00:00:00: JOHANNA: Welcome to Industry Insights, the EFM podcast presented by the European Film Market of the Berlinale. My name is Johanna Koljonen. I'm a media analyst and experience designer based in Malmö, Sweden. Industry Insights, the EFM podcast puts a spotlight on highly topical and trend setting industry issues, creating a compass for the forthcoming film year. This year-round podcast is produced in cooperation with Goethe-Institut and co-funded by Creative Europe MEDIA. This episode has been developed in partnership with Film i Väst and provides a sneak preview of their upcoming report on public film funding in Europe. This is just a teaser. The whole thing will be properly released in a seminar at the Berlinale on Sunday, February 16th. Public Film Funding at the Crossroads is a film industry research project charting the position, direction and relevance of European public film funders at all levels, from the municipal to the transnational. It's trying to understand how they work and how that work is governed, as well as why the local choices about how to operate have been what they are, which requires looking at local political culture and how that is expressed in film investment. And then the reports place all this in the wider context of the film industry's structural changes, ultimately to learn what the role of public film funds should be in the ecosystem of European cinema. Now, this is a massive undertaking. The production of the first two volumes involved a thousand interviews, as well as survey data, but it was clearly focused on these qualitative interviews and those were also continued through roundtable discussions around Europe, as well as other kinds of listening exercises. I'll say directly that these reports are sprawling. They cover a lot of ground as they both describe a multifaceted landscape and try to compare and evaluate the choices that the different funding bodies have made or choices that they've been forced into by market changes or political shifts. And then the ultimate goal of the project finally is to land in recommendations. The man in charge of getting there is Tomas Eskilsson, head of analysis at the internationally significant Swedish regional fund Film i Väst, an organization whose operations he once designed and then ran as CEO for literally decades. Today, Film i Väst is the perch from which he works on the third and final volume of Public Film Funding at the Crossroads. It's not finished. I've seen a tiny sneak preview and film producer Joanna Szymańska has seen a little more. We'll meet her later in the episode. But let's start with Tomas. Hi, Thomas.

00:02:35: TOMAS: Hi.

00:02:36: JOHANNA: So this final report is humbly called The Answers. So let me start by asking when you were done with the second report, what were the questions that you brought with you into the work with the last one?

00:02:47: TOMAS: Yeah, I think the questions that we really had after making the first two reports were how we should understand differences and what's really happening in different parts of Europe, because we learned that Europe is far more multifaceted than we thought from the beginning, because we thought about more general things like the economic situation, what type of administrative traditions do you have in your specific country, all these things that more or less influence all political areas, you can say. But we didn't really think about that there was some sort of specific thought systems or ideologies, whatever you like to call them, that exist in Europe. And that means very much, at least when you try to formulate some sort of purpose for what you are doing.

00:03:50: JOHANNA: So the purpose of the film fund is like, why do we even support culture and specifically film with public funds?

00:03:56: TOMAS: And we also felt throughout the entire work, because we asked questions about purpose. We asked those questions to, of course, a lot of people in the industry, and we also asked that question to the film agencies and policymakers. And I think by and large, most of them had quite big difficulties when it came to answer what is really the purpose, what is really the reason for why this exists. So that was something that we wanted to dig deeper into. And also we felt very strongly that if we should really come up with the answers, so to speak, we need to understand this, because it might be that the answers are not the answer, but really answers even for a specific type of topic and question that it should and need to look different in different parts of Europe, because the core purpose is very different.

00:05:02: JOHANNA: And the local contexts are different and the motivations for having that kind of policy is different. I should say that some examples maybe of what purpose could be in this context, it's about who are we in service of, is one question to ask that. Are we in service as a film fund? Am I serving democracy? Am I serving a nation state? Am I serving the local film industry? Am I serving film as an art form? Am I serving individual storytellers? There are many kinds of approaches to this. And I think it's interesting that you say that people didn't know, because I think you don't know. Many of these systems were set up literally decades ago or half a century ago. And the reasons, the way you operate today may not be actually in sync with what the original reason was, because in the end you're supporting a film industry that needs your money no matter what, whatever the original reason was. So that already is like a built-in conflict. I'm super impressed with from the little I've seen with that you are saying very openly, we weren't right all the time in the first two reports. We didn't always realize how different the local situations are. So is there something specific that you'd like to change immediately and tell people that they can forgive you for now?

00:06:11: TOMAS: No, yes, perhaps. Because you are a part of where you're from. Whoever we are. We bear that inside ourselves. In the Nordic part of Europe, and in the Nordics we also include the Netherlands, it's important to say. So it's not only the Nordic countries, because you can see also if you cross down to the continent, you can see other examples. And you can also see those examples where the Nordic thinking is quite strong. And in the Nordic context, the citizen is core. The citizens access to content that reflects, have some sort of cultural reference significance. And the audience becomes super central. So if you read, for instance, the objectives for the Danish or the Swedish and also very much of the of the Norwegian or Finnish film and audio of their film and audio policy, there is nothing about the industry. Or nearly nothing. There might be a small paragraph about the industries. Everything is about the films, the works, the citizens and how we are able to reach them, so to speak. So that's basically the core. And then if you read CNC's, very powerful, the French very powerful body, CNC's mission statement, it's absolutely not about these type of items. The first sentence is about basically stating that this is about making the French audiovisual, and that means in the end of the day, because how the system is structured, the French independent producer as competitive as possible. And by doing that, it also means that the nation, France, will be very strong and competitive. So the independent producers or independent production that it more and more becomes today and the nation are core elements in the French model. And the French model has been influencing a lot of film and audiovisual policies across Europe, sometimes in a very strange way because there's several very small countries actually that says that “yes, but we use the French model.” And you cannot really see what those similarities are and the situation are so different. So you can also understand why it's impossible, because the French system is so rich. It really has strong economy, the way it's built up. So, but it's still very influential and you can see that those two elements, industry and nation are strong in all those policies and in the British version is only about the economic effects.

00:09:08: JOHANNA: And this is so interesting because ultimately the reason probably that the French have these kinds of regulatory supports for, for instance, for the film industry is on some level across Europe. This is about pushing back against Anglo American cultural dominance, especially in the postwar period when all of our production infrastructure was broken during the Second World War. So, on some level, like when you take even an additional step back. Yes, of course, it's about protecting our local languages and so on. But it really matters how that is organized. And if you structure that response around industry, or if you structure it around an audience and citizen focus, it has very different effects. We'll continue talking about this soon, but I would ask that when you started out this project, if we looked at the first report, a lot of that was about what is the position of what should the position of public film funds be in the context of the market changes, windows system is changing, streamers entering the markets, different formats are gaining more relevance relative to feature film and so on. And that's kind of where you started. And now you are looking, asking the same purpose questions. And it's more about other kinds of political perspectives. Can you say something about about where the focus is now?

00:10:18: TOMAS: Yeah, but but I think what is also something that you can see happening wherever you are in Europe, and even if your own country still can qualify as a liberal democracy, it's still a challenge because you can see that the liberal and authoritarian forces are becoming stronger and stronger. And all research that exists in in this area, more or less prove that one of the most threatened things when this happened is freedom of cultural expression.

00:10:56: JOHANNA: When liberal forces gain. Not just when they not just when they win elections and power, but also when they just gain influence.

00:11:02: TOMAS: Yes, when they gain influence, because when they started influencing objectives, when they started in influencing priorities, whatever it is. And you can also see this in some of the some of the purposes, because we have mapped the purposes in Europe, and then you can also very clearly see how these type of elements… I mean, everybody has a relationship to the nation to the territory. It's not about that. But is it a relationship or is it very nationalistic? Or is it nationalistic chauvinistic, whatever you should call it?

00:11:36: JOHANNA: Are you serving, again to use this metaphor, are you serving some kind of a narrative of the nation? Or are you serving citizens who might be all kinds of citizens?

00:11:46: TOMAS: Exactly. And that means that like when you see when you see these trends and tendencies, I think that becomes a core challenge for policymakers and for the sector and for the industry. And it poses a lot of questions to Europe at large, because as long as we were in a way, not perhaps a big happy family, because I never think that that has been the situation. But at least a more harmonic group of nations working together, and we're basically, you can say peace and democracy were core elements for everyone. That was one situation. But when it becomes something else, then it also means something for European cooperation. So at least what we advocate in this in this text is that the entire Europe or at least the democratic Europe has sort of a responsibility across Europe to secure the freedom of cultural expression in the film and audio visual field. And that means not cooperating with certain states, but it makes creating possibilities for filmmakers and producers across Europe to actually use the freedom of cultural expression to make it possible. And I think, even if it's of course on the edge, the Ukraine or the example of support to Ukraine, Ukraine during the Russia's war and regression, is interesting as sort of a thinking model that you can actually apply on pan European level. If you want, at least for the liberal democracies, I think this is super important because if they want to have any form of position also by and large, they also need to be clearer in their position.

00:13:44: JOHANNA: Yeah, and this then connects to the film funding in very practical ways. Like for instance, if your film funding is structured around your citizens, how much space is there for you to support the sort of democracy aspects of free art in Europe and co-produce with other countries? If it's constructed around your local industry, how does that play into all of these sort of other kinds of purposes and goals that are also there? Nobody says we have film funds because we want democracy in Europe. So if that becomes part of our goals, then how all of this is structured actually really matters in a practical sense.

00:14:19: TOMAS: Yeah, and I also think it's sort of about values and how you uphold values. And sometimes I become very depressed when I speak with people, particularly in the five big countries of Europe with all these expressed extreme interest of the Middle East, for instance, from my perspective, that is a problematic take. Yes, they have very good incentive systems and whatever, but you run into more problems exactly the more problems you run into when you vote that Saudi Arabia should be given the World Cup. I mean, you run into these problems and I think it's important to address them because most persons you meet in this industry think that freedom of culture expression that you have the possibility to have this creative and artistic freedom and control is super important. And if it's super important, it needs to mean something for everyone, wherever you are.

00:15:26: JOHANNA: And then it means something in your wallet as well. You know, it's a moralistic perspective or it's a matter of principle. But I think that's an interesting that what you were saying that you have to ask yourself, am I cooperating with a state structure or am I enabling the voices of the people in this country to do something? Am I helping build an industry that is aligned with the state and that is aligned with freedom of speech, for instance? This is a great point to bring in Joanna. Joanna Szymańska is a film producer at her Polish company, SHIPSBOY. You're also deputy chair of the board of the European Film Academy, president of the Producers Guild of Poland. You're involved in producer training, most prominently right now as head of studies at the Erik Pommer Institut. You're working on a PhD on industry issues at Łódź Film School. All of this is hugely impressive. And yet you don't look exhausted. I don't know how you do that.

00:16:22: JOANNA: It's Christmas.

00:16:26: JOHANNA: It's Christmas time and we're recording. That's right. Joanna, you've been reading a little bit in the report and of course now listening to us talk. What's your what's top of mind?

00:16:35: JOANNA: Well, I love this idea of actually looking at the purpose of things, because this is also the question I start to develop my projects with, you know. So what is the purpose of this? And I think that especially right now, this idea of why are we supporting culture in the first place is a very existential question, really. And when I was listening to you, Tomas, talking about the French model, I did smile a little bit, as you might have noticed, because I do feel that, you know, copy and paste of a certain solution or solutions doesn't necessarily serve local film industries as such. And I'm a huge advocate of coming up with policies that work for the local market, but also reflect the reality of, you know, local industry, local landscape of financing, local audiences. I mean, let's not forget about audiences. And I think as all of our listeners are aware, in Poland we had a quite turbulent time in the last couple of months regarding changes at the Polish Film Institute, changes in the government. And I think we are a great example of a market that really needs to very clearly answer this question, you know, what is the purpose of Polish Film Institute? What is the purpose of our audio visual policy right now? And of course, I'm talking from a producer's perspective. So for me, the idea of defining what an independent producer is seems to be a kind of cornerstone of all of these discussions as we don't have a definition of our profession in our legal system.

00:18:22: JOHANNA: I think that's very good and right. And it made me think of a really difficult question that I'll try to put to you now. And I feel like embarrassed that I'm asking this. But one thing that I think people with liberal values are finding very difficult to accept is that the reason that these parties are winning elections in all of our countries is that people do vote for them. There are people to whom these narratives and these stories and these promises and this analysis, like this very sort of clunky analysis of why life is difficult, we think they're wrong, but there are a lot of people who are really appealed by that. And in a system, if we say, for instance, that our film funding should be in support of our citizens, wouldn't they make say, well, then we want films that reflect our view of the world? How do you respond to that, Tomas? How do you respond, Johanna?

00:19:12: TOMAS: Yeah, but that's, that's of course in all these different thought systems of Europe, there exists problems. And now we are talking about sort of what is given by politics, because that's actually the name of the last report from this research institute that's called Varieties of Democracy, that measures more or less democracy across the globe, not only in Europe in a very ambitious way, and have done that for a very long period of time. The last report is called Winning at the Ballots, Autocracy Winning at the Ballots. So that's of course a difficult question for the Nordic model, where absolutely citizens is core, but it's not really about citizens deciding what should be produced, it's more about citizens' possibility to relate to the works that are made. And I don't think all of those who have voted necessarily think that now we should go and watch a film that tells me that my vote was a correct vote. I think it's more complex in the end of the day. But of course, it poses a sort of a challenge, I will say. But the challenge in what we call the French-European, continental European model is a little bit different, because you can see, particularly in that system, because the UK system has always been what it's been. But in this model, you can see that economic policy is winning more and more ground. So culture policy holds a much weaker position, even if it's strong in certain countries, but not, I will underline, in certain countries. At first, I was going to speak a little bit about what's happening in Italy, but it might be too provocative to say that, because it proves that is not so simple. You can have a very, very strange type of government, and that government actually wants to have less of economic measures and more of culture policy measures. But the culture policy measures is not about freedom of culture expression. It is basically to fill all the decision-making positions with people very affiliated to the government. And that means that it will be, in a way, risk, at least, to be limited or shaped in another way. But there is a challenge in the other model, and that's that a lot of countries have given up on culture policy argument, and instead they have only economic policy argument. And you can see some countries inside this model, so to speak, drifting more and more towards the British model.

00:22:07: JOHANNA: And I think it also makes sense in the sort of transformations and the crises that we were going through in the industry before the boom years, and now of course the boom is over, so that's a different kind of crisis. But we were in a position where the cultural policy wasn't serving the sort of amount of production, or many reasons why it wasn't working for the actual industry. So then it made sense to say, “oh, but if we think about this, if we place this in terms of economic policy, then we have a chance of getting some support that really makes a difference for us.” Joanna?

00:22:39: JOANNA: Well, my perspective, I think, is a little bit more complex, I would say, because I hate the binary outlook on the world, like it's art versus economics, you know, I think it's much more than that. I love a good paradox, and I think the industry is full of paradoxes right now. And what I would love to throw into the mix is something that I call kind of social responsibility argument as well, but also entrepreneurial argument rather than economical argument, you know, because I strongly believe that creative industries can generate numerous results, economical results, social results, artistic results. And I think it's seeing them only in these binary terms is very, very limiting and kind of it's a straight path to coming up with a model that is one sided or that it's, you know, marginalizing a large part of creative capacities that we have. And I think this is something that we really need to put into discussion as well, to see this broader picture like what art, what cinema art, what film art, what audio visual art can do for us in a long term perspective in a broader perspective because it can have the effect of, you know, influencing society in a very positive way by being inspirational, but maybe explaining more complex issues through films or through series. It can generate jobs, it can generate revenues, it can, you know, generate new technologies or implement new technologies and therefore become more creative, etc. So I think that the biggest problem that we are facing right now is that we are so stuck, at least that's how I'm seeing things right now, that we are so stuck in these old narratives about how we discuss about film industry that we are not seeing that, you know, Poland and creative in Poland, the creative industries generate 3.5% of, you know, GDPR. So that's like half of our military budget. So, you know, like half of the tanks we are investing in come from the films and the games and art we create. So I'm really trying to see beyond the surface, so to speak, and to look for, and to look for when talking about policies, to look for arguments that can maybe open our minds a little bit more rather than see it, you know, only as art against money.

00:25:17: TOMAS: Yeah, but it's important to say, and we said that already in the second report, it will be impossible to have something that is only culture policy driven, and it will be very negative to have something that is only economic policy driven. You might have a discussion is what type of values are really on top of this. And I think that discussion is very central. Because the risk with system by economic policy becomes totally dominant is two folds or three folds or even more. First, that it actually wipes out the independent sector, it happened in several countries or diminish the strength of the independent sector, meaning it becomes too profitable to only work with the very big ones often coming from the other side of the Atlantic Sea. So you don't continue to develop, or you're swallowed up in in their structures and and whatever. And there's several examples of this. And it's also acknowledged, at least if you go into a room and close the door and you speak with persons from that country, because there is also sometimes a need to defend the economic policy measures, so you don't want to really challenge them too much but there is this tricky situation. And of course then if that happens, it also means that you have less voices, you have less interesting stories, you have less things that really relates to exactly what you are saying Joanna, you will you will lose out on that. So, so I think the big challenge in all types of context are basically how should you balance culture and economic policy measures, and how should you marry them, so that it became some sort of cohesive thinking and strategy because I think in the end of the day, that's very important for the sector but also for the long term argument for why we should really put money into this.

00:27:19: JOHANNA: Yeah, I do want to say that there are two kinds of values here and I realized I was kind of asking about the nature of the content like that is one of the things that is very difficult and it becomes like a symbolic question around freedom of speech and so on. Nobody's stopping filmmakers from making the films that they want to make the question that if filmmakers with these values want to make those films like go right ahead. It's just the question is can we force somebody to make films that are against their values and I think that that's a complete straw man I think nobody is trying to do that anywhere basically. However, the liberal cultural policy answer to that case about the nature of the content and the values of the content of course is that people are complex and art is complex. Let's say if we look at the analysis of the United States elections, we can see that there are many people who are Trump voters who may have been Bernie Sanders supporters or who may have been Barack Obama supporters and have very different values. People are complicated, you know if choices are complicated politics is complicated. And then I think that if you are open to hearing Bernie Sanders as well as Donald Trump, then I think you are open to engaging with an artwork that allows you different perspectives that can tell you a different story and more complex story about the world. So that's clear like that's why we need to keep making this work, regardless of the sort of political context. But then this is the question about the values of the support system that you are all pointing at so clearly now. And I think Tomas what you're saying is really clear so one strong recommendation is we have to resist the purely economic policy based arguments because they actually make it more hard to make this work for the audiences.

00:28:54: JOANNA: I would say purely economical argument makes it paradoxically much easier because then you go to you know one platform or one broadcaster and you work for them and you deliver this algorithmic content that clicks to certain extent until the audiences are tired and are looking for different sort of algorithm. So, I would say that actually from my perspective, economical argument is in favor of independent production, and I'm going to be like the devil's advocate for capitalism and everybody knows me knows me knows that this is very against my grain. So I would say, guys, you know if there are numerous independent films that serve numerous type of audiences that are looking for short forms, queer content, ecological content, etc. Let's fill the market with those. I mean, you can reach more customers with more, the biggest variety of content so there is economical argument behind that as well. You know freedom of expression freedom of creativity actually generates more revenues.

00:30:00: TOMAS: Yes, but the problem is if you for instance see the development in the UK sector is not that it opens up for more voices because it's more actually the compensatory work from BFI that opens up for more voices, than it's actually that you do more and more works for these big global… And you can see that this is several other countries I know it's been a big worry. For instance Iceland. Iceland has quite a weak traditional funding system is also very small, but it has a very strong incentive system. And that created a situation where basically nobody continued to doing Icelandic content.

00:30:41: JOHANNA: No, they couldn't compete with the market.

00:30:43: TOMAS: And it's very similar to situations like in what happened actually in New Zealand once that suddenly, no, why do any New Zealand type of content we work, we work for the global industry, and from understanding individuals understanding production companies, you cannot moralize about that. No, this is about surviving. This is about daily life. It's about creating a possibility for, for instance, long term possibilities, blah blah blah, you can see a lot of plus values. But still, the balance problems exists and it will look very different in different parts of Europe. For instance, we are 100% sure that big incentive systems in Eastern Europe has been good because it's built infrastructure, it built possibilities, it created a lot of things that are pluses. On the other hand, in some of the countries, and we have some very recent examples of this, and they are often with strong illiberal tendencies. It's often totally impossible to make local content if you don't find zillion billion partners. You often need to run up seven countries or 10 countries and recently we had a project with 28 partners, a small, tiny project.

00:32:09: JOHANNA: I'm going to have to arbitrate and say that you're both right. We're talking of course about different kinds of markets here. So we have the thing with like with the actual market as in what kinds of audiences are out there are all of these audiences served. No, they're not being served. And so there's room for growing audiences and for growing engagement with providing content to diverse content for diverse audiences. Separately from that, there is a global market, of course, it's globally speaking, some places become low cost countries and production providers. And then we have this essentially kind of offshoring dynamic that happens and that also drowns out local production. And then the question becomes that compensatory role that you were talking about, like what other kinds of productions is there room for and possibilities for in the local market. But additionally, I would say that that the populist perspective here, the difficulty there is that it is not certain that the big commissioners, the big funders like global streamers necessarily are very interested in in content that is diverse in the sense that it might provoke people who do actually have power over them. And again, with the US example, we are seeing very much now that the global companies are kowtowing to President-elect Donald Trump and and handing him money basically to not hate them. And these are not necessarily commissioning structures that like the cultural norms of what is acceptable and what can get you canceled do change when the political environment change. So we cannot trust the market to act in its own best interest when it comes to the large audience, then it is safer for them to go mainstream. And this is a huge challenge because I think we're going to see all of these structures in Europe as well. I guess we can't spoil the report, but it's called The Answers. So what answers would you like to see or give your analysis? Joanna, we start w with you.

00:34:00: JOANNA: Well, from my perspective, I think my call to action to all policymakers would be to be more courageous, maybe. And also to have more entrepreneurial perspective. And through entrepreneurial, I don't mean, you know, put on the global market hat rather look at your local market, look at sustainability of that market and how you can support that area of audio visual industry. So it's really flourishes. And as you said, you know, serves diverse audiences because I think we really need to get out of this of this battle between economy and art. It can be both and we can preserve it. We just need more courage. And my favorite catchphrase these days is “future is not set in stone. It's actually shaped by the actions we take today.” So just take the right actions.

00:34:54: JOHANNA: I always say the Terminator 2 catchphrase here: “No faith, but what you make. No faith, but what we make.” I love it. Tomas, what's your send-off call to action for us?

00:35:04: TOMAS: Since we have at least pretended that we should present the answers and our solutions to this is basically that we can present extremely few answers that could be for the entire Europe. Very few answers. And perhaps those answers are more values than actual 100% answers. Because then I think we live in very different types of traditions. And that also means in a way, how can we argue the reason for why the public should involve themselves in funding, so to speak, films and audio visual works. And what type of arguments will definitely not work. And that is extremely different across Europe. And it's given by many different. It's many different layers and aspects. So this is a very boring take. And some of the people that we actually presented this for will be very disappointed because they over and over again asked us: “But when will you deliver the answers?”

00:36:23: JOANNA: But this is it. This is it. The answers are not, you know, it's not defined. We have to come up with the answers that fit our specific markets, which means we have to work, work, work.

00:36:38: JOHANNA: We have to do the work. Let me offer a reframing. This is turning film policy discussions, which let's be real, maybe not always the most exciting. This is becoming like a kind of spy novel. If you are a decision maker, if you are a policy maker, if you are a bureaucrat, working in these things, if you're a commissioner, if you're a film producer, you have to think about for yourself in closed rooms. You have to talk to the people closer. What are our values? And then the spy novel comes in, which is like in the country where I live, in the system where we operate, how do we make those values pilotable and important to the system? So how do we argue for our values within the constraints of this system? And sometimes you have to frame it in some other way, I think, to make it work. And that is sometimes a way of protecting something we already have. And sometimes that will be a way of fighting for something that you may have lost or you may be wanting to gain. I think that makes it sound really exciting to be in film policy. Final words, Joanna?

00:37:33: JOANNA: It's very exciting. And I also feel it's about being honest and integral. So if you are really standing for some values, just express them and then the market will either adapt or fire you.

00:37:48: JOHANNA: And then you're welcome to another EU country. If you're an EU member, come to us and continue the storytelling there. All right, Thomas, final word.

00:37:57: TOMAS: Yeah, I think that was very exact, because I think, exactly as I said, there would be a variety of answers. And I think it's very important for those that should give the answers that they free themselves in a way, so that they leave a little bit the thought models they have been living in. But I think there is a core value that we cannot really fiddle with. And that's basically freedom of culture expression. That must be the most central.

00:38:34: JOHANNA: Thank you so much, Tomas Eskilsson, Joanna Szymańska. The session for the release of the final report in this project happens at the Berlinale on Sunday, February 16th. That's going to provide all the answers, which you now know will not in fact be all the answers, but it will help you think about your own answers. Thank you so much.

00:38:54: TOMAS: Thank you.

00:38:55: JOANNA: Thank you, guys.

00:38:56: JOHANNA: Industry Insights has been produced in cooperation with the Goethe-Institut and co-funded by Creative Europe MEDIA. This episode has been developed in partnership with Film i Väst. Do tune in to future episodes of Industry Insights and remember to rate us highly on your podcast platform. Find us wherever you get your podcasts and on the website of the European Film Market www.efm-berlinale.de. Thanks for tuning in.