kino Climates): I think relationships are probably the most significant aspect for Kino Climates. I’m reflecting on the fact that these three networks all seem to have emerged organically from grassroots initiatives, despite operating in different economies. This might reflect the shared space and activity we all engage in. We’re not top-down projects, and to my mind, relationships are at the heart of grassroots activity. I would say authentic relationships are essential to that.

Nada Bakr (NAAS): I appreciate your emphasis on relationships because it feels more open. Networks often go hand in hand with collaboration, but I don’t necessarily agree with that narrow definition. I would like to broaden the scope, as “relationship” can be more inclusive than “collaboration.” In the case of NAAS, it was founded with the intention of creating spaces for people to connect. Because you have the festivals and the filmmaking industry, and space is part of this ecosystem. But at the moment that NAAS was formed, there was not a space for these people to meet.

After more than 12 years, the needs of members, like Cinémathèque de Tanger and Metropolis, have evolved.  Take Cinema Akil in Dubai as an example. Butheina, its founder, joined a NAAS meeting in 2014 just as she was about to open her cinema. She attended a workshop in Cairo for programmers. So there’s a long history in NAAS of different generations coming together. It’s about having a safety net to fall back on. People always have different reasons why they are joining the network, but I think the idea of mutual support and being part of a network is important. Given the challenges of meeting and traveling in the region, we built a team within NAAS to facilitate coordination.

A screening organised by NAAS member Sudan Film Factory.

Agnès Salson (Cinema Makers): I’m going to continue on the theme of relationships, as I find inspiration in the potential to look beyond the existing cinema model – to create something that transcends just being a screening room. It was valuable for me not to be alone in this research, to research together. Cinema Makers started with writing and sharing ideas, then we visited cinemas on the ground, like Numax, a cinema operating as a coop that has been doing many of the things we often dream about but never see in France. It made us realize that our aspirations were indeed possible. Connecting with people who are further along in certain aspects allowed us to envision redefining our space. For me, being part of a network offers a broader perspective and the opportunity to dream of change.

Can: Cinema of Commoning may not be a network yet, but we are actively working towards that. Exchange is very much at the core of what we do, as well as solidarity. As we enter our second edition, we are focusing on global cinema practices. We are not alone; there are others with a similar mindset. Our networks are primarily designed for exchanging ideas about cinema as a social practice. I would like to continue with this question: We are all cinemas, but outside of exhibition how can these networks contribute to developing alternative approaches to film production and distribution? Can we establish this within our networks? How can we enhance visibility for films from the so-called Global South, which often gain exposure if they succeed at European film festivals or are European co-productions? What significance do these networks hold for non-commercial cinemas and initiatives, as well as for filmmakers and distributors?

Nada: I will talk from my position as a cultural organizer and as a curator, more than a cinema professional here. I would make that distinction because my introduction to networks was rooted in a technological view shaped by the internet and the idea of subverting networks. So managing a human network in physical spaces offers a different lens.

In terms of film distribution, I think what is very interesting with NAAS is that it provides a comprehensive overview of the distribution landscape. We encompass various modes, from film programming, to cinema releases, to community screenings and mobile cinemas. Considering the concepts of localities and dis-localities, we explore how films can be borrowed, shared and occupied, and also how a network might program together. Within NAAS, collaboration often happens very organically. When people know each other, it doesn’t even need to pass officially through the network. This speaks to the life cycle of a film. We facilitate spaces for our network to connect with other networks. We’ll always be the connector, from our position with the NAAS team. We have to consider how we can help expand the horizon of possibilities for film circulation. There is always the business side, and independent films are part of that cycle. Looking at the life cycle of a film from the perspective of spaces, their programmers and the cine clubs is essential.

I don’t think anyone has the right recipe for how to alternatively circulate a film, but from NAAS’ standpoint, having an overview and a shared think tank between people about the strategies we might use to expand the life cycle of a film is helpful, and part of an ongoing conversation between us all.

Star and Shadow cinema, a member of the Kino Climates network.

Christo: Kino Climates has always offered a huge amount of potential as an alternative circuit, because there’s a lot of cinemas. However, organizing major touring programs has proven elusive. That’s not to say that smaller groups haven’t co curated work. So, for example, if a cinema wants to invite a guest from very far away, they might reach out via our email list to others want to co-host. This cuts down costs and makes it more possible. These informal curatorial collaborations happen, but the full potential of this alternative circuit is always there, tantalizing but sort of out of reach.

We’ve also co-curated film programs at festivals like Rotterdam and Thessaloniki, which is another avenue for bringing network members together to select and screen films. Keeping these connections with the film community alive is important, though from a Star and Shadow perspective, it’s become more challenging due to funding constraints and the rise of streaming as a distribution platform. I’m curious about your experiences. How can we sustain connections with the filmmaking community, when online distribution routes appear more promising than alternative cinema spaces?

Can: There are various models which could answer to your question. Some networks of filmmakers here in Berlin or in Germany are established especially for German filmmakers of color, like the Berlin Asian Film Network or Schwarze Filmschaffende. At SİNEMA TRANSTOPIA, we collaborate with these networks, offering our space for their screenings, events and gatherings. These networks include many emerging filmmakers who have difficulties securing financing for their films. So we stand in solidarity with them, to see them as part of our alliances. We often showcase new films which have no recieved a theatrical releases in Germany. They might have premiered at festivals, but otherwise there is no real possibility of being seen by a wider audience. We host workshops attended by artists and filmmakers who are interested in developing particular skills or methodologies, which is important for their growth. We work within different formats and models within the cinema.

PostModernissimo in Perugia, which is featured in the Cinema Makers project.

 Agnès: I would add that if we envision a new generation of cinema that nurtures emerging talents and connects with local artists, then we can see cinema not just as a site of co-curation but also as a hub for co-production. We have this dream of supporting local talent and film production, in order for local artists to be at the core of the cinema. Independent cinemas can be seen as nodes within a network. As nodes, we can find a way to connect with each other and help to cultivate talent. It’s not just about screening something at your local cinema. If you are part of a network of 100 independent cinemas, then you can really do something different.

There was this movement in Japan, in the 1960s or 1970s, a group of arthouse cinemas who decided to produce and screen films together. It was a way to support the emergence of new spaces, but also new voices. This offers a potential direction for a cinema network. If we share our network, our practices, our workshops, perhaps in a few years’ time we will also have content to share that we’ve collectively co-produced or supported.

Nada: You know, as you were speaking, I remembered about 10 collaborations between the members that were inside out. Which is why I would emphasize that some things emerge organically. When you look at the other cinemas present here at Cinema of Commoning, none of them just screen films and call it a day. There is always a community aspect, workshops and shared values about how we work together.

At NAAS, I often ask myself a lot what this is all about. We really have to be careful about how we collaborate as a network and how we’re using – or maybe misusing – different perspectives. We are a network with a team and jobcontracts and we have to navigate funding landscapes and all the politics within that. We need to keep asking ourselves if what we’re doing works. Sometimes you need to dismantle, or take up a different shape or structure. It really does no one any good to hook up to a structure, a name or a model for the sake of it. We can sometimes be oblivious to the realities we live within when we are working inside certain theories and terminologies.

I am here speaking as the director of the network, instead of inviting the 23 members to talk on my behalf about how the network and structure works. It’s very good to be open. Of course, there is day-to-day work for you as a team, and you have to get that work done so you cannot be thinking all the time about structures. We are decentralized to a great extent, within the relationships we have with our members. We have to be constantly aware of why we are upholding this structure and what its purpose is. Shared values and goals have to be revisited constantly, as circumstances change.

Audience Question: Are you also thinking about sharing film education practices in your work?

Christo: A lot of what we do at Kino Climates is DIY and pretty informal, so a more structured approach to film education hasn’t really come up for us. But I like to think of our informal methods as their own kind of alternative pedagogy—community practice as a way of learning. We’re always learning from each other, acting like peer educators in a bottom-up way.

Young audiences came up in our Kino Climates gathering in Ghent, and there was this interesting tension between seeing young people as a potential skills base for the industry versus seeing them as individuals shaping themselves. We didn’t dive deep into it, but I think it’s crucial for film education. We need to find ways to nurture young audiences as people who want to see the world through cinema, not just as future workers. Sure, there should be pathways to becoming a filmmaker, but there should also be ways to become a more self-actualized person through cinema experiences. That’s what I’m really interested in.

Members of Kino Climates gather at Cinema Nova in Brussels.

Can: It’s clear that many of our Cinema of Commoning partners are thinking about film education, and some already have established practices. We’re running workshops and collaborating with schools in the neighborhood. We’re also working on collecting films made by German filmmakers of color that have been overlooked in the broader German film canon. As part of our educational practice, we’re figuring out how to share this often hidden knowledge with a wider audience. We want to highlight the history of migration in Germany, addressing German colonialism and our memory culture, and work with archives to pass this info on to younger generations. It’s local work, but also has a global context, especially with the rise of right-wing populism in Europe. We need to find ways to protect ourselves and ensure our spaces remain safe for our community.

Audience Question: Can you talk about the power dynamics in networks, how you decide who’s part of it, and how to keep it open rather than becoming an exclusive structure?

Christo: From Kino Climates’ perspective, there’s definitely a power dynamic at play. A lot of cinema projects from northern and western Europe tend to dominate, as they generally have more resources than those from the south and east. For instance, in the UK, the risks of ephemerality are less, which is a privilege. We don’t have many cinema projects with people of color in the network, and that’s something we need to think about. Creating space for these conversations in our meetings is really important. We have to be mindful of the systemic power dynamics we all bring to the table.

Agnès: When we toured Europe, we were also thinking about power dynamics, especially since we had funding from France. We aimed to visit newer spaces rather than just the big names, but we ended up missing a lot from rural areas. We saw many cinemas in capital cities and tried to reach smaller initiatives, but it was tougher because of these power dynamics. It’s crucial to share visibility—when you discover a lesser-known project, talk about it and spread the word. We’re definitely aware of these dynamics within the project.

Artwork from the Cinema Makers project.

Nada: This conversation about power dynamics is something we’re always having at NAAS. You have to accept that it’s ongoing. We also need to keep reminding our audience what NAAS stands for. The name—Network of Arab Alternative Screens—is quite broad, so we have to define it to operate effectively as a team. We owe it to the public to explain what we’re doing, or else it seems like an exclusive “cool club” with just 23 members in a vast region. Sure, capacity matters, but we also need to think about why we have certain members and not others. Even decentralized networks need to share knowledge and be transparent, both internally and with the wider sector.

Can: With Cinema of Commoning, we also have to keep external power relations in mind. For example, we had two people from our network who couldn’t make it to Berlin due to visa issues. So we’re left questioning if we should hold these meetings in Berlin or somewhere else. Some folks need visas to come to Germany, and have different obligations. It creates this weird imbalance between experiences, like someone in Morocco compared to someone in Germany. That’s definitely something we need to consider for future editions.

An image from the Cinema Makers project (credit Thibault-de-Senneville-Monx).

Christo Wallers is a cinema-maker and post-doctoral film scholar. He is a co-founder of Star and Shadow Cinema in Newcastle, UK, and runs the annual Losing the Plot film retreat in Northumberland. He has been active in the Kino Climates network since its beginning in 2010, and has coordinated three editions of a network-wide zine ‘Filmo#’. A part-time lecturer at Teesside University, he has published on DIY film screening cultures in the UK, cooperativism and urban commons, most recently for The Palgrave Handbook of Experimental Film (2024).

Agnès Salson toured the cinemas of Europe with her partner Mikael Arnal to gather inspiring ideas and emerging practices, documented in their book Cinema Makers. Since last April, they further expanded their practices by launching Cinema Makers meetings, an international gathering of cinemas that are approaching the exhibition of films differently. They are now settled in Toulouse, where they launched La Forêt Électrique, a cinema to connect audiences and creative filmmaking through events, workshops, residencies and film screenings.

Nada Bakr is the Executive Director of NAAS | Network of Arab Alternative Screens. With over 12 years of experience as an independent curator and cultural manager, her work spans visual arts, social justice, human rights, technology, digital art and culture. Nada holds an MA in Media Arts Cultures from Aalborg University, Denmark, and has held roles such as as Managing Director and Curator at Cairotonica – Electronic and New Media Arts Festival and as a community programme curator at Disruption Network Lab, Berlin. She has collaborated with institutions and projects including Darb 1718Medrar for Contemporary ArtIMPAKT | Centre for Media CultureElectric SouthAkademie der KünsteThe Mosaic Rooms, and African Crossroads.

Can Sungu is a curator, researcher and author. He is Co-founder and Artistic Director of bi‘bak and SİNEMA TRANSTOPIA in Berlin where he curated various international programs, events and exhibitions such as Cinema of Commoning (since 2022), the documentary exhibition projects Sıla Yolu – The Holiday Transit to Turkey and the Tales of the Highway (2016-17) and Bitter Things – Narratives and Memories of Transnational Families (2018). He has served as a juror and consultant for the Berlinale Forum, International Short Film Festival Oberhausen, Duisburger Filmwoche, Hauptstadtkulturfonds and the DAAD Artist-in Berlin Program, among others. He has published several books, including Please Rewind – German-Turkish Film- and Video Culture in Berlin (Archive Books, 2020). Between 2020-23, he has been part of the curatorial team of Fiktionsbescheinigung at the Berlinale Forum – a film program that parries German film history with intersectional perspectives. Since 2023 he is curator for filmic practices at Haus der Kulturen der Welt (HKW) in Berlin.