Days ahead of the anticipated press conference unveiling the lineup, Cannes Film Festival‘s chief Thierry Fremaux has managed to keep a certain mystery around this year’s Official Selection, despite the numerous predictions flourishing on social media.
Even “Mission Impossible: The Final Reckoning” hasn’t been officially confirmed by neither Cannes nor Paramount, but Fremaux tells Variety in an exclusive interview that he’s hoping to get a final go from the studio soon.
Rolling off back-to-back milestone editions that saw Cannes-bowing films go on to win Oscars, such as “Anatomy of a Fall” and “The Zone of Interest” in 2023 and “Anora,” “The Substance,” “Emilia Perez” and “Flow” in 2024, Fremaux suggests he’s received a record number of movies, especially from the U.S.
While some have suggested that the 2025 edition feels like the first post-strike Cannes, Fremaux says it “seems that Hollywood is in a period of transition.”
Certainly hoping to follow in the Palme d’Or-to-best picture Oscar footsteps of Sean Baker, American filmmakers such as Jim Jarmusch, Spike Lee, Richard Linklater, Kelly Reichardt, Ari Aster, Kristen Stewart and Wes Anderson are expected to present their movies at Cannes.
This year’s festival could also see an unprecedented number of female directors in the official selection, including in competition, after last year’s edition championed films by Coralie Fargeat, Payal Kapadia, Laetitia Dosch, Agathe Riedinger and Louise Courvoisier.
In the conversation with Variety, Fremaux touched upon the backlash that hit “Emilia Perez” in the run up to the Oscars, and, at a time of #MeToo reckoning in France, revealed that Cannes had added a clause to its official selection films concerning “the safety, integrity and dignity of all contributors.” Fremaux, who recently completed the documentary “Lumiere! The Adventure Continues,” also talked about how his knowledge of classic films has shaped his appreciation of contemporary cinema, and ultimately his selection process.
One week before the big announcement, how far along are you in the selection process?
With a week to go, more than half the decisions have been made and the selection is taking shape. However, we still have a lot of films to watch because not everything has arrived in the screening room yet. That means we have to watch more than 50 films in eight days, which is to say all day long, evenings and weekends.
Will it be a similar or bigger competition than last year?
Yes, similar. Cannes has always been able to control its development, which is also constrained by our cinemas.
We’re all expecting that “Mission Impossible: The Final Reckoning” will be at Cannes but at this point it’s all rumors. What’s the story there?
MI8 is being released between May 21st and 23rd in many countries, so the rumor is natural and logical. Especially since Tom Cruise made a fantastic appearance when he came to the Croisette for “Top Gun: Maverick” and our collaboration with Paramount was wonderful. We hope to be able to reunite with them and greet all of Tom Cruise and Christopher McQuarrie’s fans.
Last year you were concerned that the edition would be a letdown due to the impact of the strikes in Hollywood, but it turned out to be one of Cannes’s most successful editions, which launched several Oscar winners.
With each new edition, we are in doubt: after a very good year in 2023, we did not imagine doing as well in 2024. And 2024 turned out to be exceptional. What will 2025 be like? We will find out on the evening of May 24th! What I can say is that, together with Iris Knobloch, the President of the Festival who heads the board of directors, we do our utmost every year to ensure that the Festival is a success. And we do it with François Desrousseaux, (the secretary general), Christian Jeune, (the director of the film department), Guillaume Esmiol, the director of the film market, and with all the teams.
Did you imagine that films like ‘Emilia Perez,’ ‘Anora’ or ‘The Substance’ and even ‘Flow’ could generate such acclaim from audiences and critics internationally, including in the U.S.?
We hope for the best for the films in the Official Selection without presuming to guess their fate. We knew that “Emilia Perez,” “Anora” and “The Substance” were beautiful films. We saw the first one very early on, in February, and the second one very late, in mid-April, which goes to show that nothing is ever written in advance. During the selection process, you have to keep your cool! “Flow” is a nice surprise and consecrates an international auteur animation film. “The Substance” is our great pride because nothing could have predicted such a destiny for the film… except us! Putting it in competition was a great decision.
Did you feel a bit like a proud father during the awards season?
It’s very satisfying to see that the films selected at Cannes are celebrated by the festival-goers, then the jury, then the critics, the market, cinema-goers all over the world and, at ultimately by those who vote for the awards, at the Oscars, the Césars, the BAFTAs, the Goyas, etc. It’s worth noting that this link with Cannes has been stronger over the last ten years.
This year is the first truly post-strike year. Is that reflected in the number of American films submitted to Cannes?
I don’t know if there is a post-strike effect. It seems that Hollywood is in a period of transition, but American cinema is still sending us a lot of films. Especially since, more than ever, it’s been proven that a film can be born in Cannes and still be alive and be at the center of the attention at the Oscars, which is a big ‘rendezvous.’ After the 2023 milestone and the success of “Anatomy of a Fall” and “The Zone of Interest,” 2024 was another demonstration of this. But let’s not forget the list of all the great American films that have emerged from Cannes and triumphed upon their release. In particular, the first Palme d’Or in history, Delbert Mann’s “Marty,” awarded in 1955 by Marcel Pagnol, which was later crowned best film at the Oscars. The Cannes Film Festival is playing the same role as the major publishing houses in literature — its choices give an artistic, media and symbolic seal to the films in the selection. What also made us happy in 2024 was to see such excellent box office results for movies that premiered at Cannes, even though they were mostly arthouse films. Quality and success are no longer separate.
Do you set a limit on the number of Americans you include in the competition?
No. Neither for American films, nor for movies from any other country. The main thing is to make the best possible selection and if there were 12 American films that deserved it, we would select all 12! Well, okay, 12 would be a lot.
Last year there was a record number of English-language films (but by international directors). Are you still observing this trend? Does this linguistic standardisation worry you?
The use of English as a kind of new Esperanto is a trend that has been growing for two or three decades. It’s not a new thing. And I can understand that the market sometimes imposes English because it broadens the horizon of a film. But when it’s artificial – and sometimes it is through fanciful commercial strategies — the public is not fooled. Let’s not forget what John Ford said: ‘to be universal, be local.’ “Parasite” is the most beautiful latest example to date.
Do you see more projects dealing with geopolitics, or with a political background, given the charged context and the wars in Ukraine and Gaza, and the situation in the US with the Trump administration?
As we speak, not especially.
Some directors are very prolific, notably Kirill Serebrennikov. Would you refrain from presenting his latest film (an adaptation of Olivier Guez’s “The Disappearance of Josef Mengele) because he was already in competition last year with ‘Limonov’?
No, there is no rule against it.
It seems that there could be a record number of female directors in competition. Is that the case?
I certainly hope so. The number of female directors has increased significantly over the last 20 years, we must say it again. Films from younger filmmakers are increasingly gender-balanced, as illustrated by our selections of short films or films from the Cinef (previously called the Cinefondation). And even in 2024, when the number of female directors had fallen overall, the Cannes Film Festival maintained their presence in terms of quantity. And in terms of quality: in 2024, we’ll remember the films of Coralie Fargeat, Payal Kapadia, Laetitia Dosch, Agathe Riedinger and Louise Courvoisier.
Do you think that the success of ‘Emilia Perez’ success could encourage Netflix to return to the Cannes Film Festival? What are your discussions with them this year and with the other platforms?
Our relations with the platforms, and recently Apple and Amazon, are excellent and the slightest opportunity is a chance to meet up. I am also sure that the day Netflix has films to offer at the Festival, they will return to Cannes. In any case, I repeat it every year, our dialogue has never been broken, Ted Sarandos knows that we are waiting for him with films. And let’s not forget that Netflix has now become a contributor to French cinema by taking part in co-productions. Cannes 2025 will surely bear the mark.
Last year, Karla Sofia Gascon became the first transgender actress to win an award at Cannes, but her offensive tweets were later discovered. What was your view on the debacle?
I will refrain from making any judgement on what seems to me to be a perfect illustration of the confusion into which social networks are plunging us. I do not share the opinions that Karla Sofia Gascon has expressed, especially since in France some of her remarks could fall under the law, but she is above all an artist and artists are asked to be artists. Does an artist have to be a perfect human being? I don’t think so. Karla Sofia Gascon and the film have paid dearly, let’s move on to something else because it in no way diminishes the value of Emilia Perez, as well as Jacques Audiard and his entourage who fully deserved the nominations and awards they received.
Do you check the social media accounts of the directors before inviting them to Cannes?
The Cannes Film Festival bases its artistic choices on a rigorous code of ethics, taking into account all the information available to it, which does not only come from social media. Our commitment to the values of respect and humanism that have guided the Festival since its inception remains as strong as it was in the early days.
The Césars have made directors accused of sexual assault ineligible. Is this something you would consider doing at Cannes?
A ceremony like the César Awards and an event like the Cannes Film Festival are not comparable: festivals exist to discover, while awards consecrate. We are very much upstream and must be vigilant. We are attentive to the way people are speaking out more freely, as we are to the way that the slightest reprehensible behavior can spark absolute rejection. That is why, from 2025, we have added a clause to our regulations concerning the films in the official selection, committing the rights holders to guarantee that the films submitted have respected and continue respecting the safety, integrity and dignity of all contributors and comply with legal obligations. And we will redouble our attention to the selected films.
Because beyond that, it is the justice system that decides who is guilty and who is not, it is the law, not the Cannes Film Festival. And the law is sometimes complicated: I was ‘raised’ by Henry Fonda and Sidney Lumet. Cinema teaches you to think ‘against’ so that universal values triumph.
Last year, ‘All We Imagine as Light’ marked the return of Indian cinema in competition after 30 years. Do you anticipate other gems from underrepresented regions in competition?
We are ready!
I hear that Iran could also be represented in competition. How does the festival manage the security of dissident directors?
The Festival, in collaboration with the Cannes City Council and the State services, puts in place a particularly important system that is deployed in the city of Cannes throughout the Festival to ensure the safety of all.
You have been immersed in your film ‘Lumière L’Aventure Continue,’ these last few months, has it ‘colored’ your view of the films you watch for the Official Selection?
I wrote and directed “Lumière, l’aventure continue” during the summer of 2024 and presented it in the fall in San Sebastian before Rome, Tokyo and Jeddah (at Red Sea). Its conception did not coincide with the Cannes selection which we don’t really start until November-December. But your question is relevant because the back and forth between classic and contemporary cinema is what makes me who I am as a spectator, and I would even say that it is the key to my work. Not only because I have the privilege of being in charge of the Cannes Film Festival, the Lumière Institut and Festival, but because the way we look at contemporary works is informed by what we have learnt from the cinema of the past.
A classic film tells its own story. If you show “Citizen Kane” to a young viewer today (and preferably on the big screen!), they will be impressed, moved and intrigued, but they may find it difficult to understand its reputation because everything in “Citizen Kane” is complex and sophisticated. They will then need to direct their thoughts towards the screenplay, the filming, the aesthetic context of the time, etc. A film is like a symphony, it is complex and it can be explained. With classic cinema, judgements like “I like/I don’t like it” or “It’s good/It’s not good” don’t work. When you’re dealing with Welles, Kurosawa or Kubrick, you have to learn to evaluate the works that history has transformed into masterpieces.
The same goes for contemporary cinema and therefore for the Cannes selection: it is not a question of raising or lowering one’s thumb in a sign of approval or rejection, but of evaluating the works, each one individually and in relation to each other.
The question I have to answer is: should I show this film at Cannes or not, and for what reasons? What does it say about cinema today? These are the questions we have to answer.
You draw a parallel between the cinema of Lumière and the New Wave in your documentary…
Yes, because we find the same simplicity, the same truth, the same sincerity. Lumière invented his own codes in total freedom, the New Wave wanted to break free from the codes that 50 years of cinema had imposed. I quote Godard in the film: ‘You have to go and see the illiterate if you want to reinvent grammar.’ It still holds true.
Who do you think are the heirs of the Lumière brothers today?
It would be fun to make lists and I give a few names in the film, but there are many. The Lumière legacy is to capture reality and transform it with the camera in order to unveil its beauty. The Lumière legacy is a reminder that cinema is primarily a matter of angles, not images. The Lumière legacy is a demonstration that cinema is an instrument of peace. Lumière films do not tell a story because they are pure objects of cinema that exist primarily through their form. Lumière cinema is writing with a camera. Finally, the Lumière legacy is the cinema, which they decided to invent when Thomas Edison, with his Kinetoscope, was thinking of individual use. Today, 130 years after the birth of the Cinématographe Lumière, one thing is clear: ‘Cinema’ also implies ‘going to the cinema’. And that’s fortunate.
Even at a time when streaming platforms are so popular?
Absolutely. Streaming platforms are brilliant inventions. I have a subscription to all of them and I have them all on my smartphone. But they are no substitute for the big screen. And that is something we need to teach children. We shouldn’t deprive them of the emotions that we have experienced in theaters. In “Cinema Speculations” Tarantino talks about his first emotions in a cinema, which is a real learning experience for life.
In 2024, the global box office was in great shape and people were returning to cinemas everywhere, with film buff platforms like Mubi proving very popular. Was Tarantino right when he said “cinema is not dead”?
Of course cinema is not dead! During lockdown, it was very weakened: just imagine, for the first time in history, all the cinemas were closed, something that two world wars had not managed to do, while platforms were thriving in homes. There was no shortage of predictions here and there that cinemas would soon disappear. It happened often in the 20th century, but it won’t happen this time either. Cinemas have been and always will be saved by films, artists, professionals, theaters and the public. But we mustn’t be complacent either: to get people back into theaters, we need to spark desire, we need to fuel curiosity. We need good films.
With all the movies you watch, have you noticed that the rise of platforms over the last 10 years have changed the grammar of cinema, the way stories are told and staged?
Like the Cinématographe Lumière, platforms need to be nourished: in 1900, it was with films, today it’s with series. The language doesn’t change, it’s the language of the cinema. The demand from the public, on the other hand, is undoubtedly changing. On a global scale, the public is demanding, especially when it comes to series or original formats that require a fresh narrative, strong scripts, sharp dialogue, extraordinary stories, imagination, etc. Cinema has always faced great adversity, but it is certain that the platforms, due to their qualities, are fierce competitors. But cinema has its own answer.
You often say how important the press is for the Cannes Film Festival. What is your view on the distress of many journalists who complain that they no longer have the opportunity to interview talent during major festivals such as Cannes?
We must never forget that the Cannes Film Festival would not exist without the press. It is part of the same legend, whether it be the written press, photography or television and today the digital press. More than 4,000 professionals come to the Croisette to work and every year, we offer the best comforts so that they can do their job in good conditions, with suitable facilities. We also help press officers. The rules regarding relations with the talent are clear: most films in and out of competition benefit from a press conference, which are very popular and broadcast live on the festival’s television channel. We make this possible for journalists. But beyond these arrangements, the press’s direct and personal access to talent is part of a media strategy that is handled by the productions and not by the Festival. We understand those who want a more sustained dialogue with the artists, and this often yields great results and contributes to the love of cinema, but we also know that the proliferation of requests for individual interviews makes it mechanically impossible for them all to be satisfied.
The Cannes opening ceremony is by far the most prestigious and original of all festival opening ceremonies I go to. What is the secret? Are you involved in the artistic and editorial choices?
We work as a team with France Télévisions and Brut, which offer the festival tremendous visibility and are very demanding about the quality of their broadcasts. What is the secret? Here too, it is a combination whose formula is renewed every year. We all work in close collaboration, especially with Renaud le Van Kim, who brilliantly produces the ceremonies.
The opening film has still not been announced…
Because nothing has been decided yet. We are still thinking about it. You will find out soon… at the same time as me!
