Film industry tongues were wagging last week after Chinese officials announced that Tuya's Marriage and Blind Mountain were banned from competing in Taiwan's Golden Horse film awards because the Chinese government prohibits films with exclusively Chinese investment from competing in the event.
Luan Guozhi (欒國志), director of international cooperation at China's Film Bureau, said the Golden Horse awards evaluate Taiwanese movies and that movies made in China should not be considered Taiwanese.
Having fewer films from China competing in the awards could have been a boon for Taiwanese cinema because it would have enabled other films from Taiwan to be nominated.
This, however, didn't happen. Instead, Eye in the Sky replaced Tuya's Marriage in the Best Picture category and Protege and The Sun Also Rises replaced Blind Mountain in the Best Director category. The first two films are Hong Kong productions, while the other is from China.
One doesn't need to be a film critic to see that the Golden Horse awards have, over the past few years, favored films from Hong Kong and increasingly China -- productions that have more financial resources and often achieve a high degree of recognition at the box office.
That China banned two films from entering the Golden Horse awards because they feel that the awards evaluate Taiwanese movies is rather ironic because nothing could be further from the truth.
Which begs the question: What are the Golden Horse awards for and whose interests do they serve?
Though it is justified to call the Golden Horse awards a Chinese version of the Oscars, it seems strange that to qualify, the language of the film must be some variety of Chinese -- a bizarre rule in the world of film festivals.
Other, smaller, film festivals provide a platform for introducing films that are ignored by the mainstream film industry. To take two examples, the Vancouver Gay and Lesbian Film Festival showcases some of the best cinema featuring gay and lesbian themes and the Sundance Film Festival provides a forum for low-budget, independent films. The point here is that these two festivals have a clear identity: to promote films that might not otherwise receive the recognition -- and distribution -- they deserve.
Unlike the Golden Horse awards, the Taipei Film Festival has a clear identity of its own by serving as a platform for Taiwanese cinema. The increased visibility of the festival this year attracted curators and film professionals from South Korea, the Netherlands and Canada, to a name but a few markets.
But that festival suffers from a dwindling budget and regulations that prevent it from having a permanent executive body, which means that organizers have a limited amount of time and cannot plan for the future.
So why not amalgamate the two festivals and call it the Taiwan Film Awards? Organizers could still have the "Global Chinese" cinema category, but the emphasis would be on films of all kinds produced in Taiwan.
Having two film festivals, one that celebrates the ambiguous and archaic concept of a pan-Chinese community and another that is preoccupied with its bureaucratic structure and budget, does little to promote Taiwanese cinema.
The Golden Horse is suffering an identity crisis that can only be resolved by amalgamating with the Taipei Film Festival.
The US election result will significantly impact its foreign policy with global implications. As tensions escalate in the Taiwan Strait and conflicts elsewhere draw attention away from the western Pacific, Taiwan was closely monitoring the election, as many believe that whoever won would confront an increasingly assertive China, especially with speculation over a potential escalation in or around 2027. A second Donald Trump presidency naturally raises questions concerning the future of US policy toward China and Taiwan, with Trump displaying mixed signals as to his position on the cross-strait conflict. US foreign policy would also depend on Trump’s Cabinet and
The Taiwanese have proven to be resilient in the face of disasters and they have resisted continuing attempts to subordinate Taiwan to the People’s Republic of China (PRC). Nonetheless, the Taiwanese can and should do more to become even more resilient and to be better prepared for resistance should the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) try to annex Taiwan. President William Lai (賴清德) argues that the Taiwanese should determine their own fate. This position continues the Democratic Progressive Party’s (DPP) tradition of opposing the CCP’s annexation of Taiwan. Lai challenges the CCP’s narrative by stating that Taiwan is not subordinate to the
Republican candidate and former US president Donald Trump is to be the 47th president of the US after beating his Democratic rival, US Vice President Kamala Harris, in the election on Tuesday. Trump’s thumping victory — winning 295 Electoral College votes against Harris’ 226 as of press time last night, along with the Republicans winning control of the US Senate and possibly the House of Representatives — is a remarkable political comeback from his 2020 defeat to US President Joe Biden, and means Trump has a strong political mandate to implement his agenda. What does Trump’s victory mean for Taiwan, Asia, deterrence
The Taipei District Court on Nov. 1 agreed to extend the detention of Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) Chairman Ko Wen-je (柯文哲) for his suspected involvement in corruption involving a real-estate project during his time as Taipei mayor. Different voices are beginning to emerge from within the TPP about how to respond to their extended leaderless situation. Following a string of scandals coming to light since early August, including the TPP’s misreporting of election campaign finances and Ko’s alleged corruption related to the Core Pacific City redevelopment project, Ko on Aug. 29 announced he would take a three-month leave of absence from
RSS