For many directors, even when a film has achieved hundreds of billions of VND in revenue, they still think that the audience's taste is a difficult problem to predict. What do you think about the taste and the current film market?
- If revenue can be accurately calculated, then cinema has become a science, not just an art field anymore.
There are films that are heavily invested, have a good crew, strong media, but still do not achieve the expected results. Conversely, there are films that were not initially predicted too high but created a phenomenon.
That shows that the audience is always the most unpredictable factor.
I think filmmakers should not confuse listening to the audience with trying to please everyone. That is almost impossible.
Audiences don't buy tickets because of the crew's hard work. They buy tickets because the film brings them emotions, empathy or some memorable experience. And that is something that cannot be forced.
When I was young, I used to think that as long as there was a good story and enough enthusiasm, the audience would come to the film themselves. The longer I worked in the profession, the more I understood that cinema is not only the art of storytelling, but also the art of listening.
He is a director who has gone through many different stages of his career. When he was working at Vietnam Feature Film Studio, he participated in directing film projects commissioned by the State. Later, he "rushed in" to make private films, "market films". What is the biggest difference in these two stages of his journey?
- When making films like "The Life of Yen" or "The Legend of Quan Tien", what I am most concerned about is how to convey the spirit of the story in a truthful and convincing way. Those are often films that carry historical, cultural or social values that the filmmakers themselves must be responsible for the topic they choose.
And when entering the private film market, I have to face another pressure. Every decision in the script, in the way of telling the story or in choosing actors must answer a very practical question: is the audience willing to spend money to buy tickets and spend time on this story or not?
At first glance, those are two very different worlds. But the longer I work in the profession, the more I realize that the point of their meeting lies in the audience themselves. Because after all, a movie, no matter how valuable it is, is very difficult to create an impact if it is not accepted by the audience. Conversely, a movie that only stops at entertainment without leaving anything after the audience steps out of the cinema is also regrettable.
Perhaps the biggest thing I learned in this journey is that artistic value and entertainment should not stand on opposite sides. The more attractive a story is told, the more opportunities it has to reach the audience. And once it reaches them, what filmmakers want to convey will truly have the opportunity to stay.
There are many definitions of a good film, depending on each perspective. How do you define a good work, and how do you define a successful work? Is the director's script, revenue, or narration decisive?
- I think a good movie and a successful movie are not always the same.
A good movie is a movie that makes viewers carry it with them after leaving the cinema. Maybe they agree, maybe they argue, maybe they don't even like it. But the movie still stays in their minds.
A successful film, in my opinion, is a film that achieves the goal it sets. If it is a commercial film, success needs to be reflected in revenue. If it is an art film, success can come from the influence or the values it leaves behind.
Of course, anyone who makes a film wants to have both of those things at the same time.
And if I had to choose the most important factor, I would not choose a script, revenue or individual director. Cinema is the art of resonance. A film only truly takes off when many factors go in the right direction.
The Vietnamese film market in the past two years has had many films with high revenue but also many loss-making projects. What are the biggest difficulties and challenges for Vietnamese cinema to break through, from your perspective?
- I think the biggest problem is not money or technology.
In recent years, we have witnessed many Vietnamese films achieve very high revenue. This shows that audiences are willing to support Vietnamese films if they find attractive stories.
What Vietnamese cinema needs most at this time is probably high-quality human resources and the equitable development of the entire ecosystem.
A strong film industry cannot only rely on a few directors or a few stars. It needs good screenwriters, professional producers, well-trained actors and a good enough environment for new talents to continuously appear.
I believe that the Vietnamese market still has a lot of potential. The question is not whether we can develop or not, but how quickly and sustainably we can develop.
The decisive factor creating the strength of the Korean film industry is the talent and excellence of personnel in many stages, from scripts, directors to actors. That is what we are lacking. Do you think so?
I think South Korea is not strong because they have a few outstanding individuals. What is more worth learning is that they have created an ecosystem capable of continuously producing good personnel.
Today, we can mention a famous director, a famous screenwriter or a famous actor. But what makes the strength of Korean cinema is the generation of successors always appearing.
In Vietnam, I think we are not short of talented people. What we need is more opportunities for those talents to be trained, to be tested and to grow up in a healthy competitive environment.
If we only wait for outstanding individuals to appear, it is very difficult to create a strong industry. More importantly, build a system that can nurture and develop talents in the long term.
On the occasion of Vietnamese Revolutionary Press Day, how do you assess the role of the press in the development of the cultural industry?
I believe that journalism is one of the important pillars of the cultural industry.
If artists and production units create cultural products, then the press is one of the forces that helps those values spread, connect with the public and be placed in larger dialogues of society.
For cinema, journalism not only helps introduce a new film. More importantly, journalism contributes to forming a civilized environment for discussion, criticism and enjoyment of art. Deep articles, professional perspectives or fair criticisms are valuable to both audiences and professionals.
I always believe that a developing cultural industry cannot only rely on impressive works. It also needs supporting institutions, in which journalism is a very important component.
