Sail Neon Gielen apus.ic worLos Series Editors: Dilip Gaonkar and Benjamin Lee vouwme 15 Mette Fljort, Small Nation, Global Crema: The New Davsh Cirema vouume 14 ‘Aley Cinas, Moder, Islam, and Sealarism in Turkey: Bois, Place, and Tine vouume 13 Richard Harvey Brown, Editor, The Plits of Selfhod: Bodies and Identities in Global Capitalism voLome 12 ‘Ato Quayson, Calibrations: Reading for the Socal vouuMme 11 Daniel Herwitz, Race and Reconciliation: Essays from the New South Africa votume 10 Ulf Hedetoft and Mette Hjort, Editors, The Pestntional Sef Belonging and Identity vouume Claudio Lomnitz, Deep Mexico, Siler Mevco: An Anthropology of Nationalism vowume 8 Greg Urban, Metaclture: How Culture Moves trough the World VoLume 7 Patricia Seed, American Pentinento: The lnoenton of Indian and the Pursuit of Riches votume 6 Radhika Mohanram, Black Body: Women, Colonialism, and Space vouume 5 May Joseph, Nomadic Metis. The Performance of Ctizesbip votume 4 Mayfair Mei-hut Yang, Spaces of Tair On: Women’s Public Sphere in Transnational China vouume 3 Naoki Saki, Translation and Subjectivity: On "Japan" and Caltural Nationalism vouume 2 [Ackbar Abbas, Hong Kong Calture avd the Politics of Disapbearance vouume 1 ‘Arjun Appadurai, Modernity at Large: Cultural Dinevsiows of GlobalizationSmall Nation, Global Cinema The New Danish Cinema i PUBLIC WORLDS, VOLUME 15 [B83 UMIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA PRESS MINNEAPOLIS LONDON(Chapter? isa revised version ofthe author's contributions to Pury and Provaction Dayna 45 edited by Metie Hiovt and Scott MacKensie (London Bric Film Insitute, 2008) ert of chapter 5 appeated in Tronsatonel Cinema i Global Nort: Nordic Cinema ie Transtior, edited by Andrew Nestingen and Trevor Elkington (Detroit: Wayne State University Press, 2005). Copyright 2005 by the Repeats of the University of Minnesota All sights ceserved, Nopart ofthis publication may be reproduced, stored in are trieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, of otherwit, without the price written permission ofthe publishes. Published by the Unversity of Minnesota Press 111 Third Avenue South, Suite 280 ‘Minneapolis, MN $5401-2520 betpuwww.upress uma.edu Library of Congress Cataloging-tn-Publiation Data Hors, Mette Small nation, global cinema the new Danish cinema / Mette Hjort bem, — (Public worlds v.15) Inches bibliogrephical references and index. ISBN 0-8166-4648-1 (he alk. paper) — ISBN 0-8166-4649- (pb : alk. paper) |.Motion pictures—Denmark, |, Title. Il. Series PNi993.5.D4H62 2005 791.43'09489—de22 2005002054 Printed inthe United States of America on acid-free paper “The University of Minnesota is an equal-oppartunity educator and employer 1211 10 09 08 07 06 05 987654321For Siri and ErikContents Preface Acknowledgments 1 New Danish Cinema: A Small Nation's Path to Globalization 2 Dogma 95: The Globalization of Denmark's Response to Hollywood 3. Participatory Filmmaking: Experiments across the Filmmaker/ Viewer Divide 4. Patriotism and Nationalism: A Common Culture in Film 5 Counterglobalization: A Transnational Communicative Space Emerges in the North 6. International Heritage: Toward an Ethics of the Bio-Pic 7 Toward a Multiethnic Society: Cinema as aMode of Incorporation ‘Appendix: Dogma 95 Manifesto and Dogma Films Notes Works Cited Index vii 34 66 12 158 191 234 273 279 285 299Preface Small Nation, Gloal Cixema looks closely at the so-called New Danish Cinema in order to understand the dynamics of various globalizations within a privileged small-nation context, The discussion builds on a number of my earlier analyses of contemporary Danish cinema, some of the argu- ments and key terms of which warrant brief mention here. In the area of film culture, as I have argued elsewhere (Hjort 1996), small-nation status is typically linked to the production of ‘minor cinema." In cultural stud- ies, the term mivar is associated with Gilles Deleuze and Félix Guattaris insightful work on “minor literature,’ a concept anchored in their under- standing of Franz Kafkals writings and linked to the idea of subverting a dominant national language or culture from within, The term mivar points, then, to the existence of regimes of cultural power and to the need for strategic resourcefulness on the part of those who are unfavorably situated within the cultural landscape in question, be ita national context ora more properly glabal one, Denmark, | argued in Tbe Danish Directors: Dialogues ‘on « Contemporary National Cinema, qualifies as a small nation engaged in the production of minor cinema for the following reasons: 1 The sizeof its population is too small to sustain a commercially based, indigenous film industry. 2 The language spoken by the nation in question, Danish, is understood primarily by Danes, making it difficult co expand the market for Danish film through export and international distribution3 Akey problem forthe indigenous fil industry isthe ongoing influx and dominant presence of American films, (Hjort and Bondebjerg 2001, 20) Prior to the emergence of the New Danish Cinema in the 1990s, recurrent problems confronted by the relevant minor cinema primarily concerned a lack of interest in Danish films within national, European, Nordic, and trensnational communicative spaces. What makes this kind of generalized neglect problematic is the clear sense that itis ultimately traceable not to an inherent absence of interest or quality in all or even most cases but to polities of positionalty on the part of strong or large nations, most notably the United States. One obvious solution to the problems posed by posi- tionality is simply to get out of the game of filmmaking, to acknowledge that filmmaking on purely commercial terms is an impossibility in the small-nation context of Denmark, This isnot, however, the path taken by the Danish state, widely sup. ported by is citizens, when it became clear in the mid-1970s that Danish film would be incapable of surviving without significant forms of state support. The reasons are clear: Danish film is part of a national heritage culture, recognized internationally during the golden years of silent cinema as a leading contributor to the seventh art. Something is his- torically at stake in keeping the tradition of Danish filmmaking alive, The more important point i that we live in a world of circulating images, and itis crucial that at least some of these images are generated by “us,” that they reflect “out” perspective, concerns, language, and habitual spaces of interaction. In the Danish context, the need for films with some kind of rneaningful national dimension is nowhere more forcefully felt than in the area of children’s culture. The sense, in this connection, is that Disney's global reach and strategies of market saturation threaten to replace a Nordic coneeption of children’s film asa site of learning about real-world problems with forms of fantasy that perpetuate insidious ideologies while simulating innocence. A third reason for not simply opting out of the game of cinematic production is that films are cultural products that make it possible for a (national) community to articulate ts moral sources and guiding commitments to a much wider audience, thereby ideally contrib- ting something of worth to a larger conversation, ‘This last point raises a cluster of issues having to do with what Charles ‘Taylor has called the “politics of recognition’ (1992b). The premise under- writing Taylor's argument is that the desire for recognition constitutes a basic human need and that the withholding of recognition, either through the imposition of demeaning images or the projection of indifference, Prefaceconstitutes 2 form of harm. In the 1970s and 1980s, state support for Danish cinema was in many ways. clear case of a small nation engaging in a politics of recognition, for the aim was to ensure that a national culture found continued expression in film and that the value of that culture regis ‘ered to the greatest extent possible both within and beyond the relevant rational borders (Hjort 1996) In the course of the 1990s, however, and in the new millennium, Danish filmmakers and policymakers began to gravitate toward a series of initiatives that have effectively combined to de- nationalize, to bybridze, but also to globalize the relevant minor cinema. Small ‘Nation, Global Ciena attempts to pinpoint key strategic changes from the Tate 1980s onward, shifts that have allowed for the emergence of a minor cinema capable of reconfiguring unfavorable patterns of global circulation and challenging the varieties of national, regional, and global indifference that lasting significant asymmetries inevitably produce. Swall Nation, Global Cinema is largely an extended contrastive analysis of two of the most im- portant strategies underwriting the transformation and globalization of contemporary Danish cinema. One of these strategies is particularly at- tuned to the dynamics of cultural circulation, whereas the other relies on the psychological efficacy of deep shared culture, of hrtage In my frst chapter, "New Danish Cinema: A Small Nation's Path to Globalization,” I identify some ofthe institutional and ideological bases for film culture's ongoing transformation in contemporary Denmark, [ also provide a rationale for focusing on a privileged small nation and for contributing to globalization studies through careful consideration of specific cases. Chapter 2, "Dogma 95: The Globalization of Denmak’s Response to Hollywood,” pinpoints the political motivations behind the relevant manifesto-based movement and examines the dynamics of its globalization. The next chapter, “Participatory Filmmaking: Experiments across the Filmmaker/ Viewer Divide, continues the discussion of cultural form through close analysis of two experiments involving viewer partici pation as an audience-building strategy: the Dogma brethren’ millennium project known as D-Dag (D-Day) and Jonas Elmer‘s Mona's Word (Moras ‘en, 2001). ff the initial goal was to foster intense audience involvement ‘on a national level, the more distant hope was thatthe relevant intensities, if realized, might leverage interest elsewhere in the world and thus stimu- late the circulation of ideas, descriptions, metadiscourses, and cinematic texts associated with the experiments within a wider transnational space. ‘The focusin chapter 4, "Patriotism and Nationalism: A Common Culture in Film," is on the strategy of heritage and, more specifically, on the work- ings and implications of cinematic heritage constructions in small-nation Preface‘contexts characterized by strong commitments to democratic ideals and concepts of national specificity as well as by radical changes in terms of ‘ethnic composition, In chapter 5, "Counterglobalization: A Transnational Communicative Space Emerges in the North,’ the aim is to understand what happens when the hericage strategy is brought to bear on national and transnational cultures simultaneously, showing chat a shift in empha- sis from deep culture (or heritage) to circulation makes possible a far more effective consolidated response to Global Hollywood on the part of a number of small flmmaking nations. Chapter 6, "International Heritage: ‘Toward an Ethics of the Bio-Pic" looks at Global Hollywood's tendency 10 appropriate national culture as international heritage without feeling bound in any way by ethical considerations relating to heritage culture's inevitable imbrication with questions of identity and ownership. The analysis is anchored in Sydney Pollack’s bio-pic about the Danish author Karen Blixen (aka lsak Dinesen), Out of Africa. Inasmuch as Blixen lived an expatriate (and colonial existence) in Kenya, Pollack’s film makes it pos- sible to think through questions having to do with collective moral rights in a comparative perspective involving two quite different small-n contexts. The final chapter, “Toward a Multiethnic Society: Cinema as 8 Mode af Incorporation,” retuens us to the dynamics of cultural cil tion within a small nation-state and especially to the unintended conse- quences of some of the successes of the New Danish Cinema, The idea is to show that the “glocalization’ practiced by some of the emerging young filmmakers of the New Danish Cinema has produced an “ethnic turn” in Danish film, which has had the effect of transforming film culture into a site for public debate about questions of citizenship and belonging. Film culture in Denmark increasingly functions as a mechanism for civic inclu sion and as an effective means of negotiating changes linked to an intensi fied flow of peoples across national boundaries. PrefaceAcknowledgments began working on Snail Nation, Global Cinema more than a decade ago, prompted by a screening of Lars von Trier Element of Crime in Montreal's Cinéma Paralléle, The McGill English department generously supported my excursions onto terrain that could easily have been construed as peripheral to it efforts. Charles Taylor and John Hall, both McGill col- leagues, immersed me in debates about recognition, small nations, and nationalism and provided me with many a useful map. Ben Lee, director of the Center for Transcultural Studies in Chicago, has played the role of friendly sparring partner over the years as I sought to understand the relevance of theories of publicity and counterpublicity, of civil society, multiculturalism, and globalization, for my particular context of analysis, David Bordwell supported the project from the very beginning and pro- vided enthusiastic guidance throughout, During my years in Denmark, from 1997 to 2001, I enjoyed generous assistance from countless directors and producers who trusted me with their films (often before they were released) and always found time to an- swer even the seemingly most trivial of questions. My thanks to Connie Christensen (of Wibroe, Duckert & Partners), who sent me a tape with the Zlatko Buric advertisements as well asa bag of salty licorice to bright- ‘en my day. Vicki Synnott at the Danish Film Institute has helped me since the beginning and in ways far too numerous to list. Ib Bondebjers: and Peter Schepelern, both at the University of Copenhagen, will always be my favorite native informants about Danish film, Ulf Hedetoft, directorof SPIRT and AMID at Aalborg University, debated all the key issues ‘with me at one point or another and helped me to see how the book might be able to address many different audiences at once. The University of Hong Kong awarded me # generous Research Initiation Grant, for which Lam grateful [have had the welcome opportunity to present parts of Small Nation, Global Civema to a number of quite different audiences, who invariably helped me to clarify my thoughts, | am especially grateful to the follow- ing scholars for giving me the opportunity, at conferences or in visting speakers’ series, to speak about the “minor cinema” that | know best: “Tobin Siebers (LIniversity of Michigan, Ann Arbor), David Bordwell and. Patrick Rumble (University of Wisconsin-Madison), Meaghan Morris and Stephen Chan (Lingnan University), Natasa Durovicova, Kathleen Newman, Corey Creekmur, and Paul Greenough (University of lowa), ‘Andy Nestingen and Jakob Stougaard-Nielsen (University of Washington, Seattle), Kathleen Woodward (Simpson Center, University of Washington, Seattle), Viepi Zuck (University of Oregon, Eugene), Wlodek Rabinowicz and Jeanette Emt (Lund University), Scott MacKenzie (University of East Anglia), Mark Sandberg and Karen Sanders (University of California, Berkeley), Ben Lee and Hamid Naficy (Rice University), Suzanne Foisy (Université de Québec 8 Trois Rividres), Wang Xizoming (Shanghai University), Kristian Flimmelstrup (niversity of Austin, Texes), Morten Kyndrup (University of Arhus), Patrice Petro, Peter Paike, and Marcus Bullock (Llniversity of Wisconsin-Milwaukee), and Helle Mathiasen (Uni versity of Arizona, Tucson). fam deeply grateful to Meaghan Morris, Stephen Chan, Markus Reisenleitner, and all of the other remarkable scholars in Cultural Studies at Lingnan University for offering me a spirited intellectual home in 2004-2005. The filmmakers Jargea Leth, Ole Bornedal, Helle Rystinge, Vincent Chui, and Erik Clausen generously provided images, as did the producers at Nordisk Film, Cosmo Film, and Angel Film Production. My thanks to Per Arnesen for the right to use two of his still photographs, and to Elisabeth Helge at the Swedish Film Institute, Kirsten Klaver at the Danish Film Institute, and Line Greisen at the Film Town for help in tracking down images and rights holders. | am grateful to Carrie Mullen, Laura Westlund, and Jason Weidemann at the University of Minnesota Press for their scrupulously professional and collegial approach to pub: lishing, Robin Whitaker's conscientious and insightful copyediting is also very much appreciated, Without a doubt, chis book would have seen the light of day many Ackvowledgmentsyears earlier had it not been for Erik and Siri, who slowed me down in ‘meaningful ways and thus ended up giving me 2 chance, however un intentionally, to discard early ideas that came to scem wrongheaded as I learned more about my topic. My greatest debt is to Paisley Livingston, who believed in me when I myself did not Ackwowledg ments4 New Danish Cinema: A Small Nation's Path to Globalization Danish cinema is not what it used to be. In the 1970s and '80s this small national cinema produced about ten feature films a year, and every now and again one of them would register as successful according to some criterion of success, be it box office sales, festival visibility, or favorable critical review. For the most part, though, something was a little tired and worn about this national cinema with a golden-age past, which seemed in every respect to be very much a thing of history. If in the '70s and’80s, the carly decades of Danish cinema brought to mind the erotically charged performances of an Asta Nielsen or the remarkable images of Benjamin Christensen's Witcheraft trough the Ages (Heksen 1920), more recent Danish films tended to suggest many of the traits typically attributed to state-run operations. Viewers, it seemed, had come fo associate Danish film with slow-moving humanistic narratives in a realist style, focusing on humdrum ‘welfare-state lives and problems. One was duty-bound, of course, as @ film scholar to acknowledge the efforts of this small nation and to concede that every now and again something, worth watching and talking about made its way to the screen, But if evidence was needed to support claims sbout the generally middling nature of this small national cinema in its conter- porary incarnation, one could always point to the fact that even Danes found Danish films uninteresting, Danish films, unsurprisingly, remainedthe core of Danish film scholarship, but this field was to a significant extent a national ghetto, attracting attention only from the rare international scholar with a vested interest in Scandinavian studies Things have changed. The Danish Film Institute (DFI) now funds some ‘twenty-five feature films a year, and these films are not only widely viewed within the communicative space of the nation but also intensely debated in various civil society contexts, where film increasingly functions as a vehicle for meaningful public debate, Danish flms now account for approximately 25 percent of domestic box office sales, a high figure in a European context and one that media pundits, eager to set European national cinemas on a path to success, would once have been willing to evoke only as a regula~ tive idea. In the '90s, average ticket sales per annum totaled 9.9 million, of which 1.8 million were for Danish films. According to a DFl estimate con ducted in the beginning of December 2003, ticket sales in that year totaled 12.5 million, with 3.1 million for Danish films (Fill Jensen 2003). Recent years have seen the emergence of a domestic blockbuster phenomenon, the term blockbuster being appropriate in this small-nation context (with a population of some 5.5 million people) when ticket sales exceed five hun- dred thousand. Between 1993 and 1997 only one Danish film qualified for small-nation blockbuster status, whereas the 1998-2003 period saw the release of eight blockbuster films. In the same period, only six foreign films performed in Denmark ata similar level of box office succes. ‘A nation’s interest in its national cinema, while often absent in small- nation contexts, nonetheless has something unsurprising about it, Ae an intuitive and pretheoretical level, the absence of domestic appeal registers 48 a sure sign of inferior quality, but its presence is easily equated with the ‘quasi-natural state of affairs in any well-functioning sphere of national cultural production, Transnational, international, or global awareness of a small state-supported cinema's offerings is, on the other hand, far more striking, for the obstacles to wider circulation —linguistic, cultural, and ‘ther—are more readily apparent, Danish films are now seen by viewers around the globe, and these viewers increasingly approach these films as part of a larger phenomenon—that of the New Danish Cinema—rather than as discrete texts by established auteurs o lesser-known directors ‘with funny names that might be Danish but could just as well be Belgian, ‘Swiss, or Dutch. The visibility of Danish film on the festival circuit has in creased dramatically, as has the number of prestigious awards and prizes enjoyed by especially directors and actors. In January 2004, for example, the Danish Film institute noted unprecedented interest in New Danish Cinema on the US. festival circuit: New Danish Cinema BhoPalm Springs International Fl Festival: Spren Kragh-lacobsen’s English- language Skagrrak (2003), Lone Scherfg’s English-language Wir Warts 1 Kill ins (Wilbur ber selomord, 2002) ond Cheistoffer Boe's Reconsracton. Sundance: Lars von Trier’s English-language Dogslle (2003) and the same tirectors collaborative experiment with Jorgen Leth, The Fie Obstractions (Defem brspand, 2003), Scandinavian Film Festival in Los Angeles: Anders Thomas Jensen's The Greve Batches (Degranae sage, 2003) and Reconstruction. ‘Sevatosa Fim Festa. Shagerrak, Wilbar Wants t Kil ins, and Jonoik Johansen's Remnant (2002), Sante Barbara Internationa Fl Festival: Lars von Trier's Dogo as “festival centrepiece" (DFI 2004b) ‘Among the various directors identified above, Lars von Trier clearly stands ‘out as the driving force behind the growing interest in the New Danish Cinema, In2004 von Trier’ films, From his ear film-schoo! days to Dagvlle, toured major US. cinematheques during the month of March, when his controversial film involving an apparent indictment of ULS. forcign policy ‘was scheduled for release in the United States, Participating institutions included the American Museum of the Moving Image in New York, the ‘American Cinematheque in Los Angeles, the Harvard Film Archive in Boston, the Wexner Center in Columbus, Ohio, and the Cinematheque in Cleveland. The American Cinematheque in Los Angeles described von ‘Trier as follows in its program for the occasion: “Acclaimed for his mastery of unsettling melodramatic tension, raw character-driven emotion, and bold visual style, von Trier has situated himself as a major force in con- temporary cinema—not only for his own films, but also for the visionary Dogme 95 manifesto” (DFI 2004c). Von Trier’s work also figured cen- trally in Toronto's "SuperDanish” lm program (October 22-November 4, 2004), Steve Gravestock, who has been following the New Danish Cinema since its emergence, introduced this cinema to Canadian audiences in the SuperDanish program notes: “the oddest and most intriguing of beasts both avant-garde and traditional, commercially viable, yet artistically chal- Tenging’ (DF1 2004a). ‘The success of the New Danish Cinema is closely linked to the emer- gence of a significant number of new stars and, one could argue, to 2 newfound interest on the part of producers, distributors, and mediators at the Danish Film Institute in developing a relatively robust star system New Dawish Cinema a3with extensions into a transnational (European and Nordic) communica tive space. Drawing on the work of Francesco Alberoni, Richard Dyer identifies a "large-scale society" as one of the conditions for the possible ‘emergence of stars, the others being “economic development above sub- sistence’ and “social mobility” (Dyer 1998, 5). Denmark is in many ways a star-resistant site for key quantitative factors work against the unbridge able divides that exist between the stars and ordinary people of other cul trures, the exclusivity of those stars, and the very idea of the impenetrable spaces that they occupy, 2s does the nation’s unshakable commitment to egalitarianism. The absence of a well-developed star system has on many an occasion been singled out by filmmakers as a significant problem in terms of profiling and circulating Danish film. Nicolas Winding Refn, a central igure in the New Danish Cinema, comes to mind in this connec: tion, this young filmmaker has in fact worked hard to constitute one or two actors as stars capable of producing remarkable publicity for various cultural texts.! To a certain extent, stardom in the Danish case, 2s in 50 many small-nation contexts, is measured in terms of visibility elsewhere, somewhere in the transnational beyond. Transcendence of the national context provides the sense of unbridgeable distance that is the mark of stars in dominant imaginaries of stardom. In the small-nation context, successful actors and directors, however charismatic, remain citizens ‘whose addresses and phone numbers are widely known and who are regu larly sighted in local supermarkets, restaurants, museums, and cinemas, in the public spaces where ordinary life in all of its banality unfolds. Yet, there are now those who, much like the legendary Asta Nielsen, enjoy the option of transcending the narrow borders of the small national flm industry and cinema in which they first became visible; Ulrich Thomsen, Paprika Steen, then Hiejle, and Nikolsj Coster Waldau are some of the more obvious examoles. ‘The circulation of films belonging to the New Danish Cinema, both locally and globally, hinges less, however, on the dynamics of thespian stardom than it does on regimes of prestige and value associated with directors. Indeed, the emergence of a significant number of already re~ ‘markable or clearly promising new directors is part of the very meaning of the concept of New Danish Cinema. I have used this term loosely on a number of occasions up to this point, but itis time now to spell out its referent in a litle more detail. After years of stagnation, Danish cinema witnessed three decisive moments between 1984 and 1989. In 1984, a ‘young graduate from the National Film School, with a reputation for ar- rogance and {with rare exception) a generally rather dismissive attitude Nee Danish Cinema eaetoward Danish national cinema, won the Prix Technique at Cannes for ‘an English-language film noir entitled Element of Crime, As is so Frequently the case in the minor cinema or minor literature of small-nation contexts, Lars von Tricrs breakthrough was not merely a personal one but an event that resonated with significance for an entire industry and nation, Four ‘years later, Gabriel Axel made Danish film history by winning the Oscar for Best Foreign Film for Babet’s east (Bebetes gastbud), a heritage film ‘based on a short story by the Danish writer Karen Blixen, Axel grew up in France as the son of Danish expatriates, and he was by no means always a welcome figure in the landscape of Danish film. Indeed, his long and highly successful career in France was in many ways occasioned by the experience of a series of rejections and exclusions in Denmark. However ambivalent opinion leaders and trendsetters within the Danish film es tablishment might have been toward Axel and Babete's Feast, they could not help but embrace a success that significantly enhanced the cultural capital of Danish film and thus promised to increase the flow of govern: iment monies into the industry. In 1989 the Oscar for Best Foreign Film ‘went to Bille August’s Pelle the Conqueror (Pelle Erobreren), another heritage film, based on the first part of Martin Andersen Nexo's nineteenth- century trilogy by the same title. Each of these instances of global visi bility would have been sufficient to send ripple effects throughout the ‘entire Danish film industry. The fact of two Oscars in successive years was, however, the kind of statistically unimaginable and thus quasi prophetic event that could truly galvanize an entire milieu and make it an irresistible magnet for new talent, The New Danish Cinema is to a significant extent an effect of the small-nation successes just described. The ‘90s witnessed the graduation, year after year, of young filmmakers from the National Film School, and it is their breakthrough moments, nationally and elsewhere, that constitute the New Danish Cinema. “There is no point in trying to provide an exhaustive list of names, for any such list is vulnerable to unfair exclusions and debatable inclusions, Suffice it to say that the New Danish Cinema reflects the combined ef forts and contributions of Ole Bornedal (Nightwatcb/Natteoagte, 1994), Nicolas Winding Refn (Pasber, 1996), Thomas Vinterberg (The Celsbration! Foster, 1998), Lone Seherfig Taian for Beginners/Ttalensk or beayndet, 2000), Susanne Bier (Open Hearts/Elske dg Jor evigt, 2002), Lasse Spang Olsen (ln China They Bat Dogs and Old Men in New Cars/T Kina spver de bude I «LI, 1999, 2002), Hans Fabian Willenweber (Catch That Girl/Klatrtssen, 2002), Per Fly (Inberitance/Aroex, 2002), Annette K. Olesen (Minor Mishaps/Smd sulykker, 2002), Anders Thomas Jensen (Tbe Green Butchers/De gran sagen, New Danish Cinema ~5=2003), Christoffer Boe (Reconstruction, 2003), Paprika Steen (AYfermatb/Lad desma born, 2003), Henrik Ruben Genz. (Someone Like Hodder/Bn som bod der, 2003), Lars von Trier (Dogoill, 2003), Charlotte Sachs Bostrup (Lest (Generation! Familie Greersen, 2004), Simon Staho (Day and Night/Dag of nat 2004), and Lotte Svendsen (What's Wrong wth This Picturen/Tid tf forandring, 2004). The impact of these younger figures, most of whom are in their thirties or early forties, has been reinforced by the resurgence of veteran filmmakers such as Seren Kragh-Jacobsen (Mifune/ Mies sidse sen, 1999) and, more recently (asa result of his collaboration with Lars von Trier in the psychologically and artistically intriguing experiment known as The Fice Obstructions, Jargen Leth, The term New Danish Civema thus denotes a success that marks a break with carlir, somewhat moribund periods of ‘cinematic production. There is no one founding document to which the New Danish Cinema can be traced, unlike the New German Cinema, which can be traced to the Oberhausen manifesto. But the New Danish ‘Cinema has generated its fair share of manifestos and metadiscourses, and what these point to i a new understanding of how the challenges of cul- tural production in a small-nation context should be met Something is clearly happening in Danish film, and it is happening at 4 time when other European national cinemas continue to face the kinds ‘of problems that Angus Finney identified in 1996 in The Stat of European Givema A New Dos of Realty (which focused on Europe's ‘shaky grip on its cinema market" (2] and proffered some possible solutions). Film, as industry and culture in its broadest sense, has become an attractor in the Danish context for money, talent, youthful energies, and ambition. The National Film School is attracting not only record numbers of applica tions but also applications from students with a kind of drive, commit- iment, and even vision that is often lacking in other state-run institutions, most notably, the university system. The summer courses offered by the European Film College, which was established i the provincial town of Ebeltoft in 1990, are taught at maximum capacity. This clearly indicates the extent to which film reception in Denmark now involves a kind of popularized cinephilis, The college follows the guiding principles of the Danish folk high schools, an educational system developed in the nineteenth century by the Danish theologian N. F. S. Grundtvig and a crucial factor in the emergence of a Danish civil saciety. The aim of the traditional folk high schools was to provide especially peasants with a forum for intensive, convivial discussion of a wide range of issues that ‘were of relevance to them as citizens rather than as individuals with spe- cific work-related tasks to perform. The modern European model, pro- New Danish Cinewe ~ 6mposed by filmmaker Henning Carisen and others, is designed to establish a public space where cinephiles from all walks of life can debate film with a wide range of practitioners, with filmmakers, script writers, distributors, policymakers, and scholars ‘When we established the Film College, | was working under the as sumption that its purpose would be to create the basis for a better, more informed audience for film, People who attended the College were t0 become better film spectators, and {do think that ths is actually one of the roles that it plays today. The students are made aware of alot of dif- ferent things that ordinary spectators simply dont think about. (Henning: Carlsen, in Hort and Bondebjerg 2001, 45) Unlike the longer courses of study at the Film College, the week-long summer courses on contemporary Danish cinema have become an alter- native to a more hedonistic, and arguably more vacuous, approach to the summer vacation, The sense of fegitimacy and promise that surrounds institutions such as the National Film School or European Film College is, ! would argue, part of what I would like to calla cixematic turn in Denmatk. The gravi- tation toward fil is further reflected in the striking reversal of trends bespeaking an earlier marginalization of certain forms of spectatorship that have been definitive of film culture since its inception. Spontaneous interest in film, combined with consolidated efforts at the level of the DFI and inthe private sector, has allowed the modernization and reopen- ing of local cinemas that were previously forced to close their doors, While previously defunct cinemasare being revived, new, fully digitalized cinemas are being constructed in strategic sites throughout the country. What follows is a revealing excerpt from the latest DFI development plan (2003-2006) ‘The Danish cinema miliew has witnessed a revival in recent years. New cinemas are being built, and ioitiatves to stabilize existing local cinemas have been successful. DFT has increased support for modernization and renovation by about 400%, approximately 9 milion kroner over the past three years, which in tarn has released private and regional investments af about 90 million kroner. This can only be interpreted asa sign of health and as an indicator of cinemas significance as coltural factor. The de velopment plan continues to prioritize the small cinemas, which are to be attractive and technologically up-to-date so as to be able to function as important sites of cultural effervescence, (OFI 2002) New Darwish Cinema ei